Stephanie B wrote:
I don't know if there is the extra room to bore out the center of the cylinder to add a coil spring. Even if there is, would there be an issue with regard to keeping the cylinder aligned with no wobble as the cylinder rotates, the base pin/piston comes back as the cylinder rotates?
In analyzing Akumabito's concept rendering, it wouldn't be necessary to put the gas piston rebound spring around the piston inside the cylinder's center hole. The gas piston rebound spring could be put in the gas cylinder itself.
All that would have to be done is a gas tap hole drilled up through the bottom of the frame past the arbor channel in the frame and into the barrel.
Then the hole drilled through the arbor channel's bottom would have to be tapped and plugged and the front of the arbor hole in the frame would also have to be tapped and plugged. A newly made shorter arbor pin/piston with a rebound spring on it is then inserted into the hole that has now become a gas chamber. So contrary to Akumabito's concept rendering, the rebound spring for the gas piston would NOT
have to go in the middle of the cylinder.
I don't see a problem with the linear motion of the arbor pin/piston's reciprocating a short distance back and forth inside the center hole of the cylinder causing it to affect the cylinder rotating or causing wobble. If used as Akumabito conceived it, the pawl against the ratchet in the rear of the cylinder and the barrel in the front would serve to hold the cylinder securely in place against wobble. And even if the cylinder DID wobble a teeny tiny fraction of a bit in rotation, once it stopped its rotation and was aligned with the barrel and locked in place ready to fire, it wouldn't matter.
Actually except for his placement of the piston return spring, Akumabito's concept is really good. The only thing I worry about is not the force of the system that could be adjusted by powder load, but the SPEED
of the non delayed system being only slowed down by the gas piston spring, the hammer mainspring and the weight of the hammer possibly not being enough to slow the operation sufficiently. Hopefully there would be enough friction and delay to prevent parts breakage, galling of metal parts and cylinder over travel. No real way to tell without building one and testing it.
Stephanie B wrote:
Akumabito's idea for a gas piston might be easier, for then you're not messing around with the base pin, nor are you drilling out the cylinder and frame to accommodate a recoil spring. It looks a little funky with the gas cylinder on top, but there would be less need to modify the revolver to try it out.
I agree it might be easier to build it that way, but I just can't get behind making a Kalashnikov "AK" muzzleloading, semi-auto 1858 Remington. It just looks too modern of an adaptation and wrong looking to me. I want something that still preserves the Victorian "Steampunk" look of what might have been back then. Not something off an AK47 from today.
I think the very first experiment I will try is to get some extra nipples and drill them out to a larger touch hole diameter to allow more gas to pass out the rear of the nipples, which would blow the spent cap off the nipple, which would push the hammer back, hopefully operating the system and we will see if that is too fast a speed and if any problems develop. Then if that doesn't work, I will know that a cap directly blowing back against the hammer is too rapid and violent an action for the system to operate properly.
In that case my next experiment would be to make Akumabito's internal to the frame gas cylinder and try that using a strong return spring on the gas piston to hopefully slow the action down. At least any mods I would do would be mostly inside the revolver and not able to be seen. Then if that didn't work, those mods I did to try using his concept would not interfere with me using the same revolver to build and test my zig zag recoiling cylinder system on. Except I would have to put a plug in the barrel where I drilled the gas tap hole in trying his concept. Or else I'd have to go to the hassle of threading on a new barrel.
As soon as I get an old beater 1858 Remington repro, I think that's going to be my approach when I get the time to get around to experimenting with this.