Load for Uberti Walker Revolver
- Thread starter nightwolf1974
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2011
- Messages
- 9,505
- Reaction score
- 4,661
But I'm not a suck up Dicky my lad, I can, actually do and share photos of the work on the guns I speak of !
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2011
- Messages
- 9,505
- Reaction score
- 4,661
Ah, admit it, you guys love a good gun argument !
I actually have killed a bear in a fight using a hand gun but it wasn't a Walker.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2011
- Messages
- 9,505
- Reaction score
- 4,661
Well would you rather have every one nod in sycophant agreement on all thoughts and ideas ?
Be still my wounded heart and inner child. Sheese, been a 5 year old long?
Actually its the norm for that personality type. When absolutely cornered, then goes onto the next load of bull.
With all dues respect to the ladies of WWII (bless them and a all too little recognized group) who were taught how to machine parts, they were not machinists. They were taught to do an operation and repeat it accurately (withing tolerances). It was impossible to teach them how to be machinists in the time needed for the parts. Some were able, but they worked in a system for max results.
We can only take that so far, they went on to be wives for the most part after the war (my mom was one of them, phone operator in her case while my dad was out fighting in the Pacific). When my dad died she was forced to get a profession and she proved what many of us know, yep, highly capable, just never given a chance to show it. . We did get glimpses of that, the Women Air Delivery pilots, they knew how to fly. The ones that were taken into code breaking made some of the most spectacular breaks of the war (some good books on those now)
Now we get to the last manager the company I worked for had. He was what we called a one trick pony. Other people had taught him a series of "tricks". If something did not go right, his MO was to, Just Replace the whole thing! That is because he did not understand nor could, closed mind.
The funny one was a conveyors power turn (90 deg, 4 ft wide) that kept failing. Ok, replaced the whole power turn, and that one kept breaking.
Our foreman who was focused on the conveyors, worked for a couple of years before he sorted out all the problems. Which is all the other one needed, was someone who was willing to put the time and work in and understand the mechanics of it and why it had problems. Nothing wrong with the unit, it was an odd install where it was tilted 30 deg and that caused forces the flat 90 deg units did not have.
The foreman was not a series of one trick ponies. He was the conveyor guy and while I contributed in other areas, that was his baby and he figured it out while I took care of things he did not know (technically I was the designated engineer but did HVAC, power generation switch gear, fire systems) while he ensured the conveyors were working (or fixing them when they did not).
I was asked by a manager one time, if facility knowledge better than fundamentals? The answer to that is no. If you can grasp the fundamentals, you can figure out any of the oddities.
Ideally you had both but fundamentals is the core. Now after something failed a 2nd time, you could drop the fundamentals, confirm it was the same failure as previous and fix it. You did not have to break the circuit in half and start working from there. I could teach someone those symptoms and the fix if they were smart enough and willing (rare)
In this case, 45D is our conveyor guy. He has the top strap figured out (and a hat tip to D Yager, I get he is doing that kind of work, I just knew Mike first). Could I have done that? I suspect not, just because it is an area I have little background in.
What I can do is follow what he has done and explained and see the logic of it before Bad Karma posted his definitive text. Logic knows no boundaries. You want to destroy and engine have too small a bearing size or too much end play. It will take a while if its closer to right but pound itself into destruction it will.
We have people like Mike and D Yager and we have people you could not convince with a tactical nuke.
So, Uberti is right and Pietta and Colt were wrong? Two out of Three Factories say that is nonsense. So now you are arguing that The Colt factory was wrong about how the arbor should fit. Amazing pretzel illogical.
And why prey tell my 47 Walkers shoots all sorts of places depending on how I have the shim set in the arbor? Or the 1 inch group I got?
So, try an experiment. Take your newest car to a mechanic, have them pull the oil pan and replace one of the main bearings with the most undersized bearing available. Let us know how long it lasts!
The reality is most people do not shoot their BP a lot. This group does, but that is a few out of 350 million or so.
Real world example. We were called in to rebuild a boat drive gear system. German by the way. Man, the clutch plates were flat worn out. The owner was no ham fisted operator, he did not yank and jerk back and forth.
When the company owner called the US Rep, the story evolved. The Gear box was from a sailing boat application. Someone did the math and it was that boat ownwer run their boats 40 hours a year. The clutch pack was good for 400 hours, by which time the boat had been sold. Sail boats they last a liftime because it was straight running by ownsers who did not ham fist them.
The Gear Mfg realized that despite the math, they were getting a bad repuation. So they offered a beefup clutch pack that would last. Bottom line, how hard and how much you use something has everything to do with how well it has to be built. Uberti clearly does not care.
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2011
- Messages
- 9,505
- Reaction score
- 4,661
My your a windy fellow and apparently a therapist to boot ! I just want to see proof of the equal strength contention I don't believe is true.
Testing actual pressure levels with a Dragoon and Kurst cylinder to 30 K in a .45 Colt case would do this if the cylinder can stand the pressure. 45-D apparently didn't have any qualms about doing so with the ACP to plus P loads above cylinder manufacturer guarantee pressure levels so why not to Magnum levels in the .45 Colt case? Seems like the next logical step especially since the apparent goal is to prove equal strength of design.
I am beginning to think we have found the desist matter in the Universe.
Mike has explained his methodology. If you want to go jump over that cliff, go ahead. Mike is far smarter than that.
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2011
- Messages
- 9,505
- Reaction score
- 4,661
He is the one that introduced and pushed the concept of over pressure loading on this forum in open frame guns and contending they are of equal strength ! All I'm saying is I don't believe the contention and want him to prove it ! I can change my mind if the proof is there but not from hot air conjecture.
Magnum level pressure over a good round count and gun inspection after testing would prove the contention as it apparently does with plus P loading.
Last edited:
the Italian copies of the weak designed Colt SAA handle the 44K PSI of the 357 some are chambered in. Mike is not firing 44K PSI loads in his open tops
This is such a silly conversation. The sky is in fact blue. The revolver design evolved and left the open tops behind. the fact that modern closed top revolvers shoot crazy rounds like th .454 casual, 50 S&W, 460 Ruger etc is what it is.. yes open tops are stronger that we thought they were. No they are not as strong as the modern closed tops.. is what it is. the writing was on the wall and thats the direction it went and now we have Rugers that last a lifetime with zero modifications and zero malfunctions regardless of how hot and how many rounds you stuff through them.
yes they want to match the strongest revolver made the Walker to the weakest SA made the Colt SAA which still can handle 357 loads at 44 PSI. a walker should be compared a Ruger super redhawk
First of all, I never claimed any of them had "magnum" capability ( that remains to be seen). I DID say i believed the open-top (belt pistol) was a stronger platform than the Remington platform. Turns out, by testing, I was right about the Remington . . . as well as several other top- strap revolvers. The open-top platform (belt pistol- specifically 1860 Army) made by Uberti with a Kirst conversion cylinder can handle hotter loads than all of the revolvers I've previously listed many times. So, statement made - statement proven. If you don't believe it, I can't help it.
The Dragoon is a much larger scale revolver and the cylinder walls have much more material in them. They can easily handle the same loads the belt pistols can and more. I'm currently in the process of finding out the upper limits for these revolvers. Again, I never mentioned anything about either size of the open-top platform being able to shoot max Ruger only loads (personally, I think that is an asinine thing to think unless you were close to that pressure during testing. Only a fool would start there and what ? Load down?).
These tests are purely an exploration of what the platforms can handle when set up as designed and with close tolerances. I also stated that i do not recommend anyone doing what I'm doing and I wouldn't fire these rounds in anything but my own personal revolvers.
I didn't start this to satisfy ANYONE except myself and a few other interested parties. As far as anyone else making demands for proof, do it yourself. I'll go in the direction I see fit and besides, I've already proven what I started out to prove, the rest is just information . . . you're welcome!!
Mike
Nope, because I'm shooting 45C ammo, not 357Mag or 44Mag.
The Pietta 45C can't handle what my '60 Armys can. (think I've said this a few times before. You must not be a reloader)
Mike
I think that's what your buddy M DeLand dreamed up!!
you're just part of his dream !! 
Mike
The Remington was a very early imperfect example of the closed top but the writing was in fact on the wall. That's the way it went and look what we ended up with. I have a Ruger security six .357 mag that I have had for 44 years . when I was a teenager I loaded that thing so hot I had to hit the ejector rod with a mallet to get the spent shells out. I am still shooting that thing with factory ammo now and its flawless. Never had a single thing fixed or worked on. It has about 30% original finish but it works perfectly..
Mike. I read plenty and I appreciate and give you credit for showing how much stronger the open tops are than most of us thought but I do get tired of the conversation because its just so damn obvious that the closed top is a superior design. It is what it is.
That would only be "logical" to you
!! You don't do "ladder testing " by starting at the top of the ladder.Again, I never said anything about "equal strength" that's YOUR drivel.
Btw, isn't calling someone a "flat earther" projecting?
As far as me going over max cylinder capabilities, I haven't done so yet
Where do you come up with this ?
Mike
