Ruger Toklat cylinder play

[Deaf Smith]

I have a Ruger Toklat .454 and the cylinder very slightly can be rocked a bit at full cock.

Yes, I know a slight amount of play in the cylinder is ok but I'm a purist. I prefer zero-zero lockup on my revolvers. So, would a new cylinder latch or paw/hand tighten the cylinder play?

And does the GP100 use the same cylinder latch and/or paw(hand?)

Thanks,

Deaf

 

[eldon519]

I'm pretty sure the cylinder stop is the only thing that would effect this.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

I believe eldon is correct. Isn't it purely a matter of how the cylinder stop and the bolt cuts interact?

It isn't shaving lead right, it just bugs you?

 

[Old Fuff]

Generally speaking you only find "bank safe door lockup" in perfectly timed Colt double-action/hand ejector revolvers and some equally fitted Colt or Colt-style Single Actions.

This however is not always a good thing, unless when the cylinder is locked by the bolt/cylinder stop the chamber is perfectly aligned and concentric with the bore. In the real world this seldom happens in mass produced revolvers on all chambers.

They're exceptions (think Freedom Arms and some other custom builders) that first fit the cylinder to perfection, and then line bore the chamber pilot holes while the cylinder is locked in the frame and the drill goes through a bushing screwed in the hole where the barrel would normally be. Thus each chamber will be concentric with the bore - or at least as much so as is humanely possible. But all this is not inexpensive so you'd better have deep pockets.

This is why most (if not all) mass produced revolvers have a little wiggle built in so the bullet can self-align as it passes from the chamber into the bore.

On most Ruger single action's they're is more wiggle then is necessary because of play between the hole in the cylinder and the base pin. You can eliminate this with a custom fitted base pin, and not have to sell the farm.

 

[eldon519]

Actually now that you mention it Old Fuff, I recall a custom smith lamenting the popularity of the oversized base pins pretty much for that reason. A little play in the cylinder allows the chamber and forcing cone to roughly align and adjust a little bit. If you take an oversized pin and remove some of that play, you can actually get asymmetrical erosion to the forcing cone if there is significant misalignment since the bullet will be striking it unevenly.

 

[Old Fuff]

A correctly fitted custom base pin will only remove excessive play.

Now the trick is to define, excessive.

Obviously not all single action revolvers need new base pins. That said, what is essential to have is rotational (side to side) play, and hopefully very little of that.

 

[Old Fuff]

Oh! and I forgot to mention.

The GP100 and various Ruger single action models do not share any common lockwork, and this includes hands (by whatever name) that rotate the cylinder.

 

[Deaf Smith]

There is no end shake or crane shake guys. Just a bit of cylinder side to side wobble with the cylinder closed. Yes I know zero-zero fit is hard to get but.. I do have some S&Ws that are just like that. Just locks snug when you close the cylnder.


I think, but not sure, Ruger GP100 hand a cylinder stop are the same as the Ruger Super Redhawk.

If so I could get a few of each and see if one is a bit oversized (hand or cylinder stop) and that keeps the cylinder from any movement (and yes I know one can go to far and the gun won't cycle.)

Deaf

 

[CraigC]

I prefer zero-zero lockup on my revolvers.

As stated above, this is not always beneficial.

 

[Jim K]

The person who demands that his revolvers have no play at all will probably not own many revolvers.

The "bank vault lockup" of the old DA Colts had two drawbacks. The first was that it resulted in excess wear on the hand, notches, bolt and frame; the second was that with wear the hand could actually force the cylinder out of alignment, past the proper alignment point.

Jim

 

[Deaf Smith]

As stated above, this is not always beneficial.

Didn't say it was always beneficial but I LIKE them being that way.

I do have a few revolvers..

These being just a small number of my K frames, with some Rugers,... and I have a wide selection of N frames to as well as Js. Most of the S&Ws sleep in the safe, just my Ruger Toklat (which replaced my Stag handled 629-1 as the cannon), GP100, and a SP101 DAO stay out and about along with an airweight J.

Will see if a Ruger GP100 hand and cylinder stop fits tomorrow. If so, I can get a few of them. Worst upon worst when I have the gun Metaloy'ed that will take up the three chambers that have a small wobble.

Deaf

 

[eldon519]

I would think a SRH hand would be taller than that of a GP100 because of the larger frame window.

 

[Old Fuff]

I think, but not sure, Ruger GP100 hand a cylinder stop are the same as the Ruger Super Redhawk.

Ruger uses the same pawl (hand) and cylinder latch (bolt) in models GP100, Redhawk and Super Redhawk.

If so I could get a few of each and see if one is a bit oversized (hand or cylinder stop) and that keeps the cylinder from any movement (and yes I know one can go to far and the gun won't cycle.)

But you're still missing the main issue: When the cylinder is rigidly locked is the chamber concentric with the bore? Gunsmiths used to check this using a gauge called a range rod. It looked somewhat like a short cleaning rod but threaded on one end. With it were a set of plugs. To check cylinder/barrel alignment a plug was selected that would just barely slide down the bore. It was attached to the rod, and with the cylinder locked ran down the bore (and hopefully) passed into the chamber throat without resistance. If it didn't then the bore and chamber weren't concentric, and in theory if not practice, would shave lead from the bullet on one side. A little (and I stress "little) rotational wiggle would eliminate the problem.

Years ago I had a discussion about this with Bill Ruger Sr. He related on how the company had sold a certain number of .38 Special Security Six revolvers to the Army. Not long after some engineer with zero experience or knowledge about revolvers called to say that the cylinder on some were "too loose," and he wanted them fixed by increasing the width on the cylinder latch's ball. Bill told him he was wrong, but he would refit the problem guns with cylinder latches made to the government's tolerances. This he did.

Not long after he got another call from the same engineer, who was now saying that sometimes the latch would skip a notch and carry on halfway to the next chamber. This was entirely predictable, but Bill told him to again return the revolvers, which were reassembled with the original latches but carefully inspected for (by company standers) excessive cylinder rotation. After that the engineer-in-question was no longer heard from.

Anyway the key point I am trying to make is that:

An absolutely tight lock-up is next to useless, and even counter-productive if the chamber isn't concentric with the bore and can't center itself.





__________________

 

[CraigC]

An absolutely tight lock-up is next to useless, and even counter-productive if the chamber isn't concentric with the bore and can't center itself.

Exactly! I don't want mine to lock up like a "bank vault" (I hate that term, along with "Rugers are built like tanks") unless it's a linebored custom or Freedom Arms. Unless bore/chamber alignment is perfect on every chamber, a little rotational slack is preferred.

 

[MaxP]

Exactly, Craig!

So, how does it shoot?

 

[murf]

thank god for the forcing cone!!! else we would all be spittin lead!

murf