Ordered my 1851 .36 Navy today and ...

Obtrude: thrust forward unmasked; push out; force through an opening of some shape
I think the .490 ball thru a .451 bore is called obturation as explained above...if not call Webster on it.

George why the hell are you pullin the same crap over here that you did in VOY? If you wouldn't misquote all the good you learned I wouldn't be correcting you. You have got it wrong george and you once more are ramblin a bunch a crap here instead of in Voy...youdon't have enough expiriance to preach to any of the fine gentlemen over here. I'll make that clear just once george. Don't be contancorus and talk to people...learn something and put that damn book down while your typing...you don't need it if you listen then talk with people....OK that's it for your spankin now play nice or go to bed.:D

And if you have anything else personel to say to me do it in a message not in here...
 
Smoke,

You pull the same stuff here as you do in VOY. You know it all. The guys here are dumb, I AM DUMB, to question you.

If I had to quote you, you have made a whole bunch of remarks that do not stand up.

If I had to quote Wayne, I can find a few.

I came here. You followed me here. You persist in telling me I am an A****le because I don't agree with about 75% of your ideas. I could not really care less. I need not discuss anything with you. You make an a*****le statement, I will challenge you. You're not GOD, I don't give a da**n how many rounds per day you shoot.

There are a lot more people here who have good advice to give than just snipe at people. Go back home to where you ARE GOD. No, I was there before I came here, it's dead, ain't it, most everybody else is here. Sumbitch, I mentioned this place one time, is that how you all got here? My apologies to the rest of the Forum

I have nothing against you, but, dang, man, I can't say anything that you don't say "You're wrong." I quote you, "You misquoted me." But you just said... ("But I meant....")

Cheers,

George
 
You know George I said to you if you want to get personal send me an instant mesage...I didn't even finnish reading yours ...that's enough.
I just finnished answering your question in full and as a friend in another post. That'll be the last time. Nice knowin you.:mad:

LoL! you are a funny guy.... I gotta say that much I had to read it I thought you were prayin for me. But no now you are claiming that i am a God...too much george...good bye ol friend....
 
Good morning you all !:) George and Smoken Gun, just want you two to know that we never had any arguements on this site untel you two showed up. In fact it was one of the nicest run sites for C&B on the net and very informative.
I'm hoping we can all get it back to the way it was before it turns in to one of the junk sites where they acomplish nothing because a few people can think that if you don't do it there way your wrong.
both of you have things to offer on here and it's easy to see that you know what your talking about on most subjects. Please just learn to accept that others do too and it doesn't have to be done your way to be right.
We are here to learn from each other and have some fun sharing what has worked or has not worked for us.
Let's just get along and if you two can't then it would make it nicer for all of us if you just don't comment to each others post.
I'm not a moderator here but I like this site and when I came here there was very few people on it or at least very few interacting. Then a few of us started chating and sharing what we knew and having fun doing it. Soon others came on and all was great before you two started this constant fighting and childish put downs.
If somone disagrees with you don't get angry and continue to shove your idea down there throat because they won't come around to your way of thinking, just move on and forget it.
Let's get back to being being friends and sharing info and having fun. I had enough of fighting years ago :)
Lets have fun again and get away from the fighting . You two have a lot to offer
 
I agree RK,
I, for one, do not know everything, especially about C & B revolvers. Having not been around them for years, and now just getting back into them, abeit hip deep today. Everyone that has posted here recently (since I have been here) has someting to offer, and I appreciate it. I do not appreciate the fighting, if I want that I'll go to a horse breed board. Everyone has someting to offer. If it works for you it just might work for another, maybe not, but one can try it. If it works for you, great. If it don't, you maybe lost a little time.
So far I have found a lot that does work for me, and I speak only for myself, some things don't, but I'm not on here griping about it.

George has raised a question in my mind. I do not have an original C & B Rem. or any other make at this time, but I am curious as to the Chamber Size/bore size in an original Rem or other make. I just uit bidding on an original on the Auction Arms auction and it went for just over $300.00 , probably been $500.00 if I'd have continued bidding, with my luck.

Anyone out there with an original that can measure the chambers(albeit probably not the original size now that it was from the factory) and let us know the findings?

I know the last Rem Conversion I had had lands and grooves very close to .440 lands and .451 grooves. Wouldn't have done any good to measure the chambers as it was a 44 CF which means it would have fired the 44 Rem that I shoot today. 44 Colt fell thru the bore.

We all have things to contribute and things to learn, so lets do it at peace with one another.
 
RK I do believe I have already done that before you posted this morning as of my last post, didn't I. with all do respect. This has been done elsewhere to make a certain person think they look more knowledgable then they are on the subject..I wasn't arguing I was merely stating fact RK just has you have said to I believe it was Wayner... Let it rest I had already stopped it. More advice on the subject will only mean we are talkin about it more. Correct?

There are more than two people in this forum that have opinions on what is correct and what is not RK...remember this take one hand either hand and point your index finger at the screen. Look down at your hand and you'll see finger pointing at someone else and 3 fingers pointing back at you.
You all have a good mornin too...
 
Hows this for helpful:

attachment.php

Pretty big chambers, Huh? The first time he shot it, he got a chain fire. The next time, he had studied up on it, used larger balls etc and turned in some pretty good performance:
attachment.php
 
Last edited:
Mec has he slugged the barrel on that Rem? Just curious if it is closer t a .451 Pietta bore or a .460 Uberti bore... Have wanted to know what a first generation Rems measurements were.
 
I have slugged the bore on the 4 remington originals(conversions) and all were basically .451-452 nom. Never measured the chambers because they chambered 44 CF Cartridges (original UMC Metallic CF). These cylinders were original BP cyl.s cut off and a ring welded onto them, all had a thin recoil plate dovetailed into the frames. looked like the ones in mc Dowell's Book.

I talked to the Owner of Rapine Moulds, Buffalo Arms and the owner of Old West Moulds and all confirmed the .451-.452 original groove dimensions.

Hence the newly re-introduced 44 Rem. Cartridge for Rem. and Colt original conversion and the new 44 rem conversion cylinders from Kirst (Deja Vu??). These will work in original Rem conversions as well as original Colt 44 CF Conversions. Conversion cylinders could be made for Colt 44 BP, but as of today I do not believe that there are any being built, just for the "58 Rem.'s.

The new 44 Colt's as in the Open Top 1872's or 44-40's are not the same bore..
 
Dragoon, I was looking at my son's original 1849 pocket Colt last night before I read up to date on this thread. If I had read up before I went to his place, I'd have brought it home with me and could have given the chamber/bore dimensions on it, for what they would be worth. The thing has both bore and chambers so corroded that you can't make out the lands and grooves. It might be a useless exercise to measure that particular original but the chambers have apparently corroded at the same rate so maybe the ratio would have been maintained.
I slugged the bore on my Uberti pocket navy, was going to check the published measurements, and had to admit defeat since I couldn't figure out how to get the two different measurements with calipers. On the ball, the valley from the land is opposite the ridge from the groove. I know Wayner talked about how to do that but my fuse didn't reach all the way to his powder. How do you really measure that?
About the getting along on here, I figure that between us all, we have several hundred years of first hand, hands on experience at what we are discussing. I learn something almost every day. I really think the sharing of our opinions, and we are almost all opinionated,:) is what it's all about. I would hate to see anyone get their feelings hurt to the point they stopped posting. I'm not just saying this, I really feel like you all are friends I've just not met yet! Please keep my education going, this old dog IS learning new tricks!

Steve
 
On a new Pietta "58 their are even lands and grooves and you can get just enough bite in the grooves on the ball(lands on the gun) to get a decent reading, then the lands on the ball(grooves on the gun) are the easiest to get a reading on because it is the outside Dia., This is the important one, because the bore(land to land( in the gun) should be close to .440 on a Pietta. and the originals. grooves (lands on the ball) should be .451-.452 on Pietta's and originals. I don't have any experience with Uberti '58's at all. Zip Nada. Don't have any idea what their bore or grooves are, or should be.
 
I have several civil war period Colt dragoon bullets -240 plus grains with the healed base. These measure .443-4. I believe that this means nothing because of the oxidation that has taken place on the bullets. I would like to have a mould to throw thes2 bullets however. I would specify .451 -2" diameter with a heal of about .449.
 
Old Dragoon I'll let ya know when my Uberti gets here. I knock a .490 ball thru it and take several measurements. From the Dixie Gun Works Tech manual(HeHe)it calls out the factory specs of .440 lands and .460 grooves. This is one of the reasons Wayne reamed the cylinders. I got accurate measurements from him on the Ubberti Rems. I believe not positive that the cylinders were reamed to .450 or .452 will have to ask him. Maybe it was more, and cast .464 round balls for it. And is very accurate. Then I saw that Ruger Old Army stly came out with a .50 Cal Rev... that's .490 ball. I may try it if I do in fact have a .460 bore...and it doesn't kill Coffee Creamer bottles the way it is. But first things first I want that Kirst 6 shot in .44 Rem:) Anybody out there try a conversion in .45LC or .44Rem in a Uberti?
Oldelm I think yours is a Uberti if I recallect.
 
Since I have an Uberti '58 Rem, I may as well chime in here with the specs on it, for the sake of comparison. The groove dia. of bore (slugged it) is .456. The chambers of the percussion cylinder are .448. The chambers on the R&D conversion cylinder I got for it are .452. I wish the groove dia. of the bore was more around .451-.452 like folks here say their Pietta groove dimensions are. I wonder if it's true that the Piettas tend to have a smaller groove dia. than the Ubertis. I'm leaning towards getting a Pietta '58 Rem next, and just compare.
 
Oldelm that's been my findings in the Piettas I have had .451 swedged thru the barrels w/.447 chambers. Your Uberti is still accurate with cap & ball or the .45LC conversion correct?
 
afbyar.jpg


Here's an older pic of when I was working up smokeless loads with the R&D. It was 5.4 gr Titegroup under a 200gr RNFP bullet in .45 Schofield case at 25 yds off a stool for a rest. I've been experimenting with BP loads in .45LC/Schofield, but haven't been out since the snows have come. I'm just really curious about how a smaller groove dia. Pietta would shoot groups,...especially with the Kirst .44 Rem cyl.like Old Dragoon's. Actually , the second "Shooters" from Dixie's just arrived and still in the box,....I'm hesitant to open the box and peer down the barrel with my flashlight,...LOL!:eek: But I've been told that the "Shooters" can't be fitted with the coversion cylinders,...just gotta shoot percussion with it.
 
Last edited:
LoL Oldelm, go for it I'll wait ...I gots ta know...
Thanks Oldelm you just eased an old Pietta diehards mind...HeHe!
Oldelm I gotta step out for a bit... be back in a few...I know this shooter is a good one...There I just bessed it...LoL!
 
Thanks for the blessing, Smokin,..LOL!!
Well,....I opened the box with Shooter from Dixie's,...they just sent me another after I returned the first because of chamber/bore misalignment. This one has almost perfect chamber/bore alignment,...there's just a very tiny portion of the cylinder face showing in two grooves on the left side looking down,....just slight under-rotation of cylinder. Maybe I can correct it with Wayne's trick. There's a mild layer of rust in the barrel, and the bolt looks like it's cocked or something, it is higher on one side than the other. Looks like I gotta take the works down right away and look things over carefully. I really don't want to send this one back, and hope the problems are only minor and can be corrected or kitchen table gunsmithed. I can clean the rust out with J-B Bore Compound. It's got the real nice, deep bluing, and I checked to make sure it had the progressive rifling in the barrel, which it does. Wood in grips aren't as nicely grained as the other one, but that's ok. I take some pics of the details and show you all soon as I can.:)
 
Sounds like if the bolt is straightend the chamber/bore alignment will be right on...if it'ds in the right direction. Is the hand a hair long and pushing the cylinder too far? Or too short and not pushing far enough. Hell you'll figure it out. My blessing only covered it for bein a good one...and good is relative to the kitchen table gunsmiths..HeHe! Let us know and see it when you're done playin with it...
 
friends,funerals and obstuation

I'm tired from attending a funeral but I gotta say hello to my cap&baller shooters extraordinaires. Howdy Pards. Old Dragoon I wish we could get together to test some stuff too. Where in the world would someone get a Ransom Rest anyhows? I think I know how the test may come out as far as chambers and grooves are concerned if tested in a tight gun. I think as long as there was some back pressure or resistance enough from a ball engraving some lands the powder blast would obsturate(obstuate) the lead to fill the grooves and the gun would shoot good as you guys say your guns do. Your guns must not be too far from close enough comparing the chambers and grooves so the guns shoot good. I must have run into some guns that were too small in the chambers to let the balls obstuate consistantly so reaming them made them more accurate.I always thought that although the powder blast could probably obstuate a ball even if it was in mid air(like a bat hitting a baseball on a pedestal) if there wasn't enough back resistance by the ball by a little more than it's own weight but also by enough "land" to help give the ball resistance to over coming inertia and to the powder blast the obstuation would happen inconsistantly and not uniformly. That would mean a gun with chambers undersized by .013 would do as George mentioned up above and not obstuate well or consistantly. I think if the ball gets engraved by the lands by at least .003 on each side of the ball and the chambers are undersized by not much more than .003-.004 then the lead must obstuate enough and consistantly enough. Know what I mean? I guess the Italians figure to leave a little space for fouling "and" figure the lead will fill any gap with being obstuated enough. Best of both worlds. Right. Some guns must have equal chambers to grooves or chambers .002-.003 over barrel grooves to be ultimately consistant and fouling be damned. Wipe it out by cleaning or use a good lube or a "wayner" lube pill:D . I guess maybe the guns with closer tolerances with the chambers and grooves aren't for the majority of the consumer market because that includes the casual shooter just wanting to shoot the hell out of the gun and doesn't want or need ultimate accuracy because that would entail all kinds of specialized proceedures for the most serious target shooters or competition shooters. The ones that used the Pietta "Shooters Model" to win the World target Shoot or the ones that pay big money for a Pedersoli to compete with. You know like very rigorous cleaning proceedures and loading with some sort of apparatus to measure exactly the same compression on the ball and powder each chamber and re-sifting the powder to remove any dust and measuring the charges by scales and by practicing a shooting stance for hours and hours a week and exercising the shooting muscles with weights and practicing breathing exercises and wearing a diopter on the shooting glasses and wearing special shooting gloves and by a person that is like an olympic contender that becomes one with a specialized very efficient load chain and the revolver to be a human Ransom Rest. ha ha ha The average shooter ain't got the time for that so I guess most of the guns are manufactured with the chambers a little small to account for fouling and let obstuation do the rest. When a person encounters a gun that shoots crappy and measures the chambers and the grooves and finds the chambers are a reject from the quality control dept. and are "too" small he or she can ream the chambers or get a new cylinder ect. ect. I would hope that a person would be cautious about reaming though so they didn't get carried away and ream "too" much "too" deep. I only ream so many .001's and do so only as deep in the chamber as the ball will go with an average load like 20-22gr. in a 36cal. and 25-28 in a 44cal. I do it at my own risk and advise others that I've done it for that it's "their" call. When a shooter gets good accuracy with chambers a few .001's under groove size then I guess it's best to leave it alone. If a guy wants chambers and grooves closer in tolerances then it's good to know the guns can come from the box that way. The Pietta "distressed finish" guns come that way. The Pietta "Shooters" Model does too. There is the Pedersoli Rodgers and Spencer with chambers at .450 and grooves at .451 and the Pedersoli Remington with chambers .454 and grooves at .451. There's the Uberti 1862 Pocket Police and Pocket Navy with equal chambers and grooves. The guns are out there so a person doesn't have to ream to get closer tolerances if they want them. The Pietta 1851's and 1861's Colts have about .003 under sized chambers and people say they have the accuracy. The Pietta Remingtons 1858 Standard Models have chambers about .447 and grooves about .451. They seem to have more than aceptable accuracy. Anywhooo..... I like my chambers and grooves equal. Some people may not want that or figure the difference isn't worth the trouble. I think it is but then again I'm just a Hillbilly Cowboy that never had a horse and wears his chaps to ward off briars when rabbit hunting and likes my cap&ballers and the way of life it renders me. Like a Harley owner says his bike "is" a life style. My cap&ball revolvers are a life style.:D To each his own. When I strap on the leather and flip the ole 1860 Colt Army into the holster and head out into the woods and the fields and meadows with my dogs Curly and Moe I am one happy hombre and I leave the world and all it's stife behind reamed chambers or not.;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top