Ordered my 1851 .36 Navy today and ...

Kevin, Barns and Nobile , Amazon.com and others carry it. Mec also said it's now available as an on line book and you can buy it for like $7.00 and the pictures are great! There not all that great in the book due to the printing process I guess. Maybe do a google search on it and it should show you how to buy it on line. Mec has posted the link to it several times on here but I don't rember what post or thread it was on.
 
Won' find it in stores-unless you have them order it for you. Barnes and Noble and Amazon seem to be moving the most of them.
 
Old Dragoon,

I tried the old hat at one Salvation Army store near me. They don't have any old felt cowboy hats. If they did, would have bought all of them. Have to try a few more.

Don't know if I should mention the "58 in a basket", here.

I was right and you were WAY too considerate of the dork who pipewrenched off the barrel.

If I were to point the gun at you, no cylinder, it won't go in, and the cyl pin doesn't line up ATALL, you would say "That yahoo is using the "gangsta hold" on me. Well, that's a little exaggerated. It is twisted near an 1/8 inch.

Think the guy must have grabbed it by the grip, first, nah, just left to get the screwdrivers, pulled the grips, no marks, must have stuck a hammer handle in the frame window, sprung the frame, decided he should grab it at the barrel root, and wrung it out.

Pin won't go in, cylinder won't go in easily, when you Do get it in, it won't turn.

Gonna try to untwist her. If it works, great, if not, like I said before, I bought a bunch of spare parts in a big enough container that I can't lose them, like I could with a little paper envelope.

Hey, I bid, I bought, I got no bitch.

Cheers,

George
 
Kevin,

Go to B&N and look for Cumpston. It will give you all that he has written or co-written.

(mec: I forget whether it is o or e, but the search engine will ask "Do you mean Cumpsten " with an "e". My apologies.)

Though I like computers, I don't like e-books. Harder to read than printed page, and I love printed pages. I have at least 5,000 books, I can't throw them away, and the kids will when I pass off this mortal coil.

Hey, if you can get some electrons for 7 bucks, why don't you get the paper version for 15 or something, and not worry about a computer fritz losing it for you? Mike, can a buyer get the actual jpegs from you guys, rather then the compressed pics in the book?

Cheers,

George
 
Chambers

I could ask any shooters that have shot the Ruger Old Army or the Pietta "Shooters model Remington" about the accuracy of it and the consistancy of that accuracy compared to some(most) of the other clones of the percussion revolvers . I think any one of them would say that those guns with the chambers sized close to the groove diameter of the barrel are more consistantly accurate than the clones with the under-sized chambers left that way to accomodate subsequent shots fired thru fouled barrels and not left that way for any kind of accuracy improvement. Mec and Old Dragoon what are you guys trying to perpetrate?(refer to page three) The idea that undersized chambers are as accurate or more so than properly sized chambers in percussion revolvers? I put the question to Val Forgett (Navy Arms) and was advised that the Italians leave the chambers under sized because of firing subsequent shots thru a fouled barrel. Anyhow I guess people don't want to think their revolvers are a little defective so they persaude themselves that the under sized chambers are alright. I think they should join in the cry and persaude the Italians to improve their dimensions of the chambers to the grooves in the barrels of the percussion revolvers. People(most) understand what a wore crown at the muzzle end of a pistol barrel can do to accuracy. I wonder if people realize that under sized chambers make a gun shoot like it has a wore crown since the exact same scenario takes place with both the worn crown and the undersized chambers. Gas spurting out un-uniformly at the muzzle moving the ball or bullet off the line of sight just as it enters free air space. I don't see how or why anyone can illustrate that a gun firing a ball or bullet through a bore that the grooves of the rifling are widder in diameter than the ball or bullet can be consistantly accurate. When there are spaces in the grooves of a barrel between the bottom of the grooves and the projectile gases can spurt past the ball or bullet and cause it to move off the line of sight and the point of aim when it enters free air right at the very edge of the muzzle. No wait a minute. Maybe percussion revolvers are different somehow and don't follow the same basic known accepted proven facts about how lead projectiles are best sized to barrels and the grooves of those barrels. Minutes up. Now can anyone explain to me how improperly sized, under sized chambers when compared to barrel groove diameters can shoot good groups on targets and do it consistantly? OK we can now make believe obstuation takes place consistantly exactly the same for every ball or bullet. I'm just too highly opinionated ,I guess, but I like to tell it as it really is. Percussion revolvers(or any revolvers) don't shoot consistantly accurate with undersized projectiles. They shoot too many flyers.I guess after shooting percussion revolvers for a couple of decades I can tell if my percussion revolvers shoot better with properly sized chambers.So can a bunch of little squirrels and rabbits that had their little heads blown off by round balls from my revolvers.:eek: :D :D :D :D :p ha ha ha ha
 
Last edited:
Wayner,
I'm not trying to perpertrate anything, All I know is how my pistols shoot with the C & B cylinder and the conversion cylinder, as I have fired the pistols , all three with both (all three C & B cyl. s and the Conversion cyl.) and these guns shoot far better than I can hold them right out of the box. I don't know why, I just shoot them. I agree that I'd like my chambers the same size as the grooves, but if it ain't broke I'm not going to fix it.

Smoking gun can attest to how my guns shoot, he's shot em or watched me shoot them yesterday. We talked about the chamber sizes too.

I'm here to tell you that these guns must be engineered to take full advantage of the obstruation of the bullet. That is the ONLY thing I said.
 
If you read Mec's book you will see where they fired all these revolvers with about any kind of load you can think of and they came to the same comnclusion as the most of us have found to be true......If fact, they even state that the Remington actually shot better with a .451 ball than it did with the .454 ball.
I'm more than willing to put my two Remingtons in the hands of a pro and see what they shoot from a bench rest and what they think of the of it. You can bet that these revolvers will shoot even above there ability.
I do agree with what your saying and it all makes sense but facts are facts and action has always proven more to me than theory.
 
I agree that an equal chamber to bore dimention is optimal for revolvers with cartriges. I'm sure grouping would also be thight at longer distance with Cap&Ball Revs, but my Revs don't bind up when lubed and I have gotten 2 1/2" groups at 25yds. So I don't know if it's worse or better or whether it matters to have equal chambers to bores. I feel that .003" to .005" gives you an advantage over fouling in the Barrel...fouling isn't as hard as steel. I feel fouling is blown out and replaced..but that merely my theory. What Wayne says does make good sense, I've known him a long time and he does know what he is talkin about. Maybe I will try it someday, when I have as many Revs as you Wayne...LoL!
 
Remington Kid and Old Dragoon (Avenging Angel shooter),I reckon so. I can see where you guys are comin from. Tellin it like it is from your stand point or point of view. That's all an honest person can do right? The exchange of info is valuable to me since any facts that can teach me anything I covet. I guess now I have to sort out things and see where my inquisition takes me. Maybe I'll end up in a state of confusion that I may never recover from. There are a lot of factors that can come into play here but if you guys say your guns shoot good the way they are out of the box where chambers are concerned then I believe yas. I will just gather up my thoughts and skip merrily down the road. It could be that obstuation of pure lead is more prevelent and consistantly so with the shooting of cap&ballers than I figured. At least with guns that aren't "overly" large in the barrel grooves compared to the chambers. Maybe the guns I've tested were different in some aspect. Quite inconsistant for some reason that reaming the chambers cured some sort of symptom associated with an illness I failed to diagnose properly. Maybe Dr. Wayner needs to attend some seminars or something. Could this be considered one? Maybe I'll do some testing when the weather breaks and use factory cylinders and compare them to reamed cylinders in the same guns. I could learn something from that I guess to add to my repertoire. I think I already did that though. I do already know that Remington revolvers seem to shoot more consistantly accurate than Colts as they come from the box. In my experience anywhooo. I have a new engraved(factory) 1851 Colt Navy Pietta to try out. Factory everything with no changes to it. I've measured the chambers and the lands and the grooves of the barrel as carefully as I could and get .366 chambers, and .369 barrel grooves and .360 barrel lands. Those danged lands are hard to measure in a seven grooved barrel. Grooves are tricky too. The lands needed a precision ground pilot from a reamer I had a machine shop(tool and die maker) make for me to measure accurately. The pilot measured .360 and was a very snug fit in the barrel sos I imagine I'm within a .001 with the measurement. I do need to get some small hole mesurement gauges. Anyhow with the chambers .003 under the size of the grooves of the barrel there would only be .0015 space on each side of the ball when it is sized by the chamber and there would be .003 engraving (on each side of the ball)of the ball by the lands as long as the ball enters the forcing cone perfectly centered. That would be a tall order....perfectly centered. The alignment looks really good with the naked eye but.......Anyhow with only .0015 space in each groove mechanically before any obstuation I imagine the obstuation would bump the ball up .003 with hopefully .0015 on each or every side uniformily sos there aren't any grooves open when the ball exits the muzzle. If I use a powder amount that is on the high side for 36 cal. like around 20-22gr. FFFg then there may be more than enough obstuation force to over come any small amount of misalignment of the chambers to the grooves. I guess I have to go test that out and do a "lot more" cap&ball shooting. Darn. :D I haven't tested anything for awhile so.... I guess it will be kind of fun testing a gun with the chambers so close to the groove diameter of the barrel that it could be reasoned it is close enough to figure it's equal in the chambers and grooves(only .0015 on each side of the ball difference when the ball enters the barrel). Not at all like some Uberti's I've checked out and reamed for myself and others that were as much as .013 smaller in the chambers than the grooves. I guess it could be said that close enough is close enough. That seems to be what quite a few "non-reamed chambered "shooters seem to be saying. I guess there would be a maximum tolerance comparing chambers to grooves with revolvers that are accurate and "over maximum" showing inaccurate revolvers. Whatda ya say? I guess you guys have revolvers that are not over the maximum and are at the minimum when it comes to tolerances between chambers and barrel grooves.If "close enough is close enough" and pretty much the same as "right on equal chambers and barrel grooves" (with a little obstuation thrown in)then we are pretty much in agreement when it comes to chambers compared to barrel grooves in cap&ball revolvers.:D I mean like would any of you choose a revolver with .013 under sized chambers over one with .003 under sized chambers? The question would be... would it be worth my trouble to ream the chambers of my new 1851 Colt Navy Pietta when there is only .003 difference in the size of the chambers compared to the barrel grooves and that equates to only .0015 space on each side of the ball when it enters the barrel before any obstuation occures? May not be worth the trouble so I may as well sell my little milling machine. No wait I'll need that to mill dovetails.:D I may want to ream the chambers of this new gun so as it measures .002-.003 chambers over barrel grooves.(after I test it like it comes from the box) Like the Ruger Old Army I respect a fair amount. Before I do any reaming though I want to test any difference there may be in accuracy with the barrel as it is with tool chatter marks down the top of the lands from one end of the barrel to the other and after the chatter marks are lapped away. How can a person measure how much a lead ball is abraded from the roughness of the chatter marks on the lands? I've seen those tool chatter marks in practically every barrel of a cap&ball revolver I've looked into. Wonder if that is the ailment that Dr. Wayner is looking for a cure for when it comes to consistant accuracy in cap&ball revolvers? I read in this cockamamee book written by a gunsmith that it takes 100-200 lapping shots fired through a barrel to smooth up the marks that abrade lead from projectiles. 100-200 lapping shots fired with JB Bore cleaner in the grooves of the bullet? Man. :eek: The book states that more efficient lapping is done with a lead lap on a rod and hand worked through the barrel. The high spots can be leveled if the lead lap is long enough the book states.When a barrel is slugged to measure the grooves the slug of lead measues the smallest part of the barrel since the lead is compressed by the tight spots.I've noticed tight spots in the cap&ball revolver barrels quite often. How? Push the lead slug to be measured only part way in the barrel and then back it out and measure it. Over and over. When the tightest spot is hit with the lead slug a smaller diameter will show up. Since most all the cap and ball barrels have waves in them that would mean that the measurement we get by slugging the barrel with lead is actually smaller than the widdest part of the barrels inside and that widder measurement would be what most of the barrel inside really is. Whatda think? Close enough may not be as close as it seems.:confused: Back to the drawing board.:( Remington Kid, therory? The last time I concluded the test with an "1851 Colt Navy 36cal." I shot a two inch group one hand at approx. 40 yards. More than 35 yards for sure. One test with my Walker I dusted some ground hogs at distances like 70 and 100 paces off hand and I've done it further. Last time I fired my 1860 Colt I put 6 shots into a three inch wide sappling at 37 paces with about two inches from top to bottom of the group and from side to side . I put holes in oak leaves in the mud at the back of the pond from up on the hill from at least 35 yards. more than just a few times.I could go on. Now I'm not bragging on myself because some days I couldn't hit my own foot if I drew it up close to my gun or hit my dog if it was sittin on my lap. I had a day like that today with a cartridge gun that I know is accurate. I'm gettin too old to shoot really good anymore. I used to shoot better. Anyway I'm just trying to say I think my guns got more accurate after I reamed them. I'm just trying to spread the "good" word. You don't have to believe me. You can think I'm just a washed up old geezer blowin smoke or maybe I smoked too much wacky tabaccky when I was a youngster. I don't care. Calling what I have been talking about a "therory" is the same as sayin I'm just a bull ****tin old man. It's not a therory to me anymore. I've proved it to myself. Ruger proved it, Pedersoli proved it and Pietta has proved it. Well, I'll be a monkeys Uncle. I don't care as long as you are happy. That's all that matters anywhoooo. Right? Happy with our cap&ball revolvers as they are for each of us. That's my therory. hayha ha
 
Last edited:
Wow, I'm not about to typ that much and I hope I can still get a point across without doing so:D
The only way to tell what's going on with the lans and grooves and the ball is not by simply sluging the barrel . Shoot a ball in a barrel of water and then measure the depth of the grooves compared to a sluged ball and see what you get. I could be wrong here but I believe that a fired ball will swell from the preasure and you can't get that by sluging with a doll rod.
 
Remington Kid, You're right for sure. You can't tell how much a ball swells from a dowell rod. You don't have to tell me about obstuation. I know it exists. I've been talking about it and saying it happens. Anywhooo, it's been nice talkin to you and others. I type long replies sometimes when I drink too much coffee.:D I do it to give people something to read and to make people think and think about something they admire like cap&ball revolvers. I do it because I like people and like people who shoot cap&ballers especially.:D Peple like you and Smokin-Gun and Old Dragoon(gunsmither) and Mec ect. ect. Hope you and others enjoy what I type to get an idea across. I kind of like doing it. I should be making cumbustible paper cartridges for the boxes with authentic labels I got from a fellow cap&ball shooter extraordinaire afficionado. Anywhooo, maybe I should get one of those Ranson Rests to test my cap&ball revolvers in? I have a therory that a cap and ball revolver can shoot a one inch group from 25 yards, Well at least 20 yards.
 
Last edited:
Wayner, Just keep typing , I enjoy reading what you write . I just wish I had the gift you seem to have for doing so. I have trouble trying to explaining to someone how to tie there shoes:D
 
Wayner,
I believe what you are saying and I did read every bit of all your postings to date. My first thought was a ranson rest at the very beginning of these postings to take the human element out of the equasion. I know I have a flyer every now and then, but I cannot say, for surety, that it is the gun and NOT good Old Dragoon flinching or pulling it off.???. I too am not that good of a shot as I age.
I would be interested in seeing your data from matching and non matching cylinders from the same gun in a ranson rest. If I were closer I'd even like to help.
 
Wayner,

I don't think there is any such THING as obturation in a gun with chambers .013 under groove size.

Powder ignites, blows the ball into the barrel, it just glides through the barrel with no resistance. Forcing cone is just a funnel to get the ball going in the right direction.

BP has from 7 to 10,000 Lead Units of Pressure, LUPs, you guys keep saying CUPs, that is for hi-power rifle with smokeless, 40,000 CUP, or PSi and up..

If the ball doesn't have any resistance to movement except inertia, it ain't gonna grow wider to fill the barrel. That means if it doesn't hit a barrel with grooves smaller than it is, and needs to have enough pressure build up behind it to push it through, it ain't gonna get fat enough, from the pressure build up, to obturate.

If you're gonna say, well, pressure builds up in the chamber, well, yeah, it does, but if it mashes at all in the chamber, it can't get any bigger than the chamber. It still hits the forcing cone at .013 under groove size, and will skip down the bore. If it hits the bore at a couple under, you got some resistance, MAYBE you get obturation. Maybe not. I read somewhere that BP has a flame temp of 7000 degrees. If you got that heat slippin' by the ball, more likely you have metal being burned off the OD of the ball than mushin' the ball to fit the grooves.

Where's your accuracy? We're back to smoothbores. Skip that .36 ball down that .44 bbl. Hey, what the hell, I hit the paper?

Quigley could shoot 800 yds. Sheutzen shooters shot for the smallest hole. If you couldn't make 1 hole consistently, you didn't belong there.

Why we gotta settle for 3 inch groups? If it's the best YOU can shoot with a one hole pistol, OK, but if it is the best the pistol CAN shoot, NOT OK.

Cheers,

George
 
George if you smack a .490 ball into a .451 barrel you have obturation, and it is a true reading. I was talkin CUP as ina Kirst .44Rem conversion George! What idiot would put a .36 ball in a .44 barrel? Never mind you don't need to answer that George..I've been down this road before with you..ya still don't get it! Thanks anyway.............>>>

Now Dr. Wayne, I hope you have never ever ever thought I disblieved you for a moment. We have always had healthy discussion on all and every topic. And you know that mostly what ever I have chosen to do on these topics was only cause it worked for me. On the cylinders I'd love to try it. When I am able to do so, as I am gettin that Uberti I'll ask ya to ream me a cylinder and buy a 100 rounds of .464 round ball to try it for myself. I always agreed that equil should be more accurate...just couldn't afford the damn cly, reamin ,and mold. Not and buy a Rev too...HeHe! Deal there Bud? Then I can have a Stock cyl., a .45X cyl., and a Kirst ported .44REM. the later may have to wait till I get another Pietta 1858. Tell me what you think about the Uberti and the Kirst Conversion, in .44Rem or .45LC don't matter same O same O.
And the Day you stop writting long informative Posts will be the Day I stop Forums. Got that Wayne??? :)
 
Last edited:
Hey Mec,
Damn Man,im Not Sure What I Was Doin Wrong About Your Book On Amazon But Thanks To You I Just Got One Ordered,lol,thanks Again.
 
"What idiot would put a .36 ball in a .44 barrel? " Copy/paste, from you, Smoke. You chase me down, you **** on me.

The same one who would put a .445 ball down a .457 groove barrel. Must I remind you that many months ago, when we first started discussing my unfamiliarity with C&B, I asked you experts about this, and you, the experts told me that soft lead balls would "obsturate" to fill the barrel grooves. I got a lotta **** for correcting Wayne on the spelling; obturate. Wayne seemed to be grateful for the correction, but you and Dave and a few others were ****ty.

The same ones who said all you gotta do is put a shim on top of the arbor, it will make up for the 1/8 inch shortness of it. Now he says butt the arbor to the bottom of the arbor hole. Make it PERFECT.

Now you are here with your expertise, and the members here who have some of their own expertise, like 40 years of shootin' these things, do not do as you do, you criticize. Your way or no way.

They ain't dumb asses.

Roll your eyes as much as you want, you ain't THE answer, either.

Cheers,

George

edit: Smoke, Ain't no way you will get "Obturation" pushing a .490 ball into a .451 barrel. Obturation means to mush out from being kicked in the ass quicker than you, the lead ball can move. You can't obturate a .490 ball down to .451. It squishes down to groan through the little barrel, probably loses a lot of velocity, partly because it is so much heavier, partly because it has so much more friction surface, driving band, if you will, in contact with the barrel lands and grooves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top