Timing a revolver

[David Snellen]

Gentlemen,
I have a friend that offered to sell his brass framed remington to me (I turned him down).
The cylinder wasn't indexing correctly (plus I prefer historically accurate pistols).
After you cock it, it would move a bit (when you rotated it) and 'click' in place.
How do you time a revolver that is out of time or over indexes?
Thank you, David

 

[LeMat1856]

given that it's a pretty involved project, i thought i'd take the easy way out and point you to some articles about tuning in general - lots of photos, good technique, etc.

if these links don't work, go to www theopenrange net, first, then add 'articles to the link:
"www theopenrange net / articles" and you should be able to see both parts 1 and 2.

hope this helps.

How to tune - Part I

How to Tune - Part 2

~d~

 

[MikeChapin]

It sounds like someone ground the foot down too much. The foot is what moves the cylinder when the hammer is cocked.

To time it you would have to get a new foot and trial and error until you got it to the proper length to lock the cylinder in place while allowing it to come to full cock.

 

[David Snellen]

Thanks for the article info. So, when a revolver gets out of time, the foot is worn down?
David

 

[biliff]

It sounds like someone ground the foot down too much. The foot is what moves the cylinder when the hammer is cocked.

To time it you would have to get a new foot and trial and error until you got it to the proper length to lock the cylinder in place while allowing it to come to full cock.

I think you mean "hand" or "pawl" and not "foot".

 

[mykeal]

Bill - Yeah, the term I'm familiar with is 'hand' also. And yes, the symptom described suggests the hand is not long enough to rotate the cylinder fully into battery. The fix would be a new hand.

David - It is NOT true that anytime the timing is off the hand is worn down. Timing a revolver is a bit more complicated than that. Read the links provided above for the full story.

 

[MikeChapin]

It sounds like someone ground the foot down too much. The foot is what moves the cylinder when the hammer is cocked.

To time it you would have to get a new foot and trial and error until you got it to the proper length to lock the cylinder in place while allowing it to come to full cock.

I think you mean "hand" or "pawl" and not "foot".

Yep, you are right. It has been so long since I messed with revolvers I don't remember much of the terminology.


Thanks for the article info. So, when a revolver gets out of time, the foot is worn down?
David


That's just the first place you look. As Mykeal said it is more complicated than just one thing.

 

[Dphar]

Gentlemen,
I have a friend that offered to sell his brass framed remington to me (I turned him down).
The cylinder wasn't indexing correctly (plus I prefer historically accurate pistols).
After you cock it, it would move a bit (when you rotated it) and 'click' in place.
How do you time a revolver that is out of time or over indexes?
Thank you, David

Sounds like the advance hand is short or the cuts in the back of the cylinder are worn. Or both. Sometimes the advance hand can be stretched *if short* with a hammer and anvil. It usually only takes a little. Might be easier than finding a part that fits.
If the cylinder is damaged its basically scrap unless you want to spring for a new one, if available.
Dan

 

[David Snellen]

Thank you gentlemen,
I am glad I passed on the remington.
David

 

[crockett]

There can also be some side to side play if the hand is loose or wobbles in its slot. One trouble about timing a revolver is that everything is interrelated, you cannot just jump in and fix one thing without considering if it will then throw off something else. You really need a couple of books on the subject.
A cheap bras frame gun may be a good one to practice-learn with.

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

Or not. The brass frame may be stretched or worn, adding to the timing woes. With careful use and light loads brass framed guns are marginally O.K., and for some A.C.W. re-enactors they are almost requirements. But they are in general more trouble than they are worth. IMNSHO! :wink:

 

[gizamo]

Russ, you could be right...

Here's a thought from someone that has spent a lot of time working on various wheelguns over the years.

Lots of folks stand the gun up on it's gripframe with the barrel pointing up in the air and scrub the recoil shield with their choice of cleaner. This forces all kinds of goo into the backside of the plate. Deposits of BP also tend to build up on the back face of the slot the hand rides on. Effectively forcing the hand to ride farther back then it should. This causes the hand to release the ratchet sooner then it should. And relates to a perceived timing issue, when in fact...all the gun needs is a really good cleaning :v

giz

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

Definitely a possibility, especially if the revolver was never fully disassembled for a thorough cleaning. And this is an all too common scenario.

 

[crockett]

For what it is worth I was TOLD by a guy at a black powder gun shop near where I live that he had put 25,000 through a brass frame Colt style Navy and there was no stretching. As I said, that's what I was told- have no idea if it is true.

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

Yeah, I've heard similar stories. I'd be more apt to believe someone who told me he once flew across the Atlantic Ocean by flapping his arms real fast. :v

 

[crockett]

Well, I have never owned a brass frame revolver and don't think I'd ever want one. To me, it just seems it is an inferior gun. In any event has anyone had a brass frame that stretched? How much? How long did it take to develop? What type loads were shot?
And...I am assuming a Colt style would be more likely to stretch that a Remington style.

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

They'll both stretch with anything like a full load. I've seen both stretch and neither had 25,000 rounds through it. Or even 1500 rounds. They weren't used with full loads and were well maintained. Brass frames are pretty but they will shoot loose. Maybe they should cast them from the same bronze that was used on the .45-70 revolver that was available--maybe still is. They seem to hold up well enough.

 

[crockett]

Thanks, good to know.

 

[mykeal]

Not disputing Russ T's experience, but it needs to be pointed out that people have had good experiences with brass frame revolvers - they did not shoot loose when used with light to moderate loads. We all tend to believe that our personal experiences are the norm, but it's making a mistake to generalize that one's own experience is representative of all members of the population.

I don't personally own any brass frames. I have restored a couple for relatives interested in inexpensive black powder shooting, and I know a couple of people who shoot them regularly without any measureable damage. That doesn't mean Russ T is wrong, just that they aren't all as bad as he seems to feel they are.

 

[Tinker2]

Maybe they should cast them from the same bronze that was used on the .45-70 revolver that was available

I believe they were made of magnesium bronze.




Tinker2