Reaming out a webley cylinder

[smellie]

Well, it worked for this gun but I rather doubt it will work for all the nice antiques that you guys are wrecking.

They were designed to be shot with hollow-based soft lead bullets. I wonder if anyone has bothered to try using such a thing in one of these guns. After all, you guys are into ANTIQUE guns, aren't you? Or are you just trying to get around the law? Which is it?

And one tiny question: what about the forcing cone?
.

 

[apu]

Well, it worked for this gun but I rather doubt it will work for all the nice antiques that you guys are wrecking.

They were designed to be shot with hollow-based soft lead bullets. I wonder if anyone has bothered to try using such a thing in one of these guns. After all, you guys are into ANTIQUE guns, aren't you? Or are you just trying to get around the law? Which is it?

.

I beleive Jethunter did state he tried a 260 grain hollow based bullet without any appreciable effect to accuracy.

 

[jethunter]

Well, it worked for this gun but I rather doubt it will work for all the nice antiques that you guys are wrecking.

They were designed to be shot with hollow-based soft lead bullets. I wonder if anyone has bothered to try using such a thing in one of these guns. After all, you guys are into ANTIQUE guns, aren't you? Or are you just trying to get around the law? Which is it?

And one tiny question: what about the forcing cone?
.

The answer to the tiny question is the forcing cone is not .003" smaller diameter than the barrel.

If you read the previous posts you would know this revolver cylinder was shaved by a previous owner to use with .45 acp clips. So it's not a nice original cylinder to start with. No antique was harmed during this experiment.

Which law is it that we are getting around by making an antique revolver shoot better?? I respect your knowledge but you say some really stupid s**t sometimes.

 

[fiscus]

And one tiny question: what about the forcing cone?
.

What about it? I have a mk-1 that I shoot with flat base bullets, the forcing cone is unaltered and I would say it is better than most antique revolvers because it is not oversize but just big enough to deal with any slight misalignment. I just measured it now for this thread, the opening of the cone is .460" in diameter.

 

[david doyle]

trying to get around the law

yeah crimminals are big on staying up late with a pair of calipers and an eley catalogue trying to understand the manufacturing and design principals of 120 year old hunks of pig iron. This is a great thread no need for casting a palour.

 

[tactical870]

I gotta admit my cylinder is .450 and bore of .454 so I'm tempted to try to improve it as well. Can't see reaming a cylinder to imrove accuracy with common loads as detracting a lot from it's value anyways.

 

[dingus]

Nothing wrong with trying to make any antique shoot better and when its as simple as reaming a chamber throat i say go for it. KBC sells a chucking reamer in .4550 for like $35. just make sure your cylinder is clamped down tight and is square, if you cant do that get a machinist to do it.

I dont know to many collectors who dont shoot there antiques, none really and they like there guns to shoot good accurate groups.

My thing is whenever ive had a good 44 Russian/44 special that shot good it had .430 chamber throats and a .430 bore.
But most 44 Special SAA cylinders ive had were .435 chamber throats and a .430 bore. you cant do much if your chamber throat is bigger than the bore but if its smaller its easy to fix
Lucky for me the last 44 SAA i got the guy who set it up knew what he was doing and bore and chambers match perfect.