On Taylor Throating

[tek4260]

http://grantcunningham.com/blog_files/c5f2ab48855cf4d62d3f8c67333d27b7-412.html

The other question that comes to mind is reduced velocity. Seems that it would increase the "case capacity" before the bullet hits the throat. Seems to me that it has to reduce pressure thus velocity. Also, by the time the bullet hits the rifling and pressure builds, the base may be past the barrel cylinder gap. This would only help to reduce velocity further.

But it would help misalignment and thread constriction, and either would be a bigger problem than the reduced velocity and pressure.

Any thoughts as one day I would like to get a Reeder and might want to opt out on the Maxi Throat he offers?

[Ed K]

I tend to view it as a patch: something done because one is not able, able to afford, or able to understand the real fix. That said there are reasons at times to apply a patch. For example I see no reason why not to plug a $150 Michelin tire instead of throwing it away. I've seen them last for tens of thousands of miles and I can do it for almost free. On the other hand if to apply a "patch" I have to ship something FedEX both ways and pay a man good money to apply it, well then I'd just as soon address the root cause.

[ole 5 hole group]

Sounds about right, but that’s not my experience relative to accuracy or velocity. I’ve wanted to try a Taylor throat set-up for some time now and just see how well that set-up shot and was considering sending a revolver to Jim Stroh for the Taylor throat. Well, last year I sent a Blackhawk to Reeder for his magic in his Ultimate Black Widow model (5-shot 44 magnum) – expecting the revolver upon its return to shoot lights out. Didn’t happen.

Loading the 44 Mag with 300 grain Hornady XTP’s OAL of 1.605” (1st cannelure) with 20.5 grains WW296 gave 1,202fps from a 5” barrel with 0.4305” cylinder throats and a Maxi-throat and got 1,040fps with the same load seated out 1.740” (2nd cannelure). Got 1,060fps from my 44 Magnum Redhawk having a 5.5” barrel with 0.4325” cylinder throats using 20.0 grains of IMR4227 with an OAL of 1.735” (2nd cannelure).

My Redhawk shot between 1.5 and 2 inch groups consistently at 25 yards rested, while the Reeder held closer to the 2 inch mark with the above load. The powder may have caused the difference and I’ll find out shortly. The sights on the Reeder are not the best for my eyes, so maybe it’ll do better once I change the rear sight or add a red dot but as far as I’m concerned with this particular Maxi-throat, it isn’t a magic pill relative to accuracy.

[44man]

I have to agree, the Taylor is a waste. Too much is made of the cone when it just is not as important as the cylinder alignment by the boolit. To send a booit off center into the bore and expect the Taylor cut to make it straight is so much fun! A fix for a problem that is not there!

[Lloyd Smale]

I had 3 guns done back in the day. All were pour shooters. One responded very well. It about cut group size in half. the other two didnt show much improvement. They did shoot just as well and were a bit more consistant. They tended to shoot about everything the same. Nothing spectacular but it seemed like about everything went 2 inch at 25 yards from them which was an improvement for those guns. Would i do it again? I doubt it. Anymore if i get a poor gun it using gets traded off. For the most part ive never seen a really poor shooting gun become a tack driver no matter what was done to it short of replacing barrels ect.

[white eagle]

I have to agree, the Taylor is a waste. Too much is made of the cone when it just is not as important as the cylinder alignment by the boolit. To send a booit off center into the bore and expect the Taylor cut to make it straight is so much fun! A fix for a problem that is not there!

how would this do on a gun that has perfect cylinder/boolit alignment
:Fire:

[Lefty SRH]

how would this do on a gun that has perfect cylinder/boolit alignment
:Fire:

My opinion theres no need for it IF the gun was perfect.

[ClemY]

Taylor throating is also one way to cut out the constriction in a barrel just forward of the forcing cone where the barrel screws into the frame. I tend to view it as a bit extreme. I prefer to go with a 5 degree forcing cone. That has worked well for me in the past.

[44man]

how would this do on a gun that has perfect cylinder/boolit alignment
:Fire:
If it was perfect, why even need a forcing cone? Sounds funny but true. It is there to let the boolit FORCE alignment.
Maybe the worst is line boring and a solid lock up. Cylinder play is for a reason. You can send a boolit into a Taylor throat off center too.
Line boring uses a jig in the frame with no barrel to start holes. Then the cylinder must be chambered from the other end out of the gun. Then the barrel is screwed in and it might be .003" or more off center. Now hold the cylinder super tight so it can't be forced into alignment.
There is just nothing wrong with a standard cone and you need a little slop at the cylinder. The Taylor is the answer to a non existing problem.
To send a gun to make it tighter can make it shoot worse. Even a tighter cylinder pin can be detrimental.
Hold your gun and wiggle the cylinder and smile, you have the best.

[Larry Gibson]

The Taylor is the answer to a non existing problem.

+1.

Larry Gibson

[2 dogs]

I have a couple of line bored sixguns with almost no throat. They shoot very accurately.

This is such a difficult question since each revolver has its own personality.

[tek4260]

I have a couple of line bored sixguns with almost no throat. They shoot very accurately.

This is such a difficult question since each revolver has its own personality.

FWIW, I wasn't trying to throw rocks at your idea to fix the Smith. I am sure it will fix your thread constriction problem. I always thought the Taylors Throat was a big "funnel", that was bigger than the throats and thus cured alignment issues. I didn't realize it had to match throat size, thus couldn't help with alignment. I thought it might be something worth while for a JIC on my shooters, since I have no real way of measuring alignment other than my pin gauge thru the barrel, which leaves a few .001 of misalignment that can't be detected with em.

[2 dogs]

Actually, I appreciate your broadening the thread onto other sites. A Taylor Throat is indeed a funnel, BUT I suspect each Smith cuts them some differently as does Reeder. It should "help" a gun with less than optimum alignment shoot better. Im sure I am going to find out here pretty shortly!

[ClemY]

FWIW, I wasn't trying to throw rocks at your idea to fix the Smith. I am sure it will fix your thread constriction problem. I always thought the Taylors Throat was a big "funnel", that was bigger than the throats and thus cured alignment issues. I didn't realize it had to match throat size, thus couldn't help with alignment. I thought it might be something worth while for a JIC on my shooters, since I have no real way of measuring alignment other than my pin gauge thru the barrel, which leaves a few .001 of misalignment that can't be detected with em.

There are at least two ways to check chamber alignment in addition to the range rod method: There is a dial gage system, not cheap, with bore riding adapters, that does a very accurate measurement of chamber alignment; for cheapskates like me, I just take a good look at the fouling in the forcing cone. If it isn’t symmetric, then problems. If it is nicely symmetric, then you are about as good as you can get. When there is misalignment, a little slop in the lock-up is a good thing. When you have good chamber alignment, courtesy of fitting cylinder locking bolts and hands to get things aligned and tight, then you can get as good accuracy as your barrel will permit. Every revo is a law unto itself. That is part of the fun.