My New Merwin

[matt45]

Rumor has it that firearms like that do much better after a summer trip to the west.  I would be willing to room and board them for a few months- just for their healths' sake.

[Jake C]

That is a gorgeous Merwin & Hulbert. I'm remarkably jealous of you.

[Driftwood Johnson]

In one of Mike Ventorino's books (I don't recall the title) he claims the Merwin Hulberts tolerances were too close for extended shooting with BP. He lost credibility with me after that since I had shot entire matches with one.

Howdy Will

The book is Shooting Sixguns of the Old West. I looked up what he had to say. It seems his Merwin was binding up after just one cylinder full of Black Powder rounds. I dunno what Mike was doing wrong, perhaps not enough lube on his bullets. Or perhaps his Merwin was just tighter than mine.

Mike goes on to comment about how Merwins were so precisely made that they were the best revolvers made in the 19th Century. That is where I part company with Mike. As I have said many times, there is nothing more precise in a Merwin Hulbert revolver than anything Smith and Wesson was capable of doing at the time. In my not so humble opinion, this myth about the incredible precision of the Merwin Hulbert had its origins in what Art Phelps had to say in his book, The Story of Merwin Hulbert & Co. Firearms. In his book, Phelps states over and over again how the MH was a more precise piece of machinery than any other revolver being made at the time. Since Phelps' book is the only book on the subject, much of what he says is taken as gospel.

I just finished cleaning my new Merwin and I took the liberty of taking a few photos.

Here is the gun broken down to its three main components.





Here is a photo of the arbor with the slot that guides the barrel/cylinder assembly from the closed position to the open position and back again. There is nothing precise about this groove, there is plenty of rotational slop between the groove and the barrel.





Here is a photo of the rotational joint between the frame and the barrel. The joint is unlatched and I have rotated the barrel slightly to show the relationship of the two parts.





Here is what the joint looks like when it is closed. Notice the fit is not incredibly tight, there is a few thousandths of slop in the joint.





Here is the other side of the joint. Again, there is a tiny bit of slop. What makes this joint work is the rigidity achieved between the joint and the arbor. With two points of contact, motion is restricted much more than if there was just one point of contact.





Don't get me wrong, I love my new Merwin Hulbert. I love it because it is such a distinctive design, and it is in such nice shape. But I have no illusions about how incredibly precise the tooling had to be to make it. Up in Springfield Mass they were making guns that were every bit as exacting in their tolerances, maybe more so.

[Advertising]

[Will Ketchum]

The book is Shooting Sixguns of the Old West. I looked up what he had to say. It seems his Merwin was binding up after just one cylinder full of Black Powder rounds. I dunno what Mike was doing wrong, perhaps not enough lube on his bullets. Or perhaps his Merwin was just tighter than mine.

Mike goes on to comment about how Merwins were so precisely made that they were the best revolvers made in the 19th Century. That is where I part company with Mike. As I have said many times, there is nothing more precise in a Merwin Hulbert revolver than anything Smith and Wesson was capable of doing at the time. In my not so humble opinion, this myth about the incredible precision of the Merwin Hulbert had its origins in what Art Phelps had to say in his book, The Story of Merwin Hulbert & Co. Firearms. In his book, Phelps states over and over again how the MH was a more precise piece of machinery than any other revolver being made at the time. Since Phelps' book is the only book on the subject, much of what he says is taken as gospel.

I just finished cleaning my new Merwin and I took the liberty of taking a few photos.



Here is the other side of the joint. Again, there is a tiny bit of slop. What makes this joint work is the rigidity achieved between the
Don't get me wrong, I love my new Merwin Hulbert. I love it because it is such a distinctive design, and it is in such nice shape. But I have no illusions about how incredibly precise the tooling had to be to make it. Up in Springfield Mass they were making guns that were every bit as exacting in their tolerances, maybe more so.
[/quote]

I couldn't agree more.

Will

[Blair]

This might be a good time to remind most folks that the very first interchangeable firearm was produced at the Rifle works at Harpers Ferry in 1819. (Springfield was not involved)
This was the Hall/North breech loading Rifles and Carbines.
I should point out that these were not 100% interchangeable as made off to the tooling and machinery of the time period. It still took some hand fitting for this to happen.

However, by the early 1840's all of this had been pretty well worked out by the two US National Armories at Springfield and Harpers Ferry. The rest of the arms making world would soon fallow.
Now, my reason for bringing this up is based on my experience with Merwin Hulbert's.
While they are wonder of mechanical ingenuity, they are not what I would consider to be very interchangeable within their own respective Model types.
I would have suspected a much greater degree of interchangeability in a firearm produced in the late 1870's.
My best,
 Blair

[wildman1]

Maybe because of the way they were built a lot of the fitting may have been done by hand. wM1

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy Again

Shot the Merwin and the New Model Number Three again this weekend at the Great Nor'Easter/North East Regional. Put 60 rounds through each one over the weekend. Both performed like champs.

[Blackpowder Burn]

You are a very fortunate man!  Enjoy those great old revolvers.

[tommy4toes]

Absolutely beautiful Merwin!!! S&W too!


t4t