View Single Post
Old January 5, 2011, 08:46 AM   #5
Doc Hoy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Naples, Fl
Posts: 5,440
I had an 1851....

....in .44 which had unchamfered chambers (I think) due to a manufacturing oversight. I decided to chamfer the chambers thinking it would make the pistol easier to load. It didn't make much difference.

On the other hand I have an 1860 from ASP and in that pistol, the barrel is contoured such that a roundball placed on the chamber in preparation for ramming will not pass to the ramming (six oclock) position because the barrel interferes. One of the suggestions was to chamfer the chambers to permit the ball to sit lower and thus clear the barrel. I fixed it in a different way but I think that would have worked.

There is one thing I feel secure in saying about these tool bits. They have a way of grabbing the workpiece. If you decide to use it, make darned sure the cylinder absolutely will not move. If it grabs, there is not a human on the earth who has the strength to hold it in place. It will destroy the cylinder in a tenth of a second. Use a drill press. As an alternative, you might try chucking it in a handle (like a tap handle) and doing the work very carefully by hand.

Here is where I would solicit some endorsement or contradiction from others in the group who know more than I do. Lets talk about the problem that the tool seems to be intended to correct; the poorly fitting ball or bullet allowing gases to pass by. If you think about it the seal around the ball is made further down the chamber and so chamfering the rim of the chamber probably won't make the bullet seal any better. If you shave a ring all the way around the bullet, you can be relatively certain of an acceptable seal. I think that changing the shape of the rim on the chamber will not have much effect.
__________________
Seek truth. Relax. Take a breath.
Doc Hoy is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.03374 seconds with 8 queries