Revolver Repair

[Derilas]

Hello,

I have this old Belgian copy of a 'RIC-ish' revolver sold into the US a very long time ago in an odd caliber, .442 Webley. I am in the middle of making the brass for it out of 44 mag, so if anyone has any advice for how to precisely shape revolver brass, I am all ears. The main reason I am writing this post is that, as one might figure, the revolver is out of time. The cylinder underrotates when the hammer is pulled back, meaning that the hand is too short, and I will attach a link to a google photos album of the hand, it is pretty chewed up. It is only off by at most 500 thousands or so, so my thoughts are, rather than making an entirely new hand assembly, I could get away with welding a new tip onto it and reshaping it until the chamber-barrel alignment is as good as it can be. any other thoughts are greatly appreciated if shared

One last thing...

This is not Lawrence of Arabia's revolver and it has almost no special historical value. It's an iron gun and the finish has been bubba'd

https://photos.app.goo.gl/YM4fKR8uXezL4iwT8

[4V50 Gary]

Or you can remove the old one and use it as a pattern to fabricate a new one. That way the original remains intact. I'd use tool steel and harden it afterwards.

[44 AMP]

Either welding on additional metal and then filing/shaping to fit or making a new part patterned off the original will work, done right.

However, it needs to be done right, and about that how much do you figure it is short???

It is only off by at most 500 thousands or so, ...

500 thousandths is .500" or, half an inch. Is half an inch what you meant? or did you mean something like .005" ? (five thousandths) which is a very small amount.

[tangolima]

About the brass, what particular question do you have? I assume you have the sizing die and a way to trim. The next thing is to look for parent brass to convert from. You may need to turn the brass wall thinner.

About the hand, one option is too stretch the metal to lengthen the old part. Before doing it, I would trace out the old parts outline and dimensions. Take pictures too. I would also anneal the part before commencing stretching.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Derilas]

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

Either welding on additional metal and then filing/shaping to fit or making a new part patterned off the original will work, done right.

However, it needs to be done right, and about that how much do you figure it is short???



500 thousandths is .500" or, half an inch. Is half an inch what you meant? or did you mean something like .005" ? (five thousandths) which is a very small amount.

I am not a machinist, but I am actively talking to a professional about this. .500 th is way to much, If i was writing this post again, I would say that at most, it's off by .050 th, probably less than .020 th, although I'm not sure how to measure that. The cylinder under rotates, That almost always means that there is a problem with the hand. I figured this out by looking at the bore-barrel alignment

[Derilas]

Originally Posted by tangolima

About the brass, what particular question do you have? I assume you have the sizing die and a way to trim. The next thing is to look for parent brass to convert from. You may need to turn the brass wall thinner.

About the hand, one option is too stretch the metal to lengthen the old part. Before doing it, I would trace out the old parts outline and dimensions. Take pictures too. I would also anneal the part before commencing stretching.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

I have already figured out the parent case, my question is how to precisely trim cases. As far as I know, 44 Webley dies are unobtanium, but if you know where I can get custom dies, I would not be able to thank you. as far as stretching the hand goes, after I anneal it, how might I be able to stretch it precisely and maintain its overall shape?

[tangolima]

Originally Posted by Derilas

I have already figured out the parent case, my question is how to precisely trim cases. As far as I know, 44 Webley dies are unobtanium, but if you know where I can get custom dies, I would not be able to thank you. as far as stretching the hand goes, after I anneal it, how might I be able to stretch it precisely and maintain its overall shape?

There is a company CH4D. They make custom dies. I reckon it would be about $150 to $250.

Buffalo arms has the die set for $130.

.44 Russian die may work too.

For trimming, trimmer that allow you to adjust length without pilot will work. I am cheap. I always try modifying a Lee's length gauge to fit.

2 ways to stretch a part. Tapping with hammer. Or squeezing with pair of stout bench vise. It is a jewel maker's technique. It has pulled me out of tight spot many times. It may widen the part and you just file it to fit. It basically moves metal from the thickness.

The round requires heeled bullet. It may be your next headache. Could be a big one.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[ballardw]

Looks like bullet molds are available
https://oldwestbulletmoulds.com/shop...e-cavity-mould

[44 AMP]

I found .44Webley / .442 RIC in Cartridges of the world, and going by the given dimensions, .44Mag/spl brass will be undersize in body diameter, (by about 0.016") and oversized in rim diameter by about 0.011". I have no idea about rim thickness, but the old BP rounds usually have very thin rims compared to modern brass.

.44 Russian is the same as .44 Mag in body and rim diameters, so its not a great choice, either.

Also, considering the age and origin of the pistol, the chambers might not be "spot on" the given specs. It's not impossible your chambers will be a bit oversize. For proper function, you need to get the rim diameter and thickness right.

A case with an undersized body but the proper rim size will fire and just swell to what the chamber allows. Not a problem at black powder pressures, unless the difference is so much that the case splits. Reloading the swollen cases will be a problem, without the proper size die, and case life probably won't be all that long, even with correct dies.

Given the specs in my book, you might be better off starting with a .45 caliber case like the .45 Auto Rim, which is a close match in body diameter, just a bit over, but then there is the rim to deal with, and that will need to be turned to reduce diameter and thickness.

Factory load is said to be 16 - 19gr of black powder, launching a 200-220gr lead bullet into the 700fpr range.

Book says the round was loaded in the US as the .44 Webley, until 1940.

You might be able to find a round or two on the collector market, to use for measurements and comparison.

Good luck with your project!

[4V50 Gary]

To make the part, you'll need tool steel of the same thickness. You might have to file/mill it.

First is to make a locating pin. Drill a hole the diameter of that pivot pin. All measurements are taken from that hole's location. Then saw/file the rest to shape but leave the working part of the hand longer. Harden the working tip and then solder the pin in.

Then it becomes a matter of filing to adjust it.

[tangolima]

Originally Posted by 4V50 Gary

To make the part, you'll need tool steel of the same thickness. You might have to file/mill it.

First is to make a locating pin. Drill a hole the diameter of that pivot pin. All measurements are taken from that hole's location. Then saw/file the rest to shape but leave the working part of the hand longer. Harden the working tip and then solder the pin in.

Then it becomes a matter of filing to adjust it.

That's what I would do too. I probably would go mild steel case hardened. For tool steel or spring steel, I will definitely anneal it before any manual fitting operations.

We use online machine shops at work. They are pretty cool. We make the 3D design. They will CNC, or even 3D print, it. A bit pricey of course, but not too bad compared to labor cost making parts ourselves.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[JohnKSa]

Given that the rest of the revolver (including the cylinder ratchet) is probably very soft metal, I think I wouldn't want the pawl to be very hard. If something is going to wear out, it would probably be better if the pawl wore out again. Trying to rebuild the cylinder ratchet is going to be a lot harder.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by JohnKSa

Given that the rest of the revolver (including the cylinder ratchet) is probably very soft metal, I think I wouldn't want the pawl to be very hard. If something is going to wear out, it would probably be better if the pawl wore out again. Trying to rebuild the cylinder ratchet is going to be a lot harder.

That's an excellent point.

How much do you expect to shoot the thing once you get it repaired? Even mild steel is steel -- it'll hold up for several hundred (if not several thousand) shots.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by Derilas

I have this old Belgian copy of a 'RIC-ish' revolver sold into the US a very long time ago in an odd caliber, .442 Webley. I am in the middle of making the brass for it out of 44 mag,

I know you say you have settled on .44 Magnum for the case, but it seems a poor choice. It's MUCH too long -- even .44 Special is too long. And both .44 Specil and .44 magnum will require a significant amount of stretching to expand to the diameter of .442 Webley.

It would still require some stretching of the cases, and machining of the case rims, but I think .44-40 would actually require less stretching than .44 Special/Magnum.

[4V50 Gary]

Didn't think of that John. Thanks.

Once you get it to work, photocopy the hand and take measursements (in case you have to make it again) that you write on the photocopy.

[44 AMP]

It would still require some stretching of the cases, and machining of the case rims, but I think .44-40 would actually require less stretching than .44 Special/Magnum.

you may have the best solution there, using .44-40 brass, except for the rim. All the cases mentioned will have to be shortened, as the .44 Webley case is only 0.69" long.

My books say .44 Webley (.442) is .472" at the head and .503" rim diameter. .44Mag (and family) are .457" at the head and .514" rim while the .44-40 is shown as .469" at the head and .525" at the rim.

So, for the body of the case, the .44-40 is the closest, being just barely smaller than the Webley spec. But the .44-40 has the largest rim diameter, and so will have to be turned down more. No free lunch, it seems...

The .45 Auto Rim case MIGHT be workable, being slightly oversize at .476", it might be possible to size that down enough to work, especially if your pistols chambers are a bit on the large size, something fairly common with guns of that era...

However, the .45AR has a .516" rim and is specially made extra thick, so it would take more work to get that down to the .503" and fairly thin rim of the Webley round.

While you're working on the gun, take a bit and slug the bore (or have it done). You might find that gun despite being .442 marked, might want a .45 caliber bullet to fit the bore....
That might complicate your ammo creation a bit more...

Good Luck!

[Aguila Blanca]

Definitely no free lunch. The .442 Webley rim is also only .033" thick. All the potential donor cases have thicker rims that will need to be reduced in thickness as well as in diameter.

[44 AMP]

Figuring out how, and making shootable ammo is something to work on, AFTER the gun is repaired enough to be safely in time. IF you can't do that, there's no point to making ammo.

[FrankenMauser]

One of my friends always starts with "blacksmithing" when he identifies a short hand in an old revolver - especially antiques.

He'll heat the hand and hammer it to stretch the tip to what he believes the shape and length should be, air-cool, and then test and adjust as needed.
If it is a situation where he intends to, "fire two cylinders through it on camera and then put it away forever," he'll usually just leave it with a soft, blacksmithed hand.

But if it needs to be reliable for more use, he'll then use the working hand as a pattern to shape a new replacement.

[Unclenick]

This post says the Cartridges of the World numbers are wrong. He says the chambers in his three Belgian guns chambered for this cartridge are about 0.451" at the back at most. Indeed, the photos of the cartridge in Wikipedia and in that post show the bullets (0.436") and cases to be close in diameter. I wouldn't be surprised if the original drawings called for the case diameters to be 0.442", given when the cartridge was introduced and named.

Wiki-photo shared under their rules. Citation: .442 Webley. (2023, June 7). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.442_Webley



That link is worth a read-through, as he describes his setup for thinning the case rims, and he describes thinning the web of 44s to fit and then sizing the case body down. He also names some tools.

Given the above, I would advise the OP to start by measuring the IDs of his chambers at the back end. If you use the inside jaws of calipers, then you may be off by a couple of thousandths. They aren't very good with holes. Using a round lead ball to slug the back of the chamber would be better, as would the use of pin gauges or small hole gauges if you have them.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by Unclenick

Given the above, I would advise the OP to start by measuring the IDs of his chambers at the back end. If you use the inside jaws of calipers, then you may be off by a couple of thousandths. They aren't very good with holes. Using a round lead ball to slug the back of the chamber would be better, as would the use of pin gauges or small hole gauges if you have them.

Or an inside micrometer.

[Unclenick]

...Or a bore gauge. I got a used one some years ago. Useful at times.

[Derilas]

Originally Posted by Unclenick

This post says the Cartridges of the World numbers are wrong. He says the chambers in his three Belgian guns chambered for this cartridge are about 0.451" at the back at most. Indeed, the photos of the cartridge in Wikipedia and in that post show the bullets (0.436") and cases to be close in diameter. I wouldn't be surprised if the original drawings called for the case diameters to be 0.442", given when the cartridge was introduced and named.

Wiki-photo shared under their rules. Citation: .442 Webley. (2023, June 7). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.442_Webley



That link is worth a read-through, as he describes his setup for thinning the case rims, and he describes thinning the web of 44s to fit and then sizing the case body down. He also names some tools.

Given the above, I would advise the OP to start by measuring the IDs of his chambers at the back end. If you use the inside jaws of calipers, then you may be off by a couple of thousandths. They aren't very good with holes. Using a round lead ball to slug the back of the chamber would be better, as would the use of pin gauges or small hole gauges if you have them.

Unclenick et al.,

OP here, I bought an original remington umc factory loaded cartridge to measure, and I'm pretty certain the author of Cartridges of the world must have been relying on someone else's measurements for the 44 Webley entry. Even though I made my measurements with a cheap electronic caliper, I came up with substantially different results, especially with the base diameter. Barnes says that the 44 Webley has a base diameter of .472, my measurements are .453 for the base, for the neck, he got .47, I got .447. My OG case length is .674, Barnes' is .69. Good thing I did this investigation, otherwise I would have made ammo that didn't fit!

[rc]

How will reducing rim thickness affect the primer depth?

[Derilas]

Originally Posted by rc

How will reducing rim thickness affect the primer depth?

RC,

The 44 mag rim is .055 inches thick, the 44 Webley is .0505 inches based on the factory cartridge I am measuring. .0045 inches is a miniscule amount, just a few kisses on the lathe. My thinking was that the 44 mag rim thickness can just be kissed ever so slightly on a lathe until it fits, making it a tight seal. Seeing that the base gun is made with soft iron, and the cartridge is black powder, I am pretty sure that this will probably not be super significant. Just in case, my plan was to face the side of the rim toward the front of the case and not the back, so I don't have to think about facing the whole back of the case and hence run into primer seating issues.