New Ruger Old Army – Need help dialing in
- Thread starter Bumpy Rhodes
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
Well, not looking for "converts", didn't say you were a "lowly" engineer, i didn't "start" anything. You said the lack of a top strap bothered you (that's what tipped me off that you didn't "fully" understand the design). I figured you would "appreciate" it once you thought about it.I am waiting for you to help me "grasp HOW the open-top platform works" and educate me "just how genius of a design it really is". I'm just a lowly former engineer, Please finish what you started. Who, knows, you may win me over and help me understand. Thanks!
They had Mechanical engineers in the 1830's /40's that were extremely clever and intelligent as well. It's THEIR design that allows me to operate a copy of their design made with modern materials that can surpass many "top strap" designs (seemingly to the "upset" of many).
In short, i regularly shoot +p ammo in my cartridge converted open-top platform revolvers. A pair of '60's in 45acp and 45C in a pair of Dragoons.
The search function here will get your info.
Mike
Bumpy Rhodes
32 Cal
Thanks Mike, but I still don't understand the genius of the design, unless you are referring to the limitations of the manufacturing processes of the period. I was hoping you could help me understand. Thanks.
I am on board with Mike on the open top design. If the pistol is set up properly its a very strong platform, more so than the Remington. You have contact with bottom of the arbor socket, the frame area where the wedge fits, the slot where the wedge fits and the two pins and frame area at the bottom of the frame and barrel lug. As long as those places are fitted and kept tight you have a 2 piece unit behaving like it's one chunk of metal. Mike has been shooting +P 45 ACP loads in his guns for a little while now with no problems. For those who are hung up on the Remington top strap being the stronger design take a look at the area where the loading ram goes through the frame and look at the top strap where the sight groove is milled out. Those areas don't look real stout to me.
The "compactness" of the frame (the arbor IS the "top strap") along with the size of the pieces involved lend much to the strength of the platform rather than the frame being a "perimeter" fully around the cylinder. The arbor fully seated against the bottom of the arbor hole (in the barrel lug) under tension from the wedge "driven" in to impart and maintain such. This gives a rigid assemblage of the two which now depend on the arbor being screwed into the frame.
If there is a space between the arbor end and the bottom of the arbor hole, the wedge becomes a loose "pin" between two assemblies with opposite forces acting on it (which will eventually need replacing because of).
All of my +p rounds (23Kpsi in 45acp or 45C) use jacketed bullets (230gr for acp's, 250gr. for 45C).
The wedges in all of them are perfect with a minimum round count in the '60's of 2,000.
Mike
By the way, the end of the arbor contacting the bottom of the arbor hole is what determines the "endshake" (barrel / cylinder "gap").
The fact that ALL makers of these reproduction revolvers left out that impotent little detail ( Pietta saw fit to correct that a dozen yrs ago) is why they have been thought of the way they have been.
The platform, executed as per design, makes quite a bit of difference!!.
Mike
The fact that ALL makers of these reproduction revolvers left out that impotent little detail ( Pietta saw fit to correct that a dozen yrs ago) is why they have been thought of the way they have been.
The platform, executed as per design, makes quite a bit of difference!!.
Mike
Bumpy Rhodes
32 Cal
Thank you for the detailed explanation, it helps me appreciate the design. I never owned or disassembled one so I never gave it much thought. It is a great design, revolutionary at the time, relatively easy to manufacture with tooling of the period, made Sam very wealthy. As a modern gun guy new to blackpower, seeing the arbor carry the entire load vs the frame sharing the load top and bottom just didn’t “feel” as good. Feelings can be dangerous, maybe I should keep them to myself! 
Well, I figured someone with an engineering background would be able to "see" what happens when explained. The "genius" is the way the forces generated are delt with by the design. The "joining" of the two assemblies "done correctly" vs "incorrectly" makes all the difference. Admittedly, a top strap design makes total economical sense (make a frame - screw in a barrel . . . ) but an exaggerated top strap is needed as you increase the energy of the ammo . . . not to mention the smaller diameter of the base-pin keeps overall size manageable.Thank you for the detailed explanation, it helps me appreciate the design. I never owned or disassembled one so I never gave it much thought. It is a great design, revolutionary at the time, relatively easy to manufacture with tooling of the period, made Sam very wealthy. As a modern gun guy new to blackpower, seeing the arbor carry the entire load vs the frame sharing the load top and bottom just didn’t “feel” as good. Feelings can be dangerous, maybe I should keep them to myself!
Don't keep your feelings to yourself!!
We all need to keep learning !! (feelings just get in the way sometimes!!)
Mike
I think it was Mike that said modern Pietta copies of the Colt SAA are weaker then the open tops that he shoots but the replica SAA which is really a weak design many are chambered in 357 mag at 44,000 PSI where Mike is shooting 23K PSI. I doubt any open top could handle 44K PSI
Yap, you gotta compare apples to apples. I'm shooting .452" bullets not .357". Holes in the .45C cylinder and barrel are bigger than the same setup with .357 holes. More material means more strength. I belive Blackhawk Ruger onlys top out in the middle 30K psi. range.
I've listed in several threads a number of currently made SAA copies that won't hold up to 45acp+p/ 45C +p (both 23Kpsi) ammo and yes, even my own Pietta Frontier . . . and yes my '60's and Dragoons handle it with ease. Never said you can shoot 30K, much less 44K!!! Why not just say 60K 454 pressures?
A .22 long rifle round runs around 24K, bullet size makes a difference . . .
Mike
Last edited:
Oh, btw, in that "caliber" an open-top could definitely handle it. Walt and I have talked many times about a 44Mag on a Dragoon platform. . .
And yes, I had to "make" headspace clearance to allow the 45C cylinder to function (again) after I fired just five 45acp +p's in my "wonderful" Pietta Frontier.
Mike
Last edited:
Bumpy Rhodes
32 Cal
Blackhawk sight installed, looks good, height calculates to be right, and I really like the serrations on the ramp. Now I need some better weather to try it!
Thanks guys!!!
Thanks guys!!!
Nope, I'm not.
The Navy /Army frame is the SAME frame size as the the SAA!!! (and the open-top wins!!!!!).
I just made a statement that Walt and myself have discussed on several occasions the possibility of a Dragoon in 44Mag !!!! Concentrate!!
Mike
I am waiting for you to help me "grasp HOW the open-top platform works" and educate me "just how genius of a design it really is". I'm just a lowly former engineer, Please finish what you started. Who, knows, you may win me over and help me understand. Thanks!
The last 5 years working I was what they called a Techniain/Engineer. The engineer part was no letters, lots of experience and deeply interested and time invested in my field (call it Electro Mechanical, Generators, Fire Pumps, Boilers, Fans .......)
I was vaccinated with the 47 Walker and after a number of I am not buying it to I don't get it to, hmmm, I sort of get it to mostly get it with Mike as my guru (granted he volunteered).
Engineer wise I am not sure if the Open Top is a Truss System centered on the Arbor or in affect a solid mass, I never got into that sort of design. Field engineer sort of an I knew what worked and knew what did not or would not based on experience. Like with Mike, I had my eyes open a few times. I also worked with people that had letters after the engineer that could not design anything (and those who could). My favoite was a former filed guy who became an engineer that had turned manager. He took my end and upped it to higher levels but had that base in the real world. Great conversations with him while we fixed engineer of record screw ups.
In the end it does not matter what the Open Top technically is, seriously stout and capable of repressive performance.
Now a 36 caliber on a 47 Walker Frame? That would be interesting how far you could take that.
I too thought Top Strap would be more solid, but equal materials and no. Sure you can beef em up to nutty pressures, but use the same materials in an open top? That would be fun.
I believe S&W is using Scandiuam or something like that. You could use Titanium at a cost. The new Army rifle has nutty chamber pressures for a rifle, but they have the materials to do it.
Mike is exploring the upper end a bit at a time. Time honored method. Even an engineer would have to build on a new model as that open top design never transitioned into modern use.
Often at work I had to look the Manager in the eye and ask him, do you want to underpants it or do you want it fixed? We had mystery mechanical issues they brought an engineer on and still did not get an answer. Its not that you could not with enough money, it was there were proven methods (or equipment) that worked and it was, that is where we go anyway.
Mike opened my eyes - as he said, not looking for converts but extending the understanding has been amazing and informative and the respect for what was done back then has done nothing but go up. Mike and his mentors as well as those he teaches truly opens that area up.
Similar threads
