My views are changing on cylinder lockup

[American1776]

I have a strict examination that I put all potential revolver purchases through. Barrel alignment, bc gap, carry up, cylinder stop timing, endshake, yoke movement, etc. One of the tests I'm a real stickler for is cylinder lock up. On ALL the chambers, I check rotational movement of the cylinder with the trigger held to the rear. If the cylinder wiggled, I usually put the revolver down and passed. I wanted super tight lockup. I passed on a lot of nice revolvers.

I now think that some cylinder wiggle (some call it wink) might actually be desirable. S&W's were designed to have a little backlash in the cylinder to allow for the bullet to self-align when it leaves the chamber and enters the forcing cone. Wink is in the design.

Granted, some guns come from the factory looser than others. I'm thinking that tighter guns when new might be more likely to spit and shave, since there is less room for self-alignment *if* the gun is not 100 percent timed. Colt Pythons had bank-vault lockup, but required careful hand fitting. Any deviation from perfect caused spitting problems.

Since S&W's are not hand fit like the python, could it be that ones that come tighter in lockup might actually be slightly more prone to spitting problems than ones with looser lock up? Therefore, new S&W's with slightly more cylinder wink might work more reliably.

Thoughts?

 

[OKFC05]

If you shoot revolver action competition, you get over the "zero wiggle" the first time a trace of grit stops your action.
A little "wiggle" is highly desirable when the going gets hot and heavy.

 

[tenntex32]

Yeah I think many times people fail to understand the difference between factory tolerance for proper function versus zero tolerance and the malfunctions that can induce.

It was not too uncommon for police departments to open up the barrel/cylinder gap to the higher end of the tolerance to ensure proper function with regards to fouling, grit, etc.. (Rarely will you see a PD issued gun with a main spring adjusted so light that it may not set off a primer either. Not saying it didn't happen...…..but probably shouldn't have with a PD gun.)

As long as the cylinder stop engages each chamber cut-out correctly, barrel/cylinder gap isn't overly excessive or non-existent, there isn't too terribly much endshake or yoke play, and the barrel's rifling looks good then you should be good to go. I also look for things like hammer push-off with a cocked hammer, and smoothness/hardness of double-action trigger pull, bent extractor rods, ease of opening and closing of the cylinder, physical condition of the ratchet and it's cut recess in the recoil shield.

My personal pet peeves are buggar'd screw heads and knurled extractor rod ends, as well as beat up ratchets and ratchet recesses.

I have seen some folks that carry feeler gauges and a barrel/chamber alignment rod when out gun shopping, which seems a little excessive to me...….but to each his own. After a while you get a feel for something that looks or feels amiss if you handle enough old and new revolvers over time. Many "out-of-tolerance" issues can be simple fixes if you know what you are doing, especially if the item is priced very inexpensively. Parts replacement can get somewhat expensive, depending upon the age of the gun, and may require attention to detail with regards to fitting them correctly.

Other's opinions may vary of course.

Dale

 

[Vulcan Bob]

Speaking of a little "wiggle", two firearms come to mind, the AK-47 and the war one and two 1911's. Yeah give them a shake and you will hear the "wiggle" factor but the dang things have a reputation of functionality.

 

[Clarke Hammer]

Yeah I think many times people fail to understand the difference between factory tolerance for proper function versus zero tolerance and the malfunctions that can induce.

Dale

I find that when inspecting for lock-up tightness people also misunderstand the difference between slight rotational wiggle of the cylinder at full lock-up vs. front to back end-shake.

 

[stansdds]

The Colt lock work locks the cylinder and prevents any rotation with the trigger pulled to the rear. The S&W lock work, as well as most other manufacturers, allows for a tiny bit of rotation with the trigger pulled. I'd pass on a Python with a cylinder than moves with the trigger pulled, but it's normal on other brands. Excessive end shake and poor carry up are warning signs of improper fitting or excessive use or abuse of the revolver.

 

[Muss Muggins]

If the cylinder stop is in the cylinder notch, it's locked up as tight as it will go. I'm with the fella' who doesn't like buggered up screws and extractor knurls. It's a sign that somebody who doesn't know they're doing has been taking things apart . . .

 

[Gene L]

I didn't go to the s&w armoror's school, but several of my friends did, back in the late 70s, early 80s. It my understanding from those friends that the revolvers (that's all they did back then) WERE hand fitted. Later on, not long ago, one of these same friends went to the s&w auto school He said there were warehouses for revolvers with machines covered in sheets no longer used. He said with the autos, the assemblers had buckets of parts where they found ones that worked with a particular gun, no (or little) hand fitting. With CNC parts, I think the age of had fit firearms is just about over. Unless you're a competitive shooter and gunsmith it yourself.

 

[tenntex32]

The Colt lock work locks the cylinder and prevents any rotation with the trigger pulled to the rear. The S&W lock work, as well as most other manufacturers, allows for a tiny bit of rotation with the trigger pulled. I'd pass on a Python with a cylinder than moves with the trigger pulled, but it's normal on other brands. Excessive end shake and poor carry up are warning signs of improper fitting or excessive use or abuse of the revolver.

Yes, of course the Colt lock up is a different critter, and should be "tight as a bank vault". That being said there could still be issues with barrel alignment to the chambers even if the cylinder does lock up tight when the trigger is pulled.

I have seen numerous old Colt revolvers with cylinders that felt rather sloppy prior to locking up tight when the trigger is pulled. Short of having an alignment rod to verify correct barrel to chamber alignment you just trust they align correctly after the cylinder locks up tightly. On Colt revolvers I have CAREFULLY looked down the barrel on empty chambers to verify they "look" to align correctly when the trigger is pulled...…..but that is far from an exact science.

Dale

 

[bigggbbruce]

Yeah I think many times people fail to understand the difference between factory tolerance for proper function versus zero tolerance and the malfunctions that can induce.

Like the recent discussion on tight 1911's..

Run crankshaft bearings tight and see what happens..

 

[American1776]

Like the recent discussion on tight 1911's..

Run crankshaft bearings tight and see what happens..

I started that thread on tight 1911's too. My views on guns, and what is considered 'good', are evolving. I now think new S&W's ought to have some cylinder wiggle (rotational) with the trigger back. I now think (more strongly) that the 'Colt rattle' of the slide and frame of a 1911 is a trait I prefer.

 

[JayFramer]

Yeah I think many times people fail to understand the difference between factory tolerance for proper function versus zero tolerance and the malfunctions that can induce.

It was not too uncommon for police departments to open up the barrel/cylinder gap to the higher end of the tolerance to ensure proper function with regards to fouling, grit, etc.. (Rarely will you see a PD issued gun with a main spring adjusted so light that it may not set off a primer either. Not saying it didn't happen...…..but probably shouldn't have with a PD gun.)

As long as the cylinder stop engages each chamber cut-out correctly, barrel/cylinder gap isn't overly excessive or non-existent, there isn't too terribly much endshake or yoke play, and the barrel's rifling looks good then you should be good to go. I also look for things like hammer push-off with a cocked hammer, and smoothness/hardness of double-action trigger pull, bent extractor rods, ease of opening and closing of the cylinder, physical condition of the ratchet and it's cut recess in the recoil shield.

My personal pet peeves are buggar'd screw heads and knurled extractor rod ends, as well as beat up ratchets and ratchet recesses.

I have seen some folks that carry feeler gauges and a barrel/chamber alignment rod when out gun shopping, which seems a little excessive to me...….but to each his own. After a while you get a feel for something that looks or feels amiss if you handle enough old and new revolvers over time. Many "out-of-tolerance" issues can be simple fixes if you know what you are doing, especially if the item is priced very inexpensively. Parts replacement can get somewhat expensive, depending upon the age of the gun, and may require attention to detail with regards to fitting them correctly.

Other's opinions may vary of course.

Dale

Police departments opening up the cylinder gap on their guns?? First time I ever heard of that. Sounds like a myth to me.

 

[tenntex32]

Police departments opening up the cylinder gap on their guns?? First time I ever heard of that. Sounds like a myth to me.

Nope, it was done to prevent revolvers with minimum gap from not operating correctly with a fouled front cylinder face/forcing cone.

The thinking was that it was better to lose a few fps in velocity and gain more reliability in adverse or fouled conditions.

I am not sayin they were "adjusted" completely out of spec...….just opened up to the larger side of the spec if not already there from the factory.

I am also not stating every department did this, but some departments and armorers were keen to revolvers with minimum cylinder/forcing cone gaps having issues when fouled, leaded, or dirty.

A tight target gun and a reliable gun used for protection of one's self and others many times are two different animals entirely.

Dale

 

[American1776]

Nope, it was done to prevent revolvers with minimum gap from not operating correctly with a fouled front cylinder face/forcing cone.

The thinking was that it was better to lose a few fps in velocity and gain more reliability in adverse or fouled conditions.

I am not sayin they were "adjusted" completely out of spec...….just opened up to the larger side of the spec if not already there from the factory.

I am also not stating every department did this, but some departments and armorers were keen to revolvers with minimum cylinder/forcing cone gaps having issues when fouled, leaded, or dirty.

A tight target gun and a reliable gun used for protection of one's self and others many times are two different animals entirely.

Dale

Thanks for sharing this. It is interesting to learn the history of how some police departments handled their revolvers and tried to ensure reliability.

I know that a cylinder gap of less than .003 will offer great velocity but if shot with lead and dirty ammo, it may eventually bind up from heat and debris.

I've also been told that BC gaps have tightend after jacketed ammo became more prevalent.

 

[tenntex32]

Thanks for sharing this. It is interesting to learn the history of how some police departments handled their revolvers and tried to ensure reliability.

I know that a cylinder gap of less than .003 will offer great velocity but if shot with lead and dirty ammo, it may eventually bind up from heat and debris.

I've also been told that BC gaps have tightend after jacketed ammo became more prevalent.

True, it may be that many narrow cylinder gaps were "found out" when inexpensive lead/dirty ammo was used for extended training sessions and qualification...…..thus the possible felt need to ensure proper operation and reliability in the field where it really counts.

 

[JayFramer]

Nope, it was done to prevent revolvers with minimum gap from not operating correctly with a fouled front cylinder face/forcing cone.

The thinking was that it was better to lose a few fps in velocity and gain more reliability in adverse or fouled conditions.

I am not sayin they were "adjusted" completely out of spec...….just opened up to the larger side of the spec if not already there from the factory.

I am also not stating every department did this, but some departments and armorers were keen to revolvers with minimum cylinder/forcing cone gaps having issues when fouled, leaded, or dirty.

A tight target gun and a reliable gun used for protection of one's self and others many times are two different animals entirely.

Dale

Neat, thanks for the info. I have a departmental trade in Model 64 with a gap of .009-.010. I’ve always wondered if it were too out of spec for service.

Thoughts?

 

[ken158]

Police departments opening up the cylinder gap on their guns?? First time I ever heard of that. Sounds like a myth to me.

I agree, no way that ever happened...

 

[Bill Lear]

Nope, it was done to prevent revolvers with minimum gap from not operating correctly with a fouled front cylinder face/forcing cone.

The thinking was that it was better to lose a few fps in velocity and gain more reliability in adverse or fouled conditions.

I am not sayin they were "adjusted" completely out of spec...….just opened up to the larger side of the spec if not already there from the factory.

I am also not stating every department did this, but some departments and armorers were keen to revolvers with minimum cylinder/forcing cone gaps having issues when fouled, leaded, or dirty.

A tight target gun and a reliable gun used for protection of one's self and others many times are two different animals entirely.

Dale

Actually it has nothing to do with "fouling." It's due to heat effect when shooting magnum power cartridges quickly, with a quick reload and empty, and possibly a third.

George Nonte mentions in one of his many works on the subject of why semiautos are "better" than revolvers as combat weapons, bearing in mind that in combat, might easily fire a semiautomatic pistol hundreds of times quickly.

When firing high pressure magnum ammo in a revolver all the heat generated by firing is transmitted into the gun because the shells are still in the chambers. Heat causes metal to expand, and the barrel-cylinder gap, if of too close tolerance, can become completely bound due to heat expansion bringing cylinder and forcing cone into contact. It won't happen on a single cylinder fired FAST, but after that, if the shooter is attempting to unload cylinder after cylinder, binding can happen by cylinder load three.

I know this from personal experience way back in the age before semiautomatic pistols were in common civilian usage. When I first got into combat style shooting against time, I started with Ruger Security Six, with 6" barrel. By any standard a quality, well-built, strong revolver that was built to stand up to hot 357 magnum loads. It also had a barrel-cylinder gap around 0.025" which was a carrying over from Ruger's well-known propensity to have very tight B-C gaps in their single-actions which is why they tend to deliver much higher velocity than their S&W counterparts. In THAT revolver, I could shoot 38 Spl level hand loads repeatedly without issue. When I stepped up to 357 magnum loads - the kind that you often have difficulty extracting, the revolver seized up after the second speed reload. I could not advance the cylinder by trigger action, nor thumb-cock it until it cooled off for a few moments.

That single event, more than anything else - more than the fact that I could, and had "locked up" my revolver using fast DA pulls with not quite enough forward release (common under stress-fire). After than I acquired my first Colt brand 1911.

The advantage to the 1911 for combat is that with each shot, the hot empties are tossed clear (same for all semiautomatic pistols). This carries away HEAT allowing the pistol to function for longer, or being shot faster without seizing up due to heat. This is also one of the main advantages of the .45 automatic pistol cartridge even today, over the 9mm and 40S&W. Operating at below 20,000 psi in most loads, the 45 ACP produces very low stress and heat compared to the 33,000 9mm. Factory 40S&W loads seldom crack 30,000 psi, but that's still 1/3rd more pressure, and thus more heat. One might conclude that the people involved in procuring the 1911 way back when knew a little something when they specified the cartridge be loaded considerably milder than the gun could handle, but that's the Army for you. Everything is "derated" for durability and reliability!

Interestingly, back then one of my favorite shooting sports was Hunter class silhouette where I competed using a Dan Wesson 44 with 6" barrel and my own hand loads. Because the DW had a three-piece, user-removable barrel, I was able to set my B-C gap very close to maximize velocity, but that was shooting much slower so heat build up was not extreme. Also, the smaller bore 357 magnum will close-up tolerances faster than a larger bore.

To me, the revolver is an excellent concealed carry gun - actually about 2.5X BETTER than an autoloader if only looked by those factors that contribute to probability of first shot out and the rest behind it. But, once the fight moves into reloading, the semiautomatic pistol is hand's down the superior platform.

Even back then S&W revolvers had much larger B-C gaps - generally around 0.005" or a bit larger. To and eye "trained" on peering through Ruger B-C gaps, that seemed almost irresponsibly large! However, I never had a heat-lock on my original Model 19, and that was absolutely the reason why.

 

[tenntex32]

Thanks for the additional info with regards to heat being a contributing factor.

I once inspected a revolver with what could only be considered a tight barrel/cylinder gap. The seller had used it with lead loads and when looking at the cylinder face you could see lead smears due to lead fouling and cylinder rotation.

You could actually feel the lead smears affecting cylinder rotation when slowly pulling the hammer to the rear, as well as slowly pulling the trigger to the rear.

When I mentioned something about it he said "Yeah, I probably should have cleaned it after my last visit to the range."

I have owned several .357Magnum revolvers over the years but have never had a cylinder lock up due to heat...……...but to be honest I wasn't rapid firing tons of rounds either with full house magnum loads.

I have had to clean a few forcing cone faces and cylinder faces on used guns to get them to rotate as smoothly as they should. Maybe they were on the tighter side of tolerances.

Being a prior service Marine I take it for granted that a gun should be cleaned properly after use. That being said I have seen many revolvers that obviously had hundreds of rounds fired through them without anything more than a wipe down of the exterior.

At some point the fouling does add up to create problems, especially if dirt/grit is also added in some way to the equation...…..of which a daily carry gun may be susceptible to at the worst possible moment, for example being dropped inadvertently during a gunfight or being carried in rather dry dusty conditions.

Dale

 

[DeafSmith]

Bring a purest I love revolvers that are zero-zero. That is no end shake, crane shake, cylinder shake, etc... just clunks shut like a bank vault and the cylinder locks just a fraction before the hammer falls. I don't even like the hammer to have any play in the frame. Just super tight.

BUT, realistically I know you could, and should, have a bit of play just so the powder soot does not jam anything. Heck go look at Rugers.. they make old S&W wheelguns look super tight and yet the Rugers still shoot fine.

Still... I love guns that are clockwork tight.