Yes, I have over 20K rounds of new brass in exotic calibers and a couple thousand once fired. I will probably list some on the S&S when I get a chance.
Printable View
Yes, I have over 20K rounds of new brass in exotic calibers and a couple thousand once fired. I will probably list some on the S&S when I get a chance.
Exotic Calibers? Does that include the "Obsolete" types?
Good that you are back in Good Spirits.
Best Regards,
Chev. William
C'mon Crank... I'm getting antsy here! How about another progress report? You don't want me to go into withdrawal here, do you? How is the extractor situation progressing?
Froggie
Me too!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Green Frog
yeah, here, here ! !
Stu
Okay, you guys owe me $12.00 and a Xanax. The $12.00 is for using a nearby indoor range and the Xanax is because I got stuck next to the guy shooting his 2 1/2" .454 Casull. I swear the target stood a more likely chance of being set on fire rather than struck by a bullet (15 feet), but I digress.
:twisted:IT LIVES!!!!!!! (insert evil laugh here). I fired 48 rounds through it of full power Federal 85gr. soft points. Half the time most of the shells fell right out of the cylinder and the other times a bump on the platform released the rest. Accuracy was debatable, I could barely see my sights and the lighting was great if I was trying to qualify for a night fire course. At 30' my group was about 2-2 1/2", but at 50' I was about the same, with all shots right of center and 4" low at 30' and 8" low at 50'. I was surprised at the amount of heat that built up in the barrel and cylinder. Inspection when I got home showed no failures of any kind, but the carbon build up made me aware of an imperfection in the forcing cone (a groove?). I will worry about that after I address the extractor issue. Overall, I am very pleased with the outcome, but I realize I will want to get out with it under better conditions and shoot it at the outdoor range to get down to business as to actual accuracy. So now you have your update, to provide your "fix" for a little while.
Mark
Easier to fix a low shooting fixed sight gun than a high shooting one, in my experience. Windage might not be so much fun. Thinking about it the front sight is probably pretty close to right for a 158 at .38 Special velocities, so no doubt it is too tall for an 85 at .327 speeds.
Hopefully you can clean up the forcing cone with out having to set the barrel back a thread, although that would give an excellent chance to adjust the windage. (See there is a silver lining in at least some clouds).
Robert
Shooting at public ranges can be... interesting and not always in a good way. ;-)
Thanks for the update!
Mk42,
Actually it is more of a problem with the fixed sight, since my front sight would need to be less than an 1/8th" tall. I am going to look into adapting some kind of sights that will kill two birds at once, first is improved visibility and second, be able to alter it for load. One thing that came to mind is that recoil is so mild, that I may have a significant change going to a weight in the 115gr. range, due to recoil acting on the gun prior to exit and raising the impact. I have that issue with my .41Mag if I shoot lighter loads and it has been so long I forgot about that quirk. Any way you look at it, I am pleased with the results and now can focus on altering the ejector.
Mark
I have read of this bullet weight/impact point phenomenon and experienced it myself with my 44 mag. What is the heaviest you could go in the 327?Quote:
Originally Posted by Crank
Well you could always install a K frame adjustable rear sight :kidding:. Or fit something like a dovetailed rear sight to raise the point of impact.
I once soldered a set of (considerably modified) tall fixed match grade 1911 sights to the barrel of an 1851 Navy Sherriff's Model that I converted to a Bisley-esqe/ Keith #5 hammer profile. Sounds weird, but it looked okay and shot good groups to point of aim. I wish I had pictures of that gun.
My recommendation is to use a big target backer until you decide on the final primary load, then make sight adjustments.
Robert
I am actually considering a set of Novak style sights dovetailed in.
Some updated pics now that it's moved from "project" to "project shooter"?
Not that there is much to see, but I will take some pics later this week and get them uploaded. I will probably sit down and make the disc that will provide extraction this weekend if I have some stainless stock hiding in my steel bin. Once I have that completed, then I will proceed to machine the recess in the cylinder and get everything fitted up.
Mark
Curious, Please describe the Extractor design of the revolver you are starting with and your planned method of reworking it to fit the new cartridges, for those of us who are not 'hands on' familiar with the revolver you are modifing.
Best Regards,
Chev. William
Chev,
The extractor that is in the 648 cylinder that I used was too thin to leave any remaining material for the rim to sit on and effect extraction. This means that I need a thicker extractor and in order to do that I will graft a disc/washer/coin (you pick a name) to the underside of the extractor. This will require machining a recess below where the extractor currently seats to allow for the increased thickness. I don't know how clear that is for a description, but I will also take some photos of the current configuration and document the alteration so that there will be a bit more clarity.
Mark
How is the original 'thin disk' held/actuated? How did it extract the original cartridges if it is so thin? These are among the many questions that the photos adn further descriptions may answer for myself and others.
Thanks for the enlightening Explanations.
Best Regards,
Chev. William
Chev,
There is no thin disk, the extractor is a complex machined component. It was extracting rounded rims of a rimfire, so it was a wedge under the lip of the case.
Mark
I think there is a picture of it a couple of pages back. It is an odd-shaped little thing, if you are used to looking at K-Frame extractors in .38 Special.
Just one of the many stumbling blocks a person comes up against when he sets out to customize and convert guns from the original chambering. Of course figuring out how to work around those is half the fun and three quarters of the headaches.
Robert
Wow, we are now at 9 pages and still counting. Crank, you've created quite a stir! Just to review, I've taken the liberty of bringing back pictures of both of the "donor" extractors on their cylinders so the readers of this thread can compare the starting points. Although some head scratching is necessary for either one, I highly recommend doing as Crank did and using the earlier, more "normal" shaped one, even though it does present a couple of challenges of its own. I'm wondering whether it would be better to have a good welder just weld up the original beveled recess completely to begin with, then recut the extractor grooves from scratch(?) Anyway, here are the pix side by side for comparison.
Froggie
PS got the pix from two different sources... ignore size difference. The larger one with blue background is the 648 I will use next time.