Author Topic: Cylinder gap (Read 15824 times)

Gabriel Law · « **on:** January 12, 2015, 12:57:24 PM »

I purchased my Uberti 1875 Outlaw .45 Colt revolver in 1978 (IIRC) and it has seen a lot of use, almost all with black powder and 255 gr. lead. The serial # is in the 11000 range. Currently, I am having issues with my cylinder being loose, 'fore and aft', such that primers are backing out a little, and in some cases piercing. I can move the cylinder rearward and can see a noticeable gap between the forward bearing and the frame. There is no wear on either the front or rear face of the frame, but the forward bearing area where the axle passes through seems worn. What, if anything, can I do to rejuvenate my revolver? It is super accurate and I don't want to 'retire' it.

Flint · « **Reply #1 on:** January 12, 2015, 03:10:08 PM »

Since your cylinder needs to move forward, and seems to be too short, assuming the headspace is correct, you may need the barrel turned back one turn (by a qualified gunsmith). Then the gap can be reset, and it appears you may need a new bushing to reach the frame as well.

If your headspace is good (recoil may have hammered the cylinder's rachet flatter), you don't need a new cylinder. I doubt the frame is stretched if the gun has lived on black powder.

Gabriel Law · « **Reply #2 on:** January 12, 2015, 04:11:46 PM »

The title of my thread is a little misleading, I think. I'm not concerned about the actual gap between the end of the barrel and the cylinder, but rather that gap between the bushing on the axle, and the frame. I thought about putting the cylinder in the lathe, and facing off the bushing enough to make a perfect face and then adding metal to the bushing with low temp silver bearing solder.... then facing it off again until the cylinder rotates freely but the gap is removed. The hand pushes the cylinder forward, but still indexes well, but in half cock, the cylinder spins without much resistance from the hand.

Advertising · « **Reply #3 on:** **Today** at 07:51:25 AM »

hellgate · « **Reply #3 on:** January 12, 2015, 05:09:31 PM »

I would think that the ratchet is hammered flatter or whatever bearing surface the ratchet or back of the cylinder recoils onto has been battered in to create what looks to me to be excessive cylinder gap. I agree that unless the frame is defective, BP isn't gonna stretch the frame. Something has had to "give" to create that much gap.

Gabriel Law · « **Reply #4 on:** January 12, 2015, 06:58:51 PM »

Well, here's both ends of the cylinder. Neither end is 'battered' but they are obviously worn. Neither the front or back end of the frame is even discoloured let alone battered or worn...just the cylinder.

I'm considering facing off the front bushing, boring the cylinder to receive a stud .406" diameter x say 3/8" deep, and then facing off the front end of the new plug, once installed in the cylinder, to fill the gap. It would be a simple task, and would move the cylinder back to eliminate the primer flow issue. As I said, the actual cylinder gap is not what I'd consider excessive...the revolver's accuracy leaves nothing to be desired.

I've likely answered my own question(s)...still I appreciate the input - helps me consider my options.

hellgate · « **Reply #5 on:** January 12, 2015, 09:26:39 PM »

Gabriel,
When you pulled the cylinder back to show the gap in the beautiful photo, does it have cartridges in the cylinder or not? If not, load it with empties or live rounds and re check the gap so we can see how it looks as loaded (which would be how it is when fired). It may be that there is no real problem. Maybe the bushing just needs shimming to push the cylinder back.

Gabriel Law · « **Reply #6 on:** January 13, 2015, 12:11:35 PM »

Here's a picture with six empty cases in the cylinder. I don't think the gap closed very much. I am puling the cylinder rearward with my left hand in these pictures.

and another shot...

Abilene · « **Reply #7 on:** January 13, 2015, 12:20:51 PM »

Replace the bushing with a new one?

edit: I'm not as familiar with these as the Colt's guns, just looked at parts list and looks like it does not have a removeable bushing? If that is so, I second the suggestion to try a shim in front of the bushing.

Gabriel Law · « **Reply #8 on:** January 13, 2015, 12:38:25 PM »

Thanks for all the input. I think we are agreed that the cylinder needs to be held back against the recoil face, and that means dealing with the missing metal at the bushing.

hellgate · « **Reply #9 on:** January 13, 2015, 01:04:44 PM »

Here's a source for all kinds of shims:

http://www.mcmaster.com/#standard-shims/=q5h0dh

Flint · « **Reply #10 on:** January 13, 2015, 02:27:54 PM »

If you have the lathe to begin with, consider back boring the gas ring into the cylinderwith an endmill then making and pressing in a new, longer gas ring and fit it. Should have only .002 or so endshake.

I have done this with cap & ball Remingtons to create a gas ring, after removing material from the frame to make space for it.

Good Troy · « **Reply #11 on:** January 13, 2015, 03:23:09 PM »

Quote from: Flint on January 13, 2015, 02:27:54 PM

If you have the lathe to begin with, consider back boring the gas ring into the cylinderwith an endmill then making and pressing in a new, longer gas ring and fit it. Should have only .002 or so endshake.

I have done this with cap & ball Remingtons to create a gas ring, after removing material from the frame to make space for it.

Maybe this is a little off topic, so forgive me if it is....Did you see an improvement in shots between cleanings after this modification? What was it before and after? I just purchased a set of Pietta's and in my first trip to the range, I cleaned the cylinder between each firing cycle, and still had some stings where it got tough to cock. This was with a Pyrodex pellet (used for convenience, as I didn't have a flask yet), and a Wonderwad. I used a generous amount of T/C Bore Butter on the cylinder face, cylinder pin, and the pin bore of the cylinder.

Good Troy

Gabriel Law · « **Reply #12 on:** January 13, 2015, 06:32:24 PM »

Problem solved!! I made a drawing of the cylinder with dimensions and then machined a plug to replace the bushing. I faced off the cylinder, bored it to receive the new bushing, and then carefully faced it off until it was a perfect fit. The revolver now feels like new, in that there is almost no appreciable movement fore and aft, and it functions perfectly.

Thanks everyone for your input. I can't wait to go and try it out.

I feel it necessary to apologize for the horrific deformation on the cylinder. Years ago, the spring for the bolt broke, and jammed the bolt into the locked position. Before I could understand what had happened, I tried to remove the cylinder, and scratched the begeepers out of it. No real harm done, except to my pride for lack of patience.

Flint · « **Reply #13 on:** January 14, 2015, 05:40:18 PM »

Good Troy,

Yes, it much improved the number of shots before freezeup. I basically copied the Ruger Old Army gas ring in the conversion. The trickiest job is holding the frame in the mill square and straight to make the clearance cut for the revised cylinder.. Of course the barel has to be removed to make the cut in the frame, as well. All in all, a worthy mod for a gun used in matches where time is involved.

Gabriel,

did you make your new bushing/gas ring before or after my posting pics of the cap & ball version? At any rate, a new bushing is a better solution than trying to solder on an extension...

Gabriel Law · « **Reply #14 on:** January 14, 2015, 06:44:49 PM »

I started the work prior to your post, but your post confirmed my approach. Actually, the item that gave me the idea, was the word 'bushing' rather than 'bearing'. I realized then that I could bore out the old bushing and replace it with new steel, rather than adding on a 'washer'. I can't believe the difference it makes, and how simple it was.

Now, and the stuff of another thread, is the matter of 'lock-up'. I likely need a new bolt to take up the 'slop' and bring the revolver back to new 'tightness'.

1972 · « **Reply #15 on:** January 14, 2015, 07:20:06 PM »

Well done Gabriel. I'm not a machinist so would not have been capable of the magic you worked on the lathe, but I can understand the principal. Great save - and a very nice gun.

Good Troy · « **Reply #16 on:** January 19, 2015, 10:38:42 AM »

Thanks, Flint! Good information, and details!!

rbertalotto · « **Reply #17 on:** January 19, 2015, 11:15:56 AM »

Flint,

Am I missing something here? Why would you need to do any machining on the frame to add a longer bushing to the cylinder?

Gabriel Law · « **Reply #18 on:** January 20, 2015, 12:22:37 AM »

In my case, I simply replaced the worn metal on the cylinder - the piece that forced the cylinder back against the recoil shield. I did not see any need to remove metal from the frame. There was no wear at all on the frame.

Good Troy · « **Reply #19 on:** January 20, 2015, 11:12:40 AM »

Rbertalotto...

Flint's modification was to a New Model Army (1858). He was adding a bushing to help keep the cylinder pin assemble shielded from blow back debris. The NMA 1858 model cylinders don't have a bushing, and there isn't clearance between the frame and cylinder to allow for one (no "before" picture, so it isn't evident). So, the frame must be machined to allow for the bushing.

Gabriel Law's modification was on a Model 1875. As he said he simply replaced the worn metal to take the play out of the cylinder, and no machining was needed on the frame.

I'm no expert, just a study. I hope this helps...

Humbly,
Good Troy

News:

Author Topic: Cylinder gap (Read 15824 times)

Advertising

1972