• Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

Loading 5?or loading 6?

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I was not talking about the timing being off (bolt being late), rather when the bolt hits the lead in just ahead of the slot....

I understood what you were referring to and agree that it happens (seen it). I was talking about another cause of overtravel which is aggravated by fast cocking usually by beginners.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
as a CAS shooter I load 5 from force of habit. Occasionally when trying out a different loading I will load 6 but usually it is 5.
But do what you think best.
Bunk
 
The 5 shooters had a smaller cylinder that allowed for a slimmer profile for the frame and allowed for a slightly more concealable firearm.

Kinda sorta. I am assuming you are referring to the 1848/1849 Pocket .31 revolvers (which were made in both 5-shot and 6-shot versions) versus the 1862 Pocket Police/Pocket Navy .36 which had rebated 6-shot cylinders (ala the 1860 Army), but the frames on both of those were no larger than the Pocket .31 in width.

Note, my brass framed Navy Arms "Reb" revolver does not have the safety pins between the cylinders.

It has been my experience that early repro 1851 Navy revolvers imported by Navy Arms do not have safety pins. Many were made by Gregorelli & Uberti, Uberti, and Pietta. It all depended upon what Val Forgett/Navy Arms specified from the manufacturers.

I don't think any of the original Colt revolvers had the "safety" pins.

The Colt 1848 Whitneyville Hartford and the 1st Model Dragoons had only one safety pin. Maybe Colt, with his experience with Samuel Walker and the 1847 Walker revolver, figured all chambers would be fired in a firefight, but that is purely conjecture on my part. The 2nd Model/3rd Model Dragoon .44, 1848/1849 Pocket .31, 1851 Navy .36, 1860 Army .44, 1862 Pocket Police/Pocket Navy .36 all have safety pins between the chambers. These pins were fairly fragile.

In 1856 Manhattan Firearms Company patented a 12-stop-slot cylinder, obviating the need for safety pins. Colt could not take advantage of that patent so no Colt was produced with a 12-stop-slot cylinder. When the Manhattan patent ran out, the ACW was over, there were so many revolvers that the US government had to sell off many revolvers, and the era of percussion C&B revolvers had no market for Colt (his widow).

During the early ACW, Leech & Rigdon secured a contract with the CSA for 1500 "Navy" .36 revolvers. For the most part, these were manufactured with safety pins until about SN~1100 when Leech departed the company, and Rigdon continued to produce revolvers with/without safety pins until the contract was fulfilled. Rigdon & Ansley then started producing revolvers under another CSA contract using the Manhattan 12-stop-slot cylinder (clearly not worrying about patent infringement), obviating the need for safety pins. Rigdon & Ansley continued to produce revolvers up to SN 2300 or more, second only to Griswold & Gunnison.

I found 2 Pietta cylinders without pins from a guy on another forum a few years ago that worked well for me in my creation of 12-stop-slot cylinders to be more historically correct for a Rigdon & Ansley and an Augusta Machine Works revolver.

Augusta Machine  Works 007.jpg
Rigdon And Ansley 003.jpg


Regards

Jim
 
Your bolt should be hitting the beginning of the lead (ramp) or slightly before where the energy of it popping up can be dissipated. Then, the hand finishes rotating the cylinder and the bolt, which now is making contact with the cylinder, can slide nicely into its little groove.
Smokey, agree with you completely, at least in theory. Tried exactly as you suggest after probably seeing the same articles on the internet. At one point removed enough material from the bolt leg (where it contacts the hammer) that I had issues getting the bolt back out of the groove in time. Replaced bolt and adjusted so it was hitting just in front of the ramps. Still had the peening/burr issue.

Imagine taking one of your open tops and shooting it as fast as you can, at least under 5 seconds per cylinder, half a dozen or so times. If nothing else breaks first. Then examine the grooves for burrs. Shooting fast as possible like in SASS is very hard on these guns. Here is a photograph of a cylinder where the bolt was hitting just ahead of the ramp, yet still peening a burr. You can see where the bolt was hitting the far side of the groove because the burr would not let the bolt drop all the way into the groove, an the cylinder just skipped past the bolt.

Another set of wild cards, at least for me, are the use of multiple cylinders. They are all ‘close’, but still different. For this discussion, will not bring them in.

Open to suggestions.
1601857464969.jpeg
 
Smokey, agree with you completely, at least in theory. Tried exactly as you suggest after probably seeing the same articles on the internet. At one point removed enough material from the bolt leg (where it contacts the hammer) that I had issues getting the bolt back out of the groove in time. Replaced bolt and adjusted so it was hitting just in front of the ramps. Still had the peening/burr issue.

Imagine taking one of your open tops and shooting it as fast as you can, at least under 5 seconds per cylinder, half a dozen or so times. If nothing else breaks first. Then examine the grooves for burrs. Shooting fast as possible like in SASS is very hard on these guns. Here is a photograph of a cylinder where the bolt was hitting just ahead of the ramp, yet still peening a burr. You can see where the bolt was hitting the far side of the groove because the burr would not let the bolt drop all the way into the groove, an the cylinder just skipped past the bolt.

Another set of wild cards, at least for me, are the use of multiple cylinders. They are all ‘close’, but still different. For this discussion, will not bring them in.

Open to suggestions.
View attachment 45180

I see what you mean. You SASS boys give ‘em a workout, that’s for sure!
 
I was not talking about the timing being off (bolt being late), rather when the bolt hits the lead in just ahead of the slot (as it has to, to make sure it catches the slot at all cocking speeds), the soft steel on the Pietta and Uberti cylinders quickly peen and the burr narrows the slot, not allowing the bolt to fully enter the slot. When this happens the cylinder is not fully locked up by the bolt and goes past the slot. Some recommend fitting the bolt to the cylinder slots. I simply remove the burr to keep the slot to the factory correct width to fit bolt.

Here is a Pietta cylinder that has been loaded and fired less than a dozen times. Burr on edge of slot should be obvious. View attachment 45147

Here is a photo of a Ruger cylinder, with near identical bolt timing. It has over 10k rounds through it, yet no burr. Much tougher steel.
View attachment 45149

Here is a photograph of the tool I use removing the burr in a Pietta cylinder slot.
View attachment 45153
the tool you use, what is it? can you show a picture of it?
 
All my percussion guns DO NOT show the abuse illustrated above.

Respectfully
Bunk
 
Last edited by a moderator:
when loading 5 I mark the "6" nipple either with a piece of red tubing or just remove it and mark the chamber mouth with red fingernail polish..
Since loading usually is done off the gun it is a simple proposition.
Bunk
 
I think it is somewhat individual to the revolver. I had the luxury of a padded gym floor and a workhorse 1858 revolver with no particular value. With CAPS only I dropped it on the floor over and over, on every notch probably 50 times. I got cocky and flung it pretty hard. On this revolver the hammer stays in the notch! On a different 1858 I tried this just once and the hammer moved to the cap (although it did not set it off). That one must be carried with hammer down on an empty chamber until someone more skilled than me makes the notches work properly.
 
How feasible, whether today or in a historical sense, would it be to load 6 but cap 5? If the shooter of days yonder wanted six shots in the cylinder but also wanted the hammer stowed someplace safe, he could have done this. You'll have the five in ready-use and can get a sixth primed up within seconds.

As the hammer would be resting on the uncapped nipple, the hammer face would provide some form of covering for the breech hole.
 
How feasible, whether today or in a historical sense, would it be to load 6 but cap 5? If the shooter of days yonder wanted six shots in the cylinder but also wanted the hammer stowed someplace safe, he could have done this. You'll have the five in ready-use and can get a sixth primed up within seconds.

As the hammer would be resting on the uncapped nipple, the hammer face would provide some form of covering for the breech hole.

That could easily cause a chain fire. The cap seals the nipple from the fire going off at the others chambers but without that protection, there is nothing to block the flame from a straight line to the powder.

Also the idea of fumbling with trying to place a tiny percussion cap properly onto the nipple, even with a capper, at the moment you decide you need all 6 chambers ready (i.e. when you are being approached or threatened) is a laughable proposition. And if you don’t happen to have time to leisurely place a cap on that sixth nipple (very likely) a chain fire is the last thing you want to happen.

People back then used the safety notches and pins. For the early guns without them, they probably just kept the hammer down on a capped chamber. Most early holsters were flap holsters and while not a good idea to do that today, they would NOT have given up that loaded chamber. As Duelist1954 on YouTube suggests, they’d of thought the idea as crazy especially if it were there only gun and source of firepower.
 
Last edited:
That could easily cause a chain fire. The cap seals the nipple from the fire going off at the others chambers but without that protection, there is nothing block the flame from a straight line to the powder.

Also the idea of fumbling with trying to place a tiny percussion cap properly onto the nipple, even with a capper, at the moment you decide you need all 6 chambers ready (i.e. when you are being approached or threatened) is a laughable proposition. And if you don’t happen to have time to leisurely place a cap on that sixth nipple (very likely) a chain fire is the last thing you want to happen.

People back then used the safety notches and pins. For the early guns without them, they probably just kept the hammer down on a capped chamber. Most early holsters were flap holsters and while not a good idea to do that today, they would NOT have given up that loaded chamber. As Duelist1954 on YouTube suggests, they’d of thought the idea as crazy especially if it were there only gun and source of firepower.

Back when a man was a man. with all the stuff that could kill you back in those days I don't think gun safety was on top of the list of their priorities.
 
Back
Top