Getting the Walker tuned up

[M. De Land]

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

I don't know how the original Walker cylinders were made , if cast or wrought iron, but the later would have been stronger. I suspect probably they were cast iron as made by Whitney. What changed everything and made smaller revolvers possible was the British Bessemer process of making high quality steel by air injection when molten.
I think this Bessemer processed steel was instituted for the Dragoon series of revolvers and all subsequent models.

 

[fireman1]

Bessemer steel was not available until well after the Dragoon series. Came about in the late 1850's.

 

[M. De Land]

Bessemer steel was not available until well after the Dragoon series. Came about in the late 1850's.

Thank you for the correction and you are quite right as Bessemer of England was the one who made the process commercially available and patented it in 1856 in Sheffield England . It was interesting to discover in my research that William Kelley of Pittsburgh PA discovered the process in 1847 but did not have the finances to perfect the process and make it commercially viable.

 

[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

Have you reamed the chamber throats ?

 

[45D]

Have you reamed the chamber throats ?

Sorry, mine are Kirst cyls and they are perf for .452" ( 45C )

Mike

 

[M. De Land]

Sorry, mine are Kirst cyls and they are perf for .452" ( 45C )

Mike

Oh that's right, I was thinking Walker chambers instead of Dragoon.

 

[nick_1]

Seems like you have to jump through hoops to make a colt repro work? all I ever did with my Remmington's is load and shoot them. I haven't even upgraded the nipples.. no need to . I load the cylinders on the bench and pinch the caps until the nipples break in. all that being said someday I will own an 1860 Army. I remember my 1851 Navy being such a natural point shooter when I was a kid.

 

[ormond tony]

Seems like you have to jump through hoops to make a colt repro work? all I ever did with my Remmington's is load and shoot them. I haven't even upgraded the nipples.. no need to . I load the cylinders on the bench and pinch the caps until the nipples break in. all that being said someday I will own an 1860 Army. I remember my 1851 Navy being such a natural point shooter when I was a kid.

I got my Walker, opened the box, cleaned off the oil, and went shooting. I selected the caps that work best with it (not relying on what the book says). I learned how it felt, how to aim for windage, sight configurations, and ball/powder loads through shooting. I have had no issues, problems with it. Same with other colts I have. I learned that each has it's peculiarities and quirks. I waited until a problem occurred to fix it and didn't approach it as fixing all the problems that 'could' happen. If the wedge didn't work anymore, I get a new wedge. If the cylinder didn't align with the bore, I'd fix the mechanisms inside or have it fine-tuned, just like my car at scheduled maintenance.
Please buy the replicas so all of us won't have to worry that they would stop building them.
Just my 2 cents worth.

 

[Dude]

Good for you, Tony! Sounds like you've gotten mid-week guns that were put together properly.

Yeah, these repros should fire without blowing up and put the lead somewhere near the target.

I've gotten used vehicles the previous owner considered in excellent shape. No, they weren't PRing for the sale, it's how they truly felt. Myself, I couldn't stand operating the thing till everything was adjusted and working properly. Yeah, it would get you from A to B - but I can't stand using something that doesn't work at its best. One guy couldn't afford to fix the gauges (old BMW motorcycle) so rode it that way for five years before sending them to me for repair. To give you an idea where I'm coming from, If the turn signals work, but the switch doesn't click into position as it should, it bugs me. I've gotta fix it.

So having something important like the arbor not fitting or the barrel cylinder gap overly large is something that needs fixing. I don't want to use it till it's right. Yes, it'll shoot, but I don't have to and won't.

I don't think you have to worry about scaring off potential customers of new BP Colt pistols. A large percentage of the guns never get shot anyway, but the guys who do shoot are the adventurous type who want to know the hows and whys of things, and want to know what's involved improving them.

This must sound like scary sh*t, and I guess it can be for those not mechanically inclined, but for the rest of us it's really interesting stuff! At least you now have an idea what's involved in tuning these things and making them right. It'll be easier to recognize problems and how to communicate to the gun smith so he'll know what you're talking about.

 

[2 shots]

im getting my walker tuned up... new wheels and tennis balls

 

[45D]

Good for you, Tony! Sounds like you've gotten mid-week guns that were put together properly.

Yeah, these repros should fire without blowing up and put the lead somewhere near the target.

To give you an idea where I'm coming from, If the turn signals work, but the switch doesn't click into position as it should, it bugs me. I've gotta fix it.

So having something important like the arbor not fitting or the barrel cylinder gap overly large is something that needs fixing. I don't want to use it till it's right. Yes, it'll shoot, but I don't have to and won't.

This must sound like scary sh*t, and I guess it can be for those not mechanically inclined, but for the rest of us it's really interesting stuff! At least you now have an idea what's involved in tuning these things and making them right. It'll be easier to recognize problems and how to communicate to the gun smith so he'll know what you're talking about.

Gotta agree with Dude!!
These reproductions function out of the box but my customers don't want "out of the box" revolvers. An "out of the box" revolver is just like any one of thousands of others. The "quality " of the final product is in the fitting / details. They may look exactly the same but the difference is unmistakable after you cycle them just one time. The fit is obvious, the timing is crisp, audible and dead on. Absolutely no drag of the cylinder face on the barrel ( open-top platforms). There's no hand tension on the cyl ratchet with hammer held back at full ****. The action stop won't allow over travel. The bolt block won't allow the bolt or the cyl notches to be damaged with hard handling. A correct tensioned main spring allows the heft of the barrel to assist you in cycling the action but still deliver 100% ignition reliability.

There's definitely a difference and the difference is in the quality and it can be felt immediately.

Mike

 

[M. De Land]

Good for you, Tony! Sounds like you've gotten mid-week guns that were put together properly.

Yeah, these repros should fire without blowing up and put the lead somewhere near the target.

I've gotten used vehicles the previous owner considered in excellent shape. No, they weren't PRing for the sale, it's how they truly felt. Myself, I couldn't stand operating the thing till everything was adjusted and working properly. Yeah, it would get you from A to B - but I can't stand using something that doesn't work at its best. One guy couldn't afford to fix the gauges (old BMW motorcycle) so rode it that way for five years before sending them to me for repair. To give you an idea where I'm coming from, If the turn signals work, but the switch doesn't click into position as it should, it bugs me. I've gotta fix it.

So having something important like the arbor not fitting or the barrel cylinder gap overly large is something that needs fixing. I don't want to use it till it's right. Yes, it'll shoot, but I don't have to and won't.

I don't think you have to worry about scaring off potential customers of new BP Colt pistols. A large percentage of the guns never get shot anyway, but the guys who do shoot are the adventurous type who want to know the hows and whys of things, and want to know what's involved improving them.

This must sound like scary sh*t, and I guess it can be for those not mechanically inclined, but for the rest of us it's really interesting stuff! At least you now have an idea what's involved in tuning these things and making them right. It'll be easier to recognize problems and how to communicate to the gun smith so he'll know what you're talking about.

I love to read of all the bells and whistles of add on modifications and see what they look like and what they accomplish but personally prefer to stay within the traditional design as Colt offered them but in tuned up order to preform their best.
I view some of the modifications as solutions in search of a problem but as long as they don't cause regression in function and performance there is no harm done and if it pleases the owner then it's all good.

 

[Dude]

I love to read of all the bells and whistles of add on modifications and see what they look like and what they accomplish but personally prefer to stay within the traditional design as Colt offered them but in tuned up order to preform their best.
I view some of the modifications as solutions in search of a problem but as long as they don't cause regression in function and performance there is no harm done and if it pleases the owner then it's all good.

True.

On the other hand, finding out that the factory specified beveling the chambers to eliminate chain fires is a biggie. I haven't seen any chamfered edges on any of mine.

Some of these smithing actions may seem unnecessary and over-and-above originals, but how much do we really know? How many of us knew about the chamfered chambers? This kind of reminds me of the older Moto Guzzi bikes I love. It was discovered that the timing marks weren't always correctly stamped. So it's a good idea to verify they're correctly marked. Making a comparison here between open-tops and Guzzis, detractors would tell us to just ride the dam thing as it came from the factory! However, just because it left the factory like that doesn't mean it was what the engineers who designed the thing intended. Some things are done to a price-point and a wide tolerance is considered good enough. Sometimes there are mistakes, and even though it works, it doesn't work well or as it should.

I am curious if chamfered cylinders became a bad idea when cartridges appeared, and for the reason M.De Land pointed out? Maybe this was only a good idea for BP revolvers? It certainly wouldn't be needed in cartridge guns.

And, finally, were these guns the ultimate best they could be? Most likely not, and on the most part, would you really want to change it from the gun it was in 1847? Me, I'd like it to hold up and to shoot the loads it was designed for, and that's what this thread is all about. Detractors say "Leave well enough alone!" But that doesn't work because running full loads without any adjustments or modifications rattles them apart. Maybe originals could stand up to the wear and tear? (except for the weak cylinders blowing up). So already we've veered from the original production using modern steel.

If you don't mind turn lines, hammered and peened cylinder stop notches, wedges that won't stay in or replacing them every few sessions, etc, then go ahead and leave your new Walker as is. Or run wimpy loads that won't stress the weaknesses in the build. I don't consider that functional and prefer things holding together and just working.

 

[M. De Land]

True.

On the other hand, finding out that the factory specified beveling the chambers to eliminate chain fires is a biggie. I haven't seen any chamfered edges on any of mine.

Some of these smithing actions may seem unnecessary and over-and-above originals, but how much do we really know? How many of us knew about the chamfered chambers? This kind of reminds me of the older Moto Guzzi bikes I love. It was discovered that the timing marks weren't always correctly stamped. So it's a good idea to verify they're correctly marked. Making a comparison here between open-tops and Guzzis, detractors would tell us to just ride the dam thing as it came from the factory! However, just because it left the factory like that doesn't mean it was what the engineers who designed the thing intended. Some things are done to a price-point and a wide tolerance is considered good enough. Sometimes there are mistakes, and even though it works, it doesn't work well or as it should.

I am curious if chamfered cylinders became a bad idea when cartridges appeared, and for the reason M.De Land pointed out? Maybe this was only a good idea for BP revolvers? It certainly wouldn't be needed in cartridge guns.

And, finally, were these guns the ultimate best they could be? Most likely not, and on the most part, would you really want to change it from the gun it was in 1847? Me, I'd like it to hold up and to shoot the loads it was designed for, and that's what this thread is all about. Detractors say "Leave well enough alone!" But that doesn't work because running full loads without any adjustments or modifications rattles them apart. Maybe originals could stand up to the wear and tear? (except for the weak cylinders blowing up). So already we've veered from the original production using modern steel.

If you don't mind turn lines, hammered and peened cylinder stop notches, wedges that won't stay in or replacing them every few sessions, etc, then go ahead and leave your new Walker as is. Or run wimpy loads that won't stress the weaknesses in the build. I don't consider that functional and prefer things holding together and just working.

 

[M. De Land]

Both the new Walker Uberti and new Pietta 51 I just picked up have quite heavily chamfered chamber mouths from the factory.
I want folks to understand it's not the chamfer in and of it self that helps prevent chain fire. It's what the chamfer does to the base of the bullet or waist of the ball tending to swage a tight fit rather than just shearing a ring off. Even the chamfered chambers will do some shearing of lead but nothing like a sharp mouth does.
The reason it works better is because if the chamber alignment is not good with the loading rod center than you will sometimes find incomplete lead rings as they are cut off center to one side leaving a gap in the seal.
Loading rod faces cut with hemispheres or specialty bullet nose profiles can cause this effect if grossly out of line.
The other thing is we assume all chamber mouths are round but it isn't always true as found by cross mic'ing a slug pushed through them. I have found/measured chambers of differing diameter and out of roundness in the same cylinder. This occurs because they are gang reamed in turret mills and reamers need periodic sharpening and have a plus and minus tolerance before retired. Spindles in the turret mills eventually get worn and no longer hold true center etc.

 

[nick_1]

The timing on both my Pietta 1858s is perfect. There is no drag. The only thing they need is a trigger job. Putting new nipples on a brand new revolver is an exercise in consumerism. Just shoot it a few hundred times and you won't have to pinch the caps anymore. I doubt that original colts were perfect. Especially an early model like the Walker. There's usually buggs to work out with new models..

 

[SPQR70AD]

True.

On the other hand, finding out that the factory specified beveling the chambers to eliminate chain fires is a biggie. I haven't seen any chamfered edges on any of mine.

Some of these smithing actions may seem unnecessary and over-and-above originals, but how much do we really know? How many of us knew about the chamfered chambers? This kind of reminds me of the older Moto Guzzi bikes I love. It was discovered that the timing marks weren't always correctly stamped. So it's a good idea to verify they're correctly marked. Making a comparison here between open-tops and Guzzis, detractors would tell us to just ride the dam thing as it came from the factory! However, just because it left the factory like that doesn't mean it was what the engineers who designed the thing intended. Some things are done to a price-point and a wide tolerance is considered good enough. Sometimes there are mistakes, and even though it works, it doesn't work well or as it should.

I am curious if chamfered cylinders became a bad idea when cartridges appeared, and for the reason M.De Land pointed out? Maybe this was only a good idea for BP revolvers? It certainly wouldn't be needed in cartridge guns.

And, finally, were these guns the ultimate best they could be? Most likely not, and on the most part, would you really want to change it from the gun it was in 1847? Me, I'd like it to hold up and to shoot the loads it was designed for, and that's what this thread is all about. Detractors say "Leave well enough alone!" But that doesn't work because running full loads without any adjustments or modifications rattles them apart. Maybe originals could stand up to the wear and tear? (except for the weak cylinders blowing up). So already we've veered from the original production using modern steel.

If you don't mind turn lines, hammered and peened cylinder stop notches, wedges that won't stay in or replacing them every few sessions, etc, then go ahead and leave your new Walker as is. Or run wimpy loads that won't stress the weaknesses in the build. I don't consider that functional and prefer things holding together and just working.

on the other hand... there were 5 fingers

 

[45D]

The timing on both my Pietta 1858s is perfect. There is no drag. The only thing they need is a trigger job. Putting new nipples on a brand new revolver is an exercise in consumerism. Just shoot it a few hundred times and you won't have to pinch the caps anymore. I doubt that original colts were perfect. Especially an early model like the Walker. There's usually buggs to work out with new models..

Currently I only have 6 Remingtons in the shop ( just sent a pair out a few weeks ago). Two are competition revolvers (local cowboy shooter) back for main spring conversion to coil so they won't count but the other 4 are typical ( all Piettas) with late bolt drop (dropping on the edge of the locking notch) instead of being ON the cylinder fully before the notch. ( 1 to 1 1/2 bolt widths before the notch. "Textbook"). The other piece of the "timing" equation is the bolt locking the cylinder happens at the same instant that full **** is reached . . . 2 events happening simultaneously sounding like 1 "click".
Depending on what the use will be, "Textbook" timing should be sufficient for most activities. Competition revolvers that depend on quick cycling benefit from slightly advanced bolt drop and a "fanning" setup would have the cylinder just shy of lockup with the hammer at full **** and against an action stop. Fanners rely on "coast" ( Colt parlance) to carry the cyl to lockup. So, as long as the bolt isn't dropping on any part of the notch and lockup/ full **** are simultaneous, you may have "perfect timing" (not including Fanners).

As for shooting several 100 rounds, if an action is ill fitted, it may fail in as little as 50 cycles . . . all one would have to do is "fit" the parts as they should be and adjust the spring tension for the part and it may very well be a "lifetime of the shooter" functioning revolver . . . two ends of the spectrum . . . same revolver.
That's the main difference between "custom" and "out of the box".

An exercise in "consumerism" is how capitalism works.

Mike

 

[ormond tony]

one last comment:

I did not write my comments to detract from the fact that problems need to be resolved. I don't doubt the ability of people to fix firearms to have them perform better/last longer.
What I meant to write is that why search for solutions to problems that may not exist. Or the creation of problems caused by the solution of other problems. Go through a shooting session first and give it time to 'burn in'.
Relating to motor bike comment: is it necessary to have cylinders labeled. To me that might reduce the "did I put powder in this chamber?" Again, that's a solution to a known problem.
People would ask: 'what about non-alignment?". Well, that's a problem that exists, not a potential one. You would probably see that as you clean the oil and lube the revolver when you get it. If you don't see it, you'll see it in performance and then correct it.
Wear and tear happens. That's not a problem under normal situations; just a fact of life. Then you take remedial action.
If you are a competitive shooter, that's a different situation in a totally different world.
But I am one who goes out and shoots for enjoyment and to see if I can hit a target. If a problem happens, I'll fix it using all I have read above. But I don't take action in search of a problem.
Have a great day!

 

[nick_1]

Mike. I would love to have a tuned rig and I totally get competition setup. I shot IPSC seriously bintd. My comments are aimed at what seems to be a knee jerk reaction on this site to put slix shot nipples on every new revolver we buy. My contention is that nipples are an expendable item. They will wear out. It's going to take you at least 1k rounds to get totally dialed on that revolver so suck it up and pinch caps for a week and your stock nipples will break in. A year or so down the road when they are worn out that is the time to replace them with slickshots.