Interesting cap jam solution for open top revolvers

shop deals on amazon
the hawken shop
L & R
Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I have done all of the above. These are solutions to a manufacturing problem with current Italian revolvers. I was fortunate to be able to inspect an original 1860. Think about this, would gunsmiths during the period OR COLT come up with the same solutions we have? Answer is no. Because it was not a problem like we have.

When I inspected the original 1860, i noticed that the groove in the internal face of the original is wider and deeper than the Italian copies. A spent cap must have the space to somewhat stay in place as the cylinder is rotated. Otherwise when the cylinder is rotated the cap, partially dislodged, will be peeled off the nipple and fall into the inner workings.

Using a dremel tool I modified the groove so when i barely place a remington #10 cap on the nipple (the longest cap), it will stay on the nipple when the cylinder was rotated. This test is done with the cap barely hanging on. The hammer has a tendency to pull the cap loose off the nipple. The purpose of the groove to help clear the cap. Making this change in the frame has virtually eliminated cap jams for me. Keep in mind I used remington #10's and not #11's. The only difference in these caps is the length. The diameter is the same. However, this is not the case with other manufactures.
 
SPQR70AD said:
why didnt Colt address the problem? they had to know about it. they made tons of pistols with that problem and it would be easy for them to apply the fix while making the gun
Click to expand...

I have wondered the same thing myself. Maybe the caps were different then. Perhaps thicker metal, or of different dimensions????
 
cynthialee said:
neat
I learned a long time ago how to cycle to the next chamber without worrying (most the time) of a cap falling in and messing things up.

Raise muzzle up and there is a deft little side flick of the wrist as you thumb back the hammer. Send the caps away easy peasy the majority of the time.

Now having a modification on my revolvers that precludes the need for concern would be nice. But I suspect I'd likely still do it due to muscle memory.
Click to expand...
Pietro said:
Yep, that's the method I've used for over 40 years, with no cap jams I remember.

Just let the revolver's muzzle rise under recoil, and flick the shooting hand's wrist as you cock the hammer on the way back down into firing position.
[QUOTE/]


That's all fine for the casual shooter but is not conducive to fast shooting in a timed event (not to mention is not legal in CAS events). Pointing the muzzle skyward isn't maintaing a sight picture unless you're shooting skeet !! Lol
Personally it doesn't matter to me if folks want a cap post or an action shield or not (some don't). But, for those that do, this thread is "aimed" at them (see what I did there? !!!! LOL!!). I've made open top fanners for folks and several of my open tops have won State championships and one thing they have in common is - a cap post. I'm not saying you have to have one ( of course!!) but they do seem to be a good physical barrier for keeping cap hulls / fragments out of the hammer slot and /or action. The action shield is definitely a nice "add on" that not only keeps fouling and any hard pieces out of the action but it keeps presenting the debris so that you can turn the revolver over and dump it. Works really well! Of course the action shield along with a frame packed with Mobil1 gives you a "maintainance free" action (which means more shooting time /less cleaning time!) !!!

Mike
Click to expand...
 
Siringo said:
I have done all of the above. These are solutions to a manufacturing problem with current Italian revolvers. I was fortunate to be able to inspect an original 1860. Think about this, would gunsmiths during the period OR COLT come up with the same solutions we have? Answer is no. Because it was not a problem like we have.

When I inspected the original 1860, i noticed that the groove in the internal face of the original is wider and deeper than the Italian copies. A spent cap must have the space to somewhat stay in place as the cylinder is rotated. Otherwise when the cylinder is rotated the cap, partially dislodged, will be peeled off the nipple and fall into the inner workings.

Using a dremel tool I modified the groove so when i barely place a remington #10 cap on the nipple (the longest cap), it will stay on the nipple when the cylinder was rotated. This test is done with the cap barely hanging on. The hammer has a tendency to pull the cap loose off the nipple. The purpose of the groove to help clear the cap. Making this change in the frame has virtually eliminated cap jams for me. Keep in mind I used remington #10's and not #11's. The only difference in these caps is the length. The diameter is the same. However, this is not the case with other manufactures.
Click to expand...


I've had the pleasure of working on several originals and they seemed to have a much thinner safety slot in the hammer face than the reproductions. Much harder to force a cap hull into a smaller space than the wide slots on the repros.

Mike
 
I, for one, have had a cap frag drop down into the guts of my Uberti Second Dragoon and render the full cock notch inop...let go of the hammer in FC and the gun went off. That was the end of that gun shooting for the day, fortunately I had backup. I did find the cap frags when I cleaned the gun.
 
CaptainKirk said:
The caps "back in the day" were constructed differently and didn't tend to split apart like modern caps.
Click to expand...

I believe this is a large part of the answer.

Ive seen claims that de-burring the slot in the hammer helps also, it doesnt grab the cap as much apparently.

The matter was disccused in a letter from Major R.H.K.Whitely, writing from the New York arsenal on July 5, 1862, to Brigadeer General J.W.Ripley, Chief of the Ordnance Department in Washington.

"First, a cap suitable for Colt's pistol does not suit either Savage's or Starr's, because the main spring is too weak to explode it.
Second, a cap suitable for Savages or Starr's pistol does not suit Colt's because the hammer drives it in pieces, a fragment often lodges in front of the cock, and renders the arm useless after the first fire...............Therefore, I am compelled to have two qualities made, one for the Colt's answering in thickness to the Ely's Double Waterproof, and the other for Savage's and Starr's to Ely's Metal Lined.' Ripley forwarded the letter to Major W.A.Thornton at West Troy Arsenal and requested the he 'please see that all revolvers made for this Department are suited to fire the same caps as Colt's Army pistols."

From Guns of the American West by Joseph Rosa.

30-some years ago I recall using different caps that had varying characteristics, some would fragment badly, some would balloon out and split, but not fragment, and some would stick on the nipple badly, making reloading tough, as the caps had to be removed from the nipple with a tool. At this point, needing to pry the caps off seems less of an issue than cap fragments tying up the gun. Too bad nobody makes caps similar to the old Elys Double Waterproof specifically suited to the Colts pistols that dont fragment.

Few of us use our percussion guns regularly in life or death circumstances, though I sometimes belt mine on when out in the yard messing with the sprinklers, feeding birds and such. Pretty innocuous activities, except for living on the edge of grizzly and wolf country, and coyotes and skunks (always unpleasant besides potential for rabies) being fairly common, and the ever present rampaging rabbits. Im probably more worried about my dog than anything, but it would be nice to be able to have more confidence in the guns without raising the gun between shots, flicking the wrist or other activities.
 
Last edited:
hawkeye2 said:
Malamute, thank you for posting the portion of Major R .H .K. Whitely's letter. That is the first reference I have seen that mentions a cap problem with the revolvers of the time.
Click to expand...

Its possible we dont read of it much because people mostly used correct caps for the Colts in the day, they were likely commonly available in the needed varieties in average use. The letter stands out because of using the same caps in military supply chains on various guns they were not proper for, and it seems to have been addressed. It was a bit of a eye opener for me when i read it.
 
Siringo said:
When I inspected the original 1860, i noticed that the groove in the internal face of the original is wider and deeper than the Italian copies.
Click to expand...

Are the 1860 Colt 2nd Gen similar to the original or the Italian reproductions in this regard?
 

Similar threads

Zonie
Interesting Cap & Ball Paper Cartridge Information
2
Replies
27
Views
4K
sethwyo
sethwyo
E
Cheap Speed Capper PART 1
Replies
2
Views
2K
Enfield58
E
E
Cheap Speed Capper PART 2
2
Replies
25
Views
3K
Enfield58
E
Smokey Plainsman
My Percussion Rifle & Equipage
Replies
19
Views
3K
Smokey Plainsman
Smokey Plainsman
PluggedNickel
How I shimmed my Uberti 1847 Walker revolver. Works for all Colt Open Top revolvers
Replies
9
Views
4K
vintovka
V

Latest posts

Back
Top