Cimarron 1872 Open Top Cylinder Hole "Tightness"

[tkcomer]

Got my 1872 Navy Open Top in and attempting to set up for reloading for it.  It's a 44 Special gun.  Now then, virgin Winchester brass will not drop in the cylinder.  They drop in just fine on my 629 Smith and Wesson.  If I size the brass, it will go in, but you have to push it just a little.  I then seated a .429" fmj hollow point bullet at 1.50" without a crimp.  It would not drop in at all.  Same bullet dropped into my 629.  Once crimped, it would go in with a little shove. 

Then I find out my .431" 200grn store bought cast bullets will not fit through the end of the cylinder.  Those were the ones I wanted to use as I thought they would be easier on the gun.  They fit through my 629, but are a tight fit.  My store bought .430" 240 grain cast fit, but one hole is tight.

So I ask, are the holes in the cylinders normally this tight?

The gun is beautiful and I can't wait for it to warm up so I can bench it to see what it can do.  Any advice would be appreciated.  I may have more questions once I get the gun going.   

[Flint]

Mine are not tight, one is chambered 44 Special and the other 44 Colt.  The Special chambers fine, the Colt chambers Special for diameter (not length), and both chamber 44 Russian, which is what I shoot.

Not heard of the problem before, perhaps the cylinder didn't get a finish ream.  If it hasn't been fired, which it sounds like is true, try returning for a different one, or having the chambers freshed out.

[Paladin UK]

Like Flint says.............

Not heard of the problem before, perhaps the cylinder didn't get a finish ream.  If it hasn't been fired, which it sounds like is true, try returning for a different one, or having the chambers freshed out.

+1

Paladin (What lurvs his opentops ) UK

[Mako]

TK,
I'm sorry you are having problems with your new prized pistol.

As Flint and Paladin have said it should fit a Ø.431 bullet.  The pilot guide on a .44 Spl or a .44 Colt reamer is nominally Ø.431 which means it has to have clearance of about .001" to even rotate.  A lot of people would be envious of your tight chambers, most of them are pretty loose, I'll measure mine when I get home later and I'll post it for you, I'll bet they are Ø.432 plus.

The reason I say some would be envious is that it pretty much negates any possibility for blow back if you use Ø.429 bullets with Black Powder.  Ø.429 appears to be the diameter of choice for BP unless you have an old Winchester in .44WCF which uses a Ø427 bullet.  Blow back is not as much of a problem with revolvers, it is sometimes an issue with rifle chambers.

I know I used to get Ø.430 swaged bullets for my .44 spl loads I shot in 24s and 29s. I just checked and it appears that companies like Laser Cast are offering them only in Ø.431 or Ø.427 for smokless bullets, it's been a while since I bought any smokeless lubed lead for a caliber larger that .38, I just use the BP lube for both.

The concern I have is that factory brass doesn't fit and resized brass is still tight.  If the fired shells ejected easily then I would keep it, but that is me and I will deal with differences etc.  That would be my keep or return (or have the chambers reamed as Flint suggested) decision point.  Contact Cimarron and they can ream it for you.  They have a gunsmith they use for warranty work and as Abilene told you they often ream .44 Colt to .44 Spl on request if they don't have the .44 spl in stock.  Since you are the owner you can legally ship it to and from a gunsmith.  If I were reaming it I would just ask for the cylinder because it keeps the paperwork to a minimum.  Call them, they are pretty helpful.  Be sure to ask if you can just send the cylinder.

Let us know what they tell you.  If you have problems email me.

Regards,
Mako

[Coffinmaker]

TK,

This is a "new one."  I haven't run into this one before and haven't had any of my many Open Top customers mention it either.  I'm going to go with the previous thoughts.  The Cylinder wasn't finish reamed at the factory.  That can be done now by a competent gunsmith and will probably cost 15 - 20 bucks per hole.  All six need to be done.  That said ........

Cimarron owes you warranty.  It may not even cost postage in the end.  Cimarron may send you a pick-up ticket.  I would suggest you contact Cimarron and see what they want to do.  If Cimarron decides to replace the cylinder, they will want the whole gun.  If they decide to have yours finish reamed, they may just want the cylinder.  It's a nuisance to have to ship stuff back but you shouldn't have to pay to have a brandy new gun "fixed."

Coffinmaker

[tkcomer]

The more I fool with it, the better it's getting.  The unsized brass will almost drop in.  With a tighter roll crimp, dummy rounds are now dropping in.  And will drop right out if the gun is held up.  I gave the cylinder another cleaning.  This time I used Kroil and got some more of that protective brown lube out.  That was probably the real culprit.  I just know I can't put .431" bullets in it. 

Man that wedge is persnickety.  Just a hair too much and the cylinder won't rotate with a round in it.  Pretty much got it all the way out against the screw.

Now to pull the rounds apart.  Gonna go with the 240grn cast.  These are old and some of the lube rings are gone.  Gonna put the Lee Alox on them and I'll load 6 with 4.8grs Trail Boss tomorrow.  We'll see how those six do.  Gonna look for lead on the forcing cone.  If all goes well, then it'll be time to load a bunch and benchrest the gun and see where it shoots.  But I'll wait for warmer weather to do that.

Thanks for the help.  I got worked up as things didn't go as planned right off the bat.  I just needed to settle down and remember I have to work with this gun.     

[Fox Creek Kid]

All guns companies use different reamers built to their own specs within the SAAMI regs. That can allow for enough leeway to cause problems such as yours. It's the dirty secret of revolvers. 

[tkcomer]

After what Mako said, I'm gonna leave the cylinder as is.  Not sure if a tight cylinder will improve accuracy, but I figure it can't hurt.  And it really isn't that tight after the second cleaning.  I just used a nylon brush and a quick swab the first time.  Plus I'm using my 44 Mag dies.  I might not have gotten all the bell out the first time.  I cranked the Lee FCD down to where I could see a slight crimp, and then they started going in with just a slight shove.  A little more crimp and they dropped in.

Main concern now is cylinder timing.  I'll check for leading tomorrow.  Bullets are drying now.  Like I said, the lube rings are gone on a lot of 'em.  Hoping that the Alox takes care of that. 

[Mako]

TK and All:

I  must first start out by saying I was very surprised.  I currently have a limited population to measure, but based on 24 measurements of four cylinders I have to report that the Uberti chamber freebore runs tight on the .44 Spl. Conversions and Open Tops I own.

I used two +(plus) gage sets because in this case I was using the pins as "Go-Gages."    At the low limit of the hole to be checked it is usually given a plus tolerance in order to insure the feature is within the dimension being reported.  In my home shop I only have full Plus and Minus Sets from .0610" to .5000" in whole and .0005" increments.  I have .0001" increment gages at my disposal, but that would be overkill for these measurements.

http://i627.photobucket.com/albums/tt358/Mako_CAS/Cylinder%20Measurements/TypeII2.jpg

On every chamber the size was confirmed using the pin .0005" above the reported dimension.  Since we are concerned with how large of a bullet will fit, then the dimension reported and then up to .00049" larger is the theoretical maximum that could fit.  I am stopping at .00049" because 10 millionths of an inch (the "9" in this case) with this type of measurement is already silly
For example a reported dimension of .4305" in theory might accept a .4309" gage but the .4310 gage will not fit.  So the dimension would be .4305" - .4309" and reported as .4305".

On the charts below any number falling less than Ø.4310 is highlighted in yellow, any number which fell above Ø.4310 is highlighted in green.  Before I took the measurements I had expected all of the dimensions to fall above Ø.4315" and be highlighted green.

http://i627.photobucket.com/albums/tt358/Mako_CAS/Cylinder%20Measurements/CylinderChart.png

Just to make sure I wasn't delusional I pulled a 30 year old Smith 29 from the safe and each chamber would accept a Ø.4320+ pin and a Ø.4325+ wouldn't pass.  This is exactly what was expected based on SAAMI specs for .44 Mag cylinders.  I would expect the same on .44 special as well.

I don't have any virgin Winchester .44 Special brass but I have untouched Starline brass and they dropped in and dropped out of  the Type II #2 (smallest of the measured cylinders) when the cylinder was inverted.  I shoot Ø.429 Mav Dutchman 200 grain bullets exclusively in these four pistols and I have never had a problem.  I got the two Open Tops from a friend of mine and I know he shot smokeless loads and bullets in them and he never hinted at a problem.  I would have known because I recommended them to him.

So Tk, based on my measurements your cylinder is about like my four.  It looks like the factory standard is tight.   I have a couple of recommendations  now.
Buy yourself a Lee Factory Crimp Die if you want the brass to drop in and out and you are going to be using smokeless.  It resizes a loaded shell at the crimping operation.  Get it here:

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct/?productnumber=563825

http://www.amazon.com/Lee-Factory-Pistol-Special-Russian/dp/B000N8MWK0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=sporting-goods&qid=1295737866&sr=1-1

If you are going to use Black Powder (the intelligent choice for whooping and womping Cowboys...) then try different brass brands and settle on the one that drops in unsized.  Don't use a Lee Factory Crimp Die because you want the fit to be just drop in tight.  In fact a lot of people don't resize their BP brass.  We just bell it to accept a bullet and then crimp it.  Use only Ø.429 bullets (get them here):

http://whyteleatherworks.com/BigLube.html

Regards,
Mako

[tkcomer]

OK, tried the gun out, but chickened out and backed down to 4.4grs of Trail Boss with the 240gr cast bullets.  I only shot 12 rounds.  Gun was very pleasant to shoot.  Not as loud as I'd thought it's be.  No real accuracy tests as my eyes watered up as soon as I walked out the door with the bright sunlight and blinding snow.  I managed to hit a pop can twice the first time and once the second.  That tells me the sights are pretty darn close.  I'll need some practice to get used to the gun.

Gun ran flawless.  No binding, just a smooth operation.  And the spent shells came right out.  The screw that holds the ejector rod and housing came loose, but that might have been loose before I started.  Absolutely no leading and no lead around the forcing cone.  Going to up the powder charge to 4.8grs as the gun was so pleasant to shoot.  That should get me around 725fps.

All in all, I love this gun.  But I gotta practice.  Got some friends that want to compete with their "carry" guns when it warms up.  Be nice if I could beat a couple of them.  Just to show what these old timey guns can do.  Thanks again for all the info.   

[Mako]

TK,
That's great news!

Now go buy yourself some REMOVABLE thread locker.  We use to just call it "Blue Loctite"

http://www.amazon.com/Loctite-Threadlocker-Medium-Strength-color/dp/B0015PI75E

It doesn't have to be the Loctite brand.  You can get it at automotive stores and probably Walmart, Target, hardware stores, etc.

Just a drop on the threads for your ejector assembly and don't bugger your screw slot from trying to "crank it down" tight.  Just snug it up and it will hold.  It won't come loose now and you can remove it later which is why you want the blue.

That's a good if not the best powder choice for smokeless loads, we use it for all our cowboy cartridge smokeless loads.  It's all my daughters shoot in their pistols and rifles and I would even consider it for their shotshells (though it's not the most economical choice) if I didn't already have a big can of Clays which will last forever with their reduced recoil loads.

I am so glad this is working out for you, I was feeling bad for you after you were initially so excited.  It sounds like you have a winner in hand.

One last thing, every Uberti conversion or Open Top I have ever owned had a rough feeling ejection stroke.  In every case it was a very sharp edge or even burrs where the slot the ejector head runs in meets the inside bore of the ejector housing.  If this is true on your pistol and if you are mechanically inclined and feel comfortable removing the ejector housing we can walk you through removing the burrs.

Make sure there is a need, if it runs smoothly leave it alone.  It's just for rough feeling ejectors.  Even a rough one will get easier and break in after using it lot.  If you decide to do it let us know or PM me and I'll walk you through it.

I am very happy for you,
Mako

[Fox Creek Kid]

Mako, why aren't you shooting 0.430" bullets in those revolvers?    That's what I size all my bullets to that are used in my Uberti revolvers & Uberti rifles after slugging them. 

[Mako]

Mako, why aren't you shooting 0.430" bullets in those revolvers?    That's what I size all my bullets to that are used in my Uberti revolvers & Uberti rifles after slugging them. 

Kid,
I use ­ Ø.429 because they are readily available from my supplier and because they work well in my .44 caliber rifles.  I have two Uberti '66s in .44spl (one with the short carrier to allow me to use .44 Russian), one '73 in .44WCF, one '66 in .44WCF and a Henry in .44WCF.  They all chamber the cartridges easily and I don't get blowback with any of the .44WCF rifles, I get some with the .44 Spl and more with the .44 Russian.

With the ­Ø.429 I can use Winchester .44-40 brass, it would probably be too tight in two of my rifles if I went to Ø.430.

Besides the Uberti cylinder throats are actually under spec for SAAMI chambers on the four pistols I measured.  The SAAMI dimension is Ø.4325^+.004.  As you saw above I measured one S&W 29 as "control"  and it had Ø.4320  throats on all chambers and it is VERY accurate with  Ø.430 lead bullets and Ø.429 jacketed bullets. Those Ubertis are running .001" smaller in diameter, so I would expect an Ø.429 to work unless the actual barrel bore is very "oversize" relative to the chambers.

I haven't bothered to slug the pistol barrels , I'll have to do that sometime.  Since I only shoot BP through them I'm actually more concerned about the throat diameter to limit blowback than the accuracy from an optimized barrel bore.  If the grooves are over Ø.430 and I was striving for the ultimate accuracy I would probably open the throats to Ø.4315 and use a Ø.430 bullet, I have shot the Open Tops quite a bit and they are plenty accurate for CAS and I get minimal fouling with a fully compressed .44 Spl. case I get about a third of the case blackened with the .44 Russians.

I'm pretty sure a Ø.430 bullet might have problems with two of my rifles if they got a bit fouled.  I hate sorting brass by neck thickness, so I'm sticking with Starline and Ø.429 bullets with the .44WCFs. I would rather have reliability than any additional accuracy I would need for even the "long range" targets my clubs have.  If we're doing a Cody Dixon or long range match match I don't use a Henry pattern rifle.

I don't need another .44 caliber diameter for BP, I already have two.  I have some Ø.427 bullets I got from Slim for my Winchester and I have to keep those separated.  I'd hate to have both ­Ø.429 and Ø.430 Mav Dutchmans as well.  I have bunch of 240gr SWCs in Ø.430 for my ,modern revolvers and I'll bet all of my 29's, 629's and 24's have chamber throats running Ø.432.

~Mako

[Hoof Hearted]

Kid,
I use ­ Ø.429 because they are readily available from my supplier and because they work well in my .44 caliber rifles.  I have two Uberti '66s in .44spl (one with the short carrier to allow me to use .44 Russian), one '73 in .44WCF, one '66 in .44WCF and a Henry in .44WCF.  They all chamber the cartridges easily and I don't get blowback with any of the .44WCF rifles, I get some with the .44 Spl and more with the .44 Russian.

With the ­Ø.429 I can use Winchester .44-40 brass, it would probably be too tight in two of my rifles if I went to Ø.430.

Besides the Uberti cylinder throats are actually under spec for SAAMI chambers on the four pistols I measured.  The SAAMI dimension is Ø.4325^+.004.  As you saw above I measured one S&W 29 as "control"  and it had Ø.4320  throats on all chambers and it is VERY accurate with  Ø.430 lead bullets and Ø.429 jacketed bullets. Those Ubertis are running .001" smaller in diameter, so I would expect an Ø.429 to work unless the actual barrel bore is very "oversize" relative to the chambers.

I haven't bothered to slug the pistol barrels , I'll have to do that sometime.  Since I only shoot BP through them I'm actually more concerned about the throat diameter to limit blowback than the accuracy from an optimized barrel bore.  If the grooves are over Ø.430 and I was striving for the ultimate accuracy I would probably open the throats to Ø.4315 and use a Ø.430 bullet, I have shot the Open Tops quite a bit and they are plenty accurate for CAS and I get minimal fouling with a fully compressed .44 Spl. case I get about a third of the case blackened with the .44 Russians.

I'm pretty sure a Ø.430 bullet might have problems with two of my rifles if they got a bit fouled.  I hate sorting brass by neck thickness, so I'm sticking with Starline and Ø.429 bullets with the .44WCFs. I would rather have reliability than any additional accuracy I would need for even the "long range" targets my clubs have.  If we're doing a Cody Dixon or long range match match I don't use a Henry pattern rifle.

I don't need another .44 caliber diameter for BP, I already have two.  I have some Ø.427 bullets I got from Slim for my Winchester and I have to keep those separated.  I'd hate to have both ­Ø.429 and Ø.430 Mav Dutchmans as well.  I have bunch of 240gr SWCs in Ø.430 for my ,modern revolvers and I'll bet all of my 29's, 629's and 24's have chamber throats running Ø.432.

~Mako

So why not "uniform" all of your chambers and cylinder throats?
This can be easily done and would eliminate all these issues........

[Mako]

So why not "uniform" all of your chambers and cylinder throats?
This can be easily done and would eliminate all these issues........

Hoof,

What issues? 

I read my post again and I'm not sure what you mean.  My revolver chamber throats are actually very consistent for production guns considering we are talking about 24 chambers on 4 pistols.   I only have a range of .0015", that's plenty consistent.  It's closer than commercial ammunition mouth diameters from brand to brand.

I shoot Ø.429 Mav Dutchman bullets which are available from at least two sources.  Mark Whyte has them, Dash Caliber has them.  In fact if I opened my throats up I would be creating a looser fit for my revolvers if I used my preferred source of bullets,   Mark sizes them Ø.429 and Ø.427.  I don't understand why I should change anything, what would be the advantage?   Even with an opened throat I still couldn't use Remington brass without making Starline and Winchester too loose.

My .44 caliber rifles are more than up to the task, they are reliable and accurate.  My .44 caliber revolvers are the same...

~Mako

[wildman1]

I noticed that Remington brass is thicker than most of the rest of them. Miss B has a Rossi '92 in 357 and ya can't get Remington into it in 38 spl or 357. But they drop right into my Ruger Single Six. WM (Still can't see your pics Mako)

[Hoof Hearted]

Hoof,

What issues? 

I read my post again and I'm not sure what you mean.  My revolver chamber throats are actually very consistent for production guns considering we are talking about 24 chambers on 4 pistols.   I only have a range of .0015", that's plenty consistent.  It's closer than commercial ammunition mouth diameters from brand to brand.

I shoot Ø.429 Mav Dutchman bullets which are available from at least two sources.  Mark Whyte has them, Dash Caliber has them.  In fact if I opened my throats up I would be creating a looser fit for my revolvers if I used my preferred source of bullets,   Mark sizes them Ø.429 and Ø.427.  I don't understand why I should change anything, what would be the advantage?   Even with an opened throat I still couldn't use Remington brass without making Starline and Winchester too loose.

My .44 caliber rifles are more than up to the task, they are reliable and accurate.  My .44 caliber revolvers are the same...

~Mako

Mako,
I probably have 20+ pistols and rifles in 44 caliber. Rather than spend time (precious to me) measuring every nuance of their chambers, I had reamers ground that allowed me to "uniform" their dimensions so that ANY brass would work with a .430 to .431 bullet. It is better to to have a bullet that is 1 to 2 thou over sized than undersized. I have sent tens of thousands of bullets downrange and can tell you that bullet obturation and the forcing cone take care of your concerns regarding minor "looseness"  in the throats.

I am a bit confused by your statements:
In this thread you say that Winchester brass is tight, but in this thread: http://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php/topic,38368.0.html

You say that it is Remington that is too tight.

[Hoof Hearted]

To the OP:
Sorry for the hijack

Mako,
I feel the need to clarify.....

Above I said "throat". While my statement is still valid regarding throats. There needs to be a couple thousandths clearance in the "neck" to allow the brass to release the bullet. I was referring to neck uniforming and throat uniforming based on the bullet size. Which, prudently, should be based on the bullet and your largest measured firearm (unless, of course, it is out of spec).

[Mako]

I am in agreement with Hoof Hearted....Equalize your throats
Also not sure of your use of the nomenclature... but the throat is the size of the opening at the muzzle of the cylinder and should have nothing to do with how the brass fits.

There really is no reason you should need to sort brass between guns...which is the issue that Hoof was writing of.

Raven

Raven,

Thanks for the advice but, have you ever measured the neck thickness of Remington brass on .44WCF?  Do it sometime and then compare it to Starline or even Winchester brass.  Anyone who competes with a .44WCF has been bitten, or will be bitten if they think they are interchangeable.

I know what the throat is, and I obviously have tight throats on the revolvers as SAAMI reckons them (the necks are also correspondingly tight).  The only reason I would need to open the throats up would be to allow the use of a larger bullet.  If I did that then I would have to enlarge the chamber necks.  It's a cascading effect.  If I did that then I would potentially have to open the throats and necks on 4 revolvers and 3 (or 5)  rifles.  And to what end?

I still don't understand what advantage you are offering me.  Sounds like a tempest in a teapot because I haven't made any complaints or said I have any problems.  Besides, where would I get my Ø.430 bullets?  Mark doesn't size them that way.

So let's say I take your advice.  I would have to buy at least a Ø.4315 straight reamer for the revolvers to open up the throats, then I would have to buy a tapered reamer for the chamber neck (or a new chambering reamer which may or may not match up with the rest of the chamber), the .44-40 has an almost .002" neck taper.  I can tell you from experience recutting the chambers with a new reamer almost NEVER matches up and requires going deeper.  I would have to set up and precision ream the depth of 24 revolver chambers and 3 (or 5) rifle chambers. The '66s in .44 spl probably don't need anything, but let's say they did, then we are looking at even another reamer.

So what is it I am gaining from all of that? The loss of my bullet source?  The cost of reamers?  The time to ream 27 (29) throats and chambers?  Will it prevent all blowback on all 9 firearms, and in .44WCF, .44Spl and .44Russian calibers?

I haven't yet heard any benefit being offered by anyone other than to say I have 27 (29) uniform chambers, or as it started out...throats.

I'm not trying to be difficult, and you know how I like precision, but the return on this doesn't seem justifiable.  If I were making new cylinders or rebarreling or setting back the rifle barrels I would be sweating the .0015" range between possibly 9 firearms.  The reality of it is that the rifles probably would add even more to the variance.  I've made cylinders, I've chambered rifle barrels and fitted actions, I've chambered many, many pistol barrels because we always purchased them short chambered. I know what it takes and still can't see the return.

I will happily ream those throats if there is a demonstrable return.  This all started because first the Kid posted because I linked this old thread to a question Marshall Deadwood had about bullet weights and sizes for .44WCF. Then Hoof offered I needed to change my throats and now you.  I respect each of you as being knowledgeable, but where is the problem I am supposed to be solving?

Thanks, and I seriously mean that, I know you were offering friendly advice,
Mako

[Raven]

Mako

All this is meant as friendly discussion.

But the OP was asking about the problems he was havinhg chambering rounds in his cylinder and I would agree others who posted that the cylinder inquestion was not finished correctly.

Equalizing the chambers in his cylinder most likely would solve his problem.

If we are going to discuss these things we need to use a standard nomenclature.... The throat of a cylinder and the neck of the chamber are not the same thing. Your .429 bullets will work with .4315 throats.

So let's say I take your advice.  I would have to buy at least a Ø.4315 straight reamer for the revolvers to open up the throats, then I would have to buy a tapered reamer for the chamber neck (or a new chambering reamer which may or may not match up with the rest of the chamber), the .44-40 has an almost .002" neck taper.  I can tell you from experience recutting the chambers with a new reamer almost NEVER matches up and requires going deeper.  I would have to set up and precision ream the depth of 24 revolver chambers and 3 (or 5) rifle chambers. The '66s in .44 spl probably don't need anything, but let's say they did, then we are looking at even another reamer.

Welcome to the life of a gunsmith
People don't always understand why a gunsmith charges what they do, investment in tooling is a big part of it.
We have a set of reamers that we had made just for what we have been discussing

Maybe I missed the point somewere along the line, but I'm not going to own 9 guns in the same caliber that will not shoot the same ammo.  Unless it's 9 ORIGINAL 1st Model Richards.

And PLEASE take this in the friendly manner I intend.... you and I come from two different schools of thought on gunsmithing and number/measurements... to me the only reason to collect all that data is to do some thing about it.

Most of the time it doesn't matter if you know what the dimensions of a part is, all that maters is that it fits and functions and that if it does not, you the gunsmith can modify it to do so. Of course this also requires that you are an adherant to the philosophy that there is no such thing as a drop in part. Which, I guess, is what seperates the gunsmiths from the parts replacers.

Raven
P.S.
Mako, I know you come from a manufacturing back ground....where the numbers are all important!
Wereas I come frome a Gunsmith/Craftsman background and ended up in manufacturing.
Once the gun has been manufactured the numbers boat has sailed and my job as a gunsmith is to fix the issues that slipped through the manufacturing process. (keep in mind that I am talking about reproductions of 19th centry firearms) If a customer comes to me with 9 guns in what ever caliber and tells me they won't all chamber the same cartridges my job isn't to tell them to load different cartridges for each gun, my job is to make them shoot the same cartridges. Also in my experience most shooters are not reloaders so "equalizing" the chambers is the only viable solution for them.
Woud you put up with an AR15/16 that would not feed and fire just about any .223 ammo available?