Keeping Walker cylinder turning freely

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I think that for most folks having your balls perfect and an exact powder charge every time means exactly nothing. Maybe for a few national and world champions but for the rest of us zilch. I dont have the patience for bullseye shooting and really don't enjoy it. Ringing steel makes me happy. I measure my powder directly from the spout however it comes out is fine. little more or little less is not going to matter when shooting at a 5 inch plate @25yrds.or a 6" plate @ 50yrds. Its either a hit or a miss doesn't matter where on the plate you hit. I don't sweat it if the ball is wrinkled or pitted. its going to shoot just fine. I have watched folks meticulously measure each charge and tap every last grain down the barrel, swab between every shot. Do everything perfect and score a huge goose egg. For off hand shooting most of that stuff is completely unnecessary. What is necessary is a good trigger pull, good follow through and knowing what your sight picture needs to be. Alvin York claimed he could re load his squirl gun on the run measuring powder in the palm of his hand by feel and score a prefect hit.
I've always wondered how one works a wood loading rod in a four foot barrel and patched ball on the run? Most likely no patch or loading rod used at all but rather a spit loaded ball and a firm butt strike to seat it.
 
I think that for most folks having your balls perfect and an exact powder charge every time means exactly nothing.

I fully agree. From Chrono results with powders not intended for lower power loads, I have seen some startling results (unmentionable). 750 fps load and 320 fps. Both rounds landed close to each other. Others spot on velocity wise, 4 inches away.

That is from a solid rest at 25 yards. I would not dare free hand over 15 yards (I hate shooting up target frames)

Other factors such as how compressed the powder is for a Cap and Ball load may make a difference. I wish we could shoot steel targets, it would be fun. As noted, just ringing the steel is great fun (I have shot some rifle at a range that does allow steel).
 
The only area where the diameter of the ball matters is in loading. .457" will load harder than a .451" as you have to shave off more lead or swage it down more. They all come out of the chamber the same diameter and that is determined by the diameter of the chamber. Using a .457" ball will not increase pressure at all as when it leaves the chamber to enter the forcing cone it is the same diameter as a .451 ball from the same chamber would be.

I have my chambers reamed to .456" and shoot .457 balls down a factory bore. I cut a new 11 deg. forcing cone though. No problems!
 
I would cast up a dozen .451 round balls and see how they do as far as loading.
I haven't cast any bullets or round balls in 15-20 years. I dug out all my stuff and the Lee lead pot was about half full and I had no idea if the lead was soft or hard for some of my rifle loads. So I cast up a dozen 451 balls. Just my luck the lead is a hard linotype mix and I couldn't seat them even after resizing to 450. I found a box of 445 balls which I had cast long ago so I loaded 6 and they were tight and swagged down when seated, although the ring was almost non existent. I'll see how they shoot tomorrow.
After shooting 12 rounds today the Walker did just fine cylinder was easy to turn, indexed perfectly no over travel and no cap jams.:)
 
I posted this on another thread but it fits here too.
The .445 undersized balls did not give any problems like moving under recoil or chain fires.
I dug out my Lee lead hardness tester and checked the .451 balls that I couldn't get loaded and they are a BHN29, pure lead is BHN5, no wonder I couldn't cut a ring with them.
Today I threw them back in the lead pot and brought it to temperature to drain the pot. Found some ingots that checked a BHN8 and cast up 24 balls. Right now I had better give the Walker a thorough cleaning.

Yesterdays shots are circled in yellow. Today's are a lot tighter, 1-9, and 5 X's not a bad day for an old man.
100_2511.JPG
Edit: Told my wife about cleaning it and she said. You don't want to shoot it tomorrow? Well the cylinder is still spinning and it's not that fouled. so ya, I'll run the 24 balls I cast up today then clean it and cast up more balls.
 
Last edited:
I just found out why they didn't give any problems. The chambers in my walker are also undersized. I started loading it with the new .451 balls and I couldn't get them to clear the mouth of the chamber without a cheater on the loading lever. I got one ball loaded and the ring was thicker than normal.
I miked the new balls and they are all .451 and soft lead BHN8. I then miked all 6 chambers and they are .439. I guess that is why I cast up 500 .445 balls back then. The cylinder has the same serial number as the barrel & frame. Just wonder if the early <ASM> Walker's all had undersized chambers.
 
I drove one of the .457 oversize balls through and the barrel has .451 groves and .446 lands as far as I can tell with my calipers. I ran 2 more cylinders with the .445 balls and it still functioned fine, although the cylinder was starting to get sluggish after 6 cylinders (36 rounds) through it. I pulled the cylinder out and wiped off the arbor, back to spinning like a champ. Guess I'll start using white lithium grease on the arbor, instead of a concoction the of oil a US Marine invented in Vietnam to keep the M16 running smooth. Here is the formula, it works great for all my guns.
U.S.M.C. Gun Oil
¾ oz (22.5 cc) STP
¼ oz (7.5 cc) Hoppe’s #9
2 oz (59 cc) 10W40 motor oil
5 oz (148 cc) hydraulic jack oil
 
I drove one of the .457 oversize balls through and the barrel has .451 groves and .446 lands as far as I can tell with my calipers. I ran 2 more cylinders with the .445 balls and it still functioned fine, although the cylinder was starting to get sluggish after 6 cylinders (36 rounds) through it. I pulled the cylinder out and wiped off the arbor, back to spinning like a champ. Guess I'll start using white lithium grease on the arbor, instead of a concoction the of oil a US Marine invented in Vietnam to keep the M16 running smooth. Here is the formula, it works great for all my guns.
U.S.M.C. Gun Oil
¾ oz (22.5 cc) STP
¼ oz (7.5 cc) Hoppe’s #9
2 oz (59 cc) 10W40 motor oil
5 oz (148 cc) hydraulic jack oil
I have a Powelly gauge for measuring uneven numbered rifling and my Uberti Walker measures as follows.
1. bore .438 - plug gauge check
2.groove .4532- Powelly gauge
3. chamber mouth .449 - plug gauge
4. pitch 1-19 Left Hand
I'm considering reaming the chamber mouths up to .453 but it may not be necessary as the rifling is so deep the bases probably bump up to fill the grooves as is. I'll shoot it as is for a while and see how she acts with ball and bullet.
 
So, you don't know who made it
Well since this my mild case of OCD kicked in and I started researching the early Replica Arms Colt Walker manufactures. I am now reasonably sure that my Walker is made by A.S.M. I spent the last several days on different forums and this is just one confirmation from the Cap & Ball forum.
Leonard Frank Allen had started Replica Arms, in El Paso, Texas, in 1962, with the first Colt 1847 Walker replica, made by Armi San Marco.
This is from the Colt owners forum.
The early Walker replica made by A.S.M. had a round bolt and cylinder notch.
The replicas made by Uberti and Pietta had elongated bolts and notches.

I also found out where the makers mark was located, on the front of the barrel frame under the loading lever ram hole, even had a picture of the early (I think) Pietta logo.
I couldn't find a picture of A.S.M. or Uberti logos on any early Walkers but they were build and imported prior to the foolish mandated warnings.
When I did the thorough cleaning, I removed the grip and trigger guard and there is definitely no maker mark on this Walker.
100_2512.JPG
Edit: @Mike I also found out why my Walker flask doesn't throw consistent charges without a drop tube. There are 2 styles of that flask. One has a longer nozzle to clear the wedge and mine has a shorter nozzle that hits the wedge when charging the cylinder.
 
Last edited:
It won't do you any good to slug the bore as most Walkers have seven groove barrels and you'll need a Powelly gauge or tri-mic to get an accurate read on groove diameter.
You just have to be smarter than the slug to get a reasonably accurate reading.
I push a ball through the oiled bore. Wrap a .005 feeler gauge around the ball, hold tight, and measure. Plenty accurate enough without buying expensive measuring equipment. You can also try fitting the ball in the cylinder to see if the cylinder is undersized
 
Edit: @Mike I also found out why my Walker flask doesn't throw consistent charges without a drop tube. There are 2 styles of that flask. One has a longer nozzle to clear the wedge and mine has a shorter nozzle that hits the wedge when charging the cylinder.
Can you post a picture? I've never seen but one kind.
20230325_102231.jpg


20230324_192606.jpg


20230324_192909.jpg

I modified mine to hold 6 conicals and 18 caps -
20230324_195013.jpg


Mike
 
You just have to be smarter than the slug to get a reasonably accurate reading.
I push a ball through the oiled bore. Wrap a .005 feeler gauge around the ball, hold tight, and measure. Plenty accurate enough without buying expensive measuring equipment. You can also try fitting the ball in the cylinder to see if the cylinder is undersized
Yeah, that feeler gauge trick will get you withing a thousands or two if that's all the closer you want to measure.
 
Can you post a picture? I've never seen but one kind.
I was on so many sites, I can't remember which one had the picture of 2 flasks side by side and one had a longer nozzle. mine is the same as yours, I think I may have the stopper post (end cap) too far out (flush with the end) and when I push the flask down it hit's the chamber wall. I see yours is recessed.
 


Write your reply...

Latest posts

Back
Top