Field stirpping a Colt percussion revolver?

Update:

The seller has agreed to take the cased 1849 Pocket back. He is shipping me a 1847 manufactured 1848 Baby Dragoon, SN 171. It is inscribed as a presentation piece to a soldier of the Civil War. My day is now complete.

Taking this discussion back ontract, I recently had a freind break my antique Colt 1851 Navy. I will refrain from repeating my expletives. Suffice to say that I had to take it apart to see what broke. I used the rammer to help separate the barrel from the cylinder. I did place a brass punch between the barrel and the rammer. It was the only thing that I had on hand at the time. This procedure worked. So thankyou all for this tip!

Bob
 
Last edited:
FWIW, my "weapon of choice" for removing the wedge is a crab hammer (aka crab mallet), It is heavy enough to remove all but the tightest wedges, won't damage anything and cheap enough (free!) to toss away if it breaks. If you are not a devotee of sea food, and don't get them free, they are about $.50 each on line.

Jim
 
Taking this discussion back ontract, I recently had a freind break my antique Colt 1851 Navy. I will refrain from repeating my expletives. Suffice to say that I had to take it apart to see what broke. I used the rammer to help separate the barrel from the cylinder. I did place a brass punch between the barrel and the rammer. It was the only thing that I had on hand at the time. This procedure worked. So thank you all for this tip!
Click to expand...

Not to be a jerk, but I do not understand how one can place a punch between the barrel and the rammer. With the pistol at half-cock, the rammer should impart/contact the cylinder between the chambers and, using the load-lever, extract the barrel from the frame and arbor, and the cylinder should just slide off the arbor.

Maybe I am missing something here.

Apologies if necessary, sir.

Jim
 
Yes. I inserted the brass punch between the rammer and the cylinder. This worked well without leaving any marks. BTW I am finding steel from back in the 1800s to be softer than what is being produced now. I would never fire them.

Bob
 
BTW I am finding steel from back in the 1800s to be softer than what is being produced now. I would never fire them.
Click to expand...

It's not steel, it's wrought iron. Nothing wrong with firing them if they're in decent shape.
 
I was thinking that it is just poor quality steel. Interesting. Wrought iron. That may explain the relatively sparce grain pattern. I am not a metallurgist, just trying to figure this stuff out. I have noticed a tighter grain pattern on later Pockets. Carbon particles? FWIW

Bob
 
Wrought iron has its' advantage over modern steel in that it is more resistant to rusting away. Old wrought iron nails and tools are still here, just leave modern iron lay around and it is gone.
 
I was thinking that it is just poor quality steel. Interesting. Wrought iron. That may explain the relatively sparce grain pattern. I am not a metallurgist, just trying to figure this stuff out. I have noticed a tighter grain pattern on later Pockets. Carbon particles? FWIW
Click to expand...

Colt used case hardened wrought iron for frames until 1883. They used wrought iron for cylinders until 1860. The carbon content of wrought iron is extremely low.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top