Undersized throats a good thing?

[tek4260]

Just thinking out loud....

A brand new 45 chamber reamer on the assembly line at Ruger starts out cutting .452 throats and gets replaced when it starts cutting, say .448-.450. As that cutter wears and the throats get smaller, so does the chamber. So would we be considered lucky to get one with .448 throats and thus a minimum spec chamber? We can always easily ream out the throats to correct it, or send it to Cas for him to do. Then we would have a proper min spec chamber and correct throats without the expense of a custom cylinder or a fitted and reamed 44 cylinder.

I had posed the same question here as a followup, but it got off track a bit

http://www.rugerforum.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=124466

[subsonic]

I'd much rather have them too small than too large, but why cant they just make them .4525"?

My gun had from .449 to .450" and my chambers are still very sloppy.

I think in some guns that have a problem with boolits pulling that are used purely up close for things that want to hurt you, tight throats might keep the gun working by stopping boolits from tying up the cylinder.

[tek4260]

I wonder how much of that sloppiness in a Ruger is caused by the gang reamer. In the newer Mid-frame revolvers, they supposedly went to a single indexing reamer. Slower I am sure, but at least it will be consistent.

[white eagle]

every machine shop I worked at has a set of tolerances
that have to be met for every operation that is done
they would be further ahead to just close the door a bit on those
and would be pushing out good quality parts
until then I guess we have to do it ourselves