Getting the Walker tuned up

[45D]

Mike. I would love to have a tuned rig and I totally get competition setup. I shot IPSC seriously bintd. My comments are aimed at what seems to be a knee jerk reaction on this site to put slix shot nipples on every new revolver we buy. My contention is that nipples are an expendable item. They will wear out. It's going to take you at least 1k rounds to get totally dialed on that revolver so suck it up and pinch caps for a week and your stock nipples will break in. A year or so down the road when they are worn out that is the time to replace them with slickshots.

I thought you did some competition shooting, I just wanted to do some explanation of the "timing" aspect for those maybe just tuning in.
I understand about the nipples, "newbies" will ask me and I tell them most cowboy shooters will change to slix shots but see if the stock nips will get you going first.

Mike

 

[45D]

one last comment:

I did not write my comments to detract from the fact that problems need to be resolved. I don't doubt the ability of people to fix firearms to have them perform better/last longer.
What I meant to write is that why search for solutions to problems that may not exist. Or the creation of problems caused by the solution of other problems. Go through a shooting session first and give it time to 'burn in'.
Relating to motor bike comment: is it necessary to have cylinders labeled. To me that might reduce the "did I put powder in this chamber?" Again, that's a solution to a known problem.
People would ask: 'what about non-alignment?". Well, that's a problem that exists, not a potential one. You would probably see that as you clean the oil and lube the revolver when you get it. If you don't see it, you'll see it in performance and then correct it.
Wear and tear happens. That's not a problem under normal situations; just a fact of life. Then you take remedial action.
If you are a competitive shooter, that's a different situation in a totally different world.
But I am one who goes out and shoots for enjoyment and to see if I can hit a target. If a problem happens, I'll fix it using all I have read above. But I don't take action in search of a problem.
Have a great day!

I get what you're saying but the problem is "factory tolerances" and or "within spec". The revolver may not be "broken" and may not break for a long time. The factory setup may be leading to faster wear which WILL lead to failure. Breakage happens as a result of wear. Alleviate the wear, avoid breaking. So it's not looking for a problem, it's preventing the problem from occurring.
You can change oil in your engine or chance it . . . oil is cheaper . . .

As far as solutions, I can't think of anything I do or offer that doesn't benefit the shooter or lifetime of the revolver.

But I get it, you do what you can do and go down the road. No problem here.

Mike

 

[M. De Land]

Mike. I would love to have a tuned rig and I totally get competition setup. I shot IPSC seriously bintd. My comments are aimed at what seems to be a knee jerk reaction on this site to put slix shot nipples on every new revolver we buy. My contention is that nipples are an expendable item. They will wear out. It's going to take you at least 1k rounds to get totally dialed on that revolver so suck it up and pinch caps for a week and your stock nipples will break in. A year or so down the road when they are worn out that is the time to replace them with slickshots.

What happens is the tapered cone gets shortened and swaged out by hammer impact eventually and the face of the hammer gets imprinted by the nipple cone . The hammer face is not supposed to actually contact the nipple but rather bump up to the cap metal thickness and the soft copper of the cap cushions impact but eventually the hammer face begins to imprint in most revolvers.
This happens in the 58 Remington as the shoulder stops on either side of the hammer nose and the frame seats batter over time and on the open frame guns the hammer web against the frame is supposed to arrest full nipple contact but usually over time one will find that the hammer face will be imprinted by the nipples.
Nipple height as well as cone profile is extremely important for reliable ignition and back blast seal from proper cap fit.
This relationship in hammer face-nipple contact against the soft copper cap to contain pressure is the main weakness of open frame percussion design and is why smokeless pressure wreaks them without a brass case to seal off rampaging pressure curves.
The reason converted open frame guns get away with lower smokeless pressure is two fold , the brass case to seal off and contain the pressure and the modern steel in the convertible cylinders that will stand the hoop stress pressure.
The wedge slot in the arbor is still the weak link in resisting forward pressure the bullet passage puts on the barrel and although not as strong as a solid frame design ,does remarkably well in resisting the forward pressure vector if the wedge is fit up well and properly hardened .
End fit arbors contribute in this as they reliably repeat wedge depth and remove any chance of rearward wedge slack.

 

[M. De Land]

The timing on both my Pietta 1858s is perfect. There is no drag. The only thing they need is a trigger job. Putting new nipples on a brand new revolver is an exercise in consumerism. Just shoot it a few hundred times and you won't have to pinch the caps anymore. I doubt that original colts were perfect. Especially an early model like the Walker. There's usually buggs to work out with new models..

I have always preferred an early bolt drop if the bolt nose is polished smooth and does not cause any cylinder galling. The reason is the bolt sliding on the cylinder under it's spring tension dampens/brakes impact from rotation inertia on the back wall of the notch stop. This rotation inertia impacts the bolt window in the frame as well as the cylinder notch.
To me out of time is when the hand is trying to turn the cylinder before the bolt is clear of the notch.
The cylinder is gaining speed through out the hammer stroke and the early bolt drop helps mitigate the inertia energy impacting the back side of the bolt notch.
Rub lines hurt nothing performance wise and as explained actually have a benifit as long a there is no galling occurring .

 

[dickydalton]

Ahem..... Are you ever going to shoot the Walker and give us a report?

 

[M. De Land]

Ahem..... Are you ever going to shoot the Walker and give us a report?

Yup!

 

[M. De Land]

Ahem..... Are you ever going to shoot the Walker and give us a report?

Finally got some time to get out to the range with the Walker today and the gun is totally different in how it behaves compared to any others I have worked up loads for.
First I had to shoot out the two ACP bullets I seated in empty chambers to get the seating depth figured out and from there was able to charge through the nipple ports and fire them out. It turned out that 45 grains of 3F is about right for the ACP bullets and 48-50 for .451 balls with an 1/8 inch felt lube wad under the ball.
I had two tie ups with caps jamming the works and had to tear the action most of the way down to get the buggers out. Looks like I may have to employ Mikes action shield and a cap post on the Walker if I can't get it to behave without them although I would like to keep it as original as what the old guys had to use.
The wedge looks perfect but 25 rounds isn't much of a test. I couldn't get any where near 60 grains in with the grease wad and ball. I could barely make that load work with 50 grains.
The gun shoots high and right. With the bullets it's about 12inched high and 3 inches right at 25 yards from sand bags and with the ball it's about 8 high and 3 right.
I didn't take the chronograph today as I just wanted to see how the gun behaved and try to come up with a respectable load which I think was achieved.
I have some more work to do on her as I can't hold elevation with that factory front sight so will cut a dovetail and mill out a target style Partridge front blade. I also think that a square notch made out of the factory V in the hammer nose will be needed.
I also think I will at some point ream out the chamber mouths deeper so as to have more seating depth versatility .
Here are the targets shot today working up a load for both conical and ball.

First target top 4 are the ACP bullets with 50 grains of 3f. I had to practically stand on the loading lever to get the bullet nose deep enough to clear the barrel.
The second four are balls with lube wad and 50 grains of 3F. The one on the far left was an off hand shot after a short cap misfire. The bottom of the green was the aiming point.
The second target was both conicals and bullets with the top six the ACP bullets and all the rest balls. The balls were so deformed from the loading rod face they shot all over the place on the second go around.
I think I will probably have to machine an insert threaded into the loading rod face for ball seating.
She acts like she wants to shoot but I am going to get that new front sight in before trying it again.

 

[M. De Land]

Finally got some time to get out to the range with the Walker today and the gun is totally different in how it behaves compared to any others I have worked up loads for.
First I had to shoot out the two ACP bullets I seated in empty chambers to get the seating depth figured out and from there was able to charge through the nipple ports and fire them out. It turned out that 45 grains of 3F is about right for the ACP bullets and 48-50 for .451 balls with an 1/8 inch felt lube wad under the ball.
I had two tie ups with caps jamming the works and had to tear the action most of the way down to get the buggers out. Looks like I may have to employ Mikes action shield and a cap post on the Walker if I can't get it to behave without them although I would like to keep it as original as what the old guys had to use.
The wedge looks perfect but 25 rounds isn't much of a test. I couldn't get any where near 60 grains in with the grease wad and ball. I could barely make that load work with 50 grains.
The gun shoots high and right. With the bullets it's about 12inched high and 3 inches right at 25 yards from sand bags and with the ball it's about 8 high and 3 right.
I didn't take the chronograph today as I just wanted to see how the gun behaved and try to come up with a respectable load which I think was achieved.
I have some more work to do on her as I can't hold elevation with that factory front sight so will cut a dovetail and mill out a target style Partridge front blade. I also think that a square notch made out of the factory V in the hammer nose will be needed.
I also think I will at some point ream out the chamber mouths deeper so as to have more seating depth versatility .
Here are the targets shot today working up a load for both conical and ball.

First target top 4 are the ACP bullets with 50 grains of 3f. I had to practically stand on the loading lever to get the bullet nose deep enough to clear the barrel.
The second four are balls with lube wad and 50 grains of 3F. The one on the far left was an off hand shot after a short cap misfire. The bottom of the green was the aiming point.
The second target was both conicals and bullets with the top six the ACP bullets and all the rest balls. The balls were so deformed from the loading rod face they shot all over the place on the second go around.
I think I will probably have to machine an insert threaded into the loading rod face for ball seating.
She acts like she wants to shoot but I am going to get that new front sight in before trying it again.

So far the loading rod stays up in recoil with the very stout latch spring put in the new Walker so there may be no need for a latch mod.
The sear lift on the hammer worked very well making a crisp breaking trigger letting off right at 2 lbs.
I may have to time the bolt drop a bit earlier as it drops right at the edge of the notch perhaps a bolt width before and might begin to peen the front side of the notch.
I also noted the hammer web was making contact with the frame mortise to limit hammer nose contact with the nipple which is good adjustment from the factory.
Recoil even with the conicals is barely noticeable dampened by the 5-6 lb heft of the loaded gun.
Fouling was about the same with the tight cylinder gap as with the wider gap on some of my other guns. I don't like them much over .006-.008 and she was getting pretty stiff after 25 shots with lubed wads and lubed conicals.
Except for the cap sucking and two tie ups it was quite interesting and fun !
I'd like to learn how the Texas Rangers made their Walker reliable without the mods if possible.

 

[45D]

I'd like to learn how the Texas Rangers made their Walker reliable without the mods if possible.

Well, they had heavier duty caps than we have ( they were very corrosive though), they were built correctly and I would think the "endshake " would be more in the .004" - .005" range ( I've never seen that spec. anywhere). Customers get 80 /90 rounds with no binding with .0025 " - .003".

As far as your Walker, if you'd close down the "endshake" to .003" or so, more "exhaust" would go down the pipe rather than out the side.
The caps we have today become shrapnel so that's what needs to be dealt with. A cap post takes care of most of it and a shield keeps the fouling and debris out of the engine.
I know the originals didn't have these items but the Rangers didn't have our "cheap" caps.

Mike

 

[M. De Land]

Well, they had heavier duty caps than we have ( they were very corrosive though), they were built correctly and I would think the "endshake " would be more in the .004" - .005" range ( I've never seen that spec. anywhere). Customers get 80 /90 rounds with no binding with .0025 " - .003".

As far as your Walker, if you'd close down the "endshake" to .003" or so, more "exhaust" would go down the pipe rather than out the side.
The caps we have today become shrapnel so that's what needs to be dealt with. A cap post takes care of most of it and a shield keeps the fouling and debris out of the engine.
I know the originals didn't have these items but the Rangers didn't have our "cheap" caps.

Mike

The gap is less than .003 in my Walker after the arbor end fit plug was made and fit but I was using felt lubed wads and lubed conicals not grease over ball which may be the reason she was getting pretty stiff after 25 rounds.
The black powder used could also have been a factor as it was very old 3 F Hodgedon.

 

[M. De Land]

Well, they had heavier duty caps than we have ( they were very corrosive though), they were built correctly and I would think the "endshake " would be more in the .004" - .005" range ( I've never seen that spec. anywhere). Customers get 80 /90 rounds with no binding with .0025 " - .003".

As far as your Walker, if you'd close down the "endshake" to .003" or so, more "exhaust" would go down the pipe rather than out the side.
The caps we have today become shrapnel so that's what needs to be dealt with. A cap post takes care of most of it and a shield keeps the fouling and debris out of the engine.
I know the originals didn't have these items but the Rangers didn't have our "cheap" caps.

Mike

I need to look up the formula for calculating front sight height addition it's been so long since I used it last. I'm wondering about making it the same basic shape as the original only three times higher and on a dovetail for windage adjustment. I'll need to make some drawings and see if the profile can work with the height increase as it needs to look somewhat compatible I would think so as not to make me puke every time I look at it.
Here is the one I milled out and put on the 62 Police to replace the brass pin that has worked well and isn't to offensive to me .

 

[45D]

I need to look up the formula for calculating front sight height addition it's been so long since I used it last. I'm wondering about making it the same basic shape as the original only three times higher and on a dovetail for windage adjustment. I'll need to make some drawings and see if the profile can work with the height increase as it needs to look somewhat compatible I would think so as not to make me puke every time I look at it.
Here is the one I milled out and put on the 62 Police to replace the brass pin that has worked well and isn't to offensive to me .

That's a nice looking sight especially for target shooting. Oddly enough, the factory sights work well with my unmentionables although I do square up the rear notch to have light on both sides.
I really like an old S&W crescent style front sight. They just look "period elegant" to me !!

Here's an 1860 penny on an 1860 Army.

 

[M. De Land]

That's a nice looking sight especially for target shooting. Oddly enough, the factory sights work well with my unmentionables although I do square up the rear notch to have light on both sides.
I really like an old S&W crescent style front sight. They just look "period elegant" to me !!

Here's an 1860 penny on an 1860 Army.

View attachment 255660

Neat looking and that won't hang up in a holster!
I'll need the windage adjustment for the Walker as she prints 3 inches right at 25 yards although I can take up some by moving the notch in the hammer nose slightly left when filing in the square notch.
Been giving some thought to a brass inlay on a 45 degree angle on the back side to gather light if I can come up with a profile that looks half way decent for a hand gun. I make them for my rifles and they really show up in dim light. I'll chew on it some and see what I can come up with.
This is what I'm talking about scaled down to hand gun size .

 

[Bad Karma]

That's a nice looking sight especially for target shooting. Oddly enough, the factory sights work well with my unmentionables although I do square up the rear notch to have light on both sides.
I really like an old S&W crescent style front sight. They just look "period elegant" to me !!

Here's an 1860 penny on an 1860 Army.

View attachment 255660

Pure copper is an excellent material for foresights. I think it shows up as well as or better than brass in low light conditions. And penny sights are just cool.

 

[Bad Karma]

I need to look up the formula for calculating front sight height addition it's been so long since I used it last. I'm wondering about making it the same basic shape as the original only three times higher and on a dovetail for windage adjustment. I'll need to make some drawings and see if the profile can work with the height increase as it needs to look somewhat compatible I would think so as not to make me puke every time I look at it.
Here is the one I milled out and put on the 62 Police to replace the brass pin that has worked well and isn't to offensive to me .

Here’s one for you. (No, it doesn’t give figures for shorter barrels but @M. De Land seems clever enough to find a way around that bit.)

 

[Tyler L]

In addition to the above chart, there's also this online calculator:

https://www.dillonprecision.com/sight-correction-calculator.html

 

[M. De Land]

In addition to the above chart, there's also this online calculator:

https://www.dillonprecision.com/sight-correction-calculator.html

Thanks for the input guys. I have the equation formula in one of my reloading books but the Dillon app was really easy to plug in my target, sight in values. It calculated I need .042 windage correction left and .167 elevation (sight blade height) correction.
I'll double check it with the equation in the book and get to work on a new front sight.
I put one on my 60 Pietta some 30 years ago and It was about three times as tall as the factory front sight before it would shoot to POA at 25 yards.
I used brass for this blade but prefer steel with brass inlay at top and didn't cut a dovetail for windage which I should have. For some reason I can't remember I just soldered it back into the original sight mortise. Probably in a hurry to get it shooting to POA.
As a result I have to hold a bit of the rear sight V off to the right for windage which kind of sucks but does work after a fashion !