Brass Frame 1851s

[bpd303]

It's been my experience that every brass frame revolver that "shot loose" the owner/operator suffered from Magnumitus.

 

[D Yager]

And a short arbor on open tops and excessive end shake on the Remmies.

 

[LostInSauce]

It's been my experience that every brass frame revolver that "shot loose" the owner/operator suffered from Magnumitus.

Is this condition treatable?

 

[bpd303]

Is this condition treatable?

Yes, however it takes time and in my case graduating to an 1847 Walker by Replica Arms and A Euro Arms Rogers & Spencer both in 44 cal.

 

[LostInSauce]

Yes, however it takes time and in my case graduating to an 1847 Walker by Replica Arms and A Euro Arms Rogers & Spencer both in 44 cal.

Man, sounds pretty good to me. When I tried explaining to my doctor that I'd graduated from beer to hard liquor (in 80 proof) he was NOT impressed.

 

[M. De Land]

I'm inclined to agree, I just avoid loading the cylinder on the gun, well with the brass frame that is. Even with the .36 Cal and .375 RB, you are exerting and good amount of force and that Force is multiplied at the ball due to it being a lever and all.

I'm quite certain the imprinting is from shooting but the loosening of the arbor thread I believe is aggravated by the off center cantilever pressure from the loading lever operation.

 

[Dale Lilly]

You’re right that brass frames can eventually shoot loose if pushed too hard. They just can’t handle the same long-term stress as steel frames. That said, if you stick to lighter loads (I’d recommend staying in the 15-20 grain range for regular use), your revolver should hold up fine. Brass technology has improved somewhat, but physics is physics—heavy loads will accelerate wear. You don’t want to beat the gun to death and send it to an early grave, do you?

For brass frames, I’d avoid max loads like 30 grains—those are better suited for steel frames. Somewhere around 15-20 grains of FFFg powder (or equivalent in Pyrodex) works well for brass revolvers and is more enjoyable to shoot. Less fouling, less recoil, and easier on the gun. I use ten grains in my .38 Mang in Graz, and I regularly hit steel targets out to 50 yards, frequently acing the pistol portion of our club trail walks (with targets posted between 15 and 50 yards). A lot of guys poke fun at my “frog fart” loads, but I think the results speak for themselves.

For gripping the revolver, one hand works great for that classic old-school feel, but you can use two hands if you’re looking for more stability. Just make sure your off-hand stays clear of the cylinder gap—the gas and debris that vents out there can be unpleasant (or worse). A solid one-handed grip places the web of your hand high on the backstrap, and your trigger finger should naturally land on the trigger. For two-handed shooting, support your firing hand with your off-hand underneath the grip.

Personally, I think .457 is a little on the large side. Most .44 cal revolvers call for .451/.454, with the exception being the Ruger Old Army. If it loads with relative ease for you, you’re good to go; however, if you find it’s difficult to ram it home, it may place unnecessary stress on the loading lever.

Enjoy the new toy!

I stay under 20 but don';t shoot much; for me brass is fine and I prefer the look.

 

[bpd303]

I still love my brass frame colts with target loads not to exceed 20 gr fffg Goex.

 

[smoothshooter]

You’re right that brass frames can eventually shoot loose if pushed too hard. They just can’t handle the same long-term stress as steel frames. That said, if you stick to lighter loads (I’d recommend staying in the 15-20 grain range for regular use), your revolver should hold up fine. Brass technology has improved somewhat, but physics is physics—heavy loads will accelerate wear. You don’t want to beat the gun to death and send it to an early grave, do you?

For brass frames, I’d avoid max loads like 30 grains—those are better suited for steel frames. Somewhere around 15-20 grains of FFFg powder (or equivalent in Pyrodex) works well for brass revolvers and is more enjoyable to shoot. Less fouling, less recoil, and easier on the gun. I use ten grains in my .38 Mang in Graz, and I regularly hit steel targets out to 50 yards, frequently acing the pistol portion of our club trail walks (with targets posted between 15 and 50 yards). A lot of guys poke fun at my “frog fart” loads, but I think the results speak for themselves.

For gripping the revolver, one hand works great for that classic old-school feel, but you can use two hands if you’re looking for more stability. Just make sure your off-hand stays clear of the cylinder gap—the gas and debris that vents out there can be unpleasant (or worse). A solid one-handed grip places the web of your hand high on the backstrap, and your trigger finger should naturally land on the trigger. For two-handed shooting, support your firing hand with your off-hand underneath the grip.

Personally, I think .457 is a little on the large side. Most .44 cal revolvers call for .451/.454, with the exception being the Ruger Old Army. If it loads with relative ease for you, you’re good to go; however, if you find it’s difficult to ram it home, it may place unnecessary stress on the loading lever.

Enjoy the new toy!

I suspect the loading process may be harder on the frames than shooting them.

 

[Flintlock Fellow]

I suspect the loading process may be harder on the frames than shooting them.

Perhaps. What it ultimately boils down to is that brass-framed revolvers are less durable than their steel counterparts. Firing heavy loads and forcing unnecessarily large balls into the chambers are both practices that exert undue stress on the frame and ought to be avoided.

 

[M. De Land]

I have personally run across a few Walkers that no matter what you did to the hammer face it pulled caps. A cap post was the only answer.

Colt apparently never saw a need for a cap post although I read he did some experimenting along that line. Most all cap sucking can be eliminated with a stronger hammer spring and defanging the safety groove in the hammer face.
I've never yet tied up any other open top revolver model, with a loose cap in the action lock works, with the exception of the Walker.

 

[Frontstuffer070]

I can add, The 100% factory stock Pietta G&G that I have does not suck caps or have I had a Cap jam. And it has a Pretty heavy main spring. I have been wanting to change it. But you guys have me rethinking that idea.

 

[D Yager]

I have seen Walkers, Dragoons, 1851s, 1860s and pocket model open tops with cap fragments in the innards. An action shield and cap post pretty much takes it out of the picture. Most would still function but were really sketchy on whether or it would go boom. I had one that at least a half dozen caps under the hammer and in the area below the hammer and even one that had worked its way into the hand chimney.

 

[45D]

Most all cap sucking can be eliminated with a stronger hammer spring . . .

Apparently not because they had different caps, different manufacturing, different size nipples . . . They weren't like our REPRODUCTIONS!!!

Sure, you can double springs if you want but you're shortening the life of the hammer notch and trigger sear.

I think you're using the wrong "measuring stick" !!!

Mike

 

[D Yager]

I have customer that tried to double the hammer spring to stop cap sucking and the hammer bouncing to the half cock notch. He tried changing nipples, doubling the hammer tension and none of that worked. A cap post and action shield solved the problem. I set the hammer pull to 4.5 lbs, enough to pop caps and still be able to cock the thing without breaking your thumb.

 

[KingOfKindling]

Apparently not because they had different caps, different manufacturing, different size nipples . . . They weren't like our REPRODUCTIONS!!!

Sure, you can double springs if you want but you're shortening the life of the hammer notch and trigger sear.

I think you're using the wrong "measuring stick" !!!

Mike

It can be both. And you don't have to double the spring weight, just increase it.

Every original I've ever played with has had hammer springs at least as strong as a Pietta, most were even stronger. Uberti makes their springs thinner and weaker than the originals.

Now I've only ever played with original pocket and belt sized (1851/60 colts, 1858 Remington) guns. Never gotten to handle an original Walker sadly. Would not surprise me at all if Uberti also made those springs weaker though. They do for every other gun.

 

[Frontstuffer070]

what did an 1850's Percussion cap look like? I wonder if the original percussion caps even blew apart like ours now days do. I want to think they acted like they do when I put a cap collar on them. There is no Cap jam with a collar. But they add a whole bunch of time in loading and reloading.

 

[Trev]

Can those springs simply be reshaped and re-tempered to increase the the hammer tension? It seems to me that just straightening the spring a bit would increase the the hammer force considerable?