Crude gun mfg

[89diesel]

I've had an original 1858 Remington 44 for a while now. Just for the hell of it, I started building a conversion cylinder for it today. As far as I know, and can tell, everything on this gun is factory.

When I started taking some measurements on the original cyl though, everything was all over the place.

The cylinder is round....sort of. Its not out by much, but it isnt perfect.
All 6 chambers were not only drilled to different depths, they arent concentric to the pin nor the circumference of the cyl.

Just a theory, but I think the chambers were drilled but not reamed. 2 chambers are identical, but each one after, gets progressively larger. Which would be explained by a drill bit getting hotter and expanding. Also, as it gets dull, it wipes more of the metal.

2 of the cyl stop notches are out by a bit. 1 enough that it doesnt engage every time.

Even though gun making techniques and machinery from 150 years ago, arent what they are now, they made some pretty impressive things back then. I was just suprised that by the lack of accuracy in building something that has worked so well, for so long!

 

[Skinny 1950]

If you can make every part the same size then those parts can be interchanged with out problems......Henry Ford

I just made that up but Samuel Colt had the same idea.

 

[Musketfire]

Maybe that's the reason the colts cost the American government more per piece?????
better materials and better machine tools putting out a more consistent product??? Maybe better Quality control as well??

 

[tactical870]

Are you sure it's a real remington?

 

[trevj]

If you get a chance, read through the two Campbell books about the Winchester Single Shot Rifle.

There are several mentions of the manufacturing technology that was responsible for the whole of their product lines. It wasn't really very high-tech. There were several key players that had worked in other major makers shops as well, so the technology stayed fairly much the same from shop to shop, as the workmen travelled around throughout their careers.

In Winchester's case, the guys that actually ran the production machines, likely never saw a drawing. It was arranged to have gauges and examples of the parts required, available for setting the tools up, and for checking the finished or semi-finished parts with. A lot like Mr. Ford, the production was set up so that the labour could be done as cheaply and efficiently as possible, with the least amount of knowledge and skill, on the part of the actual worker.

No reason to think it was different in Remington's case. Maybe even more so, as Remington was very much more oriented towards contract manufacture for military purposes, rather than chasing the more fickle sportsman's market.

They only made the stuff as good as they had to. I think most folks have a lot higher expectation of accuracy and precision from the gunmakers, than the gunmakers had of their own products.

It kept a lot of gunsmiths working over the years, eh. We are spoiled for capability when we go and buy modern made parts, that do not require filing and fitting to install on modern made guns.

Cheers
Trev

 

[sunray]

"...everything was all over the place..." Machining accuracy and metallurgy has come a long way in 150 years.
"...but Samuel Colt had the same idea..." Wasn't Sam or Henry. It was Eli Whitney who got the credit.