cylinder throat/bore dimensions?

[LongWalker]

I've been offered a USFA in trade, and it looks like it might be a good shooter, but...it is NIB, and seller won't even let me try the action, let alone slug the cylinder throats and bore.  Caliber is 44 special.  How did these run for cylinder throat dimensions and bore dimensions?

Thanks,
Jim

[Pettifogger]

If I were selling a gun I would not let you slug the cylinder or bore either.

[GaryG]

Assuming it's a US made barrel and cylinder, the cylinder throats should be .4305-.4315.  The barrel grove should be .429 and the lands .417.  A .428 barrel was used in a dual cylinder 44 Sp / 44-40

[Professor Marvel]

He "ought to" allow you to measure with pin guages and, if you are serious,
Cycle the action carefully in order to ascertain the usual culprits.

I would never buy any pistol that the seller would not allow careful cycling, or
Careful removal of the cylinder.

Slugging is for once you own it.

Your money, your call.

Prof marvel

[Coffinmaker]

  PLUS ONE for Pettifogger 

[LongWalker]

thanks to all for the replies.  I apologize, I should perhaps have been more clear.  I was approached by an acquaintance who offered to trade to me this USFA revolver and a couple of Colts.  It isn't as if I am seeking to purchase them. . . .  I'm just trying to figure if it is worth considering.  I know little about USFA, or the gun (flat top target with some engraving).  In considering it as a shooter, I'm trying to figure how I should value it. 

How would I determine if the barrel and cylinder are US-made or imported?

The comment about slugging bores and cylinders is an inside joke: one of the Colt's he offered is a parts gun we put together at a gun show about 25 years ago.  He'd found a blackpowder frame (from 1882 IIRC), so we dug through parts boxes looking for the other parts.  The gun wound up as a 38-40 because that was the best match of bore diameters we could find after slugging every barrel and cylinder we could find at the show. 

[OD#3]

I have exactly one USFA in .44 special--a rodeo that has the finest, most precise lockwork I've ever encountered in a production single action revolver.  HOWEVER, it has the absolute WORST chamber finish I've ever encountered in a production single action revolver, which makes ejection very, very sticky.  Your post has reminded me to finally get around to tackling this problem.  I purchased the cylinder hones many months ago, but I just never got around to it.  I have to agree with the others here concerning slugging before purchase--that isn't something I'd be comfortable with either, if I was the seller; but if I was considering the purchase of another USFA in .44 special--and I had access to it before the sale--I'd be scrutinizing the chamber finishes very carefully.

[Dave T]

OD#3, every time you post about that problem I feel very bad.  In the few months I owned that revolver I never fired it.  If memory serves I was working on duplicating the original ballistic performance of the full powder black powder 45 Colt and never fired the 44.  When I sold it to you I had no idea there was a problem.

I once offered to buy it back from you and the offer still stands.  Save you all that extra work!  (smiley face goes here)

Dave

[OD#3]

No way, Dave!  Although I really appreciate your trying to "make good" on what you perceive to have been an oversight on your part, I don't feel cheated nor taken advantage of in the least bit.  Nor do I consider you negligent for not test-firing it before selling it.  I don't know about everyone else, but I've sold or traded a fair number of firearms over the years which I'd never gotten a chance to shoot.  In fact, that was often the reason I got rid of them in the first place--I'd just never gotten around to using them.  So I'd considered them surplus to my needs. 

Re-reading my earlier post, it does sound like I have regrets.  For that, I apologize.  I'd take rough chambers that need a little honing any day just to have such a perfect action as this revolver has.  I guess it was just my giving the OP a warning that SOME USFA's in .44 special might have rough chambers. 

Again, please don't waste a single moment regretting our transaction.  I don't, and I remain grateful to you for selling it to me.  It remains one of my prized acquisitions.

[Coffinmaker]

  HEY!!  Odie 

By golly it's good to hear from you.  Thought you packed up and went to Alaska for King Crab fishing!!!

I'm gonna wade in > Again <  Every manufacturer manages to sell a "Thursday" product every no and then.  Bad chambers are not all that uncommon.  Over the years I had my shingle out I ran into dozens.  Literally DOZENS!!..  I actually gave up on Ruger altogether.  Ruger chambers and cylinder throats are atrocious.  Uberti rifle chambers just plain SUCK!!

Now.  OD#3.  You be righteous careful with that chamber "hone."  You might be better served to make a flap sander with some 600 Wet/Dry and go easy.  Just buff out the stupid machine marks.  In fact, I might even start with some 800.  Don't really want to remove much if any metal.  Just make the chambers nice and SMOOOOTH!!  Just my take.  OH, almost forgot.  If you do apply the chamber hone, DO NOT use the hone without HONING OIL!!  Without honing oil, you will ruin the hone and the chamber.

HAPPY NEW YEAR!!

Stay safe and Healthy.  People are Hazardous to yer Health

[OD#3]

Hey Coffinmaker,

I appreciate the sentiments and the warm welcome.  I'd come under the impression that my admiration for Standard Manufacturing's single actions had raised the ire of a few in this forum.  I check in regularly, but I haven't posted in a long while. 

Thanks for the advice on honing.  The hones I bought are actually the second set I've purchased from that concern.  The first ones  I acquired years ago in .45 Colt.  That purchase included a large bottle of honing oil, of which I still have a great amount left. 

The biggest reason I never got around to treating the USFA cylinder, is that I was mulling over exactly how I would mount it in the drill press.  I wanted to set everything up so that each hone spent the same amount of time and depth in each chamber and that each chamber was aligned perfectly.  When I purchased the earlier .45 hones, I was trying to rescue a S&W 2nd model hand ejector that had been originally chambered in .455 but had been subsequently altered to .45 Colt.  The original importer had done a very bad job.  The chambers were left non-concentric and rough.  Ultimately, though I smoothed the chambers well, I had no faith in the integrity of the chamber walls due to their non-concentric nature, leaving some very thin chamber walls in some areas.  I ended up fitting a NOS 1980's era cylinder in .45 ACP to that revolver.  That's a job I vow never to do again, as it occupied many, many hours cutting each ratchet tooth in the cylinder star with needle files just to get everything timed well.  An expert would have exclaimed that one couldn't fit a 1980's cylinder to a WWI era S&W; but I managed to do it, and I ended up with a very nice action with a tight cylinder gap. 

All that to say that I have some experience with cylinder honing, which is why I've held off delving into this USFA cylinder until I figured out how to set up everything just right.  I don't want to enlarge the chambers--just smooth them up equally.  Ideally, each pass with the hone will be of the same duration and depth with each chamber.  BTW, that's an interesting suggestion about the flap sander. 

Again, thanks for the warm "hello".  I didn't think you liked me anymore after the exchange about Standard Manufacturing.

[Abilene]

OD#3, I enjoy reading/watching your stuff, because you know more than I do and know how to convey it.  Everybody is opinionated (except me, of course.  I simply know what is right and wrong.  )   Heck, Coffinmaker makes fun of anybody with a pistol barrel longer than 3".   

[Coffinmaker]

  OH HEVENS TO MERGATROYD 

Parish that thought.  Nothing personal atall.  I'm just not enamored of Standard.  Especially at their price point.  Don't get me wrong, their SAs are nice guns, just not really "that" nice.  Pair of Pietta's anyone (snicker snicker) ??

But seriously.  Consider that home made "flap sander."  Twer it mine, I'd start with 800 until the chambers looked good, then I'd switch to 2000.  The base idea is to knock the sharp edges off the tool marks and then buff everything to a righteous shine without oversizing the chambers.  Also, with the flap do-hickey, you don't need a drill press and jig.  Just a nice stick and a variable speed cordless.  It's about a "One Cup" job (cover the cup)

People are being Hazardous to yer Health.