Ruger Old Army with Cartridge Conversion Cylinder Range Report

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy

The cartridge conversion cylinder for my Ruger Old Army showed up this week.

I took it to the range this afternoon to try out with my Black Powder 45 Colt ammo. Shot about 25 rounds through it.

Accuracy was terrific. This was the best group shot from a rest at 25 feet.

But operationally it leaves something to be desired.

First off, unlike a Remington 1858, to remove the cylinder to reload the loading lever with the cylinder pin attached has to be completely removed from the frame. With the Remington you just swing down the lever and pull the cylinder pin forward to remove the cylinder for reloading. Everything stays attached to the gun. With the Ruger, the entire reloading lever assembly including the cylinder pin has to be pulled forward out of the frame. Then you have to be careful how you lay it down, because the parts are all loose, they are not attached. Spent a little bit of time a couple of times figuring out how to put the loading lever assembly back in.

The other thing was after only one or two shots it started binding up. It was difficult to cock the hammer fully to the full cock position. I'm not sure what the culprit was, I scrubbed the soot off the front of the cylinder after each five shots, but that did not seem to help. Needs further exploration to find where the binding occurs. It may be that the tolerances on the Ruger are so tight that a little bit of soot binds it up. I do not recall having this difficulty when shooting it Cap & Ball.

Anyway, I just cleaned it up and am attaching a couple of photos.

As I said, accuracy off a rest was very good, but I'm not sure I will want to mess with this thing at a match.

Too fussy.

 

[45 Dragoon]

Now you know why I'm working on a gated conversion for ROA's. That "cool" loading lever is a pain!!! I realize not everyone will want to open up the recoil shield to utilize the gate and that's fine, there's a blue million adjustable sighted ones that will be perfect specimens for gated conversions.
My 4 ROA's are all very accurate with a Kirst cylinder!!

After looking at the Howell sight ( as well as your pictures), it looks like there's no bushing on the cylinder? The Kirst cylinder has a bushing which would be the ticket for the binding problems.


Mike

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Nope.

There is a prominent bushing on the front of the cartridge conversion cylinder, just like on the C&B cylinder. I understand completely about the value of a bushing on the front of the cylinder, that is why the 1858 Remingtons tend to bind up so quickly, they lack a bushing on the front of the cylinder.











I'm not sure where the binding was coming from, but it was not coming from fouling slipping past the bushing. When I removed the cylinder pin/loading lever to clean the revolver, there was no fouling on the cylinder pin.

The binding was coming from somewhere else.

This will require further study on my part.

 

[Rustmangler]

I think they make pins so it's easier to pull the cylinder.

 

[Mizar]

What are the odds that the cylinder is binding from too little endshake or BC gap, Driftwood?

 

[45 Dragoon]

DJ, the bp loads may be a little dirty for the "closed" conversion cylinder? The cases may be backing the end cap to the rear with blow-by fouling binding the the cases in position.
I've never had a problem with the Howell cyl in a Remington or the Kirsts in a Remington or my ROA's but I shoot smokeless.

Mike

 

[noelf2]

Leave off the rammer and lever when you shoot. All you really need is the pin. Keeping it simple makes loading easier. Your cases look way dirtier than mine do after shooting bp cartridges. Are you using light or heavy bp loads, fillers? I think Mike is on to something about the end cap causing the binding. Were the cases hard to extract? I have the same setup as you, and haven't had the binding issue, but like Mike I shoot smokeless mostly.

 

[Jackrabbit1957]

Ran into the same problem with an 1872 conversion open top. The cases weren't expanding enough to seal the chambers, they were difficult to extract and covered with soot. I know this isn't a Ruger with a conversion cylinder but the principal is the same.

 

[Heir Kommt Die Sonne]

You guys with your stainless ROAs; so lucky.
Anyway, the binding issues is why it was impractical to 'swap cylinders for reloading' in the day. Nonetheless, a cartridge is still a very useful thing.

 

[44 Dave]

Love the .44 WCF for black powder, even with light loads and filler they seal.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Leave off the rammer and lever when you shoot. All you really need is the pin. Keeping it simple makes loading easier. Your cases look way dirtier than mine do after shooting bp cartridges. Are you using light or heavy bp loads, fillers? I think Mike is on to something about the end cap causing the binding. Were the cases hard to extract? I have the same setup as you, and haven't had the binding issue, but like Mike I shoot smokeless mostly.

Howdy

Good point about only using the pin when shooting, although I am not sure I could get away with that at a SASS match, because the revolver would not be in its original configuration.

A full charge of (around 35 grains or so) Schuetzen FFg under a 250 grain Big Lube bullet. Compressed about 1/16" - 1/8" when the bullet is seated. No fillers, perish the thought. My brass always looks dark because I do not run it through steel pins when tumbling. I rinse the brass in soapy water until it comes clean, dry it over night, then tumble it in Lizzard Litter. It never comes out shiny again.

What are the odds that the cylinder is binding from too little endshake or BC gap, Driftwood?

DJ, the bp loads may be a little dirty for the "closed" conversion cylinder? The cases may be backing the end cap to the rear with blow-by fouling binding the the cases in position.

Yup, I'm thinking that is the problem.

The barrel/cylinder gap is .006 and there is absolutely no endshake. The cylinder does not move forward or back at all.

What I noticed was every time I took the rear cap off the cylinder to reload, there was a heavy deposit of soot around the individual firing pins from blowby in the chambers. I scrubbed the soot off the front of the cylinder, but did not think much about the soot on the face of the cap. So sitting here at home I'm thinking the soot from the first shot backed the cap off the cylinder enough so it was binding when I cocked the hammer.

The chambers are running around .483-.485 in diameter.

SAAMI calls out .4862 +.004/-.000 for chamber diameter. So according to SAAMI, the chambers are a little bit small.







Interestingly enough, I never have this problem when shooting cartridges in my old EuroArms Remington with its R&D cylinder. The drawback to the Remington design is no bushing on the front of the cylinder, so soot blasted out of the barrel/cylinder gap gets deposited directly onto the cylinder pin, binding the cylinder. Applying extra bore butter to the pin and scrubbing off the fronts of the cylinders at every reload keeps binding with the Remington to a minimum. But I have never noticed heavy buildup of soot around the firing pins of the Remington cylinder.

The Remington has a barrel/cylinder gap of .002 with .005 endshake. Also, chambers on the Remington cartridge conversion cylinder are tighter, running around .480 in diameter. These chambers are so tight I use this cylinder as a cartridge gauge when loading 45 Colt. Any round that will drop into this cylinder will drop into the looser chambers of my Colts.








My Black Powder 45 Colt ammo is running .472-.473 at the case mouth.

So there is a worst case gap of around .013 when I chamber a round in the ROA cylinder.

Only about .007 with the Remington.

As we all know, Black Powder charges may not develop enough pressure to expand a .012 thick 45 Colt case in a chamber, allowing blowby.

So I suspect the blowby is shoving the cap back enough to make the cylinder bind.

I am stuck with the 483-.485 diameter chambers, there is nothing I can do about that.

The only solution I can think of is to have a friend with a lathe kiss off about .001 or .002 from the front of the bushing, so there will be a little bit of endshake. Hopefully that will loosen things up enough so the soot blasted back in the chambers will not cause the cylinder to bind.

Hopefully this does not make things worse.

Thoughts?

I'm getting really ticked off that a lot of my photos are not coming through these days.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Love the .44 WCF for black powder, even with light loads and filler they seal.

Yeah, my 44-40 rifles are the same. Because of the .007 thick brass at the case mouth, the brass always expands to seal the chambers.

But that really does not help me much with my 45 Colt conversion cylinder for my Ruger Old Army, does it?

 

[Mizar]

I have no experience with conversion cylinders and only limited one with ROA, so I really cannot give any valuable advise here... Having said that, endshake in the limits of .001-.002 sounds OK - it's not too extreme, even for a tight fitted Colt. Why don't you give Howell a call and see what they think about that binding problem?

 

[Jim Watson]

Ever try annealing .45 Colt case mouths so they will obturate at low pressure?

 

[Acorn Mush]

As we all know, Black Powder charges may not develop enough pressure to expand a .012 thick 45 Colt case in a chamber, allowing blowby

Do you think annealing your cases might increase the chances of sealing chambers upon firing, thereby reducing the sooty blowback? I know it would add more work to the reloading process, but you might get two or three loadings before going through the annealing process again. Just a thought.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Ever try annealing .45 Colt case mouths so they will obturate at low pressure?

Nope.

I know some folks do that, but I do not want to load up some ammo just for the Ruger.

One extra step that I don't want to go through.

My 45 Colt ammo works fine in my Colts, and the one Uberti Cattleman I still have.

The same reason I don't load up some 44-40 with .427 bullets for some of my rifles and .429 bullets for some of the others.

Loading up ammo differently for just one gun is something I avoid.

For that matter I could probably fireform some of my 44-40 ammo in the 45 Colt Old Army chambers, and then load it up as 45 Colt.

Ain't gonna do that either.

But thanks for asking.

 

[Jackrabbit1957]

For that tiny amount of material you want to remove a bit of 300 grit wet/ dry sand paper on a piece of glass will work saving you the effort of getting someone to turn it on a lathe.

 

[Black cloud]

Why not just go buy a blackhawk?

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Why not just go buy a blackhawk?

You mean like this one that I bought brand-spanky new in 1975?






Or these old Three Screws? A 44 Mag on the left and two 357 Mags.






I guess you are a little late to the party.

I got a terrific price on the Old Army about a month or two ago. I took it to the range and fired it with the Cap & Ball cylinder, and had a great time with it.

If you care to read about me shooting it as a Cap & Ball revolver you can find that here:

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/look-what-followed-me-home-the-other-day.913410/


The point of this thread is that cartridge conversion cylinders are available for the Ruger Old Army, and frankly I would rather be shooting it as a cartridge revolver than a Cap & Ball revolver.

I got the Old Army for such a terrific price that I did not mind investing a bit more to be able to shoot it with cartridges.

Although if it winds up being more fussy to shoot it with cartridges I may just shoot it at CAS matches as a Cap & Ball revolver.




Anyway, here are my latest thoughts before I mechanically alter the cylinder.

The cylinder will accommodate the larger diameter rims of the 45 Schofield cartridge. (Incidentally, when R&D first offered these cartridge conversion cylinders many years ago, the wider rims about .520 vs .512 for 45 Colt, would not seat in the recesses for the rims. I had a gunsmith open up the recesses just enough that 45 Schofield rims would fit. Any way, the 45 Colt conversion cylinders now have enough room for wider 45 Schofield rims.)






I do not load them very often, but I do load 45 Schofields with Black Powder on occasion.






My 45 Schofield rounds have less powder and a lighter bullet than my 45 Colt rounds, only about 28.5 grains of Schuetzen FFg and a 200 grain Big Lube bullet, vs about 33.5 grains of Schuetzen under a 250 grain Big Lube bullet for 45 Colt.






So I'm thinking on my next outing I will bring along some of my Black Powder 45 Colts along with some of my Black Powder 45 Schofields and compare the results. The Schofield rounds will probably develop less pressure than the 45 Colt rounds, owing to the lighter powder charge and lighter bullets. So I do not expect the blowby problem to go away. But they might generate enough less soot that the cylinder will not bind.

If not, I will probably be visiting my friend with his lathe.

Sandpaper and glass? I think not. My pal is a professional machinist, and he can skim off a couple of thousands much more quickly and much more accurately than I could ever hope to do lapping the bushing on sandpaper.