|
Post by mike454 on Feb 25, 2011 5:44:18 GMT -5
I've had two Colts through here in late 2008 and early 2009. The first had been buffed so badly that there wasn't a sharp corner to be found on the gun. They must have used a small buff on a dremmel to get the hard to reach places they couldn't round over with the big buffing wheel. Also the gun still had .456 throats. I contacted Colt and sent pictures of the gun and they had me send it in for replacement. The replacement was better but still not anywhere as straight and sharp as any of my 10 usfa guns. Also replacement still had large cylinder throats. I've sent 2 of my USFA guns back for manufacturing problems. one was fixed one wasn't.
|
|
|
Post by Ken O'Neill on Feb 25, 2011 8:14:10 GMT -5
Okay, let's help my education. Can someone tell me what the Colt chamber mouths are measuring on the .45 Colts they've seen that were made during the last 2-3 years? Oops! I didn't see Mike454's post when I wrote this. Can anyone else chime in on chamber mouth measurements?
|
|
|
Post by mike454 on Feb 25, 2011 8:42:12 GMT -5
Just measured my "replacement" colt from early to mid 2009, and it goes .457. Measured my early colt Annaconda goes .456. Took the plug gauges to the rest of my 45 colts S&Ws, Rugers, FAs, and USFAs from the last 20 years and most were .452 or less.
|
|
|
Post by taffin on Feb 25, 2011 9:06:44 GMT -5
]Just measured my "replacement" colt from early to mid 2009, and it goes .457. Measured my early colt Annaconda goes .456. Took the plug gauges to the rest of my 45 colts S&Ws, Rugers, FAs, and USFAs from the last 20 years and most were .452 or less. [/quote]
IN THE PAST SIX MONTHS I HAVE PURCHASED THREE "CLASSIC" PRE-MODEL NUMBER .45s SMITHS FROM THE EARLY 1950s: TWO 1950 TARGETS ARE BOTH .454" WHILE THE 1955 TARGET GOES .455"
|
|
|
Post by taffin on Feb 25, 2011 9:08:19 GMT -5
PS TWW OF THREE .45 COLT SMITHS MODEL 25-5s GO .455" AND .457"; THE SMITH M2000 SCHOFIELD IS .457"
|
|
|
Post by CraigC on Feb 25, 2011 12:26:26 GMT -5
As much improved as they are, I haven't heard of a new Colt SAA .45 with properly sized chamber mouths yet.
|
|
|
Post by taffin on Feb 25, 2011 13:18:48 GMT -5
As much improved as they are, I haven't heard of a new Colt SAA .45 with properly sized chamber mouths yet. WHAT IS "PROPERLY SIZED"?? MY THEORY IS MOST OF THOSE WHO BUILD .45s WITH RATHER THIN CHAMBER WALLS FURNISH OVERSIZE THROATS TO RELIEVE PRESSURE. RUGER HAS GONE THE OTHER DIRECTION WITH THEIR STRONGER BLACKHAWKS AND ORIGINAL VAQUEROS WITH TOO SMALL THROATS.
|
|
|
Post by Ken O'Neill on Feb 25, 2011 16:28:17 GMT -5
My desire in .45 Colt chamber mouths is .452-453".
|
|
raven5
.240 Incinerator
Posts: 73
|
Post by raven5 on Feb 26, 2011 14:12:43 GMT -5
When did the specs for the .45 Colt change, as far as the bullet diameter and chamber mouths? Original specs called for a .454 or .455 diameter bullet, right? Didn't the advent of the .45 ACP with its .452 diameter bullet lead to, either wrong or right or whatever, all .45 handgun calibers (not including the .45-70 or other rifle cartridges with their .458 caliber bullets) eventually using a .452 diameter bullet? The factory(s) consolidating things a bit? Feel free to make any corrections if I'm wrong, I won't be offended. But if this is so, then Taffin's theory is probably correct (what's new ) with the oversize mouths to relieve pressure slightly. Just appears that the older manufacturers, i.e. Colt and Smith and Wesson, have either adhered still or at least longer to the original (and correct?) specs while newer companies, i.e. Ruger, are following the newer guidelines, trend, or whathaveyou. Can anyone think it is just sloppiness, laziness, or something altogether else that these manufacturers can make every other caliber firearm with the 'correct' chamber mouths but just 'can't' when manufacturing the .45 Colt? Really?
|
|
|
Post by Ken O'Neill on Feb 26, 2011 15:11:53 GMT -5
My 3 early 625's (which I stupidly no longer own) all measured .452-.453". They were all quite accurate. I haven't yet seen any other S&W's or Colts that tight. John may indeed be correct. Those 625's proved the mouths could be bored tighter, if Smith wanted them to be. In any event, I have never personally seen or shot a 25-2 or 25-5, all of which had larger mouths, that would shoot with those 3 625's. Thus, I know what I want. Others can choose what they will.
|
|
|
Post by taffin on Feb 26, 2011 15:32:02 GMT -5
THE "OVERSIZED" WILL USUALLY SHOOT FINE WITH LARGER DIAMETER BULLETS. I HAVE A PAIR OF 625s, ONE .45 COLT, THE OTHER .45ACP, BOTH TIGHT AND ONE 25-5 ALSO TIGHT. SO IT IS HARD TO KNOW WHAT THEY ARE THINKING AT THE TIME. I GUESS IT DEPENDS UPON WHO IS IN CHARGE. THE ITALIAN REPLICAS ARE ALL OVER THE MAP ALSO.
|
|
|
Post by mike454 on Feb 26, 2011 15:40:38 GMT -5
My 3 early 625's (which I stupidly no longer own) all measured .452-.453". They were all quite accurate. I haven't yet seen any other S&W's or Colts that tight. John may indeed be correct. Those 625's proved the mouths could be bored tighter, if Smith wanted them to be. In any event, I have never personally seen or shot a 25-2 or 25-5, all of which had larger mouths, that would shoot with those 3 625's. Thus, I know what I want. Others can choose what they will. I've read that post p&r S&Ws will have .452 or so throats. My experience bears this out. I have 5 smiths, 26-1, 625-5, and 3 stainless mountain guns, 2 with the lock. None have pinned barrels and all have .453 or tighter throats.
|
|
mec
.240 Incinerator
Posts: 7
|
Post by mec on Feb 26, 2011 17:09:24 GMT -5
I recently bough a 3rd generation .45 Colt. I expected to find the cylinder mouth measurements in the .457 range and decided to live with the necessity to get ovesized bullets for optimum accuracy: I had a supply of commercial RNFPS at diameter .452 on hand and fully expecting them to drop through the cylinder, I applied the Venturino test and was pleasantly surprised that the bullets stopped against the cylinder throat reduction. I then measured the cylinder openings with a caliper at .452 or as close to that as you can get with a caliper. One handed 25 yard groups without significant shooter error look like this: Further, the action of this late third model is as light and smooth as any second generation. The out of the box trigger pull is three pounds. Timing is perfect. Further. point of aim corresponds very closely with point of impact at 25 yards. I have had one very well set up civilian/gunfighter length USFA Pre War that was equal in quality to this Colt. Later, I bought a 7.5" barrel model USFA that had a ten-thousanths cylinder gap, was indifferently accurate and delivered lower velocities than the shorter barrel gun. I do not know if this Colt revolver represents a departure from the odd-ball cylinder throat measurements of the recent past or not. I would like to think so. In any case I am glad to have a perfectly set up example of the genre complete with Colt address line and rampant pony in the proper locations.
|
|
|
Post by Gary @ R&G on Feb 26, 2011 22:53:48 GMT -5
I bought a new SAA 44-40 in 05 or 06. Looks and functions just fine. I love the USFA's but I prefer my SAA's and 1911's to have a pony on them. Whats the old saying about imitation and flattery....
|
|
|
Post by Boge Quinn on Feb 27, 2011 11:00:04 GMT -5
Unusual and cool watch - Montgomery dial (without a subsecond "6", so not REALLY a Montgomery), with Boxcar numerals. Is it a Hamilton 992?
|
|