Correct cap fit

[tacotime]

Ruger Old Army. Only Rem #11 caps available. Seem to fit snugly. A little pressure from a wooden dowel seats them all the way apparently. Shoots fine. The fired cap's skirt is split in three parts usually. Is that expected? Sign of bad fit?

I read that the #10 caps have a longer shirt. Is that better for revolvers?

Ruger manual says 10 or 11 in one place, and 10 in another.

Thanks.

[scattershot]

The number 10 caps are slightly smaller in diameter than the 11s. A firm push is sometimes necessary to seat the #11 caps, but using a dowel or something like that is not a good idea, since it can cause an accidental discharge. The cap splitting is normal, and helps the fired cap to fall from the pistol when you cock it for the next shot.

[ken s]

as long as it goes BANG, it's ok....watch the old. 1940 cowboy movies. when they shot their colt .45 they 'threw the bullet', then lifted the gun up and back..That's the old way THEIR grandfather's who were in the CW taught them. by lifting the gun up and back after the shot, they threw the spent cap up and away...tried it,,and it works...now for a few 'rebs'....ok ok just kidding....Ken

[Nobade]

My ROAs get only #11s. The #10s take a few hits to get them to go off.

-Nobade

[Hellgate]

A #10 CCI is a lot smaller/tighter on the nipple than a #10 Remington. They are like apples & oranges. The Remington #10 is a longer version of the Remington #11. They are the same diameter, merely differing in length. The Rem#10 grabs the nipple shank farther down and will fit a smaller nipple than the Rem#11 and is labled as a smaller cap. The CCI#10 is a tougher cap that may need to be struck twice to seat and I believe is smaller in diameter than the CCI#11. Same for the RWS caps: the #10 RWS (actually #55) is quite small and tough to seat. The RWS#1075 is close to the CCI#11 in nipple fit. Half my guns take the RWS#11, the other half take the CCI#11 but all will take the Rem#10 which is softer to push on and seat and thus will fit a wider variety of nipples than most caps. Rem#10s have thinner walls that are pre-split so they more easily expand as they are seated. The size designations are more relative to those caps made by the same manufacturer. The Remington #11 is too "big" for any of my guns although the same diameter as the Rem#10. Confused now? Another variant is the slope of the cone of different manufacturers nipples which adds even more inconsistency.

[tacotime]

The #11 has worked pretty well. One FTF. The #10 was only tried once over an empty cylinder. It seemed to dirty up the nipple and pocket worse than the #11. I was expecting the longer skirt of the #10 to be a little more contained. What is the point of the different skirt lenghts on these?

[Hellgate]

TT,
The dirtier nipple from the #10 was more likely due to no clensing effect of the back thrust out the back of the nipple upon firing a fully charged chamber. A loaded chamber will blow more cap debris (unfired priming compound) away. The longer skirt on the Rem #10 cap is so it can grab the nipple cone farther down the skinnier shank of the nipple. A larger nipple will be fatter in the shank and the shorter #11 cap will grab higher up with less splitting/flaring of the cap.

[tacotime]

That all leaves me unsure which cap technically fits the ROA best. The ROA nipple is skinny at the cap end and fatter towards the cylinder end.

I get the bang criteria, but since there is a good deal of discussion about chain fires caused by poorly fitting caps, I would sure like to get it right on this guy without learning the hard way...