Got my baby back.

[littlejack]

Here a few months ago, some of you may remember me having to get a replacement barrel for my Model 57 Smith & Wesson. The original barrel had cracked starting at the forcing cone, and going down into the bore a ways. I did find a NOS barrel on ebay after searching for a couple months. It is the proper vintage barrel for the year of the revolver. I bought the revolver new in 1972. Yep, we got history. I had my gunsmith remove the old barrel, and check the frame before buying the new barrel. Fast forward to present. Got a call yesterday from the smithy that the revolver was ready for pickup. Yes, I did beat feet to his door and pick her up. I have ammo ready and waiting for this much anticipated moment.
Question: Should I do a light polish in the bore to get rid of any burrs, and smooth things out some. I dont shoot jacketed, just my own cast boolits. Probably going to stick with my tried and true Lyman 410459 and Herco powder.
I'll save the heavies for the Ruger SBH Hunter.
Comments?

[onelight]

I normally shoot a few hundred jacketed through a new gun / barrel but I also have guns that have never shot a jacketed bullet .
Run a tight fitting patch on a jag through it you can feel smooth 8-)

[GSP7]

No pictures ? ? what the ?

[Der Gebirgsjager]

If there is any roughness I think it will just naturally smooth out with use.

[monadnock#5]

I normally shoot a few hundred jacketed through a new gun / barrel but I also have guns that have never shot a jacketed bullet .
Run a tight fitting patch on a jag through it you can feel smooth 8-)

Split the difference and go with gas checked maybe.

[littlejack]

I have a couple hundred 410459 checked with PB aluminum. Then I also have the 270 grain Ranch Dog, checked with copper.

[Mk42gunner]

I'd shoot it with the intended load first just to see if it leads. If it does then more drastic measures are cared for. IF it doesn't you haven't wasted money on unneeded jacketed bullets.

I've always kind of wanted a .41 Magnum, but right now I am thinking I don't really need to start over with a completely new to me bore size. Plus I never really found an N frame S&W that I could get comfortable with. A Ruger Blackhawk on the other hand....

Robert

[Gray Fox]

You might try giving it the prescribed workout with Butch's Bore Paste to smooth it up a bit. GF

[Thumbcocker]

I have several revolvers that I bought new that have never had a jacketed bullet shot in them.

[Green Frog]

IMHO, it would be perfectly fine to shoot 50-100 rounds of your proposed lead round, checking to see what kind of accuracy you can get. Make sure your cast bullets are properly sized to the bore. Then clean thoroughly, paying particular attention to whether you are getting any leading in the bore.

If accuracy is acceptable and there is no significant leading, you’re good to go. If leading shows up, then you can look into remediation. Don’t worry yet about problems that may not exist.

Froggie

[littlejack]

Ok, gonna scrub it out with a brass brush and Hoppes. Run a few patches down to check for burrs. Load up some Lyman 410459 without checks, and run them through to check for leading. The factory barrel did lead, thus the reason for the pb checks. The chambers will just allow a .410 jacketed or sized cast to slide through. I realize the original factory barrel and the new replacement are two different aminals, so we'll see what happens. Hopefully theres no constriction where the barrel is screwed in the frame. Thanks fellas for all your input.
Regards

[hanh vi xau]

Very nice

.

[littlejack]

Uh Oh, got a problem!
So I'm getting ready to give the new barrel it's first cleaning. Just out of curiosity, I decide to check the barrel cylinder gap. One side will allow a .016 feeler about half way. The other side will only allow a .010 feeler through. I tried these two different ways. All six checked with hammer cocked and cylinder locked in the firing position, and then all six checked with the hammer down. There was not a noticeable difference between the two ways checked. I carefully looked at the face of the forcing cone with a magnifier and no turning mark's from a lathe. Its looks as though it was never turned and trued up. Only very fine mark's 90° with the bore. I could probably live with the .010 gap, had it been the same on both sides. I believe this is going to cause excessive gas cutting on one side, and the difference in gap, will cause the gases to push the base of the bullet into the forcing cone more on one side than the other. This could cause it to spit lead, bad accuracy, gas cutting in the forcing cone, more on one side than the other, etc. Besides, it's flat out not right. Bringing her back to the gunsmith Tuesday.
Anyone had any such expieriences? If so, what was the outcome.

[Mk42gunner]

I never saw a barrel cylinder gap on any of the K frames we issued that was that far out of square.

I agree a .010" gap could be lived with, but to even get that to clean up you would have at least a .016 or .017" gap, which is entirely too much. I'd be happier with a .006-.008" gap myself. This will probably involve removing the barrel and setting it back a thread, then facing the end of the barrel to set the gap against the cylinder.

Just had a second thought. Are you sure the crane isn't bent to one side? Actually all of this should have been checked before the gun was returned to you.

Robert

[littlejack]

I'm in agreement with your fix Robert. When I went to pick up the piece, the smith told me he had checked everything with his gauges and everything was good. After I received the new barrel and brought it to him, he brought it to his machinist. I called him after a few weeks to inquire about it. He said he was still waiting on his machinist? Now that I have it after seven weeks, and it's not right, I'm wondering what his machinist was doing. It certainly doesn't look to have had the face of the barrel squared up. Looks to me as though it was just screwed in as is, cinched down, pinned and called good enough.
Anyway, it's going back!

[Ozark mike]

I guess they allow drinking on the job? That is basic machinest type stuff.

[littlejack]

I agree Mike.