Wasp
.30 Stingray
Posts: 312 
|
Post by Wasp on Apr 13, 2015 0:18:01 GMT -5
I respectfully disagree with the notion that making any surface of the latch pawl convex to any degree whatsoever is ever appropriate. Same goes for a trigger sear surfaces; I'll maintain that they should always be maintained as dead flat, square and true, and well polished. No hacking, cutting, chopping, grinding welding or soldering need be applied. I was going to say that in my last post but I couldn't find the correct words. I may not be an expert, but close to factory as I can get, yet, "I'll maintain that they should always be maintained as dead flat, square and true, and well polished". Thanks |
|
|
|
Post by aus71383 on Apr 13, 2015 0:42:05 GMT -5
David - thank you for creating this thread and sharing your knowledge and experience.
Jim - thanks for taking the time to explain. I think part of the initial confusion was which direction the groove was facing - now it's clear that it would be in line with the bore, not perpendicular to it.
I don't think I'll be filing any grooves in my cylinder latches, but as said a few comments up - to each their own.
I will say that personally, if I bought a gun and took it apart and found ratty looking firework and blobs of solder - I'd be horrified, and order replacement parts right away.
|
|
44spl
.30 Stingray
Posts: 146
|
Post by 44spl on Apr 13, 2015 2:01:21 GMT -5
Jim, You've explained it well, thanks. In the event of such extremely worn parts as you describe my choice would be to properly reshape/refit the latch to it's original shape and fit, or replace it entirely. I respectfully disagree with the notion that making any surface of the latch pawl convex to any degree whatsoever is ever appropriate. Same goes for a trigger sear surfaces; I'll maintain that they should always be maintained as dead flat, square and true, and well polished. No hacking, cutting, chopping, grinding welding or soldering need be applied. Best, Paden Hi Paden Thx for sticking with me on this. I can't find anywhere that I represented the groove in the latch as convex. It's CONCAVE. David's misunderstanding of that key element began with this quote from him: “As for your recommendation to carve a convexity on the cylinder latch, ostensibly to reduce wear in the cylinder notch....” Maybe David confused his word 'convex' with 'concave', I don't know, but everyone seems to have swallowed it hook, line and sinker. EVEN after I corrected him in my very next response post to him and I quote verbatim (emphasis is mine): "But you misinterpret the cyl latch modification. IT'S NOT CONVEX with sharp edges. As I posted, it's like the trigger sear shown above, just slightly RELIEVED IN THE CENTER 1/3 to PREVENT a hump." The whole point is, what you say: "In the event of such extremely worn parts as you describe my choice would be to properly reshape/refit the latch to it's original shape and fit, or replace it entirely." all becomes irrelevant BECAUSE OF CONCAVING the center of the latch surface. The latch will wear but the fit doesn't deteriorate, because the concaveness in the latch surface can not develop a convex hump in the center of the latch. There's no longer any metal there, it's concave. I have only done this modification once for a friend as a favor, I don't charge friends. I don't do it to my guns. But I was impressed with the results! My friend is a quick draw competitor and saw other guns with the latch 'concaved' by professional tuners. He asked if I could do it to his Ruger New Vaquero. Well of course, it's so simple. Now what can be more abusive to a single action, even a Ruger, than quick draw and/or fanning? That was four or five years ago. He brought it back to me recently for installation of a Powers Custom 1/2 cock hammer. I was amazed at the lack of deterioration of the cyl latch fit. It was still as good as when I installed it. The gun has had a lot of fast draw in four + years! That's of course one anecdotal case. But jeeze, it worked as well as purported to. I really hope readers will read thoroughly and that this clears it up. All the best, Jim |
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Apr 13, 2015 6:34:48 GMT -5
Jim (44spl)..... first, please excuse my misstating fugitive alteration of cylinder catch. Meant to say CONCAVITY. A challenge of proof reading one's own material is the ability to mentally correct a mistake without spotting the misprint.
Beyond that, permit me to repeat: I appreciate buckheart's posting the photo of the bastard "trigger job" done on a New Model Ruger. The photo captures an absolutely indefensible attempt at trigger "improvement." Fugitive, also, the attempt to smear as unscientific knowledge distilled on the firing line. Makes me wonder how Ruger let me do the triggers on the .357 Maximum and stainless SBH prototypes.
Purpose of this thread: to share notes on PROPER TRIGGER WORK. If you want to climb Mt. Everest in sneakers, go ahead, I can't stop you. Meanwhile, I'll do what I can to help others shoot straight.
David Bradshaw
|
|
paulg
.375 Atomic
Posts: 2,420
|
Post by paulg on Apr 13, 2015 7:37:46 GMT -5
I'd like to first say that I wouldn't attempt a trigger job on anything. I don't have the know how or the want to. But this discussion has set a great example for the art of gentlemanly debate.
|
|
44spl
.30 Stingray
Posts: 146
|
Post by 44spl on Apr 13, 2015 20:17:37 GMT -5
Jim (44spl)..... first, please excuse my misstating fugitive alteration of cylinder catch. Meant to say CONCAVITY. A challenge of proof reading one's own material is the ability to mentally correct a mistake without noticing the misprint. Beyond that, permit me to repeat: I appreciate buckheart's posting the photo of the bastard "trigger job" done on a New Model Ruger. The photo captures an absolutely indefensible attempt at trigger "improvement." Words intended to intimidate---i.e., "science"----can lift garbage out of the gutter. Purpose of this thread is to share notes on PROPER TRIGGER WORK. Some of the doubt cast the presented technique kinda makes me wonder how Ruger let me do the triggers on the ,357 Maximum and stainless SBH prototypes. Meanwhile, I'll do what I can to help others shoot straight. David Bradshaw David, I said several times the methods I posted were not mine nor advocated by me, just additional information for members, it did not challenge your expertise and I did not disparage your posts or your vocabulary. So there's no justification for your petty sarcasm like this: "If you want to climb Mt. Everest in sneakers, go ahead, I can't stop you." It doesn't do right to this board, its members or your profession, I'm sorry you saw fit to do that. You may think I'm being thin skinned but that's not the case; sarcasm may be appropriate among close friends in person. But not on a forum and to much newer members. You're bigger than that. It impedes a free discussion board, and takes away from this friendly forum, and is not appreciated by me or even other members that were not targeted by you. Maybe you just had an off day, perceived your knowledge being challenged, or momentarily forgot your manners. Jim |
|
Paden
.375 Atomic
Lower Goldstream Creek
Posts: 1,132
|
Post by Paden on Apr 13, 2015 22:45:52 GMT -5
But this discussion has set a great example for the art of gentlemanly debate. I fear, Sir, your accolade may prove overstated and premature. ::) |
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Apr 14, 2015 10:12:34 GMT -5
My continuing thanks to whitworth for posting illustrations & notes on the CORRECT TECHNIQUE for a clean, long lasting, and, above all, SAFE tigger job on all Ruger New Model single actions.
David Bradshaw
|
|
|
|
Post by whitworth on Apr 14, 2015 10:23:48 GMT -5
I said several times the methods I posted were not mine nor advocated by me, just additional information for members, it did not challenge your expertise and I did not disparage your posts or your vocabulary. So there's no justification for your petty sarcasm like this: "If you want to climb Mt. Everest in sneakers, go ahead, I can't stop you." It doesn't do right to this board, its members or your profession, I'm sorry you saw fit to do that. You may think I'm being thin skinned but that's not the case; sarcasm may be appropriate among close friends in person. But not on a forum and to much newer members. You're bigger than that. It impedes a free discussion board, and takes away from this friendly forum, and is not appreciated by me or even other members that were not targeted by you. Maybe you just had an off day, perceived your knowledge being challenged, or momentarily forgot your manners. Jim You didn't advocate, but you didn't really distance yourself from this method either: "Just sharing other methods (not mine) that exist for the benefit of all readers. The "best way" is in the opinion and eye of the professional gunsmith. Other pros have their own ways that they are famous and well known for. "Worse case trigger job" is an opinion. Obviously it has a problem, NOW. Any trigger job using any method can be abused and/or eventually wears. Only scientific testing produces factual evidence, and only that proves or disproves opinions." I think you are reading way more into the tone of David's posting than was meant. That is the biggest problem with the internet in that tone is difficult to discern. David is concerned with unsafe practices as the consequences may be dire. He wants to clearly highlight them in order to prevent readers from hurting themselves. Plain and simple. Knowing Mr. Bradshaw, I can tell you that his intentions are pure and his knowledge is deep. Plus, he's just a great guy for what that's worth. This board has a reputation for civil behavior, and we would like to keep it that way without having to moderate with a heavy hand. Carry on, gentlemen. |
|
paulg
.375 Atomic
Posts: 2,420
|
Post by paulg on Apr 14, 2015 14:20:29 GMT -5
But this discussion has set a great example for the art of gentlemanly debate. I fear, Sir, your accolade may prove overstated and premature.  I ain't givin up on em yet! |
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Apr 16, 2015 11:04:22 GMT -5
Found----quite by accident----the original hammer from one of the very first Silhouette Super 10-1/2" SBH's. (Reckon the original trigger is hiding somewhere...)
There was no mechanical reason to replace the original hammer. Thought I'd install one with bluing still on it. I'll post photos in an upcoming "DB Vol." The "new" hammer & trigger were cannibalized from one of the original SRM .357 Maximum prototypes. Before Ruger, Jr., and I commensed to shoot the prototypes, I cleaned the letoff on each. (For the hell of it, I took a few letoffs down to 6 and 8 ounces. The full cock held, while trigger rebound was sketchy. At any rate, the CONTACT PATCH was too small for strength and effective REGAIN, and the PULL WEIGHT too low for human consumption. It was just an experiment and it proved the correctness of Ruger heat treatment.
My original Silhouette Super hammer shows signs of restorative touch-up, and I remember doing it once. This revolver lived life of deep breathing, winning a roadblock pile of goobers along the way. History not possible with the junk-science hammer & trigger from a gun buckheart bought on the internet, and shown in the posted on this thread. Which sad work is a poster for demented tampering.
Yes, given great hardware----found in Rugers----proper trigger work will grow a beard on your sixgun.
David Bradshaw
|
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Apr 17, 2015 8:14:01 GMT -5
Chrome-moly vs stainless hammers & triggers
As development of the .357 Maximum neared completion, Bill Ruger, Jr., brought a pair of Super Blackhawks to New Hampshire, presumably for me to shoot comment upon. These were stainless steel and, except for cylinders slightly shorter than blued production, matched the tapered contour of the SBH 7-1/2" and the S-410N (10-1/2" "Silhouette Super").
After a brief dry-fire session, I strip-cleaned the revolvers and gave each a trigger job, (SOP: during a trigger job, 10 to 25 dry-fires follow each re-assembly.)
My initial impression that the stainless hammer and trigger aren't quite as good as chrome-moly for dead-clean letoff has been pushed to the wall many times over the years, and would be meaningless without long strings of fire without room for error. A light, clean breaking trigger feels grows heavy when you're in your zone.
The prototype stainless 10-1/2" was a shooter. Once doped, my first five shots were at a pig painted on cardboard. Fired from the reclining Creedmoor position at 100 yards, the Federal 240 JHP's stitched a 2.7-inch group. Four of five cut a horizontal line measuring 0.7-inch, center-to-center. Ruger, Jr., who was on the spotting scope, said in dry wit, "You leaked one."
For the the punch-up to production. I was emphatic that the 10-1/2" must have an untapered "bull" barrel, target front sight, and an ejector long enough to completely clear brass from the chamber. The Maximum ejector assembly, albeit in stainless, was attached to this revolver, which became the KS411N. Ruger noted that the bull barrel favors direct threading of the ejector, without the traditional threaded nut soldered to the barrel. (that this revolver continues in production to this day warms my heart, for it is a sleeper. And my first choice for a shortened barrel Super.)
Ruger sent me one of the first KS411N's, believe early 1983, and it set a record on its first outing. Performance in the offhand category the defining climax. I pushed aside my perceived preference for chrome-moly.
Yet preference lingers. The risk of mentioning this is to unlock the tailgate on a dump truck full of opinions. My KS411N "Silver Hornpipe" went to the home of another steel shooter, who continued it along its leaded path. Years later I encountered this Silver Hornpipe again, and the trigger had perfect REGAIN and broke nearly good as new.
David Bradshaw
|
|
|
|
Post by 2 Dogs on Apr 17, 2015 8:49:35 GMT -5
Sir, what height should the Dog notch be? Is there a minimum dimension?
|
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Apr 17, 2015 9:29:05 GMT -5
Mr. 2 Dogs.... good question, about to receive a lousy answer.
I have attempted to measure the height of the hammer dog, by extending the tail of a caliper from dog to notch. My reading are inconsistent, therefore useless. I proceed by feel, and never sacrifice REGAIN for imaginary perfection. (For those just dropping by, REGAIN is a hook quality in the angles interfacing hammer and trigger.)
My final test involves minimum 25 squeezes. Employing the most delicate accumulation of pressure, the trigger sweeps rearward at the moment of hammer fall. That tests correct engagement. A fixture might limit stock removal, but I don't have one. Therefore, I don't know whether distance between hammer pivot and full cock notch might vary from hammer to hammer.
Ruger SA trigger work----two ways:
1) dead clean break. Light for silhouette. Heavier for hunting. This letoff is found on my Silhouette Super and .357 Maximum, etc.
2) smooth take-up. Whether set for a light or heavier letoff, there is a large contact patch (engagement patch). Which makes for a durable fast draw engagement. The Ruger 03 sports this arrangement.
Two advantages of Ruger New Model hammer and trigger:
Hammer----a flute at the back of the notch facilitates cleaning underside of dog.
Trigger----thick sear tip much stronger than thin Peacemaker sear.
Note for old model (Peacemaker-type)----the old model hammer notch has a square corner. Very few tools qualify to touch it. Most tools which claim to be square produce a radiussed corner at the bottom of the notch, which a sharp trigger sear must rub. As you well know, the resulting sensation will make you reach for a straight jacket. To clean a square notch, I use a ceramic stone----made, I believe by Coors----which has a sharp square angle. It has no other job.
A jig which measures both pin-to-notch, followed by pin-to-dog, should allow for a consistent dog-height and letoff.
David Bradshaw
|
|
|
|
Post by 2 Dogs on Apr 17, 2015 10:16:24 GMT -5
Got it. Thanks. I agree a caliper would be difficult to use to measure the hieght of the dog. But it should be possible to make a gauge so that one can cut it to the gauge depth and go to the stone. I will discuss such a gauge with Ray here pretty soon.
|
|
