Schofield pistols and black powder(777)

[Rusty Bones]

Hello all. I find myself desiring to purchase a brace of Schofields ( 5.5 bbl.), in 44-40. Plan to use 777 and hard wax boolits. This is to keeps ammo production variables to a minimum. Currently doing this with my Mod. 92 and 73.

Here is my questiion. How much of a problem do these guns (Ubertis) have with foulin over the duration of a ten stage match. I like to shoot. I will clean em when I gettem home. Any experiences out there you'd like to pass on would be greatly appreciated!!!

[Cuts Crooked]

Donno 'bout 777 but the real stuff don' seem ta work in the reproductions available today. Seems like I have heard that those who like to shoot these guns Darksider style have found that one of replica black powders is the only way to do it...might be that 777 is what they're usin'.

[Grizzle Bear]

Aw, shucks, I shoot real BP in my Schoefields.  I just squirt a little solvent on the cylinder pin between stages.

I have acquired the Big Lube bullet mould, but haven't shot enough of them yet to determine if that will help.

Grizzle Bear

[Advertising]

[Tommy tornado]

I am not sure if I remember correctly, but I believe that the schofield will shoot well with APP powder. 

[44caliberkid]

The Scho's will work fine with 777, APP, or Pinnacle.

[Dick Dastardly]

So, why is it the original Schofields did fine with Holy Black and the repros won't?  And, is there a modification that will make the new ones do what the originals did?  I don't own one and haven't shot one, but if I did, I'd want to shoot Genuine Powder in it.  What good is a reproduction of something that won't shoot the original ammo?

Thanks, I stand by to be informed.

DD-DLoS

[Cuts Crooked]

'ello Dick!

We think that the problem is that the manufactures have changed the geometry of gun a bit, making the cylinder a bit longer in order to handle cartridges like the .45 Colt, which the orignals were never chambered for. In doing so they brought the gap b'twixt the chambers and the forcing cone out a bit, and directly over the cylinder pin. This allows fouling to blow straight down onto the cylinder pin and up around it. With the originals this was not a problem so much because of the slight offset.

Interestingly, I've encountered this in later reproductions of Remingtons too. The early reproductions have a slightly shorter cylinder, just barely enough to allow them work with the .45s. The newer ones have a longer cylinder giving the same problems one runs into with the Schofields. Not as bad as what I've heard about the Schofields, but the newer ones definately don't run with BP as well as my old one. Of my three, two are later production runs and one is an early run.....and it will run all day long with BP! The newer ones need periodic maintainance to get through more than three stages.

[44caliberkid]

The original Schofields had a shorter cylinder, for the the shorter 45 Scho cartridge, and a gas ring around the cylinder pin.  The new Schofields and No.3's have a longer cylinder for 45 colt, which left no room for the gas ring which previously protected the cylinder pin area from fouling.  So the fouling goes right in between the cylinder, the pin, and the frame.   When Uberti started the Schofield series, they had talked about a 45 Schofield (caliber) with the shorter cylinder and the gas ring, but it never materialized, probably because of lack of demand.  Powders that leave a low residue, such as APP and 777 ought to work in the new Schofields.

[Dick Dastardly]

So, how hard would it be to machine the cylinder face, leaving a collar to protect the cylinder base pin and then moving the barrel back to take up the slack?  I'm thinkn' that once the procedure was established by a compatent smith,  it could be repeated for not a lot of bucks and would end up with a gun that might handle the Genuine Powder as well as did the originals they were cloned from. . . .

My haid works that way.


DD-DLoS

[Cuts Crooked]

I think with the Schofileds it would be impossible, because the barrel/frame assembly is kinda different, with the barrel being hinged to the frame...no way to set it back.

With the Remington design you get into problems because of the web being precisely fit to the barrel/frame. I think one could set the barrel back and shorten the web, at the rear, an equal amount. But the remington would be a three part solution. 1> Maching the face of the cylinder to shorten it while leaving a bushing face, 2> Cutting the threads on the barrel deeper and setting the barrel deeper in the frame, 3> Modifying the web & ejector rod housing to fit the deeper seated barrel.

Another possible solution with the Remington design would be to have the cylinder modified to a colt style sleeve/cylinder bushing. But I don't know enough about the job to tell if there's enough metal there to safely do this.

[Rusty Bones]

Hi folks. I love all the new info!! Keep it coming. Rusty.

[Steel Horse Bailey]

I posted this on the gunsmithing frorum about a month or so back.  The idea I had was for Remingtons, but I don't know enough about the Schofields to speculate whether it would work or not.  A half-competant machinest could easily do it - even me;  you just have to have a lathe to make it practical.

I wrote:

This is purely hypothetical.  I have enough machinest experience to be dangerous, but what I'm proposing would be pretty easy for a machinest.  I know that it would NOT be authentic, but could help shooters of Remingtons who want to shoot BP, but who haven't learned the knowledge that comes from experience regarding the use of lube and how much it takes to keep a Remington shooting. (Or even a Colt.)

Making a Colt style bushing would be a simple task as is boring the cylinder out enough for the bushing.  The harder part would be relieving the frame enough for the bushing.  It could be done with a file, but a machinest would be able to do it with a powered tool. (Mill)

The point is this:  would this (non-authentic) mod coupled with other mods (ie: grooving the cylinder pin to hold more lube) enable shooters to shoot their '58, '63, '75, & '90s longer with less problems when shooting their guns with BP?

Like I said, this is hypothetical.  I think it would work and probably wouldn't cost that much if you had to pay a machinest to do it, and it certainly wouldn't cost much for those of you with the tools and experience to do it yourself.

Just an idea ...