• This community needs YOUR help today. We rely 100% on Supporting Memberships to fund our efforts. With the ever increasing fees of everything, we need help. We need more Supporting Members, today. Please invest back into this community. I will ship a few decals too in addition to all the account perks you get.



    Sign up here: https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/account/upgrades
  • Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

Percussion Hammer Cam (Divot)?

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Ok, going a bit wild here and see if mods chime in.

With all due respect Mr. D, nothing could beat a Zero in a turning dog fight as long as it was under 250 mph or so (Spitfire included). Basically the technique was to dive and do a slow high speed turn the Zero could not stick with (hard on controls). Sakai (lot of myth there) outmaneuvered a group of Hellcats over Iwo Jima and he only had one eye.

The Zero was extremly light and had high G load structure (it was not rugged but that gets into damage end no G load). Japanese were obsessed with maneuvering over reality which is speed rules all (initially it was the fastest climbing aircraft out there as well).

The latter P-47s did have the legs and the P-47N was the ultimate. Hellcats were a bit slow but more than fast enough for Pacific combat. P-38 being twin engine true fighter was hard to fly. Bong and gang had a lot of time on the P-38 when they went into combat.

I have laughed hard at the insistence by one of the Hellcat designers that it was as fast as a Corsair. Not even close. The Hellcat was a great Pacific fighter as it was easy to fly and had the climb and speed needed out there. At the end of the War the Navy was replacing replacing Hellcats with Corsairs. Hats off to the Hellcat, it allowed green pilots to survive and thrive and broke the back of the IJN aviation groups.

Flown right a P-40 and P-39 could take on the Zero (as did the Wildcat flown correctly). Spitfire pilots found to their regret that even the Spit could not out-turn the Zero at lower speeds.

Ironically the Allison in all respects was a much better engine than the Merlin which was good. The Army Air Corp refused to let Allison work on two stage and or two speed super chargers which the Merlin did have. The P-38 has a tubro/supercharger series ergo its speculator performance. Allison got more hp (if allowed war rating the Merlin did) and had far better time on wing and easier to repair (a lot fewer parts, the Brits love complex parts and fasteners)

Its a twist of history the Army Air Corp tied the Allison engine behind the P-40 and P-51A back, then used exactly the two speed super charger in the Merlin in the P-51 that they would not let Allison develop.

The Wildcat simply did not have a speed advantage on the Zero but the same diver and up over 250 mph and turn and you escaped.
 
I know its off topic but the P-47 has long been a favorite of mine. Not pretty but a beast and far better fighter than its been given credit for. You gotta love the P-51, P-38, Mosquito/Spitfire for looks but as a workhorse maybe only rivaled by the Corsair and Mosquito in its fighter/bomber form. P-47N was incredible. The Jug equaled and bettered the P-51 in air to air and exceeded it by volumes in air to ground.

One of the huge oddities post WWII was the USAF dumping the P-47 and going to P-51 that was not suited to Air to Ground in Korea. All looks, P-47 just disappeared without a trace despite it being as good air to air and much more versatile in the combined roles.

The USN and USMC not only kept the Corsair they got newer versions of it. Corsair and P-47 equal in my view, maybe a small not to Corsair with 20 mm cannon.
Wow I can’t believe this Jugs and Corsairs on the muzzleloading forum. I’m 66 this April once in my life I was as aviator. Had the great fortune of having an uncle that had his roots at Rosevelt Field. He introduced me to all his pals he worked at Republic in Field Service through the Korean War and into the A10. Many legends when I was working towards my A&P. The Jug was my favorite as one if my flight instructors was Captain that flew the Jug in Europe his squadron moved over to the Cadilac of the sky P-51 he was never happy about that though he recognized it as a great aircraft. He said he felt safer in the Jug as he was shotdown once. His name was Henry Lederer at the time were were all working at FRC on the A10. Henry was kind of my mentor who was at the time President of the P-47 Association. I also had Frank T Hayes one of the smartest people I ever knew and dear friend of my Uncle. Henry and I had weekend jobs at Republic Airport FBO Cosmopolitan Airlines which was a Cessna Flight training center. Henry was the Chief Pilot and the FAA Examiner. I was a lineman. 😂 He introduced me to Dave Tallichet a millionaire who owned a thunderbolt and some other war planes. We worked volunteering to support the opening of the 56th Fiighter Group Restaurant at Republic Airport. Dave promised me that when he makes his movie thunderbolt I could play it in it. 😂 the movie never happened. When the T-46 program was shut down we all transitioned to Grumman. There Henry introduced me to Jack Ahearn who flew in the Pacific flying P-47Ns island to island 50 feet above the ocean. At introduction Henry says look at the size of him he flew missions in the Pacific with temperatures over 100 degrees and that comfortable humidity. Jack was retired AF he was a mountain of a man. I have pictures of my uncle taxing the Corsair in that zigzag because of the poor visibility. I also worked at Sedco Systems where I met Don Johnson another Jug pilot unfortunately shot down was taken pow sustained a leg injury that never healed. He told me he actually met and worked at the same company years earlier buy the FW pilot that was able to take him down. For some reason all these Jug pilots liked me. Don Johnson gave me his book P-47 Thunderbolt given to him and signed by Robert Bob Johnson one of the Great Aces of the war and part of Hub Zempkies Wolfpack. You have no idea what an honor and privilege it was to have met flown and worked with these gentleman. Many will never get it. Man those are great memories God Bless them all. Sorry for the rant lol I could go on.
 
Ok Guys, (GETTING BACK TO THE THREAD.lol)Here are some pictures of the new cam installed with the wear pattern of the hand to cam face. The new cam has fixed early bolt drop on the cylinder,which was causing bolt drag marks (rings) before the approach of the notch. (the black area is sharpie. don't have any DYKEM)
REPLACE HAMMER cam 1.jpg
REPLACE HAMMER cam 2.jpg
 
My next questions is on occasion the bolt does not reset. Should I remove metal off the bottom of bolt arm or off the radius of the cam? I have watched "OLD RANGER'S Video on this problem.
BOLT1.jpg
 
After further diagnosis, I found the with the cylinder off the frame the bolt does not reset. Which tells me under this condition the bolt is bottoming out further in the frame.

WOW everything is connected!
 
After further diagnosis, I found the with the cylinder off the frame the bolt does not reset. Which tells me under this condition the bolt is bottoming out further in the frame.

WOW everything is connected!

Yap, reset only needs to happen with cyl installed.

Mike
 
My next questions is on occasion the bolt does not reset. Should I remove metal off the bottom of bolt arm or off the radius of the cam? I have watched "OLD RANGER'S Video on this problem.View attachment 296726
I'd take a few diamond file strokes off the top of the new cam careful to keep it at 90 degrees to the bolt finger loop. Bolts are way more expensive and technical than is the removable/replaceable cam.
Nice job and superior cam of tool steel.
 
Ok Guys, (GETTING BACK TO THE THREAD.lol)Here are some pictures of the new cam installed with the wear pattern of the hand to cam face. The new cam has fixed early bolt drop on the cylinder,which was causing bolt drag marks (rings) before the approach of the notch. (the black area is sharpie. don't have any DYKEM)View attachment 296721View attachment 296722
I did make one small deviation from the factory cam face profile on the one I replaced. I angled the cam face nearly all the way to the top for a longer and less abrupt angle to lesson the bending stress of the bolt finger. Not really necessary but thought it might extend the bolt finger life a bit.
 
I did make one small deviation from the factory cam face profile on the one I replaced. I angled the cam face nearly all the way to the top for a longer and less abrupt angle to lesson the bending stress of the bolt finger. Not really necessary but thought it might extend the bolt finger life a bit.
I think I know what your talking about. Pietta cams are that way. I was trying to copy the original Uberti cam face profile (less the minor lead-in angle.)
 
Does the wear pattern look good to you?
Yes, it looks pretty good as it is making contact in more area than one small spot across it's width. The bigger the contact area the less overall wear and the more gentile the cam angle the less the bolt finger bend stress.
The best cam angles I've seen are compound angled so as to cause the whole bolt leg/finger to bend like a bow limb rather than to only bend in one area near the pivot hole.
 
Last edited:
Ok, going a bit wild here and see if mods chime in.

With all due respect Mr. D, nothing could beat a Zero in a turning dog fight as long as it was under 250 mph or so (Spitfire included). Basically the technique was to dive and do a slow high speed turn the Zero could not stick with (hard on controls). Sakai (lot of myth there) outmaneuvered a group of Hellcats over Iwo Jima and he only had one eye.

The Zero was extremly light and had high G load structure (it was not rugged but that gets into damage end no G load). Japanese were obsessed with maneuvering over reality which is speed rules all (initially it was the fastest climbing aircraft out there as well).

The latter P-47s did have the legs and the P-47N was the ultimate. Hellcats were a bit slow but more than fast enough for Pacific combat. P-38 being twin engine true fighter was hard to fly. Bong and gang had a lot of time on the P-38 when they went into combat.

I have laughed hard at the insistence by one of the Hellcat designers that it was as fast as a Corsair. Not even close. The Hellcat was a great Pacific fighter as it was easy to fly and had the climb and speed needed out there. At the end of the War the Navy was replacing replacing Hellcats with Corsairs. Hats off to the Hellcat, it allowed green pilots to survive and thrive and broke the back of the IJN aviation groups.

Flown right a P-40 and P-39 could take on the Zero (as did the Wildcat flown correctly). Spitfire pilots found to their regret that even the Spit could not out-turn the Zero at lower speeds.

Ironically the Allison in all respects was a much better engine than the Merlin which was good. The Army Air Corp refused to let Allison work on two stage and or two speed super chargers which the Merlin did have. The P-38 has a tubro/supercharger series ergo its speculator performance. Allison got more hp (if allowed war rating the Merlin did) and had far better time on wing and easier to repair (a lot fewer parts, the Brits love complex parts and fasteners)

Its a twist of history the Army Air Corp tied the Allison engine behind the P-40 and P-51A back, then used exactly the two speed super charger in the Merlin in the P-51 that they would not let Allison develop.

The Wildcat simply did not have a speed advantage on the Zero but the same diver and up over 250 mph and turn and you escaped.
What I said was the F-6 could defeat the zero better than could the P-38 in turning dog fights which is a true statement.
The F-6 in the hands of an experienced pilot was more than a match for the Zero and is how it got it's reputation as the Zero Killer. It simply used it's strength against the Zero's weaknesses mainly speed and vertical climb ability and shot them down in deflection and pass through attacks.
It could sustain a vertical climb a bit longer than could a Zero before going "greedy" and stalling which made all the difference in who got on who's tail.
Sakai was the best fighter pilot Japan ever fielded in WWll and admitted he got out of that jamb by pure luck and inexperienced American pilots. I've listened to his own account of that dog fight on line. I doubt very much he would have survived an F-6 pilot with Bongs experience level.
 
Last edited:
What a Great thread!
Two of my favorite things- wheel guns and warbirds!
Learning lots of helpful timing tips, gonna dig out my Kuhnhausen book too.
All this Jug talk reminds me of the show “ Dogfights!” One of the Jug jockeys absolutely did Not fit the stereotype of a cocky fighter pilot, he was a little guy who looked and sounded like a mild mannered accountant.
Great show, now more pistol talk-
The cam in the hammer is a press fit replaceable part?!?
Now that is an epiphany!!!
 
What a Great thread!

The cam in the hammer is a press fit replaceable part?!?
Now that is an epiphany!!!

No. On Colt OT's and SAA - yes. On early bp copies and SAA copies- yes. Today and the last 30 years or so the cam is integral to the hammer. If the cam gets damaged, you can install or make a new cam but you'll have to grind down the original cam and drill a mounting hole . . . or you can replace the hammer.
 
What I said was the F-6 could defeat the zero better than could the P-38 in turning dog fights which is a true statement.
The F-6 in the hands of an experienced pilot was more than a match for the Zero and is how it got it's reputation as the Zero Killer. It simply used it's strength against the Zero's weaknesses mainly speed and vertical climb ability and shot them down in deflection and pass through attacks.
It could sustain a vertical climb a bit longer than could a Zero before going "greedy" and stalling which made all the difference in who got on who's tail.
Sakai was the best fighter pilot Japan ever fielded in WWll and admitted he got out of that jamb by pure luck and inexperienced American pilots. I've listened to his own account of that dog fight on line. I doubt very much he would have survived an F-6 pilot with Bongs experience level.

Mr Deland:

Keeping on off topic though I am very invested in the timing discussions and hope this is informative for others as a lot of the WWII Urban Legends are due to be retired.

You are trying to split S hairs here.

The key to dealing with a Zero or the Tony was the issue with their control forces. As the speeds went up, the controls on both got harder to move to impossible. 250 mph was a guarantee, a better turning fighter (Spitfire) probably could do it at 220 mph, but the essence is nothing could outurn a Zero/Oscar in a true dogfight (lower speeds and what they now call a turning fight)

Zero is really a euphemism for the KI-41 (Oscar) and the A6M, both based on maneuverability when superior speed is what rules a air to air fight. There is no way a 9200 lb empty weight aircraft is going to out turn a 3700 lb empty weight aircraft or even come close until you cross a threshold of the 250 mph area that changed the dynamics hugely.

Speed is king, you got that and you don't need anything else. I do not know if a P-38 could turn with a Hellcat and if so at what speeds. Both had superior climb but the issue with climb is for a period of time you are still in range. That is true of a dive but the time exposure is less.

Hellcats did not try to turn with a zero. They used superior speed in an attack (best if with better altitude and some dive) and it was hit and run. You maintained speed and or dove and the Zero was both slow and could not turn at speed. So yea, you came back at a Zero once you had sufficient spacing, but that is not a turning dog fight.

An F-6 was no exception. The myth is (Urban Legend) was that it was designed off the Zero recovered in the Aleutians. That Zero did nothing more than confirm what was known and the F-6 was already designed off what they knew which was that it was a highly improved Wildcat (which flown right was on equal terms with the Zero). The P-40 flown right was on equal or better terms (faster) with a Zero as was a P-39 and its variants.

Chenault had it figured out in 1940 and the P-40 record more than proved it if flown to his assessment. An F-6 was a faster P-40. A P-38 was really fast as was the Corsair and their better speed better dictated the terms of a air to air fight.

The early war failures were not because the aircraft on the Allied side were inferior, they were not taught to fight them correctly as the uber thing then was a dog fight and when you pit two P-40 against each other, then yea, the thing to do is outrunn the guy, if you fought right you were a woose. Do that against a Zero and you were toast.

The F-6 was designed to overcome the Wildcat issues of too low a speed and not enough climb rate.

The Bearcat was intended to be really fast as that is what was needed to deal with Kamikaze, up to that point the F-6 had enough superior speed to deal with the Japanese fighters. Its big advantage was it was easy to fly and huge numbers of new aviators into the fleet made that critical. The Corsair was faster, but harder to fly and worse to do carrier landings with. But at the end of the Pacific war it was replacing the Hellcat as that superior speed was then badly needed as was it being a better Air to ground aircraft.
 
Mr Deland:

Keeping on off topic though I am very invested in the timing discussions and hope this is informative for others as a lot of the WWII Urban Legends are due to be retired.

You are trying to split S hairs here.

The key to dealing with a Zero or the Tony was the issue with their control forces. As the speeds went up, the controls on both got harder to move to impossible. 250 mph was a guarantee, a better turning fighter (Spitfire) probably could do it at 220 mph, but the essence is nothing could outurn a Zero/Oscar in a true dogfight (lower speeds and what they now call a turning fight)

Zero is really a euphemism for the KI-41 (Oscar) and the A6M, both based on maneuverability when superior speed is what rules a air to air fight. There is no way a 9200 lb empty weight aircraft is going to out turn a 3700 lb empty weight aircraft or even come close until you cross a threshold of the 250 mph area that changed the dynamics hugely.

Speed is king, you got that and you don't need anything else. I do not know if a P-38 could turn with a Hellcat and if so at what speeds. Both had superior climb but the issue with climb is for a period of time you are still in range. That is true of a dive but the time exposure is less.

Hellcats did not try to turn with a zero. They used superior speed in an attack (best if with better altitude and some dive) and it was hit and run. You maintained speed and or dove and the Zero was both slow and could not turn at speed. So yea, you came back at a Zero once you had sufficient spacing, but that is not a turning dog fight.

An F-6 was no exception. The myth is (Urban Legend) was that it was designed off the Zero recovered in the Aleutians. That Zero did nothing more than confirm what was known and the F-6 was already designed off what they knew which was that it was a highly improved Wildcat (which flown right was on equal terms with the Zero). The P-40 flown right was on equal or better terms (faster) with a Zero as was a P-39 and its variants.

Chenault had it figured out in 1940 and the P-40 record more than proved it if flown to his assessment. An F-6 was a faster P-40. A P-38 was really fast as was the Corsair and their better speed better dictated the terms of a air to air fight.

The early war failures were not because the aircraft on the Allied side were inferior, they were not taught to fight them correctly as the uber thing then was a dog fight and when you pit two P-40 against each other, then yea, the thing to do is outrunn the guy, if you fought right you were a woose. Do that against a Zero and you were toast.

The F-6 was designed to overcome the Wildcat issues of too low a speed and not enough climb rate.

The Bearcat was intended to be really fast as that is what was needed to deal with Kamikaze, up to that point the F-6 had enough superior speed to deal with the Japanese fighters. Its big advantage was it was easy to fly and huge numbers of new aviators into the fleet made that critical. The Corsair was faster, but harder to fly and worse to do carrier landings with. But at the end of the Pacific war it was replacing the Hellcat as that superior speed was then badly needed as was it being a better Air to ground aircraft.
Very interesting but did they have black powder muzzle loaders ? .Not that I Have sensible objections or even chimera's ones . I have absolutely no knowledge of Motor bikes .
But I do have an old pushbike dubbed my' Company Vehicle 'Ime too old to hop freights anymore but I still hitch when required. They say'' Why don't you work like others Do ' '. ? ' 'How can I work with the sky so blue ?!".
Equally relevant .Rudyard
 
I see that now-
Thanks!!
Mike is correct about the manufacturing of hammers and cams. But one of my 1861 Ubertis has a new "PRESS FIT" cam. I did add a drop of loctite once I was happy with it's clocking. Agreed about the thread. SOME GREAT help was received here. Not to mention the aviation portion.Thx Fellows!
 
Well I started on my second hammer cam pin upgrade. This one is on a 2023 Spiller&Burr 1862. Unlike my1861 Navy,I Have not even shot this one . This is what the cam looks like. It was exhibiting bolt drop on the cylinder.

In addition this one was press fit and not integral. So should be a tad easier or at least one or two steps shorter.

SB CAM1.jpg
SB CAM2.jpg
SB bolt drag.jpg
 
Well I started on my second hammer cam pin upgrade. This one is on a 2023 Spiller&Burr 1862. Unlike my1861 Navy,I Have not even shot this one . This is what the cam looks like. It was exhibiting bolt drop on the cylinder.

In addition this one was press fit and not integral. So should be a tad easier or at least one or two steps shorter.

View attachment 301241View attachment 301242View attachment 301245

All you really need to do is clock that one slightly (clockwise of course) and press it back in. There ya go !!! Brand new cam !!!

Mike
 
Back
Top