Loading and Unloading the Merwin Hulbert

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy

I just watched the video about Merwin Hulberts from Rock Island Auction that Drydock linked to in a previous post.

Very good video presentation overall. But I did want to make a few comments. I am starting a new thread so as not to clutter up the video thread.

As usual the narrator makes the claim that the Merwin Hulbert revolvers were "arguably the best revolver of the frontier era".

Well, I will argue with that. I think the Merwin Hulberts, fascinating as they were, were a compromise between the ruggedness of the Colt and the cleverness of the Smith and Wesson Top Breaks.

I do want to mention a couple of specifics. The narrator talks about how the Merwin automatically ejects all the spent cartridges when you break it open. I have three of them. My experience is that most of the empties fall out, but often a couple of empties will hang up and need to be flicked out with a finger.

As to the claim that if you want to "top off" the gun, and add a few more rounds, all you have to do is open the gun and the empties will fall out while the unfired rounds will be retained by their bullets, it ain't that straight forward. My experience is that when the gun is opened, the live rounds retained by their bullets tend to slide out of alignment with their chambers. Before the gun can be closed again, they have to be wiggled back into alignment with their prospective chambers. Once the live rounds have been realigned, then the gun can be closed again






Then of course, you close up the gun and can add more rounds to fill up the cylinder through the loading gate.





As to the strength of the design, there is no way that a revolver that is held together with two joints, no matter how precisely machined, is going to be as strong as a revolver with a solid frame.

I had an interesting conversation with Roy Jinks, the Smith and Wesson historian, just last week. I asked him why did Merwin Hulbert come up with such a bizarre design in the first place. He said that Smith and Wesson controlled all the patents that made a Top Break possible.

Don't get me wrong, I think Merwin Hulberts are fascinatinating.

They just are not as mystical as some folks think.

[Will Ketchum]

Howdy

I just watched the video about Merwin Hulberts from Rock Island Auction that Drydock linked to in a previous post.

Very good video presentation overall. But I did want to make a few comments. I am starting a new thread so as not to clutter up the video thread.

As usual the narrator makes the claim that the Merwin Hulbert revolvers were "arguably the best revolver of the frontier era".

with their chambers. Before the gun can be closed again, they have to be wiggled back into alignment with their prospective chambers. Once the live rounds have been realigned, then the gun can be closed again


Don't get me wrong, I think Merwin Hulberts are fascinatinating.

They just are not as mystical as some folks think.

I couldn't agree more.  I have had two Merwins and enjoyed the heck out of both. Fun to shoot and make a great BBQ gun for banquets but they wouldn't be my choice in a frontier gun fight.  That would be a S&W Double Action in 38-40. 

Will Ketchum

[tommy4toes]

My understanding is that Smith & Wesson held so many patents regarding firearms that they successfully sued just about every other manufacturer, with the exception of Remington, who paid a royalty on every gun with a bored-through cylinder until the patent expired in 1869. Numerous patent infringement lawsuits were filed - Merwin was involved in a few of them. Hence the fascinating but impractical design.

Cool show and tell piece at the cowboy shoots :-)

T4t

[Advertising]

[45 Dragoon]

DJ,
 When "realigning" the unfired cartridges, will pointing the barrel up allow the cartridges to align themselves? Just a thought. I've always thought the MHs were a cool set up but you make some good points. Thanks for the info, you always have good info.

Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com

[Trailrider]

I've never owned a Merwin, so I can't comment on anything but the following:  It is my understanding that they were machined with very tight tolerances, so they tended to foul with BP.  Supposedly, they are fine with smokeless powder. IOW, they were quite a bit ahead of their time! Just sayin'....

[Driftwood Johnson]

I've never owned a Merwin, so I can't comment on anything but the following:  It is my understanding that they were machined with very tight tolerances, so they tended to foul with BP.  Supposedly, they are fine with smokeless powder. IOW, they were quite a bit ahead of their time! Just sayin'....

Sorry Trailrider, as I have said many times, there is nothing more precise about the Merwin Hulbert than anything Smith & Wesson was capable of producing. That is the myth that has arisen from Art Phelps' book 'The Story of Merwin, Hulbert & Co. Firearms'. Phelps book is the only in depth book ever published about the MH, and the opinions he stated in the book have been swallowed whole and regurgitated by dozens of gun writers. The book is not particularly well written, and Phelps is very biased towards the MH. But he has the bully pulpit because nobody else has published any other in depth books about the MH.

Regarding Black Powder, Merwin Hulberts were built in the last quarter of the 19th Century, the tail end of the Black Powder era. I have three of them. I only shoot them with Black Powder. The MH is no different than most other revolvers built during the BP era. It has a prominent bushing built onto the front of the cylinder which directs fouling blasted out of the cylinder gap away from the pin or arbor the cylinder rotates on.

This is the bushing on the front of the cylinder of my Pocket Army.





This is how the bushing nestles up inside a recess in the barrel. Note the relationship of the bushing and the barrel cylinder gap. The arbor is completely encircled and protected from fouling blasted out of the gap.





This helical groove is cut onto the arbor, very similar to the helical groove on a Colt C&B arbor. Any fouling that manages to get past the bushing will be deposited in the groove as the cylinder rotates and will not contribute to binding. The long deep groove in the arbor is a guide for the wedge in the barrel to align the barrel as it slides over the arbor.





Comments about the precision of the MH usually relate to the joints between the barrel and the frame. This has nothing to do with how well the revolver behaves with Black Powder. Shooting a revolver with Black Powder is all about how the bushing deflects fouling from the arbor or cylinder pin.

With all due respect, gun writers who talk about how the precision of the MH will prevent it from shooting Black Powder well, simply don't know what they are talking about.

Here is a photo of me shooting my Pocket Army during the Great Nor'Easter, this past July. Twelve stages over two days. I did not clean the MH until the end of the match. It performed like a champ.

[Kinchafoonee Kid]

PaGood evening, friends, I have a Merwin, Hulbert & Co. Automatic Double Action seven shot special Target revolver chambered in .32 MH&Co .32 cf target caliber.  It has seen some honest wear, but is fully functional.  I load using .32 S&W Long brass, 3Fg Schuetzen black powder and the Lyman 313249 cast pure lead bullet, lubed with the Dan T (may he rest in peace) lube of beeswax, anhydrous lanolin and Caola oil.

The mechanics are tigh and it still exhibits the characteristic suction action of the cylinder traveling along the arbor.

I have fired numerous stages at NCOWS matches with no binding nor fouling detrimental to either function or accuracy.

The accuracy at 10 yards is impressive and it is a perfect pocket pistol, especially with the folding hammer.

[Colt Fanning]

Howdy,
Does anyone know if the extractor on MH's is a separate part held in place by the arbor (as in the Spanish copies) or is it integral with the grip frame?  I have a MH army with a broken extractor that could be easily replaced if it is separate.  Not easily fixed if it is integral.
Regards,
Colt

[Blair]

Colt,

I have not tried taken the Arbor out of either of my MH's.
The extractor ring looks to be made as a part of the recoil shield to me, with the arbor being drilled and threaded into the ring.
That is just my best guess?
My best,
 Blair

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy Again

I just checked all three of my 44 caliber Merwins. The extractor ring on them is a separate part, most likely pressed, perhaps silver soldered in place. Despite Merwin Hulbert's reputation for precision machining, it would be much simpler to press a separate part in place. I can even see a hairline joint on my Pocket Army.

This is a photo of the ring on one of my Frontier models. The two cuts in the ring are clearance cuts for the hand. Notice they extend below the surface of the recoil shield. More evidence that the cuts were made before the part was pressed in place.

[Blair]

DJ,

Good points.
After looking my large frame .44 MH over in good lighting, I would have to say the extractor ring is indeed a press fit into the recoil shield.
My best,
 Blair

[Colt Fanning]

Howdy,
Thanks for the responses.  The hairline seam is not as clear on mine but you re right.  The hand slot would be difficult to cut with the
extractor in place.  I will try to repair it.
Regards
Colt

[DJ]

Merwin, Hulbert Extractor Collar

I have a first model single action MH that had a loose arbor.  In every large frame MH I have seen, there is a set screw in the hammer recess that keeps the arbor from turning, and this one is no exception.

After I took the set screw out, the arbor unscrewed easily.  When I removed the arbor, the extractor collar was attached to the arbor, not the recoil shield, so the collar came out with the arbor.  Unfortunately, I didn't check to see if they were one piece or two separate pieces, but my impression was that they were a single piece.  At the very least, the collar and arbor seemed very attached to one another.

When the arbor on my MH is screwed in tight, so that the collar seats against the breech face, the collar has over-rotated, so that the slot in the collar that the hand  passes through is not aligned with the hand.  If the arbor is screwed almost all the way, so that the slot in the collar aligns with the hand, then the extractor collar does not firmly touch the breech face.  In that situation, the fit of the threads is the only thing aligning the arbor, and the thread fit is a little bit loose.  Consequently, when not screwed in tight, the arbor has a little bit of wiggle, both rotational and from side to side.  When screwed in tight, the arbor seems to derive most of its rigidity from the collar acting as a "shoulder" against the breech face.  

The looseness of the arbor on my MH seems to have been the eventual result of slight imprecision in fitting the arbor/collar to the gun when it was first manufactured. For most of this revolver's life, the set screw probably kept the correct alignment and, when new, probably prevented the arbor from feeling loose.  But this is a pretty small, soft screw, and it eventually developed dents along the sides (due to rotational force of the arbor when the barrel is rotated) that allowed the arbor to develop both rotational and lateral play.

My solution was to remove the arbor and punch a few small dents in the back of the extractor collar with a center punch.  The metal raised around the edge of the dents gave the extractor collar just enough extra thickness so that it turned up tight when the hand slot aligned with the hand.  I had considered a shim, but the thickness involved was very very slight, and shims would have to have been too thin.

I can't speak for all Merwins, but on mine, the extractor collar was attached to the arbor.

DJ

[Blair]

DJ,

Very nice report!

My MH is of the late model variation with top strap and square butt, in .44 MH cartridge.
I will have to pull it apart to look for the small set screw that holds the arbor/extractor ring to the frame.
I had thought the arbor and extractor ring were made as one piece. It just seemed to me to be the most practical build method to use. But, was never sure how these were connected to the frame.

It might be nice to be able to make some comparisons with other MH owners and how their revolvers are set up?
Thanks.
My best,
 Blair

[DJ]

In the interests of science, I pulled my MH apart for a photo session.  I haven't posted photos all by myself before, but I will see if I can get them up without violating any forum rules.

These are of a 1st model Merwin Hulbert, square butt, caliber .44 MH.  Hopefully they are self-explanatory, as I don't see how to add captions at this point.

--DJ

[DJ]

Hey, that worked!  OK, here are a couple more.  The first is a detail of the arbor (showing the slot in the extractor collar for the hand).  This is shot from about 7 o'clock as viewed from behind the revolver.  Near as I can tell, the arbor/extractor were turned as one piece.

The second photo shows the counter bore in the breech face to accept the extractor collar.  The firing pin hole is at the top of the photo. 

--DJ

[Driftwood Johnson]

Excellent!

It makes perfect sense that the arbor and the ring would have been one piece.

And thank you for showing a detail in your photo that has now explained itself.

I have often wondered what the little screw was for that the arrow is pointing to in this photo. I guessed that it was securing the arbor in place. Now you have answered that question. Your photo even shows the same screw sitting in a small counterbore. I assume you had to remove this screw to unscrew the arbor? Did the head of the screw keep the arbor from unscrewing?



And by the way, that is a terrific 1st Model Frontier you have there. I love the mottled hard rubber grips. Yours has what was called the Humpback Hammer. Here is a photo I took of Phelp's book showing that model.

[DJ]

It looks like the arbor is threaded into the breech face, and then a hole is drilled and tapped at the joint between the arbor and the breech.  When removed, the arbor has a half-round, threaded cutout that, when matched to the breech makes a hole.  The screw is essentially a headless threaded rod about 3/16" long.

The bottom photo shows the half-hole in the arbor and the top photo looks through the breech face and shows the threads for the arbor and the smaller threaded seat for the lock screw.

--DJ

[Driftwood Johnson]

Great!

Thanks for the explanation!

[DJ]

 
One last photo--showing the headless set/locking screw partially unscrewed.