Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > >

Notices

S&W Revolvers: 1961 to 1980 3-Screw PINNED Barrel SWING-OUT Cylinder Hand Ejectors


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-20-2021, 05:23 PM
RWJ RWJ is online now
SWCA Member
Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question  
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Northern Neck of VA
Posts: 608
Likes: 206
Liked 283 Times in 137 Posts
Question Model 53 question

Back in May, I spied what I thought might be a 22 Jet spare cylinder on the big auction site, listed as a K-22 cylinder - it was marked with a serial number in that general range, anyway. Took a shot and bid on it, winning for ~$240, figuring that at most, I probably overpaid for an actual K-22 cylinder to have re-bored to 32-20 for my Model 16-4. It arrived, and because of pending family matters, got promptly thrown on the bench and buried/forgotten.


Fast forward to today, I uncovered it and compared it to both a Model 10 cylinder and a recessed 19 cylinder - it matches the 19, and measures @ 1.68, vs the 1.671 of the 19, so I think I bet right. The gas ring, however, is on the cylinder, and I can't currently access my Model 53; does the 22 Jet cylinder (449xxx range)have the gas ring on it, or is it on the yoke?


Thanks



RWJ
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #2  
Old 08-21-2021, 06:06 PM
snw19_357's Avatar
snw19_357 snw19_357 is offline
Moderator
Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question  
Join Date: May 2006
Location: N.AZ
Posts: 3,437
Likes: 129
Liked 1,128 Times in 371 Posts
Default

A K449 M53 (4-screw) would definitely have the gas ring on the cylinder and I believe all M53s and M53-2s had the gas ring on the cylinder. The model was discontinued in 1974 before the move to the yoke.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-22-2021, 12:09 PM
RWJ RWJ is online now
SWCA Member
Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question  
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Northern Neck of VA
Posts: 608
Likes: 206
Liked 283 Times in 137 Posts
Default

Thank you for this info - my gun safe is currently blocked in with all my son's stuff which I have to store while he's overseas, but it's good to know it will likely work.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-22-2021, 12:32 PM
SuperMan SuperMan is offline
Member
Model 53 question Model 53 question  
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Rochester, NH USA
Posts: 3,596
Likes: 1,050
Liked 3,996 Times in 1,406 Posts
Default

...a question...doesn't the 16-4 have a .38 Special length cylinder? I had one at one time and don't recall it having been Magnum length...

And that is a GREAT score. There are several folks on here who would love to get hold of one of those cylinders to make a .327 Federal out of a 53 or 19 with a 53 barrel...

Bob
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-22-2021, 05:19 PM
RWJ RWJ is online now
SWCA Member
Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question  
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Northern Neck of VA
Posts: 608
Likes: 206
Liked 283 Times in 137 Posts
Default

I believe you are correct; that's why I hoped best case (.22LR magnum-length cylinder) , but planned worst case (regular K-22/.38 length cylinder), even though the latter would be overpaying . I'm anxious to get to the gun and check it out!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-23-2021, 05:47 PM
RWJ RWJ is online now
SWCA Member
Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question  
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Northern Neck of VA
Posts: 608
Likes: 206
Liked 283 Times in 137 Posts
Default

Well, it turns out to be a double edged sword - it is indeed a Model 53 22 cylinder, and it fits/times up nicely, just as is; the down side is that the barrel/ cylinder gap is "0", and the face rubs on the barrel. The endshake is only about .002. Normally, when I would fit a cylinder, I stretch and face the yoke, and be done, but it this case, I'm reluctant to do this because the yoke is fit to the Jet cylinder. Do they make .001 shims for the .22LR cylinder I can use? I've only seen .002 and above, and have never liked to use them, but may have to .
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-23-2021, 06:41 PM
steelslaver's Avatar
steelslaver steelslaver is offline
US Veteran
Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question  
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Central Montana
Posts: 9,878
Likes: 6,718
Liked 25,137 Times in 6,868 Posts
Default

The .002 end shake is fine and messing with yoke tube is not the way to go. Shortening it will not move cylinder away from barrel and a .002 stretched yoke would only cause .000 end shake and that is to tight and would only give you a .002 B/C gap, besides mess up the fit of original JET cylinder I probably take .003-4 off the face of the 22 lr cylinder if rear gauge is minimal. Someone with a lathe or mill with a rotary table could do it easy. That way the barrel shank remains the same and jet cylinder works as it always has. T depending on yoke tube and center hole length taking .003 off the face of 22lr cylinder let let the cylinder move forward a bit more giving it even more end shake, but shims in cylinder to adjust it to .001 to .002 once face is trimmed would give you a good fit. When you remove the yoke the shims will remain in the cylinder. I had a dual cylinder 45 acp 45 colt setup that worked that way.

Another possibility is what is the rear gauge or head space with 22 lr cases measured between case head and firing pin bushing area? If it is say .006 or more you could remove .003 from face of ratchet and then space the cylinder back .003, end up with .003 head space (or more) and a .003 gap Removing material from center of ratchet will close up head space. To much will cause case head binding though. If you found some thicker case heads (sammi spec is .040) and they bound a bit a couple turns of a 22 lr reamer would let the cases set bit deeper. I am not sure the specs on a 22lr but on rimmed guns it is supposed to be .001 to about .008 from hear to recoil shield



Point is a good Smith smith can make both cylinders fit and function with out messing with the yoke, original cylinder a rear barrel face.

Last edited by steelslaver; 08-23-2021 at 07:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Like Post:
  #8  
Old 08-24-2021, 09:14 AM
RWJ RWJ is online now
SWCA Member
Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question  
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Northern Neck of VA
Posts: 608
Likes: 206
Liked 283 Times in 137 Posts
Default

Steelslayer,


I'm thinking that you are right on the money about having a 'smith face the cylinder a couple of thousandths as the answer; I hadn't considered that maneuver to increase the b/c gap. Usually I don't care about having to work the yoke 'cause it's a replacement cylinder going in, but the headspace is so minimal on this 22 one that adding 2 or 3 thousandths via shim would probably make it too tight. Sending the cylinder off would be the simplest answer, and the right one to boot! Since I don't have those abilities or tools, my mind didn't go in that direction! I did think about getting a facing cutter that goes through the barrel, but I'd have to get a forcing cone cutter too, and it would mess with the Jet b/c gap. Now I just need to find a 'smith who will do it.


Usually, they say working on the cheapest part since you can replace it, but a 22 LR Jet cylinder, doesn't look like that's the case here.......


Thanks
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #9  
Old 08-24-2021, 09:25 AM
steelslaver's Avatar
steelslaver steelslaver is offline
US Veteran
Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question  
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Central Montana
Posts: 9,878
Likes: 6,718
Liked 25,137 Times in 6,868 Posts
Default

Your right, 22 jet cylinders in 22lr are hard to come by. A good machinist should be able to chuck it up and shave the face a tiny bit no problem though. 3 thin pieces of brass or copper, held to the cylinder with drop of super glue each will protect the cylinders finish. The face of course will lose its finish, but some good cold blue and a few hundred rounds with minimal scrubbing on the cylinder face should pretty much fix that.

I keep think of making a 53 22lr cylinder by lining the chambers on a model 19 cylinder and using a K 22 extractor. Not very high on my list because I already have a selection of K22s.

Last edited by steelslaver; 08-24-2021 at 09:27 AM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #10  
Old 08-24-2021, 04:41 PM
Hondo44 Hondo44 is offline
SWCA Member
Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question  
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Posts: 17,391
Likes: 9,669
Liked 17,589 Times in 7,304 Posts
Default

I agree with steelslaver's recommendations all the way.

It's almost an easier decision when the fit is way off. You can jump right to machining the cyl and don't look back.

But I'd double check a few things first just for kicks before a final decision:

It's not uncommon that the barrel is not square on the back end. Is the barrel contact you observe on the 22 LR cyl completely around the chamber mouths? Or are they at the top, bottom or on one side?

If so, I'd true up the barrel end first with a stone and carefully hone it square by hand. This won't affect the bar/cyl gap with the original Jet cyl more than negligibly, and it should be corrected anyway.

Does the barrel rub all the way around the front cyl face? If not the cyl may have a little "runout" and would need to be faced off on a lathe to true up anyway.
__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Last edited by Hondo44; 08-24-2021 at 04:43 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #11  
Old 08-24-2021, 07:27 PM
SuperMan SuperMan is offline
Member
Model 53 question Model 53 question  
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Rochester, NH USA
Posts: 3,596
Likes: 1,050
Liked 3,996 Times in 1,406 Posts
Default

I see now I misread your original post...

Congratulations on a great find... I had a dual cylinder 53 for 40 years before I turned it into a .327 Federal...

Bob
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #12  
Old 08-24-2021, 10:57 PM
steelslaver's Avatar
steelslaver steelslaver is offline
US Veteran
Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question  
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Central Montana
Posts: 9,878
Likes: 6,718
Liked 25,137 Times in 6,868 Posts
Default

Here is my a model 53 dilemma. I have a 4" model 53 barrel. It would look good on a K22 or bored to 32 make a neat 327. except the shank would be to short to work with a 22lr cylinder. I enough for 2 turns (.0555) off the back of shroud and barrel shoulder to take care of that, but then I would need to shorten ejector rod that much too and that wouldn't leave much knurling on it. But a shrouded barrel K22 would be cool.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #13  
Old 08-25-2021, 08:20 AM
RWJ RWJ is online now
SWCA Member
Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question  
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Northern Neck of VA
Posts: 608
Likes: 206
Liked 283 Times in 137 Posts
Default

I checked around, and I think I have located a 'smith in Ohio who will take about .004 off the cylinder face, so I'll send it out by the end of the week. I'll follow-up when it comes back and post the results.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-25-2021, 12:57 PM
Hondo44 Hondo44 is offline
SWCA Member
Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question  
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Posts: 17,391
Likes: 9,669
Liked 17,589 Times in 7,304 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steelslaver View Post
Here is my a model 53 dilemma. I have a 4" model 53 barrel. It would look good on a K22 or bored to 32 make a neat 327. except the shank would be to short to work with a 22lr cylinder. I enough for 2 turns (.0555) off the back of shroud and barrel shoulder to take care of that, but then I would need to shorten ejector rod that much too and that wouldn't leave much knurling on it. But a shrouded barrel K22 would be cool.
Yes it is cool! I put one in a model 18 with a 22mag cyl as well. Shorten the other end of the extractor rod.
__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-25-2021, 01:43 PM
steelslaver's Avatar
steelslaver steelslaver is offline
US Veteran
Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question  
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Central Montana
Posts: 9,878
Likes: 6,718
Liked 25,137 Times in 6,868 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hondo44 View Post
Yes it is cool! I put one in a model 18 with a 22mag cyl as well. Shorten the other end of the extractor rod.
You shortened the threaded end? My question on that is did you have to add threads and if so just what size. I have never checked, just assumed they we not any kind of standard thread. Thanks Jim
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 08-25-2021, 06:36 PM
Hondo44 Hondo44 is offline
SWCA Member
Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question  
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Posts: 17,391
Likes: 9,669
Liked 17,589 Times in 7,304 Posts
Default

NOTE: This process is especially useful for shortening ext rods on pre war HEs with the mushroom and barrel knobs.

This was a Pre Model 18, 1955 vintage:

It has the little 'top hat' bushing/spring retainer between the extractor rod (male threads) and extractor star shaft (female threads). On a lathe I turned off/moved the shoulder on the rod's threaded shank towards the front. The amount I needed the rod shortened was not that much, just enough to close up the bar/cyl gap I needed for the standard K frame 22 cyl length after setting the barrel back the same amount.

Moving that shoulder maintains the proper bushing spacing for the large ext spring.

Then when the rod was tightened the rod would no longer screw into the extractor star shaft all the way to tighten the bushing against the end of the star shaft. So I drilled out (by hand) a few female threads in the front end of the ext shaft to fit over the area where I moved the shoulder forward.

And a few male threads may have had to be turned off the back end of the rod's threaded shank for the shank to thread all the way into the ext shaft and tighten the bushing in place, I don't recall. Maybe the back end of the rod's shank was also shortened just a bit. It depends on the depth of the threaded hole in the ext shaft. This was a few years ago.

Yeah, those are weird threads.

I did not want to chase male threads on the front end of the rod's shank where I moved the shoulder! Or female threads deeper in the hole of the extractor shaft.

Note: The parts of the extractor rod may differ from your M53 as they evolved in those years; I don't have a M53 to check. But it shouldn't be a problem for you to get the shorter length that you need. It takes more time to explain this understandably, what's really a simple process.

The bigger problem for me on the standard non-magnum K frame is the short front frame face; the extractor shroud hangs down below the front surface. I raised the bottom edge of the shroud by removing metal until it looked better on the front face of the frame. You won't have that problem on a Model 53!
__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Last edited by Hondo44; 08-25-2021 at 07:05 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-25-2021, 08:59 PM
steelslaver's Avatar
steelslaver steelslaver is offline
US Veteran
Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question  
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Central Montana
Posts: 9,878
Likes: 6,718
Liked 25,137 Times in 6,868 Posts
Default

I don't want to put it on my model 53 I want to stick the 4" model 53 on a K22 at some point. I think I can probably figure out the rod problem from your hints.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-25-2021, 09:28 PM
Hondo44 Hondo44 is offline
SWCA Member
Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question  
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Posts: 17,391
Likes: 9,669
Liked 17,589 Times in 7,304 Posts
Default

Yeah, no problem for your skills.
But you will have the shroud issue I mentioned, fitting it to the front frame face on the k22.
__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Last edited by Hondo44; 08-26-2021 at 01:15 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-14-2021, 11:47 AM
RWJ RWJ is online now
SWCA Member
Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question  
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Northern Neck of VA
Posts: 608
Likes: 206
Liked 283 Times in 137 Posts
Thumbs up Success!!!

Just got the cylinder back from the gunsmith, and the removal of .004 from the face worked perfectly! B/C gap is about .003, with no binding and good timing on all charge holes. The cylinder ( 449312) will go well with my gun (4K485xx), and I'll test it out this weekend. I kinda feel sorry for the owner of the original gun, but I did check the Forum and the Database for a matching number before proceeding, even though it was on that auction site. The finish on it is less than perfect with one small pit on the breech face and a faded blue that doesn't match the boxed gun, but for under $300 total (including gunsmith and postage), I feel like I came out a winner on this one .


Many thanks to Steelslayer for his suggested solution.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #20  
Old 09-14-2021, 04:15 PM
steelslaver's Avatar
steelslaver steelslaver is offline
US Veteran
Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question Model 53 question  
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Central Montana
Posts: 9,878
Likes: 6,718
Liked 25,137 Times in 6,868 Posts
Default

Just glad it worked out for you. Actually what you should have done is send it to me for my 53. LOL
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
.22 M&P (Model 45 or Post Office Model) Question m4user S&W Revolvers: 1961 to 1980 3 11-15-2020 10:22 AM
Model 69 question for Paul 105 or any other model 69 Enthusiasts ? Neal S&W Revolvers: 1980 to the Present 8 05-04-2020 06:10 PM
Model 1- 2nd Issue and Model 2 Army assembly ID question Kaiserhof S&W Antiques 5 03-12-2017 11:48 AM
Question About Smith Model 360PD Scandium/Titanium Question Rhetorician S&W Revolvers: 1980 to the Present 2 03-28-2015 09:25 AM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:25 PM.


Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v2.0.42 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2021 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)