Uberti Schofield B/C Gap

[gunboat57]

I bought a new Uberti Schofield in 45 Colt last year. Love the gun, pretty much hits POA at 25 yards with various reloads. But with the cylinder pushed forward I measure .011" B/C gap. Pushed to the rear, gap is .012". So endshake is not a problem. But it vents a lot out the gap when firing.
What does the cylinder stop against when it is pushed forward? Is it the end of the cylinder arbor? If so, would trimming off a few thousandths reduce B/C gap?
But if I did that I'd increase endshake. Does the cylinder move rearward until the ratchet teeth hit the frame?

 

[OutWest50]

The proper way to decrease B/C gap is to set the barrel back one turn .... a job only for the very experience with proper tooling. I'm not familiar with Uberti specs but .012" doesn't seem too far out of line especially considering the amount of work and expense to set the barrel back. Removing material from the front of the cylinder arbor increases endplay (not good) but also increases headspace which could possibly lead to misfires. Since the gun shoots well at POA, I would leave it "as is" and enjoy shooting it.

 

[gunboat57]

Agreed about setting the barrel back one thread and re-cutting the forcing cone. I actually did it once on a worn out S&W 1917.
But the Schofield barrel is not threaded. So, unless I can let the cylinder go forward a few thousandths and somehow take up the end shake that results, I will live with the B/C gap.
I should mention that it's not spitting lead, just flames. When I shoot two-handed from a rest I end up combing a few powder grains out of my beard.

 

[colt_saa]

If you bought it last year, have you considered returning it to the manufacturer for a warranty repair?

I have had this one for about 25+ years now and it shoots great. Truth is I never bothered measuring the barrel cylinder gap in all the time that I've owned it

 

[rays44]

The bigger problem with mine is that the throats measure .456. In spite of that, it's a very fine shooter. The copper plated bullets from X-treme fit the short cylinder, shoot very well, and of course, no leading.

 

[colt_saa]

If the revolver shoots fine, why care about what the cylinder throat's measure?

 

[gunboat57]

Colt_SAA, if you have some feeler gages, I'd be curious what the B/C gap is on your revolver. Is yours an Uberti? Maybe the gap was made tighter back when yours was made.

 

[colt_saa]

Colt_SAA, if you have some feeler gages, I'd be curious what the B/C gap is on your revolver. Is yours an Uberti? Maybe the gap was made tighter back when yours was made.

Yes, my revolver was manufactured by Uberti and imported by Cimarron

I do have feeler gages but I will not be able to measure that revolver for a month or more.

The firearm is actually at a different house than where I am located right now and we have no plans to go up that way at the immediate time

One of the things that attracted to me to this firearm is that it was the 5" Wells Fargo model.

I wasn't too worried about how it was going to shoot because I wanted it for its nostalgic appeal for my collection, those were the CAS days.

Once I shot it, I was blown away at how well it fired, how naturally it pointed for me, how accurate it was and how comfortable in the hand. I had never expected a top brake chambered in 45 Long Colt to be like this

 

[steelslaver]

There is no way to turn the barrel back on top breaks.

I can think of several way to do it, all real difficult. Moving the cylinder forward is not a good plan as it not only adds endshake it increases headspace.

I guess you could move the cylinder forward and shim the extractor back the same amount. Kind of a wonkie fix though especially on a top break that cams the extractor back

The good news is that I doubt the the .006 between .006 and .012 cost you even 35 FPS

According to ballistics by the inch a 38 special shooting 158gr rn from a 6" barrel had velocities of 1000fps with no gap, 950fps with .001 gap and 942fps with .006 gap, showing that most gap velocity loss (50fps)occurs during the first .001 and the next .005 only lost 8fps. so I doubt another .006 would take much away

 

[stansdds]

Unless there is an issue such as poor accuracy or lead shaving, I'd leave it as-is. Too many people seem to get hung up on a BC gap of 0.003" being desirable and 0.006" being the maximum acceptable and the gap has remarkably little effect on accuracy or velocity. In other words, worry less and shoot more.

 

[gunboat57]

I checked the headspace on my Schofield and it is at the low end of the tolerance. So, as Steelslaver said, I could stone a few thou off the arbor to reduce gap, add a shim under the ejector star to take up the end shake, and still be within spec for headspace.
For now, I think I'll just shoot it. I'll wrap a piece of card around the gap and see if anything other than flame is coming out.