Calling Bass.

[44man]

I have questioned your wear findings but have actually found it.
I have a .454 here that does not shoot well. I found the bore is .453"-.4531". The throats were .4524". The gun has almost no forcing cone and the rifling near the gap shows uneven wear. In fact the area seems wallowed out and an 11* cutter just touched 1/8" at the rear before I stopped so the gauge would not go in too deep.
I reamed the throats to .453" and found spots that would not clean up and determined it is from bullets (Jacketed only have been used.) being forced sideways from chambers out of line. These marks are a little different in each throat, some to the side, one to the outside and one to the center.
I can only say super tight cylinder lockup and line boring is not a good thing. This gun has just not been shot that much, my friend hardly ever shoots it.
I will not say the maker, you can figure it out! :veryconfu

[MtGun44]

Very interesting. My revolver expert friend & serious S&W gunsmith will not set up a gun
with too tight a lockup, says it jams the bullet or boolit as it jumps to the barrel. He says
no revolver is exactly lined up, no matter what and you have to give the cyl enough play
to line itself up without jamming everything. Sounds like you have some proof.
Any estimate on the total round count?

I expect a forcing cone would have helped mitigate this issue, too.

Bill

[felix]

No doubt about it. Too much money involved in DYNAMICALLY lining up a revolter. Need to ascertain a certain load dynamic before the operation takes place and provide that to the owner to where the gun was "tuned". I find it absolutely fascinating to shoot a revolter with a full range of loads accurately. STATIC lockup is a feel-good syndrome only. ... felix

[Marvin S]

This is an interesting thought that sounds reasonable. So we will assume a revolver with a little looseness in the bolt area has just found its happy spot and is best just left alone, case in point my Ruger Blackwawk .357.

Or can we assume if its a little loose, that is was a little out of spec when new and there ain't much you can do about it within reason?

Maybe if it is still tight after many rounds fired, it is a good gun and made to spec ?

[44man]

Very interesting. My revolver expert friend & serious S&W gunsmith will not set up a gun
with too tight a lockup, says it jams the bullet or boolit as it jumps to the barrel. He says
no revolver is exactly lined up, no matter what and you have to give the cyl enough play
to line itself up without jamming everything. Sounds like you have some proof.
Any estimate on the total round count?

I expect a forcing cone would have helped mitigate this issue, too.

Bill
Not sure but would bet less then 300 rounds. He only shoots here.
I do not like tight lockup and prefer Ruger, S&W and BFR revolvers. That cylinder MUST move. Even a little pin slop is good and is why I do not replace them. The Belt Mountain can help with pin pull but can ruin accuracy.
I admit this wear was a big surprise because I have never seen it like this. I never went this far on the expensive guns because the owners will not let me touch those areas, they love the solid click.
I have wanted to put some play in a few cylinder locks to no avail.
It is funny to watch them cock their guns and talk about how great they are fit.
With 60,000 heavy loads through my SBH and untold light loads, I defy anyone to find wear except for sandblasting on the cone edges.
I might just loosen this gun up a little

[Bass Ackward]

STATIC lockup is a feel-good syndrome only. ... felix



Nobody can predict what steel is going to do with pressure applied. Why some guns work at a certain pressure range with designs that do well with velocities that are achievable with that pressure level.

And even Jim believes in a tighter than necessary piece. I have seen him recommend STP on the base pin several times. Why? Chambers and entire cylinders get out up and down too , just not around the wheel. Preventing pin wear if needed forces the need for a deeper or worn cone or it elongates the holes in the frame of the gun. No free lunch. :grin:

So it is all in our heads that we "think" we are controlling wear when in truth, the quality of the original gun dictates what amount is necessary and WILL occur.

The " REAL " question is not should a gun be perfectly tight? Cause every gun will loosen on it's own. The "REAL" question is do I want a sloppy piece just because I might have a poorly made piece and need it? My answer is no.

The line bored gun has the longest functional / useful revolver life. Period. That statement has to be understood. That doesn't mean that it will be accurate at all pressure levels. It also doesn't mean that a line board will be accurate right out of the box. Especially if because of the steel movement you have moved outside of it's useful pressure range for alignment. Or that it won't wear.

My FA 357 came with .3575 throats and a .357, CUT RIFLED bore. When the cut portion of the groove cleans up, this groove dimension opens. My bore is now .358 and change. So I reamed my throats to .3585 which after they cleaned up, they are now .3595 even though I shoot .358 bullets. I expect to follow this out over the life of the gun as the gun dictates "IF" it dictates it.

Look at my new factory Ruger. It is beginning to look like a walker. My throats started out .432 with a .4295 bore. The throats have been surprisingly stable. But the bore diameter has open to .431 with @ 1200 rounds. I have re-cut the cone twice, the last time to reflect the changing bore center. If this had been a 44 Mag, I would have had to set the barrel back or gone to a lighter angle to reach deeper without removing valuable steel at the breech that determines strength. The BC gap is .004 which is excellent unless you slide the cylinder back and then it goes to .018. Thank God there is a spring to have it start out fine. And thank God this isn't a 44 Mag that I would have to worry about frame batter from the cylinder slamming back and forth.

I can only hope that this stops soon because this is a shooter with 180-225 grain bullets. But if it quits shooting, I can always use it for the grand kids to amuse themselves as a baby rattle. :grin:

[buck1]

"
I have questioned your wear findings but have actually found it.
I have a .454 here that does not shoot well. I found the bore is .453"-.4531". The throats were .4524". The gun has almost no forcing cone and the rifling near the gap shows uneven wear. In fact the area seems wallowed out and an 11* cutter just touched 1/8" at the rear before I stopped so the gauge would not go in too deep.
I reamed the throats to .453" and found spots that would not clean up and determined it is from bullets (Jacketed only have been used.) being forced sideways from chambers out of line. These marks are a little different in each throat, some to the side, one to the outside and one to the center.
I can only say super tight cylinder lockup and line boring is not a good thing. This gun has just not been shot that much, my friend hardly ever shoots it.
I will not say the maker, you can figure it out! ""

WOW,........WOW!
I am one of the "they".
Mine locks up as tight as a bankers wallet,It does not know how to lead and Boolits stop in mid air and wait to go through that same hole with loads that some would concider ....unwise.
I have only found a slight ammount of even forcing cone were.
In my mind, the BFRs are the way to go(best for the $). Running a close second in quality and followed by a tuned ruger.
I dare say that at 300 rds devided by 5 cylinders=60 rds each, Its not even broke in yet. I sugest putting another 300-400 rds down her and re check.
I am no expert, I do not even play one on TV, But these are just my humble opinions based on me experences. ...Buck

[44man]

Bass, STP does not take up space but it stays put and prevents wear. Parts are still free to move.
This gun was getting worse and worse the more he shot it, it would need a new cylinder and barrel if he continued.
I went down and shot the gun today after the work and it improved a great deal.
The two left targets are the Lyman that is too big for the twist rate but even it improved. Each left target was shot before the work and the right one after.
On the right is my 330 gr PB, got to an inch group at 50 yards.
I need to see what jacketed will do but I don't have any. No more LBT's left either.
I would say the improvement was dramatic. I can call it a shooter now.

[44man]

I am really getting stuck. I only have a few scrap targets left, went through over 1000 this year.
No jacketed left for anything, no factory cast or factory loads. I need to cast too but have few primers left. I ran out of SRM primers for the .454 and used WW SR primers for today's shooting. I have no cut down .460 brass to test.
I am reduced to sitting in front of this silly machine and drinking beer! [smilie=l:

[Bass Ackward]

You have the gun, so you are the only one that can comment.

I will tell you that the human eye can see .001. It is quite possible another .001 and wear would have stopped cold. You never know. This is what I mean by observing and assisting "if" necessary.

Either way, you feel better now. I suspect your friend does most of all. He still has the bank vault lock-up, the FA name, and it shoots. Just wait until you get another couple thousand through it!

Don't you just love a happy ending? [smilie=w:

[buck1]

I am really getting stuck. I only have a few scrap targets left, went through over 1000 this year.
No jacketed left for anything, no factory cast or factory loads. I need to cast too but have few primers left. I ran out of SRM primers for the .454 and used WW SR primers for today's shooting. I have no cut down .460 brass to test.
I am reduced to sitting in front of this silly machine and drinking beer! [smilie=l:

Thats almost a emergency, LOL
I am glad it came together for ya....Buck

[runfiverun]

james:
is this that revolver that shot eccentric circles by the cylinder???

[frankenfab]

Well it is hard to agrgue with the experienced members of the board. I would like to think that a gun could be built such that it was tight and the alignment was so perfect as to give optimum results every time, and have the tightness that at instills confidence in an unseasoned mind. I am reconsidering this as I read this thread, and advice
Jim has already given me.

One thing is for certain. Jerry Khunhausen speaks of both of fixed and floating chamber/bore misalignment. In the case of a Freedom Arms gun, if there is an alignment problem, it is definitely a FIXED misalignment.

Yes, the bank vault lock up sure does FEEL good. But my BFR is looser and the .500 S&W I had as well and they still shot just as well as a Freedom.

[44man]

james:
is this that revolver that shot eccentric circles by the cylinder???
No, that is the .357. This one always shot decent, just never tight and I borrowed it to test factory loads Whitworth has. He went pig hunting so I need to wait for him to come over.
I increased the charge by 1/2 gr with the PB boolit I made for my .45 and shot 5 into 1-1/4". I would like to work down a little but don't like the SR primers. .454 brass is a thorn in my side. Ignition gets iffy with any reduction and ES's and SD's get real bad along with failures to ignite.
Many do not understand how bad a mismatch .454 brass and the primer is, so to get 1" at 50 is making the gun work as best it can.
The .454 we worked loads with using cut down .460 brass shot so well that we gave all the brass to the owner, he is one happy camper. Now I wish I had the brass! :cry:

[44MAG#1]

I have been ignoring this small rifle primer negativity but feel I must respond. I have 2 454 Casulls both FA and have NEVER had a squib or a non-firing load out all the pounds of H110 and Win 296 I have ever shot.
The ONLY one I had was with a very reduced load of 2400 in about 25 degree weather. I rarely used bullets lighter than 300 gr and up to 340 with powder charges from 10 percent reduced to full power but mainly reduced by 5 percent or so most of the time.
I used Fed 205's Rem 71/2's CCI 450's and 400's
I bought 32 pounds of H110 and used most of it in the 454's and also Win 296 and 2400 so the poundage count was more than a couple pounds
Now whether that counts as enough to come to some conclusion about the the firing ability of small rifle primers in the 454 I don't know. That is up to the readers of this post.

[frankenfab]

I loaded 1000 300 XTP's with WC820 and BR-4 primers for 1700+ fps and never had a hiccup. I also loaded 1300 of the Lyman 325 RFNGC with 21.5 gr. WC820 with WSR primers for average velocity of 1389.4 ES of 44, which is kind of a lighter load, and never had any problems with ignition.

I didn't buy all my Freedom Arm's new, but I ordered a model 97 .41 new and the test target that came with it was a cloverleaf.

Like I said before, If there is a problem with alignment or dimensions on a FA, it is a FIXED problem until someone corrects it.

Still, I have not shot as much as 44man or Felix or Whitworth, and I consider their opinions valid until proven otherwise, and in light of their experience, I certainly have too many other endeavours on my plate to set a course to affirm or disprove their conclusions.

I am a little younger than alot of the guys here (42) and I have yet to post any target pics. I'm working my way up to that. But I can say I have laoded a BUTTLOAD of ammo and chronographed much of it. Yes, I know that SD is regarded as higher priority over ES, but when it comes to long range, ES must be at a minimum, pure physics.

I mean no disrespect to my elders (age or pure experience-wise) and I continue to search for real world experience and increased knowledge of cast boolit sixgun shooting.

Maybe my target pics would make other shooters feel better about theirs!:lol:

[doghawg]

frankenfab

I'm 20 years older than you but my experience with the .454 parallels yours. I've got two .454 Mod 83's...one made in the late 80's and one recent production and I've never had any issues with either Rem 7 1/2 or WSR primers. My light loads use 231 or Unique, mid-range is with 2400 and I seldom full throttle anymore but 296 gets the nod then. Both guns have optics and will shoot 1" to 1 1/2" at 50 yards (from a rest) which is as good as I can shoot anyway. I think they're even better shooting guns than my .475 BFR...which ain't no slouch either. :drinks:

[Bass Ackward]

Sadly, guns are a matter of statistics. No matter the manufacturer. You can get a bad one in anything. The things that I "might" have to correct on a FA I can work and live with. Metal can always be removed. It's putting it back that is the PIA.

But then I bought used, so I can be flexible. Trying to put myself in the market for new today, might alter my viewpoint.

[44man]

First the primer thing! H110 and 296 caused a problem when working from starting loads of either powder and I tried all primers. I would get a poof and the boolit with unburned powder would be up in the barrel.
When I got near max, they all fired and even worked better a half gr over max.
But I still do not believe ignition is positive enough for top accuracy. When a half gr more powder will light while the lesser load does not, does not sit well with me.
The SR primer was used with the extreme pressures when Casull was working with duplex and triplex loads starting with Bullseye and destroying guns while testing. Normal .454 loads do not generate that much pressure.
Since the higher pressure .460 uses a LP primer I cut down some brass and found starting loads all fired even with a standard 150 Fed. Going to the 155 was more accurate and working loads was a breeze with the sweet spot out shooting every load with .454 brass.
Sure all of your loads are going off but your powder weight range is so small you can't work with the gun and you will never know just how accurate it is. Just because it goes "BANG" is not the end of the story. If you are happy, that is OK but I was amazed at how accurate a .454 can be with good ignition. The SRH we worked with was cutting 1/2" holes at 50 yards using .460 brass.
This DOES NOT APPLY WITH FASTER POWDERS so if you are using Unique or 2400, don't bother because a standard SR primer will work. Some of you are mixing apples and oranges trying to prove the SR primer works. Why you defend it baffles me! :holysheep
Whitworth could not believe I had to go up and get a brass rod and hammer to remove bullets stuck in the bore. Imagine rapping off shots double action! :groner:

[44man]

Now line boring! I do NOT believe in it and with a super tight gun, it MUST be perfect. Some are but some are not and that is the bottom line. I have to wonder if it is the reason most Freedom guns come with over size bores???? The first .357 barrel was .3595" and the second was .3599" with a .3575" throat. The last barrel is .357" yet shoots worse. Chambers just can't get in line with the bore.
This .454 has a 453"-.4531" bore and had a .4524" throat before I reamed it.
Sticking a jig in the frame to start chambers does not mean all is good when the chambers need to be finished from the other end.
Then who is to say the barrel screwed in is in line with the chambers???? Who says the threads in the frame are perfectly in line with the cylinder? What about the jig that might have cut 100,000 cylinders? Maybe they use a new one for each gun! :holysheep
Just how many times will it come out to perfection?
Line bored perfection is a myth, can't happen or every revolver maker would do it. All it does is increase cost.
Get rid of the super tight lockup of the cylinder, let the bullet align it and be happy.

[Bass Ackward]

Everybody is always linear in their thought process concerning primers.

I had the occasion to buy Speer DWM brass in 7MM Mauser in the early 70s that gave erratic ignition with starting level charges even with magnum primers which was unheard of then and showed pressure 1 1/2 grains below the older brass. Turns out that the flash holes were small.

My point here is that you don't have to go to a magnum primer to get better ignition if it's a problem.

Your thought process is disasterly misplaced towards line boring. All from a manufacturing method. I think that you need to get passed that and look at dimensions.

A normal cylinder notch for a single action allows for .006 wiggle room left to right. Doubles are about .008 average because they may index faster and the stop needs more time to engage. If you have large throats you can add to that measurement minus your bullet diameter.

Here is my point. If you think that non-line bored cylinders aren't out enough that even that amount of play is not adequate, you are mistaken. That is the crime!!! Even with all that play, you will often observe what you did. And on top of that you have the play from the slop in the gun. It is easy for all of this to amount to .015 easily and STILL not be enough. Yet your belief is that a forcing cone fixes this.

So what if line boring is off by .005. That would have to be a VERY poor job. If a forcing cone is the solution for .015 or more, why wouldn't it be perfect for .005? And you still end up with a tighter gun.

If you had your choice between a .005 off BFR would you take it? Or would you claim that the dimensions are too tight? That is the fact that you can NOT change.

And if the base line is off, the run out is still uniform. What happens to one bullet happens to all the rest. What is it you always say about uniformity from everything to bullets, to case neck tension, and on and on. Why you aught to have line bored tattooed on your arm just below Mother.

[44MAG#1]

No, no one is mixing fruits. I shot MANY pounds of H110 and Win 296 through my 454's. I am not a benchrest revolver shooter. I work up to a good load (not perfect mind you) and I shoot offhand and field position type shooting.
I am not competeing with you as the resident revolver brenchrest shooter and am just letting people know that if you stay within the 10 percent range of load data one should have no trouble with H110 and Win 296.
Now dropping down to maybe 15 percent or so one may have trouble I DON"T KNOW.
If one can't find a decent load withing a 10 percent range with a bullet the gun likes something else is wrong. If I have to drop down to 15 or 20 percent below max with H110 or Win 296 I will go to a different powder. Plain and simple.
There are real problems and then there are manufactured problems that some like to create so they can work them out so they can get validation by their peers.
I don't need validation so I don't create problems just to have something to do.
Now I realize I don't know as much as you and I am not sure I would want to as I am at peace with what little I know as I believe in keeping things as simple as possible for peace of mind.
This is just my two cents worth and I am not even sure it is worth 2 cents. Maybe on the order of a half cent worth.
As I said you are far more intellegent than me on the subject but I am just stating what little I know.

Have a good day and may they all go into one hole.

[S.R.Custom]

Line Boring: Not only can chambers be misaligned concentrically with the bore, but because of tolerancing in the manufacturing process, they can also be cocked in relation to the bore axis. Anyone who's put a tightly piloted reamer through a cylinder has seen this to some degree. And it's not just bad chamber boring that causes this. Misplaced base pin holes, crooked/mis-aligned barrels, badly cut barrel & frame shoulders, and crooked/loose threads all contribute to this.

There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to not line up the bore and chambers as well as possible during the manufacturing process. And line boring helps accomplish this by minimizing the effects of all the other discrepancies that occur in the MFRing process. All else being equal, a line-bored gun will shoot better than one that's not.

[44man]

Bass, I am not talking a lot of play, just a tiny wiggle that can hardly be felt.
Take a BFR and the cylinder movement can just be felt, that is enough. A Ruger is right as are all S&W's.
We are talking a very small amount but it is enough to keep a bullet from slamming into the side of the forcing cone without moving the cylinder.
I am convinced line boring can be perfect one time but off more then cylinder play the next. I am convinced every chamber in one gun can be different. I would rather have a cylinder in a jig with all chambers bored and chambered at once. There are better ways to index chambers.
.001" off is too much if the cylinder has zero play.
You confuse the cheap guns with half a rotation slop with what I want.
Most times .002" play will do it right. But .0000 will NOT.
Putting a dial indicator on a BFR lock notch shows .006" movement But don't you think this will be less towards the center pin? So at the side of a throat it will be .005" and that is only .0025" side to side.
I will never agree that a line bored gun is better if the cylinder locks so tight it can't move. No revolver should have zero movement at the cylinder because it is not possible to cut chambers that close.
I much prefer CNC machining over screwing a jig in threads to guide a cutter.

[44man]

Line Boring: Not only can chambers be misaligned concentrically with the bore, but because of tolerancing in the manufacturing process, they can also be cocked in relation to the bore axis. Anyone who's put a tightly piloted reamer through a cylinder has seen this to some degree. And it's not just bad chamber boring that causes this. Misplaced base pin holes, crooked/mis-aligned barrels, badly cut barrel & frame shoulders, and crooked/loose threads all contribute to this.

There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to not line up the bore and chambers as well as possible during the manufacturing process. And line boring helps accomplish this by minimizing the effects of all the other discrepancies that occur in the MFRing process. All else being equal, a line-bored gun will shoot better than one that's not.
All of the first things you said are correct but then you fail to understand that all of the bad points are put onto the gun after boring.
You need to show proof of what you say about line boring. Show accuracy from many guns and show wear patterns, not from one perfect gun, it means nothing.

[felix]

Actually cocking up might be an improvement in dynamic alignment error. ... felix

[Changeling]

No, that is the .357. This one always shot decent, just never tight and I borrowed it to test factory loads Whitworth has. He went pig hunting so I need to wait for him to come over.
I increased the charge by 1/2 gr with the PB boolit I made for my .45 and shot 5 into 1-1/4". I would like to work down a little but don't like the SR primers. .454 brass is a thorn in my side. Ignition gets iffy with any reduction and ES's and SD's get real bad along with failures to ignite.
Many do not understand how bad a mismatch .454 brass and the primer is, so to get 1" at 50 is making the gun work as best it can.
The .454 we worked loads with using cut down .460 brass shot so well that we gave all the brass to the owner, he is one happy camper. Now I wish I had the brass! :cry:

Hi Jim, I would really be interested in seeing some pictures of the 45 bullet that you designed and made if you have the time.
I don't want to hamper this current conversation because I find it very interesting.

[S.R.Custom]

Actually cocking up might be an improvement in dynamic alignment error. ... felix

Possibly. But as a general practice, I load as fat a bullet as will fit in the chamber, regardless of the diameter of the throat. This minimizes the effect of the round lying on the bottom of the chamber at ignition. (This also has the side benefit of minimizing blow-by at ignition, prior to the boolit's engagement with the throat.)

I'll not bore you with the details, but sizing in this manner yields statistically superior accuracy to simply loading .001" over throat; it certainly makes for some pretty impressive standard deviations.

[felix]

I know all about that, having been touting that for 10 years on this board. Through many rifles, a clearance of 0.0008 has been about right for 40K cup boolit loads (hard boolits). A clearance should be increased gradually to see where it should be (depends upon boolit base expansion), and that is where the brass elongation becomes about zero between shots and require no further turning (boolits are behaving). ... felix

[Bass Ackward]

Well now you understand the theory to Taylor Throating. He came up with the same conclusion.

It was origionally designed to have a big and gentle enough forcing cone to allow the bullet to exit the cylinder freely without rotating or touching anything from the worst chamber of the gun and then to slowly funnel the slug to the bore.

[44man]

Hi Jim, I would really be interested in seeing some pictures of the 45 bullet that you designed and made if you have the time.
I don't want to hamper this current conversation because I find it very interesting.
It's not much, I just wanted a fatter boolit without a gas check. I size it .453" and it shoots OK.
Actually, I am surprised it takes a full house .454 load. It is only WD WW.

[Lloyd Smale]

ive got mixed thoughts on lineboring. Ive got quite a few guns that are linebored and for the most part they probably do outshoot the non linebored guns but theres exceptions. I had clements make me a non line bored 41 mag and a linebored 44 specail on old model rugers at the same time and the 41 will outshoot the 44. Not by much but the 41 has a definate advantage. What i will say is ive yet to find a linebored gun that did poorly. Cant say the same about sloppy guns. John Linebaugh used to get roasted all the time by guys who claimed because he didnt linebore his guns were inferior to some of the other customs. John allways thought that lineboring was just a shortcut to a properly fitted gun and that he could do better by hand fitting the cylinder to the bore. But the term lineboring just impressed everyone and some guys thought they were getting ripped off if there guns werent linebored. My 475 John built is not linebored but it is as tight as a FA gun. At least theres no play you can actually feel in it and it is the most accurate revolver ive ever owned or shot.


As to the 454 primer deal. I too have shot a ton of 454s with 110/296. I can honestly say ive never had a squib using ww small rifle primers. I can also say that my chrono readings dont show big swings in velocitys like i get using lighter charges of aa9 in 45 colts and 44 mags. Im not saying theres no merit in the large primer 454 idea. As a matter of fact ive got a bunch loaded up in cut down 460 brass for testing right now. It will be a couple more weeks before i get to it though. My FA 454 is a good shooter. It routinely shoots about 2.5 inch at 50 yards. But ive never found that majic load that shot into one ragged hole so hopefully this will be a stepping stone to the answer.

[44man]

I have been learning as this goes on. I have gotten PM's from fellas that say their guns have been shooting worse and worse the more it has been shot. Then my friend mailed me and said this gun shot 1" at 50 when new but also got worse over the years. I never seen him do better then 3". So I will dispute those that say to shoot it more and it will even out. Is a super tight fit to the cylinder a money making deal for a gun rebuild?
Bass, I have not yet seen a BFR with any out of spec dimensions. Bores are perfect as are throats in EVERY gun brought here. Every one has been capable of 1" and LESS at 100 yards. Funny that they are NOT line bored.
I took a picture of the forcing cone on my BFR 45-70 after many thousands of rounds. It is perfect all the way around and a clean barrel shows no off center wear to the rifling. Now this was done with the huge, long cylinder and chambers without line boring.
Now if they could line bore THROUGH AN INSTALLED BARREL, it would be close, like a hand grenade, yet the throats must be larger then groove diameter so the cylinder still has to be chambered from the other end and also throated. With all of the different operations needed from both ends, just how do you keep it perfect?
EVERY SINGLE TOOL NEEDS CLEARANCE and the more tools used the more off center you get in the end.
If you think I will give up a BFR for any line bored revolver, you have rocks in your head! :bigsmyl2:

[44man]

How about my SBH forcing cone. Sandblasted--YES, off center wear--NO, rifling is still perfect after 60,000 rounds.
All I did was clean this with a brush and M-Pro 7.
Strange how a line bored, tight gun can wear crooked and a cheap Ruger will not.
Keep trying to convince me Bass, you are barking at the moon.
Notice the little reamer mark? It is even all around and even it has not worn away.

[Bass Ackward]

How about my SBH forcing cone. Sandblasted--YES, off center wear--NO, rifling is still perfect after 60,000 rounds.
All I did was clean this with a brush and M-Pro 7.
Strange how a line bored, tight gun can wear crooked and a cheap Ruger will not.
Keep trying to convince me Bass, you are barking at the moon.
Notice the little reamer mark? It is even all around and even it has not worn away.


Strange. I have been around a lot of cones in my life and watched hundreds of guns shot out every other year. None looked new like that.

I wore two cones through enough that the forcing cones hardened and cracked with factory pressure loads myself. On those, the rifling began around an inch from the end of the barrel.

On my Rehawk that has only about 38k, the rifling starts out beyond the front of the frame. In fact, it really should be rebarrelled soon before this one splits. Sorry, best I could get on the photography. Forcing Cone? What forcing cone? :grin:

[44man]

Strange. I have been around a lot of cones in my life and watched hundreds of guns shot out every other year. None looked new like that.

I wore two cones through enough that the forcing cones hardened and cracked with factory pressure loads myself. On those, the rifling began around an inch from the end of the barrel.

On my Rehawk that has only about 38k, the rifling starts out beyond the front of the frame. In fact, it really should be rebarrelled soon before this one splits. Sorry, best I could get on the photography. Forcing Cone? What forcing cone? :grin:
I can't explain it either. Had so many revolvers I can't count them anymore. Each was shot with tons of bullets of all kinds and I never had any changes in wear or accuracy except the Freedoms that really only needs a little play in the gun.
When I did gunsmith work I had many OLD, OLD guns here with a lot of Colt single actions from long ago that I hated to shoot because of value. I never seen wear like you show. Even dirt cheap junk guns that flopped the cylinder all over never had worn cones or barrels except for rust.
I have lapped or reamed many, many .45 Ruger throats that were shot for years with under size dimensions and none have cut with a bare spot.
I shot the blazes out of S&W model 29's, double action fun shoots and IHMSA and never harmed a single one, clean it and you could not say it was ever shot.
I have thought about setting the barrel back on my SBH to get the sandblasting cleaned up but it still will do 3/4" at 50 and will still shoot long after I am gone. The rough edges do NOT touch a boolit.
I have no idea what you are getting and seeing.

[Bass Ackward]

I have thought about setting the barrel back on my SBH to get the sandblasting cleaned up but it still will do 3/4" at 50 and will still shoot long after I am gone. The rough edges do NOT touch a boolit.
I have no idea what you are getting and seeing.



I can tell you that your SBH has more forcing cone than my 44 Spec already and it has only about 1350 through as of today. :grin:

If I didn't know, I would say it was a new gun that you just used some sandpaper on back of the barrel. Set that back? Set it back to WHAT? Yours still has tool marks in it and such.

That thing should shoot soft lead like their was no tomorrow. I mean you now see that from full power 454 that you were obturating, compressing slumping and ever other thing one can experience and you still shot well. Or maybe you falsely believe that that lead wasn't giving in at that pressure? Remember solid copper at 40 BHN does at 45k. :grin:

Guess this must be a shock thread for you huh?

[44man]

I can tell you that your SBH has more forcing cone than my 44 Spec already and it has only about 1350 through as of today. :grin:

If I didn't know, I would say it was a new gun that you just used some sandpaper on back of the barrel. Set that back? Set it back to WHAT? Yours still has tool marks in it and such.

That thing should shoot soft lead like their was no tomorrow. I mean you now see that from full power 454 that you were obturating, compressing slumping and ever other thing one can experience and you still shot well. Or maybe you falsely believe that that lead wasn't giving in at that pressure? Remember solid copper at 40 BHN does at 45k. :grin:

Guess this must be a shock thread for you huh?
This gun will NOT shoot soft and 22 to 28 BHN is best. Most of the shots through this gun was with Hornady silhouette or XTP bullets for IHMSA. It won Ohio state with 79 out of 80 using Hornady bullets. I shot quite a few 39's and 40's with it. I only went fully to cast after I dropped out of IHMSA and started hunting with it. I can't afford those "J" word things for all the shooting I do anymore since I retired. There is no overtime on SS.
I bought this Ruger long ago and might have one of the first of what was called the "Silver Hornpipe" KS411N. Total price from a gun shop was $335.95. My first BH flat top was $96. My first Ruger Mark I was $37.50. My brother in law still has that one and it shoots like the day it was made, it will do 1" at 80 yards.
The SBH has not changed from the day I bought it and will be going strong long after I am gone. If I had the open sight vision I had, I bet I could shoot 80 for 80. Zero wear from a well made gun and I expect my BFR's to even out live a Ruger.
The amount spent for a gun will never make it a better gun.

[BABore]

Somebody pleeeeease advise Bass on proper smelting techniques.

You gots to get all them steel clips and road grit outta the pot so as not to wear your wheelers out so fast.[smilie=l:

[44man]

Somebody pleeeeease advise Bass on proper smelting techniques.

You gots to get all them steel clips and road grit outta the pot so as not to wear your wheelers out so fast.[smilie=l:
Darn it Bruce, you made me spill good beer into my keyboard! :bigsmyl2:

[44man]

Bass made me clean my .475---OH MY!
How about this little BFR beauty that has many thousands of rounds through it? There is still a reamer mark all around and rifling is perfect.

[Changeling]

This is a thought, but what powders (Predominately) were you guys (Jim and BA) using, in the individual revolvers, and at what pressure levels? The individual findings you have shown don't make a lot of sense to me and I think all the information available would surely complement the conversation. At least I hope so!

[Bass Ackward]

This is a thought, but what powders (Predominately) were you guys (Jim and BA) using, in the individual revolvers, and at what pressure levels? The individual findings you have shown don't make a lot of sense to me and I think all the information available would surely complement the conversation. At least I hope so!


In the Redhawk, the gun gets heavy charges of 296. The other powders used are ..... 296 and a some H-110 until more 296 comes in. :grin:

Powder is not the problem. Big bullets are. Hard bullets are. Could be some misalignment in the picture too. And a small bore is. But .... it was what the gun wanted from day one and it hasn't changed. Any powder will rough up the cone, the lead smooths the cone where it touches.

Ever press harder on a piece of sandpaper? What happens? This action is repeated until a taper is worn that the (catch this now) type of steel will support. It continues until it stops. (slows) Basically this throat has looked like this around 15k and hasn't changed much since then.

This gun will eventually be re-barreled with a .431 dimension that will clean up to about .432. to remove this .... imbalance. But it works till it don't!

[44man]

This is a thought, but what powders (Predominately) were you guys (Jim and BA) using, in the individual revolvers, and at what pressure levels? The individual findings you have shown don't make a lot of sense to me and I think all the information available would surely complement the conversation. At least I hope so!
296 for me too. The .44 had most shots with FMJ silhouette bullets or XTP's for IHMSA. 240 gr with 24 gr of 296. My hunting loads all use 296 with 22 to 25 BHN boolits.
The .475 uses 296 and the 45-70 4759.
Ball powder particles eventually roughen the edge of the cone along with high pressure gas action.
The only thing that prevents boolit wear is a straight start. This is where I have doubts about a Keith boolit too, I want the nose to pull in alignment.
If the gun is too rigid, you will get the off center wear but even a loose gun can have chambers too far out of line. An old Dan Wesson was way out and I had to time it.

[Changeling]

It was just a thought! I didn't know if Bass might have been using a lot of "Unique" type powder at top end loadings with big hard bullets therefor beating the heck out of the forcing cone. However it seems that both of you are in the 296 camp.
Bass you should probably go slow as I have heard that some of the new 296 could possibly have a + or - pressure increase over the New H110, wouldn't want anything severe to end up giving you "trigger finger", LOL!

[Bass Ackward]

I don't worry about wear. Wear is a natural occurrence. Everything causes wear which isn't always bad. Doesn't mean that wear is going to make it bench rest quality by any means, but your choices are to sell or give them a chance. Where is the challenge with perfection?

People always assume that alignment is chamber related. Everyday barrels are installed out of line or not even centered in the frame. A cylinder can be dragging on the back of a frame for one cylinder that alters chamber angle. Center pins can be off or sloppy. And this list can seem endless.

Stresses in steel will work out with heat and stress. And this can cause it to move altering what was once good alignment and then it goes bad or visa verse. Much like re-boring an old engine block. They were the most stable.

And because of this, no gunsmith likes to work on or customize a new gun. He would rather see the wear pattern from use and correct from that point if it is necessary. It enables him to correct / build a better product. So when I re-build, it would be line bore from an extremely WELL used piece.

This is the problem that Freedom has. They build new.

[44man]

It was just a thought! I didn't know if Bass might have been using a lot of "Unique" type powder at top end loadings with big hard bullets therefor beating the heck out of the forcing cone. However it seems that both of you are in the 296 camp.
Bass you should probably go slow as I have heard that some of the new 296 could possibly have a + or - pressure increase over the New H110, wouldn't want anything severe to end up giving you "trigger finger", LOL!
Old H110 was always a little slower then 296 because of the burn rate Hodgdon got. It amounted to 1/2 gr difference when loading.
Both have always been safe powders even with a little over max, it doesn't seem to suddenly jump pressure.
I do not know if both powders now come from the same lots or if there is still a difference.
I can't picture Bass shooting hard boolits! :holysheep He likes all the work shooting sludge down his bores creates. [smilie=l: I have tried to tell bass that mixing sand in lead does not make a good filler. :bigsmyl2:
If any gun ever wore out shooting hard, they would be mine.
I think I just read the billionth post about severe leading and barrel damage and along comes someone that says you need a hollow base pure lead boolit so after the brass sizes the boolit, it will expand again to fit. :killingpc
I don't answer anymore to those questions! :takinWiz:
I have to wonder when a soft boolit slugs up to fill the whole forcing cone and tries to squirt from the gap, if that doesn't cause excess wear???

[Bass Ackward]

I have to wonder when a soft boolit slugs up to fill the whole forcing cone and tries to squirt from the gap, if that doesn't cause excess wear???



It can. Freedom recommends against soft PB in the manual. I am working on another test with that 44 Special shooting nothing but pure lead and tin. Even that gun has lost tool marks with 700 rounds. Not all, but a large percentage. Mostly from powder impact.

I shoot a lot of hard bullets. Mostly because I don't want to waste my pure to mix. But I shoot rocks in my 625s with low rifling height cause that's what works in it with light 45 caliber bullets and narrow drive bands.

It's a matter of record here that I have said that you need to match the pressure level for hardness and then let Professor gun tell you what is needed. You can't change that fact.

Now can you change history. Old timers won competitions just like you with soft lead and tin. And the standard back then was 1 1/2" at 50 yards with open sights. So where is the dramatic improvement? Imagine if they would have seen fit to mount glass? Whats the difference? Pressure. Point and click cartridges.

So I don't want to be a person that shouts that " I " can only do it hard cause that means I have a hole in my game. :bigsmyl2:

[44man]

Well, you hit the nail on the head. I have a lot of pure lead but it is hoarded for my muzzle loaders. :drinks:

[fecmech]

O
I think I just read the billionth post about severe leading and barrel damage and along comes someone that says you need a hollow base pure lead boolit so after the brass sizes the boolit, it will expand again to fit.



An awful lot of those pure lead hollow base slugs loaded with Bullseye which totally destroyed them seemed to somehow squirt their way into the "X" ring on 50 yd targets over the years!

[44man]

An awful lot of those pure lead hollow base slugs loaded with Bullseye which totally destroyed them seemed to somehow squirt their way into the "X" ring on 50 yd targets over the years!
They may have but I had to clean too many guns years ago with as much lead on the outside of the gun as hit the target. Throats and rifling packed too. Even a chunk of lead wire can be made to hit now and then.
I belonged to a Police shooting range and was stupid enough to volunteer to clean their .38's! :killingpc
Ever try to remove all that lead without removing the bluing? I gave up rotorooters long ago. :p