Questions About Current Percussion Replica Revolvers

[Crooked River Bob]

Howdy, Gentlemen (and the rest of you varmints)

I would consider myself reasonably knowledgeable about muzzleloading firearms in general, but reproduction percussion revolvers are in a class of their own.  I have some experience with those and I own a Colt Blackpowder 2nd Generation 1851 Navy.  I have a number of references, including Adler's book on Colt blackpowder revolvers, and my dad had some original revolvers (although not a dragoon) which we shot when I was a kid.  So, I think I have a handle on the historical background.

Anyway, I'm thinking of getting a Second Model Dragoon revolver.  I'm not a collector.  I take good care of my guns, but if a firearm comes to live at my house, it should expect to work for a living.  It seems that Uberti has cornered the market on the Dragoons.  I don't think anybody else is making them at this time.  The Uberti Second Model Dragoons are widely available... Taylor's and Cimarron have them, and Dixie has them on sale right now at a very attractive price.  However, I'm seeing mixed reviews, which suggests the quality control may be inconsistent. 

I have also located two Colt Blackpowder Second Generation (not Signature Series) Second Model Dragoons, unfired, both at prices I would consider very reasonable, although it is certainly more than Dixie is asking for their Uberti.  I would pay the difference for a better revolver.  So, given the choice of a new Uberti from Dixie, Cimarron, or Taylor's, or an unfired Second Generation Colt Blackpowder version of the same revolver (I've seen mixed reviews of these, also), which do we believe would be a better choice for a shooter?

Second question, which is somewhat unrelated:  Taylor's Firearms lists an impressive array of 1858 Remington revolvers (I know, the teminology may not be exactly correct, but that's what they are calling them).  These range in price from $314.00 to $555.00, depending mostly on material and finish.  They show one near the lower end of the price spectrum with a "casted" steel frame, while most of the others in steel have forged frames.  What are the advantages/disadvantages of cast versus forged frames, in terms of precision, durability, and overall quality?  Also, it appears Pietta is making 1858 Remingtons and I'm interested in hearing how they compare to Uberti versions of this same revolver.

So, just to recap, here are three (hopefully) straightforward questions:

1.  Given the choice of a new Uberti replica of a Colt Second Model Dragoon revolver or an unfired Colt Blackpowder Second Generation version of the same firearm, which would be a better choice for a shooter?

2.  What are the advantages/disadvantages of a cast versus a forged frame on an 1858 Remington replica, from a shooter's standpoint?

3.  Given the choice of a new Uberti 1858 Remington revolver or a Pietta version of the same firearm, which would be a better choice for a shooter?


All knowledgeable responses which address any or all of the three questions will be appreciated and considered.

Much obliged,

Crooked River Bob

 

[Coffinmaker]

You've asked multiple questions.  However, there is a single explanation for all.  Well, not really.  There are actually several applicable points.  Colt Second Generation percussion guns were made up from a pile of Uberti parts.  Not Colt parts.  Uberti parts.  So those guns have all the same problems associated with Uberti guns.  They will need work.

While any of the current crop of percussion guns will work right out of the box (maybe), none of them will work well.  They will all need work.

Remington reproductions as well.  They will need work too.

I don't collect.  Ergo, I see no reason to pay any more for a Second Generation Colt example than a New Uberti from Cimarron.  ALL of the Colt 2d Gen BP guns I have worked on were pretty to look at, but trash on the insides.

I find Pietta guns easier to set up.

I have never noticed a "Cast" vs "Forged" frame in advertising.  I'll have to look.  I'm not a true Metallurgist.  I don't know that one is better/worse that the other.  I do know Ruger frames are ALL cast.  Nobody seems to mind.

OK,  I don't like Remington.  At all.  A Remington barks my fingers something fierce.  So I can't recommend a Remington at all.  YMMV

[Cliff Fendley]

Actually in my limited experience I've found the Colt ones to be the worse of all and current production about as good out of the box as they have ever been.

It's as if the Colt 2nd gen ones were just going to be collected and looked at and never meant to fire. I've seen some with the timing and arbor fit so bad they probably were not even that safe to shoot.

[Crooked River Bob]

Thank you, Coffinmaker and Cliff Fendley.  I did indeed ask multiple questions, and you responded to all of them, which I appreciate. 

I was aware of the Uberti/Colt Blackpowder connection, and the use of Uberti parts, but I thought the Colt Blackpowder guns might have been assembled from those parts with more care.  Evidently not.  I have not shot my Colt Blackpowder 1851 Navy much, but my limited experience with it suggested it could benefit from some gunsmithing to improve the action and timing.

Taylor's offers a service they call "Taylor Tuning" for their "suppository" revolvers (breechloaders, for the uninitiated).  I contacted them and asked if their gunsmith would go over and optimize their percussion revolvers, but the answer was "We do not offer tuning services on the blackpowder guns mostly because if you lighten them up they will not be able to set off some of the very hard caps that are on the market today."   Well, there is a lot more to tuning a revolver than lightening the springs, but I let it go.

So, it sounds as if the Uberti Dragoon may be the way to go, and leave the Colt Blackpowder Dragoon to be a "cabinet queen" for collectors.  Too bad Pietta doesn't make these!

Regarding the Remingtons:  I had a pair of Uberti 1858 Remingtons purchased new maybe 14-16 years ago, but never got around to shooting them.  They could have used some work.  The actions were a little rough in both, one had a slight timing issue, and cylinders were very difficult to remove and replace.  In any event, my son took a shine to them and I ended up turning them over to him.  Not sure if he still has them.  My dad had an original Remington which we shot occasionally when I was a kid.  It was a gem.  I don't have it, but I believe it's still in the family.

I believe Ruger championed the use of precision castings in firearms manufacture, and I have no prejudice against cast frames.  I was just curious as to why makers and sellers would utilize or specify one or the other.  You can take a gander at this, if you're interested: Taylor's 1858 Remington Page.  The piece with the "casted" frame, made by Uberti, is in the third row, middle column on the first page, with a price tag of $347.00.  The last gun on the second page, also a Uberti, is described as having a forged frame and is priced at $398.00.  Evidently, Uberti values their forged frames higher than the cast ones, but I don't know if there is any practical difference.  The revolver shown on the first page, third column, top row, is made by Pietta and costs $314.00.  They don't specify whether the Pietta revolver has a cast or forged frame.  All three of these guns appear virtually identical to me.  The only difference I can find is the Pietta has a fixed blade front sight, and the Ubertis have dovetailed front sights.

In any event, I appreciate your comments, and will look forward to further discussion.

Best regards,

Crooked River Bob

[Professor Marvel]

Greetings My Good Bob -

As Coffin and Cliff pointed out, the Italian BP revolvers all need some work "out of the box". They have gottne better in recent years, but
everything at least needs a "fluff and buff" and Uberti Colts all need the arbor adjustment plus more.

the following are just my opinions.
1) personally, if at all possible,  I prefer to physically handle any Dragoon rather buy sight unseen via mailorder.
    if that's not possible, then it seems the choices are "cheapest available" (like cabelas) vs somepolace like Taylors or Cimmaron
    or EMF that might offer "hand selected" at a premium.

2) once you have it in hand, play with it a tish, then send right off to Mike at Goon Works for a proper tune up and arbor corrections.
   I trust his work over "something" done at Taylors.

3) cast vs forged:  Whilst Ruger et al have achieved marvleous wonderment with modern cast steel technologies,  I don't think the
Italian C&B revolvers are anything close. when folks port a C&B revolver fort a loadiong gate, they often find casting voids.
It is important to remember the  Italians are building to a price point - they even use common red brass instead of a slightly more expensive
and much stronger "gunmetal bronze" .

So , knowing this, and what I know about mass production forgings, given the choice of 1858 Rem  Italian C&B pistols  I might  prefer a forged frame. However, that is merely a preference on my part, and I actually prefer Piettas over Ubertis.

Uberti "used to be" better at fit and finish , but Pietta has converted to CNC a while back and I don't see much difference.
Ubertis are smaller, more correc to the original, Piettas are larger, and fit my hand better.
Ubertis cost more, Piettas cost less.
UIbertis seem to need more tinkering , Piettas not so much.

If you want "the best" 1858 and cost is less relevant, you might consider some Santa Barbara Remingtons (no longer made)  , or the costly "Shooters Models".

hope this helps
prof marvel

[Abilene]

Crooked River Bob, I'm going to do some reminiscing here about stuff I'm not 100% on, so don't take this as gospel.  Several years back when Uberti started producing the '58 conversion, they beefed up the frame and cylinder a bit, size-wise, and I think that's when they went to the forged frame.  When first announced (pre-production) in the gun rags, the gun was supposed to come with (or be available with) a percussion cylinder as well.  But it turned out to take too much fitting for them both to function well so they dropped the dual/purpose setup.  But they continued to use the new frame for the percussion guns.  I was part timing at Cimarron then and recall there being two separate bins of '58 percussion cylinders, for the new/larger and old/smaller guns.  Seemed to me at the time that this could cause a headache for guys who like a lot of pre-loaded cylinders and end up with mixed size guns, but I haven't heard people complaining.

[Professor Marvel]

Say Abilene, have you ever considered moonlighting as a "consultant" to wander over and "hand pick" for folks?

yhs
prof mumbles

[Abilene]

Might be fun, but it's a hundred mile wander. 

[45 Dragoon]

First of all, thanks  for the recommendation Professor !!

CRB, I basically agree with all the others here. The revolvers made in the '70s were basically abysmal. They had big chuncky parts that appeared to whittled out with a hatchet. This includes the Colt 2nd gens as well.
Today's Italian offerings are much better and for a class "A" shooter, a much better foundation to work with. Since I work on Uberti's and Pietta's, I'll not pick a favorite.  Suffice it to say Pietta's don't have the arbor problems (just some adjustment) but action parts need more work while the Uberti's have very nice action parts but have the arbor problem to deal with. As for the Remington pattern (and also mentioned), Pietta's are physically larger but Uberti has the adjustable front sight and the forged frame. Personal preference. 
   So I guess what everyone is saying is, if having a "pony" isn't the most important thing, new is best!!! (Otherwise, your screwed!! )

Mike
   

[Professor Marvel]

I am happy to beat the drum for you Mike!

Whilst cooking some Brats for dinner I reminisced over forging vs casting and a couple of thoughts burbled
to the top of the swamp brain, to wit:

which is more desirable,
a cast axe head or a forged axe head
a cast knife blank or a forged knife blade
a cast cold chisel or a forged cold chisel
etc etc.

I generally prefer forged over cast for the following reasons:
  they start with hot rolled steel stock - this squishes and aligns things nicely ( "grain" if you will )
- they take the hot rolled steel stock , heat it red, and feed it into giant hammer forging machines, thus squishing it more and
   "compacting" the steel. 

forging is admittedly an old-school process, and as an amatuer blacksmith I am prejudiced in favor of it.

here is some propoganda from an an tique metallurgical handbook/textbook

Advantages of Drop Forging:
(1) Good grain flow is achieved.
(2) Faster speed of operation.
(3) Good strength of material is obtained.
(4) Little or no wastage of material.

Disadvantages of Drop Forging:
(1) Die preparation is a costly process.
(2) Die impression requires a good skill of work.
(3) Die maintenance is costly.

yhs
prof mumbles

[Crooked River Bob]

Thanks to all who responded.  This has been very informative.

If anybody who followed this thread is interested in knowing more, check this out:  Second Dragoons On Trial

The link takes you to an online article by Gun Tests magazine.  The article was evidently published in July, 2006, but I just found it today.  I always read magazine reviews with some skepticism because the writers are evidently afraid to say anything negative.  Not these guys!  They tell it like it is.  They compared three Second Model Dragoon replicas:  a blued Cimarron (by Uberti), an EMF with antique finish (also by Uberti), and a Second Generation Colt Blackpowder model, made by Iver-Johnson with I-J and Uberti parts.  I learned a lot.

Essentially, the Colt looked best on the outside, with correct markings and a nice blue job and color case hardening, but it was mechanically deficient and did not shoot well at all.  They found the chambers were .016" smaller than the bore (groove) diameter.  They did not give the actual measurements, but indicated the only way to fix the problem would be to ream the chambers and have a custom oversized mould made, so I'm assuming the bore was oversized.  I don't think I'll get a Colt!

The antique finish on the EMF was reportedly achieved with an acid dip.  The barrel was evidently not plugged during this operation, so the bore was also "antiqued," complete with pitting!  There was also some serious rusting on other parts where the acid had not been "killed."  They said Cimarron uses the same process to achieve their "Original Finish"... Maybe Abilene can tell us more about that.  In any event, I don't think I'll pay extra for the antique finish!  Other than the rust problem requiring detailed cleaning before testing started, and the bore requiring fire lapping,  the EMF performed pretty well.

The Cimarron was reportedly the best of the lot, although not without a couple of minor issues.  One of these was the loading lever latch would not hold.  The EMF had the same problem.  However, the reviewers rated the Cimarron very highly overall.

There's more, but if you were interested in this thread, or if you're thinking of getting a new percussion revolver as I am, you'll probably get a lot out of the Gun Tests article.  As noted, the article was published in 2006, so prices are different, and I don't think EMF sells the Dragoon revolvers any more.  However, the essential points still seem pertinent.  I expect I'll order a new Uberti and send it to Mike as the Professor recommended.

EDIT:  See Abilene's post (below) regarding Cimarron's "Original Finish."

Best regards,

Crooked River Bob

[Abilene]

...The antique finish on the EMF was reportedly achieved with an acid dip.  The barrel was evidently not plugged during this operation, so the bore was also "antiqued," complete with pitting!  There was also some serious rusting on other parts where the acid had not been "killed."  They said Cimarron uses the same process to achieve their "Original Finish"... Maybe Abilene can tell us more about that.  In any event, I don't think I'll pay extra for the antique finish!  Other than the rust problem requiring detailed cleaning before testing started, and the bore requiring fire lapping,  the EMF performed pretty well....

Regarding antique finish:  Almost all finishes like this come from the manufacturer, in this case Uberti.  I antiqued a very few guns for Cimarron years ago when someone wanted one and only blued guns were in stock.  It was very labor-intensive (no dipping involved - just exterior surfaces).  Cimarron also paid some guys to antique a bunch of 1878 (TTN) hammer shotguns some years back.  Most of those looked like crap.  They also paid a guy to antique some pistols, but they also looked kind of like crap.  Especially the wood.  So, mostly it has just been Uberti.  They are supposed to plug cylinder chambers and barrels.   Maybe they don't always.  Pietta sent some samples of an antique finish once.  It was supposed to be "semi" antique, more of a worn finish with some blue still left on the gun.  Looked like crap, not like real wear.  It is a chore to try to make a pistol look very worn without taking away all the finish.  I do have one Cimarron antique finish 7 1/2" .45.  It looks exactly like my 1st gen .45 from 1901 (no finish) and I shoot them as a pair.  I also antiqued my TTN myself and it looks great.  Antique finishes are not for everyone.  I have shiny guns for when I'm more dressed up.  And I just ignore folks who say we shouldn't shoot antique finish guns because we are portraying folks shooting them when they were still newish.

As regards percussion guns, my choice would be Uberti just because I think they look better (there are exceptions, like those little Captain Schaeffer snubbies!).  The guns will need work no matter who made them.

[Crow Choker]

Well it's been almost 2 weeks since the last post on this subject. CR Bob possibly you've already ordered/received a 2nd Mod Dragoon. If not, here's my 2 cents, maybe someone else is contemplating the same decision. I have a Uberti/Cimarron 2nd Model Dragoon I've had since 2007 and I love it to all the pieces it's made of. If I were to choose just one of the ten percussion revolvers I have (8 Ubert's, 2 Pietta), it would be the one and only. Like the looks, heft, caliber, and history. I agree mostly with what all has been posted reference the Pietta/Uberti difference. All of my Uberti Colts have mostly been trouble free except minor timing issues on a few. Four of them needed no arbor adjustment, I slicked up the innards on all just because they needed it..The one Pietta Colt (51 Navy 44 cal) worked fine and didn't have the terrible metal/metal and wood/metal fit I use to see in so many Pietta's. Minor stoning of the innards was all that it needed. The Pietta Remington I have works fine. Uberti 1860 Army Colt 2nd choice, Pietta 1851 Colt 44 caliber 3rd choice in case anyone is curious.

The 'biggy' on my Whitneyville (Transition) Dragoon and 2nd Model Dragoon was the vertical loading lever catches (vs the horizontal ones on all of the other revolvers) that would fail a lot of times to hold the lever in place when firing. My Colt Walker has its own unique loading lever that needed its own Rx. What I had to do with the Whitneyville and 2nd Dragoon was file the V notch a bit deeper on the barrel catch on both by trial and error until it would hold the lever in place while firing. I generally load 40-45 grains of FFF in both. 30 grains didn't bother much, but that's a squib load in those big horse hoglegs. After careful filing, it took usually two attempts so the lever would stay in place. I can't recall who, but someone posted on the forum once (think in the STORM) that he had good luck replacing the spring in the loading lever with one with a little more resistance. Have been going to try that also, but haven't got around to it yet.The horizontal lever catches as on the 51 Navys, 60 Army, 61 Navy, and Remington have never been a problem. I do have a Uberti Remington 44 kit that is still under construction so it is no effect. I have a unfired 3rd Mod Colt Signature  Dragoon that is also of no effect---timing is good on it, guts will need stoning if I ever get around to shooting it, arbor need checking, mostly a safe queen.

Interesting article by 'Gun Tests'. Mostly mirrors everything I've ever heard about the 2nd Gen Colts, Uberti's, EMF's, and other once upon a time' firearms. As previously noted, Pietta's once had terrible outside cosmetics, better now, I've always preferred Uberti's as they looked better, the minor internal needs always outweighed the once crappy looking Pietta's. Professor---interesting take on forged vs cast. As Coffinmaker posted, I neither have seen advertising listing the choice between forged or cast. Guess wasn't looking at the advert hard enough. Have to check it out also. I prefer Colts to Remington's, but enjoy the Rems, fun shooters too.

Note: Checked the 'r-cheeves' ref replacing the loading lever spring with one stronger. It was Montana Slim who did so in his Dragoon and he advised he never had the lever drop again.

[45 Dragoon]

C.C.,  I too "enhance" the given setup on the loading lever (vert.or horiz.) by installing a "helper" spring which will do the trick. It's the same "fix" I used on my personal open top revolvers. As far as your Uberti's, they all have short arbors, I haven't seen one of any make that wasn't short except for the Piettas of the last several years (unless it has already been addressed). Proof would be a simple washer in the arbor hole and re-assembly. They'll all need "addressing". The Whitneyville is defiantly my favorite of the Dragoon series!! (You have excellent taste!!)
  The Dragoon for the OP will be acquired this Mon. or Tues and is a 1st Mod. (already on hold) which will be given the "Outlaw Mule" service which will include a coil spring conversion of the action, a cap post,  action stop, a bolt block, an action shield, a 3 1/2 lb hammer draw, a 2 3/4 lb trigger pull and a set .0025"-.003" barrel/cyl clearance.  A full diet of max loads is expected for the rest of the Dragoon's life!

Mike

[Crow Choker]

C.C.,   As far as your Uberti's, they all have short arbors, I haven't seen one of any make that wasn't short except for the Piettas of the last several years (unless it has already been addressed). Proof would be a simple washer in the arbor hole and re-assembly. They'll all need "addressing".

45 Dragoon, I know what your saying and respect that. Coffinmaker says the same, BUT-back when I went about doing my Uberti made cap and ball percussion revolvers, the four I didn't adjust the arbors on "really didn't need anything". Before doing anything I bought some of the Dillion brass buttons that Pettifogger recommended in his "How to do" information, but as I was busy at the time went the split washer route. Not liking the stainless steel 10mm (or whatever size they were), I bought four thicknesses of brass washers of the same diameter as the arbor and used them for all of my arbor fixes. Some took two, others were fine with one, just had to find the right combination. Liked them lots lots better, hold them in with a dab of grease, haven't lost one yet during disassembly. The four cappers I didn't do were so close to being perfect, even the thinnest brass washer I had was to thick. Thought of stoning them down, but have no problem with any of the four. Could they be adjusted to the Nth degree by using Pettifoggers or your method, probably so, but they were so close that the meaning of 'close' would need redefining.

Of my three Uberti conversion type cartridge revolvers, one was right on, no matter how I checked its mating. My 44 Open Top needed adjustment as did my 38 Spec Richards/Mason. My 44 Richards II was a gem in a box of rocks, arbor fit no need of fixing, checked it every way possible. One of these days I hope to getting around to doing the Pettifogger Dillion brass button treatment on them. I realize you and Coffinmaker have had a lot more experience with the Uberti's and not trying to put that down, but I have five Uberti's that didn't need adjustment. Have read comments by others who advise they have found Uberti open top style revolvers also that were fine, not the normal, but I believe they're out there. Enjoy your posts, thanks for posting and educating us--- always informative.  Crow Choker


Crooked River Bob: I went to Taylors website and read what you posted about Taylors 1858 Remington Uberti choice's cast vs forged. Interesting--never knew Uberti offered a choice other than barrel length and finish on them. Never saw that, guess I wouldn't have as I haven't really been in the quest for another Remmie, never have seen any talk or writings about it either until you posted it. The Pietta I do have I bought used from another shooter and my Uberti is a work in progress kit I bought some years back, but like I advised, "a work in progress'.

[dddrees]

Not having a clue about any of these guns. My only recommendation that you may want to consider is to see if Buds Gunshop sells any of these guns you are interested in. If so when ordering you have an option to buy their lifetime warranty. At least this way if you get a lemmon maybe that might give you an added b it of protection. I have yet to use their warranty but I have purchased a good number of guns through them and have always been more than satisfied with my dealings with them.

[Abilene]

...Of my three Uberti conversion type cartridge revolvers, one was right on, no matter how I checked its mating. My 44 Open Top needed adjustment as did my 38 Spec Richards/Mason. My 44 Richards II was a gem in a box of rocks, arbor fit no need of fixing, checked it every way possible. One of these days I hope to getting around to doing the Pettifogger Dillion brass button treatment on them. I realize you and Coffinmaker have had a lot more experience with the Uberti's and not trying to put that down, but I have five Uberti's that didn't need adjustment. Have read comments by others who advise they have found Uberti open top style revolvers also that were fine, not the normal, but I believe they're out there. Enjoy your posts, thanks for posting and educating us--- always informative.  Crow Choker
...

As I've mentioned before, my 4 R-M conversions from the early to mid 2000's all had short arbors.  My Type II .38 from about 3 years ago or so was correct.  Uberti may have corrected the arbor length, but I would not expect them to retrofit everything they still had in stock, and some short ones would still be in stock with the distributors for quite some time as well.  So it should always be checked.

It is also possible that Uberti corrected the arbors for cartridge guns only.  Those and the arbors for percussion pistols are two different part numbers (presumably the cartridge gun arbors are stronger?).

[45 Dragoon]

Crow Choker,  thanks for the compliment and likewise, I enjoy all you guys posts! Always wanting to learn!!
The only true way I know of checking is to drop a thin washer in the arbor hole and see if you can install the arbor and have the lug and frame meet . I've never found any that would (except for the mentioned later Pietta's and original 1st gen.) The "swinging the barrel to meet the frame" test won't work.

  I just checked a new (CS) in the box '72 OT and at minimum, it's .030" too short. That was the thickness of the washer and the lug butted right up to the frame , which means there's probably more space to fill in there (I didn't try more than just the one, I just wanted to test it just for this post.). I've found a single plug or spacer is superior to stacked shims held together with epoxy (JB) as the epoxy can compress.
  The Piettas I work on are naturally too long (I think the bbl/cyl clearances are typically  .004" - .006"  so just dressing the arbor down accordingly for a .003" bbl/cyl clearance is defiantly an easy operation!

Mike

[Crow Choker]

Mike I know what your talking about and the need reference the Colt open top style of revolvers, whether percussion or cartridge. The first method I read about to check the arbor fit was by using the twist method and seeing how much over gap (or under) there was. Then it was brought out that unless a person polished all of the burrs out of the arbor hole and anything on the arbor (esp around the wedge hole), a true determination couldn't be attained. Good and useful information. Other methods to go along with the twist and polish were the use of feeler gauges were said to be needed to get true fit and proper barrel/cylinder gap-again another true and useful guide. All guides I use, if there is anything else, I'm ignorant of it. If a shooter didn't want to use the Pettifogger or your method of adjusting the arbor/frame fit, some 10mm (preferably stainless) steel split washers could be dropped in the frames arbor hole to adjust the fit. 'Kinda' worked or at least bridged the gap some.

I didn't like the split washer route because when you proceeded to install the wedge, you had to compress the barrel/receiver unit to get the wedge in. This provided some advantage, but I thought in case the gap was more than a split washer could fill, you'd have a partially compressed split washer that wasn't a solid gap fill. Also in the case of the four percussion revolvers that even my thinnest brass washer was to thick, when trying the split washer, the barrel/arbor fit was to much not allowing a good fit and improper barrel/cylinder gap. Also making it impossible to insert the wedge without trimming the wedge or wedge hole (which was a no-no). That's why I went with the four thicknesses of brass washers. Not as good as yours or Pettifoggers for a permanent solution, but it works allowing me to get a proper fit of the arbor and also a good barrel/cylinder gap within a hair close to the 0.003"(plus/minus) that works. As I previously posted, I just use a tad bit of grease to hold them in when taking the revolver apart. Sometimes one or both will be on the end of the arbor, but that's no biggey', haven't dropped/lost one yet. I'm avoiding epoxying them in due to the fact 'sometime' I want to do a permanent job on them and even so, the grease works fine. As a note, I've read a number of other solutions posted, some here on CAS and on other forums of those who say they have the best or another method, can't recall the specifics right now, but guess they worked. One of them I recall was "way out in left field' as to the procedure and method of attaining proper arbor fit. Doing to much for what needed to be done. Guess I'll quit, need to get some yard work done.  Yers- Crow Choker---Hey I'm a Roger--any more of ya out there?" I know of at least one. Named so as my Dad on his WW2 ship advised radio transmissions ended in a Roger.

[Coal Creek Griff]

10mm (preferably stainless) steel split washers

In the interest of clarity, I believe that we should be talking about #10 stainless split washers, which (I believe) are a little smaller than 10mm, except for the heavy-duty variety.

On the other hand, I could be very wrong about this.  Goodness (and my wife) knows how often I'm wrong.

CC Griff