Cimarron 1872 Open Top Cylinder Hole "Tightness"

[Fox Creek Kid]

Good info from all here.    I am a HUGE believer in reaming revolver throats to a correct dimension, especially 44-40's which are notoriously crappy.    I am also a believer in Taylor throating for OVERSIZED chambers. However that is a topic for modern smokless ctgs.. I see Mako's point however from a cost perspective as well as well as no measured gain. The solution is to ream the chambers/throats as you buy them!!    FWIW, I just size all my Uberti bullets to 0.430" and they all chamber & shoot fine. A far more important factor is to DEFINITELY chamfer the forcing cone on ALL!! In Dec. 2008 I bought someType II Richards and one shot way high and about 4" - 5 " left at SEVEN YDS.!!!    I chamfered the forcing cone and then it tore the X ring out. Yes, it makes THAT much difference.

Mako, there is one brand of brass far worse than Rem. for 44-40. Avoid the Brazilian CBC garbage like the plague.

[Mako]

Raven,
I hope we aren't just miscommunicating... And you are right, this is a very friendly conversation.

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.

This discussion is from way back in January, Tcomer solved his issue by correctly crimping the cartridge. There was no indication his chambers were ever "unequal," his throats were just tight and his chambers appeared to be on the low end of the tolerance just as I have found four of my Uberti .44 special "Open Top" revolvers to be.

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.

I always called a throat a throat (I could have called it free bore, but that confuses some people).  That is what the measurements from January show, the throat, nothing else (Besides, if you look at the huge picture in the post you can see it is the throat and not the neck).  I'm not sure where that got lost in the discussion.  A neck is a neck, I never gave dimensions for a neck on the revolvers (but I will tell you they are in the specified dimension range because I ran a gage from the breech end to check).  As far as using common nomenclature, I'm confused as to who the "we" is in that regard.

I still don't understand why you keep trying to force a larger throat on me.  I am perfectly happy with the throats at the dimensions they are.  They work beautifully...Opening them up will lead to a decrease in the case pressure as the bullet leaves the case mouth.  I don't want that, I want the case to obturate and to seal the case against the chamber walls just as they do now.  You still haven't explained why a larger throat is of benefit unless I wanted to shoot a larger diameter bullet.

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

Raven, if you recall previous conversations you should know I understand very well about the life of a gunsmith, I have hundreds if not thousands of tools as well.  In fact I actually have cylinder reamers in .44 spl and .44-40 (I have headspace gauges for .44WCF/.38WCF as well, but they are rim gauges).  The .44-40 reamer is for a cylinder and has the Ø.4455  neck at the mouth instead of the old Ø.4435 neck since it was specifically designed for the Ø.429/Ø.430 bullets.  The pilot is EXACTLY Ø.431, I know this because they sent me one with a Ø.427 pilot and I returned it and they made me one with the Ø.431 pilot.  I don't have a rifle reamer in .44-40, and I haven't needed one.

I have a variety of straight reamers as well including sets of adjustable straight reamers, I also have neck reamers in a variety of calibers but not for the .44-40.  I wouldn't attempt to run any of the reamers I have through my Uberti chambers because I have found the Italian chambers are very different from what a JGS, PTG, Green or Clymer reamer will cut.  I would have to set the chambers forward to even hope to have a chance of cleaning up.

It sounds like you may have had custom reamers ground to meet your needs and what you found on the Italian firearms.  A standard American reamer usually won't work.  The .44-40s reamers I had cut were for some USFA revolvers we set the barrels back on, We later tested them on an EMF cylinder after we put dykem in a chamber and rotated it backwards to avoid cutting, it didn't even touch the walls and the neck was hitting where if diverged from the chamber body wall.  I have no idea how much it would have taken to clean up that chamber.  He wanted his headspace reset and the cylinder gap optimized, we told him we couldn't do it with that revolver .

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.

I wholeheartedly agree!!!

Where did you get the idea I couldn't use the same ammunition between the firearms of the same caliber?  Remember, four pistols in .44 Special,  one rifle in .44 Special, One .44 Special Carbine with a carrier to allow .44 Russian, three rifles in .44WCF.  Common ammunition  is the exact reason I have no desire to shoot a Ø.430 bullet.  I buy my bullets from Springfield Slim, he sizes them either Ø.427 or Ø.429, I buy them in Ø.429 for my reproductions and just load them up...No fuss no muss.  I use Starline cases for my .44-40s, all three of them can also use Winchester brass, but one is snug.  None of them can use Remington brass reliably, the Remington brass is too tight because the neck is too thick.  The Remington brass is also tight in the USFA revolvers, but it fits, although it was sometimes sticky in ejection.  This tells me the Uberti rifle reamers for .44-40 (at least on the three example I have are very tight or on the low end of a .44-40 chamber) because they barely accept a reloaded Remington case with a Ø.429 bullet and if they are fouled the cartridge has to be forced in with the lever and is hard to extract.   To make the chambers large enough for Remington brass would mess them up for every other brand of brass.

I also don't like the current Remington brass in the USFAs because it sets back and stays back creating friction after firing.  As I said, it fits but it is not a "reliable fit."  I don't know what Remington's current thought process is, the current neck is actually also too thick for reliable use in an old Winchester.  I still have 40 year old Remington and Winchester Jacketed .44WCF ammo my Grandfather used in the original '73,  there are some empty cases in the boxes and the Necks on both vintage Winchester and Remington cases are thinner by .001"-.002" than current Remington brass and that ammo has Ø.426 jacketed bullets.  Unlike my Grandfather who just used it as his hunting rifle I don't use anything but Black Powder and Ø.427 lead Mav Dutchman in original '73 if we shoot it.  That is the only rifle that uses a different cartridge, it has to because it was manufactured to use the Ø.427 bullet.

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

I don't just record dimensions, I evaluate them and determine what they mean.  I have determined there is no need to do anything to any of my .44 caliber Ubertis other than to use them as I have been.  That sounds like a sound interpretation of the data to me. My Ubertis aren't fussy or picky at all, in fact it seems they have the perfect chambers on the pistols to take best advantage of Slims sized Mav Dutchman bullets.  What more could I ask?

I am exactly like you in many ways, I act on data, but only if it warrants it.

But, I believe data is a good thing, it allows us to determine what the manufacturing methods and intent is from manufacturers that don't volunteer their manufacturing documents and tooling dimensions to us.  That's what this forum is all about, ideas, data, and an exchange of information.  The only clues we have must be ferreted out with careful inspection and consideration of the meaning of that data.

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?

I'm still not understanding where you think I have a problem with my rifles.  Let me take your AR15/16 analogy and run with it a bit... I have an original Winchester 1873 in .44WCF built in 1886.  It will only chamber ammo with Ø.427 bullets, my Ubertis all have bores and chambers for Ø.429 bullets.  Do I just drop to the floor and cry because I can't use the same ammo?  Somewhere you got the impression I have ammo problems, I don't...I load on a Dillon 650 and I load hundreds if not thousands at a sitting.  I don't separate, specially segregate or do anything other than what hundreds of other CAS shooters do concerning Remington .44-40 brass.  A lot of us, I know this because I have read it for years on boards and discussed it with shooters at matches (.44WCF shooters tend to talk to one another) have issues with Remington Brass.  We find the necks are too thick.  We have all chosen to use Winchester or Starline Brass.  I will use either, but I prefer Starline from experience with the three rifles.  I also find that same ammo chambers perfectly in a pair of USFA Frontier Six Shooters chambered in .44-40 and I presume it would chamber in any firearm chambered for .44-40 with a bore diameter of Ø.429.

One more thing, not all weapons chambered for .223 will chamber 5.56x45 military ammunition.  There is s definite difference between a 5.56 Nato chamber and a commercial chamber in .223, look it up...

Strangely enough I have a Gunsmithing/Craftsman background as well.  As you said I used to manufacture and produce gun parts or even what you would call "gunsmith" ready assemblies on a volume basis to tolerances better than what the average craftsman could produce unless he spent weeks in trial and error.  I produced a large number of oversize or near fit parts allowing lapped assembly better than anything we imagined when in the past we cut, welded, peened, squeezed, ground and lapped all that was available  I don't normally subscribe to the manufacturing techniques of the 18th century, unless we are talking about fine double guns or custom stocked sporting rifles.  Eli Whitney set us free in that regard. 

Have a good day my friend,

Mako

[Raven]

Mako,

It's my problem, but I have a very hard time understanding what your relaying until I have had you explain it several times

I can see your points but still do not agree on all points....personaly I think your accuracy will improve with a slightly larger throat.
But you should do what works for you.

I don't normally subscribe to the manufacturing techniques of the 18th century, unless we are talking about fine double guns or custom stocked sporting rifles.  Eli Whitney set us free in that regard

I personaly would disagree. I think we have made a mistake by dropping one style of manufacturing for another...a combination of the two would be much better. We are sold the idea of modern manufacturing techniques being better than the older methods but usualy they are just FASTER and CHEAPER and DISPOSABLE...definately not BETTER.
I would include any Handcrafted firearm in your list and the Custom Stocked Sporting Rifle supports my idea of a merging of manufacturing styles (the stock being 18th/19th and most of the action 20th)

Being a 1911 guy you should agrree that the vast majority of off the shelf 1911's will need that 18th century hand work to be truly competitive...Why do we believe a Repo should be competitive straight out of the box

Have a good one
Raven

[Fox Creek Kid]

...We are sold the idea of modern manufacturing techniques being better than the older methods but usualy they are just FASTER and CHEAPER and DISPOSABLE...definately not BETTER...

Some are...

[Raven]

Oh God.....not a Glock guy.

Raven

[Mako]

...Being a 1911 guy you should agrree that the vast majority of off the shelf 1911's will need that 18th century hand work to be truly competitive...Why do we believe a Repo should be competitive straight out of the box

Have a good one
Raven

Because I've done it before.    I'd hazard to say it is the best out of the box 1911 ever produced on a large scale.

You could do it with any firearm out there, but with the low volumes of the reproductions it would take other product lines to support the operation.

As for the Glock, the kid can't help it, besides he shoots it sideways and has spinner wheel covers...

[Fox Creek Kid]

...As for the Glock, the kid can't help it, besides he shoots it sideways and has spinner wheel covers...

My Glock will still be going bang when you are putting your 1911 gunsmith's kids through college! 

[Hoof Hearted]

Ladies and Gentlemen, This bus has left the building

[Mako]

My Glock will still be going bang when you are putting your 1911 gunsmith's kids through college! 

Talk to me again in 2082, that is, if the production reaches it's centennial and then you can crow about it....

(I've got 1911s older than either of us...)

[Raven]

Talk to me again in 2082, that is, if the production reaches it's centennial and then you can crow about it....

(I've got 1911s older than either of us...)

You and I are on the same page with that one

Raven

[Fox Creek Kid]

BLASPHEMERS!!! I CAST THEE OUT!!!

[Mako]

BLASPHEMERS!!! I CAST THEE OUT!!!

That picture is older than any Glock.  In fact that movie photo is about as old as you are...

Gaston was attacked in 1999 by an assassin paid to kill him.  He was almost killed and he was severely beaten with a hammer (no joke).  All the while he kept thinking to himself, "if I only hadn't left my 1911 at home I would shoot this sucker..."

~Mako

[Hoof Hearted]