Getting the Walker tuned up

[MugWa]

All this talk of "fixing" so many things before you ever shoot the guns you acquire. How much shooting do you do? I'd like to see if it results in much better groups than an "out of the box" gun. To me the basic function of the gun is to hit what what your are aiming at rather than make it a project of re engineering.

 

[nkbj]

Are they easy to get seated square ?

When the rear bands are sized to slip into the chambers the bullets will align themselves the same as loading a TC maxi or Lee REAL into a rifle barrel. Just leave the front bands large to shear off like you were seating a round ball.

On a side note, I'm waiting for a 1858 cylinder to come back from machining, to have a short length of .452" diameter increase at the front of the chambers. The idea is to have the chambers accept and align .451" diameter bullets. After going in a short ways they'll get swaged into a smaller diameter (like on a factory supplied chamber). I'm thinking the design will let me use a lot of different molds, some of which will be accurate shooters and some won't, just like any other revolver. I suspect that a lubed wad will probably be needed to keep fouling in the chambers soft, to keep it from interferring with reloading, with trying to smoothly seat bullets into the tapered transition in diameters. Or maybe the old standby of cornmeal filler and a little dab of whatever works. With .452" diameter front ends on the chambers the piece should also work well with .457" round ball. Once it comes back and I get to run some tests I'll publish the results; good, bad or ho-hum.

 

[Ed C.]

A simple thing like a trigger job can make a gun easier to hit what your aiming at. Crowning a poorly trimmed barrel , evening out a forcing cone or correcting a poor sight picture can greatly enhance a revolvers performance.
What happens usually is each problem or short coming found and corrected will add a few percent of accuracy enhancement and the accumulative effect can be significant.

It would be interesting if you did before and after range tests to see the actual effect of the tuning.

 

[ormond tony]

I'm just curious. Is this what the new recruit to the Texas Rangers talked about when issued his new Walker? Did they get rid of their Walkers when the Dragoons came out? Did the Texas Rangers have a person whose job was to modify each Walker for each recruit to meet the above discussed standards? Where can I find dialogs like this that happened back in 1846? Or did they just live (and die) by just loading up the Walkers and making sight adjustments as they learned that some had to aim slightly up and to the right if they wanted to hit anything. Or did they just file the front sight down? Seems we're getting away from frontier muzzleloading and into scientific muzzleloading which was probably the domain of a very select few. Please point me in the direction that provides indication that the last 6 pages of this thread happened in 1846.

 

[fireman1]

I'm just curious. Is this what the new recruit to the Texas Rangers talked about when issued his new Walker? Did they get rid of their Walkers when the Dragoons came out? Did the Texas Rangers have a person whose job was to modify each Walker for each recruit to meet the above discussed standards? Where can I find dialogs like this that happened back in 1846? Or did they just live (and die) by just loading up the Walkers and making sight adjustments as they learned that some had to aim slightly up and to the right if they wanted to hit anything. Or did they just file the front sight down? Seems we're getting away from frontier muzzleloading and into scientific muzzleloading which was probably the domain of a very select few. Please point me in the direction that provides indication that the last 6 pages of this thread happened in 1846.

You should go start your own thread. You can talk all you want there about what the Rangers did in 1846.

OP is looking to maximize his shooting fun. Hi gun, his thread, his choice.

NOTHING he is talking about violates any rule here on the MLF.

 

[Bad Karma]

I'm just curious. Is this what the new recruit to the Texas Rangers talked about when issued his new Walker? Did they get rid of their Walkers when the Dragoons came out? Did the Texas Rangers have a person whose job was to modify each Walker for each recruit to meet the above discussed standards? Where can I find dialogs like this that happened back in 1846? Or did they just live (and die) by just loading up the Walkers and making sight adjustments as they learned that some had to aim slightly up and to the right if they wanted to hit anything. Or did they just file the front sight down? Seems we're getting away from frontier muzzleloading and into scientific muzzleloading which was probably the domain of a very select few. Please point me in the direction that provides indication that the last 6 pages of this thread happened in 1846.

Probably all sorts of things happening in 1846 that weren’t written down. Gun cranks have always fooled with guns and professional gunmen more than most. You can bet that a Ranger depending on his tools knew how to get the most out of them. It’s exactly the same way as it is today.

 

[45D]

It's more than just "setting up " a cap gun like "normal" this time . . . it's a " reckonin' " . . .

Mike

 

[Ed C.]

You should go start your own thread. You can talk all you want there about what the Rangers did in 1846.

OP is looking to maximize his shooting fun. Hi gun, his thread, his choice.

NOTHING he is talking about violates any rule here on the MLF.

I don't think there is any mention of rules violations. Just a questioning of how much tuning was done or needs to be done on a new gun. Of course every individual has the the right to enjoy his gun however he wants.....shoot the heck out of it or machine it to exacting standards and maybe never even shoot it. I'm just looking for the balance between work put into a gun and noticeable, practical results.

 

[ormond tony]

What exactly is your problem Fireman? I said nothing about preventing anyone from using anything to get a better revolver. I never said there is a violation of rules. I didn't say a thing about what the Rangers did - just queried on what processes they may have done to make their Walkers better. Did they do all this stuff and what did they do that would benefit these day? Maybe it would be interesting to have a forum within here on 'scientific' and/or 'mechanical' or 'engineering' ways to make a better firearm and shooter.
I wish I had a dime for every thread that roamed every which way. I would be able to contribute enough to this site to pay for a years maintenance.

 

[45D]

What exactly is your problem Fireman? I said nothing about preventing anyone from using anything to get a better revolver. I never said there is a violation of rules. I didn't say a thing about what the Rangers did - just queried on what processes they may have done to make their Walkers better. Did they do all this stuff and what did they do that would benefit these day? Maybe it would be interesting to have a forum within here on 'scientific' and/or 'mechanical' or 'engineering' ways to make a better firearm and shooter.
I wish I had a dime for every thread that roamed every which way. I would be able to contribute enough to this site to pay for a years maintenance.

Your response is interesting. One thing they didn't do or question is if "the arbor bottoms out in the barrel assy" . . . it wasn't a thought, that's what they were handed. They didn't need to know . . . Only those of us that have "reproductions" that weren't "true" reproductions. It apparently shatters some thoughts but others correct it and go on and realize what an awesome revolver Colt designed . . . but hey, that's ok !!

Mike

 

[J-Bar]

If you are concerned about Range Officer ignorance, go on the offensive. Leave the gun in your car and talk to the RO about what you have and what you are planning to do. Record the conversation with your cell phone in your shirt pocket. You are being up front with the staff and not putting them in an uncomfortable situation. Invite the RO to take a couple of shots. He may surprise you!

 

[fireman1]

I don't think there is any mention of rules violations. Just a questioning of how much tuning was done or needs to be done on a new gun. Of course every individual has the the right to enjoy his gun however he wants.....shoot the heck out of it or machine it to exacting standards and maybe never even shoot it. I'm just looking for the balance between work put into a gun and noticeable, practical results.

Hi Ed,

I agree with you on all counts. of course I'm just a hack and shoot them however they show up.

Some guys just like to show up in a thread and stir the pot....not saying that is you.

 

[fireman1]

What exactly is your problem Fireman? I said nothing about preventing anyone from using anything to get a better revolver. I never said there is a violation of rules. I didn't say a thing about what the Rangers did - just queried on what processes they may have done to make their Walkers better. Did they do all this stuff and what did they do that would benefit these day? Maybe it would be interesting to have a forum within here on 'scientific' and/or 'mechanical' or 'engineering' ways to make a better firearm and shooter.
I wish I had a dime for every thread that roamed every which way. I would be able to contribute enough to this site to pay for a years maintenance.

You show up in the thread questioning why the thread even exists since they probably weren't doing this when they got issued the Walkers.

I'm not gonna disrupt the thread anymore.

 

[M. De Land]

If you are concerned about Range Officer ignorance, go on the offensive. Leave the gun in your car and talk to the RO about what you have and what you are planning to do. Record the conversation with your cell phone in your shirt pocket. You are being up front with the staff and not putting them in an uncomfortable situation. Invite the RO to take a couple of shots. He may surprise you!

Great suggestion instead of just bitching about it ! I'm duly chastised about the comment and except your correction and solution !

 

[M. De Land]

Probably all sorts of things happening in 1846 that weren’t written down. Gun cranks have always fooled with guns and professional gunmen more than most. You can bet that a Ranger depending on his tools knew how to get the most out of them. It’s exactly the same way as it is today.

One of the mods I saw some where said/showed, the rangers commonly kept a rawhide choker loop around the barrel and loading lever, in back of the front sight, to hold the loading lever up under recoil.
Making one handed snap shots from horse back wouldn't work if that loading handle kept flopping down after every shot so I'm quite sure the rangers actually did make this modification to their revolvers !
I picked up some more Walker Trivia today I did not formerly know but that's not unusual for me to be late to the party on historical stuff. The Trivia was that when the first 400 Walkers were test fired after manufacture well over 1/4th of them burst a cylinder.
I had always thought/read this occurred after issuance to the Rangers during combat, probably from backward Pickett ball seating but apparently most of it happened before being issued in test firing, if I understood Bellvue correctly. It was a Mike Bellvue video I saw this on and he seems to be pretty well read on percussion gun history from what I can detect.

 

[ormond tony]

One of the mods I saw some where said/showed, the rangers commonly kept a rawhide choker loop around the barrel and loading lever, in back of the front sight, to hold the loading lever up under recoil.
Making one handed snap shots from horse back wouldn't work if that loading handle kept flopping down after every shot so I'm quite sure the rangers actually did make this modification to their revolvers !
I picked up some more Walker Trivia today I did not formerly know but that's not unusual for me to be late to the party on historical stuff. The Trivia was that when the first 400 Walkers were test fired after manufacture well over 1/4th of them burst a cylinder.
I had always thought/read this occurred after issuance to the Rangers during combat, probably from backward Pickett ball seating but apparently most of it happened before being issued in test firing, if I understood Bellvue correctly. It was a Mike Bellvue video I saw this on and he seems to be pretty well read on percussion gun history from what I can detect.

I have read that along with lever falling, bursting cylinders were the prime reason for Colt making the Dragoon series (1,2,and 3 (supposedly improving by #3)). That asks the question: did the Texas Rangers or civilians incorporate the Dragoon improvements onto their owned Walkers? Cheaper than buying a new revolver???? hmmmm....

 

[45D]

One of the mods I saw some where said/showed, the rangers commonly kept a rawhide choker loop around the barrel and loading lever, in back of the front sight, to hold the loading lever up under recoil.
Making one handed snap shots from horse back wouldn't work if that loading handle kept flopping down after every shot so I'm quite sure the rangers actually did make this modification to their revolvers !
I picked up some more Walker Trivia today I did not formerly know but that's not unusual for me to be late to the party on historical stuff. The Trivia was that when the first 400 Walkers were test fired after manufacture well over 1/4th of them burst a cylinder.
I had always thought/read this occurred after issuance to the Rangers during combat, probably from backward Pickett ball seating but apparently most of it happened before being issued in test firing, if I understood Bellvue correctly. It was a Mike Bellvue video I saw this on and he seems to be pretty well read on percussion gun history from what I can detect.

If you're referring to the latest video of him talking about the Walker history along with using the flask, it's rather unimpressive!! He has no clue how to use the flask or that there is an actual adjustable feature on it ( it ain't the "plunger" !! ). That leads me to question the rest of his "true" information on the subject.
Just thought I'd throw that out there . . .
Oh, mine holds 6 .455" conicals . . .

Mike

 

[M. De Land]

If you're referring to the latest video of him talking about the Walker history along with using the flask, it's rather unimpressive!! He has no clue how to use the flask or that there is an actual adjustable feature on it ( it ain't the "plunger" !! ). That leads me to question the rest of his "true" information on the subject.
Just thought I'd throw that out there . . .
Oh, mine holds 6 .455" conicals . . .

Mike

I think he was quoting from a book by a fella named Pate who is supposed to know what he's talking about when referring to Colt history.
I seated the ACP bullets to night and they are going to work out very well I think as they make contact at the sized heeled bullet base at the choke down in the chambers with a good solid seat just as the nose clears the chamber mouth for rotation. The loading rod does not deform the nose and centers them perfectly square in the chamber.
I did not get the Walker take down multi-tool, screw driver, nipple wrench, main spring vice with the Uberti. Was I supposed to? I would like to pick one up if there not to expensive if I can find who sells them. It'd save me several hours of labor making one.

 

[45D]

I seated the ACP bullets to night and they are going to work out very well I think as they make contact at the sized heeled bullet base at the choke down in the chambers with a good solid seat just as the nose clears the chamber mouth for rotation. The loading rod does not deform the nose and centers them perfectly square in the chamber.
I did not get the Walker take down multi-tool, screw driver, nipple wrench, main spring vice with the Uberti. Was I supposed to? I would like to pick one up if there not to expensive if I can find who sells them. It'd save me several hours of labor making one.

The bullets look good in the cylinder.

No. That's just an accessory. It's not needed. The easiest way to remove the main is to just slide it out from under the hammer to either side. Re-install by stacking your thumbs on top of each other on the spring and pushing the spring down and back under the hammer.
I use that method when I can't just slide the main straight down from under the hammer ( thumbs stacked). 90 percent of the time I can but some older springs don't fit the lug loose enough to slide so the "pivot" method is needed. The newer examples have nicer springs that fit correctly. Sliding them down for removal and up to re-install is pretty easy.
I've never owned the tool, you'd need to remove the spring from under it anyway so you can lighten it if needed and to drill and tap the t.g. for an action stop.
The only reason for having the tool is either to complete a "set" or just to say you have one. They definitely aren't needed.

Mike

 

[nkbj]

The Walker experience must have been the impetus behind developing "silver steel".