My experience with Walker cylinder gap and some other notes.

[Dude]

Where'd this idea of hot-rodding the NMA come from? Looks to me like the push is to make these new reproductions as solid as the originals. That's not hot-rodding, that's bringing them up to square one.

 

[French Colonial]

Yep, square one, all those original colts had coil springs LOL!

 

[45D]

No, yer not paying attention ! The original Colts had correct length arbors, the coils came latter!!! Lol!!

Mike

 

[45D]

Where'd this idea of hot-rodding the NMA come from? Looks to me like the push is to make these new reproductions as solid as the originals. That's not hot-rodding, that's bringing them up to square one.

Coil springing the Remington's came about because of Cowboy shooting. It was working well with the Open Tops so the Remington's should get the same treatment. The biggest problem was springing the hand. That seems to be the most broken spring in the Rems. You can't drill the frame and put a Ruger style spring and plunger because you can see it (not allowed). Needless to say, I figured that one out (in a dream of all things!!!) and the bolt was straight forward. Took a little head scratching for the trigger but got it figured out.
Remington's setup this way along with a bolt block and an action stop can run rings around the ROA!! It is definitely the the 19th century "Ruger" ( but lighter!!)!!

Mike

 

[French Colonial]

Still don’t understand it, why not shoot a modern gun that already has coil springs?
My 1911’s shoot little ragged one hole groups.

Oh well, back to my flintlocks that do not have any coil springs.

Have fun guys, it is a good thing that we all have different tastes, Viva La Difference!

 

[45D]

Well, that's fine sir. You don't have to "get it".
I believe you!!! Lol
Competition shooters like for revolvers to work. Cowboy shooters can't use "modern" revolvers or 1911 bottom feeders. ( there's this thing called Cowboy Action Shooting)
I understand that you apparently don't understand that coil torsion springs last many many lifetimes more than the flats that come in the reproductions. They put less stress on parts which cuts wear tremendously. So, for folks that "get it", it works just like it's supposed to.

Mike

 

[French Colonial]

Yeah, I get it now, this is the same as the USPSA and IPSC shooters I used to see at the matches when I was younger and could run, they would show up with the latest and greatest whiz bang gizmos and modifications and they still couldn't shoot. Time and again I would be at the top of the leader board with a stock Glock 34 or 1911 while they were making excuses, the old saying then and here applies.

It is not the arrows, it is the Indian.

 

[Dude]

FC - It's irrelevant that guys with the new stuff couldn't shoot, or that you, with the old technology, could. The point being made is that coil springs in a revolver reduce wear and failures and the necessity of repairs.

Sometimes it's just better to concede the point than trying to be right at all costs. It's ok - we got that you prefer old original technology over any improvements, even if hidden and not visible. But changing the topic to make others wrong and yourself right doesn't reflect well.

 

[French Colonial]

I did not think I changed the subject, you think 1851 open tops need improvement, I disagree. When you put all the "improvements" in them they are no longer an 1851 and I personally do not think it helps enough to turn a poor shooter into a good one. You go ahead and do what makes you feel good.
I will never buy an 1851 or a flintlock with coil springs...but then I am a traditionalist on a forum trying to keep tradition alive.

 

[Kansas Jake]

Some guys restore a Model T, some guys leave it alone or just keep it running and some folks chop, channel and hot rod it. I like ‘‘em all and appreciate each effort. Same here with these revolvers.

 

[cw1873]

Haaaaaa! 4 or 6 ?

Mike

I have one with 4, and one with 6.

 

[45D]

Nice!!!

Mike

 

[M. De Land]

I have to agree with 45 that coil springs are less prone to failure than are flat springs in general but then again a properly made, heat treated and dressed flat spring can last several life times with out failure. Many flat spring failures of today are from cast flat springs which are not as reliable as when made from certified spring stock. I make both flat and coil springs (wind them on lathe mandrel) to suit the purpose intended and both still have application advantages that the other does not.
I will have to say that in general a well designed gun ,originally made with flat springs, will be smoother and faster of action than with a coil spring modification of equal strength. The reason this is true is because a coil spring always has more length to transfer it's energy over than does a flat spring and some of it's energy is lost in the coil friction against the strut/guide it must have.
Any modifications to revolvers that are actually of importance mechanically add accumulative percentages of consistency, accuracy, and longevity. Some of them more and some less with the goal of balanced performance gain.

 

[45D]

I have to agree with 45 that coil springs are less prone to failure than are flat springs in general but then again a properly made, heat treated and dressed flat spring can last several life times with out failure. Many flat spring failures of today are from cast flat springs which are not as reliable as when made from certified spring stock. I make both flat and coil springs (wind them on lathe mandrel) to suit the purpose intended and both still have application advantages that the other does not.
I will have to say that in general a well designed gun ,originally made with flat springs, will be smoother and faster of action than with a coil spring modification of equal strength. The reason this is true is because a coil spring always has more length to transfer it's energy over than does a flat spring and some of it's energy is lost in the coil friction against the strut/guide it must have.
Any modifications to revolvers that are actually of importance mechanically add accumulative percentages of consistency, accuracy, and longevity. Some of them more and some less with the goal of balanced performance gain.

I agree with your statement comparing nice flats with "Italian flats". I also agree with your comparison differences between flats and coil springs. It's the reasons you stated as to why I'm not a fan of a coil main spring. They are a " slow to act" power source. Flat main springs are necessary for moving heavy payloads FAST . . . like hammers!!
The springs I use mostly are "coil torsion" springs. They act torsionally instead of compression or expansion. It's a "winding /unwinding" application. It's the same setup Ruger used for the bolt in 3 screw /ROA revolvers. I use them for the triggers and bolts in all Colt type actions as well as ROA's and Remington's (and for the hand in Remington's). The coil torsions apply a rather constant force and are easy to "tune" for each part they power. Compression springs are only used for the hand applications (save for the Remington). And of course the main (as previously stated) remains flat.
So far, I haven't had a spring break that I know of. You can run my guns crazy fast.

Mike

Here's a pic.

 

[M. De Land]

I agree with your statement comparing nice flats with "Italian flats". I also agree with your comparison differences between flats and coil springs. It's the reasons you stated as to why I'm not a fan of a coil main spring. They are a " slow to act" power source. Flat main springs are necessary for moving heavy payloads FAST . . . like hammers!!
The springs I use mostly are "coil torsion" springs. They act torsionally instead of compression or expansion. It's a "winding /unwinding" application. It's the same setup Ruger used for the bolt in 3 screw /ROA revolvers. I use them for the triggers and bolts in all Colt type actions as well as ROA's and Remington's (and for the hand in Remington's). The coil torsions apply a rather constant force and are easy to "tune" for each part they power. Compression springs are only used for the hand applications (save for the Remington). And of course the main (as previously stated) remains flat.
So far, I haven't had a spring break that I know of. You can run my guns crazy fast.

Mike

Here's a pic.View attachment 142350

Yeah the torsion/coils I have to make separately on a hand lever, jig system I worked out. I first used it to make Winchester HW and Falling Block Works main coil/torsion springs but the "jig winder" can be adapted for any of that type spring application.
I use various diameters of hobby shop piano wire which is ready to be formed into coils and levers as is. Tension-ing ( via a small screw plate) the wire in the lathe feed onto the coil mandrel as well as the same thing happening in the lever jig seems to " work harden to perfection" the wire a bit but I've yet to have one fail. No heat hardening or annealing is necessary as with flat spring work.
I have to say that learning how to make ones own coil and torsion springs is one the handiest applications of lathe work I ever came across as when a gun spring takes off across the shop into where ever they disappear to.

 

[Desperado]

The wedge should be Driven in with good force. Lightly tapping won't "take up" clearances or impart enough tension. More than likely the thicker spacer you made would be much closer to what you need but you have to smack the wedge in hard to close the frame/barrel lug joint. It's "endshake" you're measuring by the way not a gap. With no bushing to hold a "gap" the endshake closes to zero (or should) with each cycle of the action. That basically makes them "self cleaning " which is pretty much the one "+" an open top has over a revolver with a gap ( it's also why you can get away with such a close endshake measurement).

Mike

Do you know if at the moment of firing the hand pushing the cylinder forward makes it have better obturation?

 

[Ed C.]

Do you know if at the moment of firing the hand pushing the cylinder forward makes it have better obturation?

Just guessing, but I think we are talking milliseconds here. At the moment of firing the cylinder will be driven back and the endshake will be at its maximum gap when the bullet engages the rifling. I doubt the hand has any effect in that moment. Just MPO.

 

[45D]

Just guessing, but I think we are talking milliseconds here. At the moment of firing the cylinder will be driven back and the endshake will be at its maximum gap when the bullet engages the rifling. I doubt the hand has any effect in that moment. Just MPO.

Nope, you're exactly right, the "endshake" is the "endshake" at firing (since the cylinder IS the "cartridge" as well) which is why a .0025" - .003" works well.

Mike

 

[M. De Land]

The pioneer does take prior info into account and says, "maybe it can also be done another way to suit my purposes" This is how progress is made and how followers are given different paths to achieve the same results. Experimentation leads to innovation.

I agree completely and am a gunsmith of 40 plus years. The very reason we have custom gunsmiths is because they have found ways to improve factory designs and techniques. Folks like Linebaugh, Galager and Bowen have left factory guns in the dust as to precision, accuracy and longevity years ago !
Being trained as a factory assenbler only assures factory thinking with in there fit tolerance and liable boundaries !.