More news from the novice

Doc Hoy · April 20, 2009, 10:48 AM

Fellas,

I bought my first two tins of CCI caps. (Number 10). I figured that number ten caps should be essentially the same size, regardless of who makes them. So yesterday, some education occured.

Number 10 CCIs will not fit my ROA. I used them very well on the Remington (ASM) and the Colt (Euroarms). In fact for those pistols I will begin using CCIs exclusively.

For the ROA I am going back to Remington 10s or perhaps try CCI 11s.

What do you experts think?

Also, Do I imagine correctly that CCIs provide a little better ignition? Maybe hotter or more consistent manufacturing than Remington?

Fingers McGee · April 20, 2009, 12:08 PM

I've not had much luck with CCIs (missing compound, hard to seat, lots of tiny fragments). IME #10 Remingtons work best with Treso nipples in my Colts. I don't have ROAs so can't comment on their efficacy there.

mykeal · April 20, 2009, 01:06 PM

First, here's my (by now) well published size comparison chart; these are averages of at least 20 samples of each brand and size listed. The opening diameter measurement is very hard to make, so the implication of 3 decimal place precision is misleading; the error is probably on the order of .002" to .004".

Second, there is no standard specification for cap sizes. One brand's No. 10 is NOT the same as another brand's No. 10. Also, they vary in size between batches of the same brands, so the ones you buy may not be the same size as the ones you buy next year. You don't get .001" precision for 4 cents apiece.

My ROA accepts either Remington size and RWS 1075's, but again, what works for me is no guarantee, or even a good hint, at what will work for you. These things vary all over the place.

ClemBert · April 20, 2009, 02:28 PM

Doc, read this thread Percussion Cap Misfires

Doc Hoy · April 20, 2009, 02:29 PM

To Fingers,

Sounds like my observations of the consistency of CCI caps over Remington does not match your experience. (I do acknowledge that I have thus far only shot two tins of CCIs.)

To Mykeal,

I had seen this documentation before but it took your post to remind me of it. I think I will continue to try CCIs as I said previously using Nr 11s for the ROA. The 1Os worked great on the Remington and the Colt with zero misfires attributable to caps in almost 200 rounds. (I put a couple through the ROA with so little success that I became unbenefitted, as my wife says when she loses her temper.) I would say that is pretty good.

Now for the question.

What is the true advantage of Treso nipples?

Doc Hoy · April 20, 2009, 02:35 PM

Clem,

Thanks for the link. I read a good bit of that post before it got so involved. Then I forgot all about it when I went shooting on Sunday. I bought the CCIs at a gun show three weeks ago. And now I have shot them all up.

If they continue to perform as those first two tins did, and if the number 11s fit my ROA the way I think they will, and if the sizes can be relied upon to be consistent, I think I have some keepers.

If we had some bacon, we could have bacon and egss, if we had some eggs.

Dooda Dooda!

Fingers McGee · April 20, 2009, 04:23 PM

There is a post on another forum regarding current production Remington Caps. I just checked some #10s that I bought about 3 years ago. The 20 I checked the length on miked out at between .165 and .174. Yeah, .165. Tripple checked that one. The rest were between .171 and .174. Then checked 20 in a tin from a case of 5000 I bought last Oct. They miked at between .178 and .180.

After I finish the 3 yr old ones, the new ones will get a try out. we'll see how compatible they are with Treso Nipples.

Hawg · April 20, 2009, 04:55 PM

Quote:

I've not had much luck with CCIs (missing compound, hard to seat, lots of tiny fragments).

I've had the opposite experience. I much prefer CCI over Remington.

gmatov · April 21, 2009, 11:35 PM

mykeal,

I believe your chart is valid, BUT, I have Rem 10 and 11, CCI 10 and 11 and Dynamit Nobel 1075 and none of them fit my Uberti Walker. I have to crimp them all.

I am ready to order a new set of nipples to allow me to use what I have with this revolver without pinching them.

To measure them accurately, you would need to buy a set of ground gage pins. Your chart shows the 10 as bigger than the 11 for the Rems. That SHOULD not be, but maybe it is so.

I have about 1800 caps that I bought from a store that was clearing BP supplies, going out of that business, strictly fishing, now. Powder, tho', they would not reduce. Still bought out their stock of Goex. 13 per pound.

Cheers,

George

Fingers McGee · April 21, 2009, 11:54 PM

Quote Doc Hoy

Quote:

Sounds like my observations of the consistency of CCI caps over Remington does not match your experience. (I do acknowledge that I have thus far only shot two tins of CCIs.)

Many moons ago (20+ years), when I started shooting BP rifles in competition, I used CCI caps. They worked very well for me until I apparently got some from a less than stellar lot. Misfires, missing compound, etc caused me to switch to RWS 1075s (the old formula in the metal tins - which I still have 10 tins of). The RWS caps outperformed the CCIs that had let me down, so I didn't use the CCIs for a number of years.

When I started shooting CAS a little over 10 years ago, I used the RWS caps on my C&B revolvers; but was having some trouble with them. As it was, they weren't sized to fit the nipples very well. I tried CCIs again; both number 10s and number 11s, and was seeing the same missing compound in one or two caps oer tin, and was having misfires. A fellow shooter introduced me to Remington caps and Treso nipples. After determining that the 11s didnt fit the nipples as well as the #10s did; I switched to using Treso Nipples and #10 Remingtons on all of my shooting C&Bs.

#10 Remingtons were in short supply a couple or three years ago and the only ones available were #11 CCIs. I bought a couple tins and found once again, that some of the caps in the tin were missing the compound and even had some fall out after I loaded them in a TDC revolver capper. As a result, I have sworn off CCI caps.

Of course, Your Mileage May Vary.

Hawg · April 22, 2009, 03:24 AM

I've had the missing compound problem with Remington and not with CCI's. I use factory nipples and CCI fit better than Remington which are too tight. I would like to swap nipples out on my 60 Colt to take #11 like my 58 does. All I can get in a #10 is Remintgon and have to drive 60 miles one way to get them.

Doc Hoy · April 22, 2009, 06:23 AM

Goex for 13.00 a pound!? Cripes!

I bought Triple 7 at 22.00 a pound at the gun show a couple weeks ago and thought I was doing good.

Doc Hoy · April 22, 2009, 06:35 AM

Both posts are good information. Not so much for their support of one brand over another but for the confirmation that the lifestyle we live is a very individual thing.

I don't remember ever reading a post on this forum, and I doubt that I ever will, in which there is a universally held opinion on the topic of conversation. It's "Brass frame good/Brass frame bad" or "Remington, No Colt" or "30 grains...No Way! Not more than 22" or "Wouldn't pay more than $65.00 for a used brass frame anything...Ah You cheapskate!".

There are many good things about these discussions but one of the best is that those who adhere to differing viewpoints can do so without pulling out the shootin iron.

ClemBert · April 22, 2009, 08:47 AM

Quote:

gmatov:
mykeal,

I believe your chart is valid, BUT, I have Rem 10 and 11, CCI 10 and 11 and Dynamit Nobel 1075 and none of them fit my Uberti Walker. I have to crimp them all.

I am ready to order a new set of nipples to allow me to use what I have with this revolver without pinching them.

To measure them accurately, you would need to buy a set of ground gage pins. Your chart shows the 10 as bigger than the 11 for the Rems. That SHOULD not be, but maybe it is so.

I have about 1800 caps that I bought from a store that was clearing BP supplies, going out of that business, strictly fishing, now. Powder, tho', they would not reduce. Still bought out their stock of Goex. 13 per pound.

Cheers,

George

My findings are very consistent with mykeal and his observations. Here is my own chart below. I probably live 1000 miles from mykeal and probably bought my caps at a different time from possibly a different batch.

And a comparative photo:

From left to right: Rem #11, Win #11 Mag, Rem #10

mykeal · April 22, 2009, 12:43 PM

The point isn't that my data, or anyone else's for that matter, is valid or invalid; it's that cap sizes are a crap shoot. Gmatov's post actually agrees with and reinforces my thesis, whether he understood that or not.

gmatov · April 22, 2009, 11:38 PM

mykeal,

Oh, I do INDEED agree. I have said that NONE of mine fit my new Walker without crimping. I tried crimping a bunch and loading the capper, but you know what? That damned hole will not accept a crimped cap. Makes them oval and they don't fit the fill hole. So, back to thumbing them on.

Can't handle them li'l sumbitches when it's under about 55 F, fingers get all fumbly. Same with the Rems, I haven't modified the cappers to fit that space and get them on right. Thumb them on. Gotta take a file and a stone to them.

Surprise is that the LENGTH is the major difference. Never measured that. ID is about the same, well within reasonable error in measurement. The surprise is that the length of the cone must be the determinant of the size you need. The further down the cone you push it, the tighter it seems to get. I'd have thought, without checking, that the flash hole end of the cone was larger on one pistol or the other to need larger or smaller caps.

I posted a measurement a long time ago on another forum. Never thought to measure the length. Someone said you learn something new every day. I have today.

I think I will go to Track or someone and buy a whole bunch of new nipples. I think Treso makes them all to fit one size cap. Or you can buy them all to fit one size cap. I would rather have 10,000 of one size than 2,000 of each size, one size for each pistol.

I take a different mix out each outing. Don't want to have to make sure I grab the right ammo each time. Like grabbing 44 Mag when you take the 357 out, or vice versa.

Thanks for the measurements.

Cheers,

George

mykeal= Michael?

mykeal · April 23, 2009, 06:24 AM

Quote:

I think Treso makes them all to fit one size cap. Or you can buy them all to fit one size cap. I would rather have 10,000 of one size than 2,000 of each size, one size for each pistol.

My point was that there is no such thing as 'one size cap'. They vary all over the place. You can buy a batch of 1000, or maybe even 5000, that will be close to each other because they were made at nearly the same time. The next batch may be entirely different. There is no standard.

Doc Hoy · April 23, 2009, 12:02 PM

I love it when the questions I ask generate a lot of conversation. I value the inputs and always wind up smarter as the posts continue.

You said something a while back that went (to paraphrase) ....at four to five cents a piece for caps you can't expect much in the way of accuracy or consistency of manufacture. I apologize if my interpretation of your comment is not accurate.

Those of you who shoot enough to make purchases of caps in the 5000 lot range seem to accept that in stride.

When I buy caps I buy two to five tins. What I am reading is that there is little reason to hope that my next batch of caps will be anything like my last batch. So my resolution, stated in the opening post to use only CCI caps might be rethought.

It does seem to me as though the industrial process could be controlled closely enough that one could trust that a number 11 cap will consistently be larger than a number 10. I would add that in my opinion this should be applicable across company lines. BUT...The market (that would be us) seems unwilling to demand these standards. In our discussion, no concensus emerged as to the desirability of one brand over another. Indeed we seemed to be surprised at your chart which showed the dscrepancy in the relative size of caps from different manufs. Two things to me seem to be important:

1. Consistent fit on the nipple. That is to say that if I find that number 11 CCIs fit my ROA today, they should fit my ROA 25 years from now.

2. Consistently acceptable ignition. The number of cap associated misfires should be extremely low.

If the market were able to come to a decision we would do it by purchasing caps with more consistent standards in higher numbers. The manufacturers whose volume declines would have to figure out what was wrong and fix it, or start trying to sell candy. (No one cares about nipple fit or consistent ignition in M&Ms)

arcticap · April 23, 2009, 12:43 PM

I think that the nipples are more to blame than the caps since many guns have inconsistently sized nipples.
I thought that the older ROA's were made with larger nipples and then at some point Ruger switched and started making them smaller.
Remington did the same thing with the size of their #11 caps about 10 years ago when they were the size of #11.5 - #12, until they totally revamped production for their current new cap style and size.

ClemBert · April 23, 2009, 12:58 PM

What I walked away with is "expect consistent inconsistency".

Doc Hoy · April 23, 2009, 01:22 PM

You said, "the nipples are more to blame than the caps".

My problem is that I assumed incorrectly, that my successful use of nr 10 Remingtons on the ROA (My one and only ROA in which I have yet to change nipples) was an indication that the choice of cap size for the pistol is nr 10 regardless of who made the caps.

Now I have learned that it don't work that way.

madcratebuilder · April 23, 2009, 01:46 PM

I have found it easier to find a revolver to fit my caps. I must have over a dozen different tins of caps and no two alike. I just go through my revolvers till I find a good match and then that tin stays with that revolver.
The only revolvers I have found that I had to change nipples on are Pietta Remingtons. The angle of the nipples, and it seems the hammer always hits them on a new revolver, deforms them.

arcticap · April 23, 2009, 03:44 PM

It's like buying a pair of shoes and with so many of them being made in China now, some brands always seem to be made too narrow.
I'm curious about how old your Ruger is and when Ruger may have switched their nipple size, if at all?

Ruger serial number history:

http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Firear...erHistory.html

April 20, 2009, 12:08 PM	#2
Fingers McGee Senior Member Join Date: March 19, 2008 Location: High & Dry in Missouri Ozarks Posts: 2,113	I've not had much luck with CCIs (missing compound, hard to seat, lots of tiny fragments). IME #10 Remingtons work best with Treso nipples in my Colts. I don't have ROAs so can't comment on their efficacy there. __________________ Fingers (Show Me MO smoke) McGee - AKA Man of Many Colts - Alter ego of Diabolical Ken; SASS Regulator 28564-L-TG; Rangemaster and stage writer extraordinaire; Frontiersman, Pistoleer, NRA Endowment Life, NMLRA, SAF, CCRKBA, STORM 327, SV115; Charter member, Central Ozarks Western Shooters Cynic: A blackguard whose faulty vision see things as they are, not as they should be. Ambrose Bierce

April 20, 2009, 02:29 PM	#5
Doc Hoy Senior Member Join Date: October 24, 2008 Location: Naples, Fl Posts: 5,440	Thanks guys plus a question To Fingers, Sounds like my observations of the consistency of CCI caps over Remington does not match your experience. (I do acknowledge that I have thus far only shot two tins of CCIs.) To Mykeal, I had seen this documentation before but it took your post to remind me of it. I think I will continue to try CCIs as I said previously using Nr 11s for the ROA. The 1Os worked great on the Remington and the Colt with zero misfires attributable to caps in almost 200 rounds. (I put a couple through the ROA with so little success that I became unbenefitted, as my wife says when she loses her temper.) I would say that is pretty good. Now for the question. What is the true advantage of Treso nipples? __________________ Seek truth. Relax. Take a breath.

April 20, 2009, 02:35 PM	#6
Doc Hoy Senior Member Join Date: October 24, 2008 Location: Naples, Fl Posts: 5,440	Yup! Thats it! Clem, Thanks for the link. I read a good bit of that post before it got so involved. Then I forgot all about it when I went shooting on Sunday. I bought the CCIs at a gun show three weeks ago. And now I have shot them all up. If they continue to perform as those first two tins did, and if the number 11s fit my ROA the way I think they will, and if the sizes can be relied upon to be consistent, I think I have some keepers. If we had some bacon, we could have bacon and egss, if we had some eggs. Dooda Dooda! __________________ Seek truth. Relax. Take a breath.

April 20, 2009, 04:23 PM	#7
Fingers McGee Senior Member Join Date: March 19, 2008 Location: High & Dry in Missouri Ozarks Posts: 2,113	There is a post on another forum regarding current production Remington Caps. I just checked some #10s that I bought about 3 years ago. The 20 I checked the length on miked out at between .165 and .174. Yeah, .165. Tripple checked that one. The rest were between .171 and .174. Then checked 20 in a tin from a case of 5000 I bought last Oct. They miked at between .178 and .180. After I finish the 3 yr old ones, the new ones will get a try out. we'll see how compatible they are with Treso Nipples. __________________ Fingers (Show Me MO smoke) McGee - AKA Man of Many Colts - Alter ego of Diabolical Ken; SASS Regulator 28564-L-TG; Rangemaster and stage writer extraordinaire; Frontiersman, Pistoleer, NRA Endowment Life, NMLRA, SAF, CCRKBA, STORM 327, SV115; Charter member, Central Ozarks Western Shooters Cynic: A blackguard whose faulty vision see things as they are, not as they should be. Ambrose Bierce

April 22, 2009, 06:35 AM	#13
Doc Hoy Senior Member Join Date: October 24, 2008 Location: Naples, Fl Posts: 5,440	To Fingers and Hawg Both posts are good information. Not so much for their support of one brand over another but for the confirmation that the lifestyle we live is a very individual thing. I don't remember ever reading a post on this forum, and I doubt that I ever will, in which there is a universally held opinion on the topic of conversation. It's "Brass frame good/Brass frame bad" or "Remington, No Colt" or "30 grains...No Way! Not more than 22" or "Wouldn't pay more than $65.00 for a used brass frame anything...Ah You cheapskate!". There are many good things about these discussions but one of the best is that those who adhere to differing viewpoints can do so without pulling out the shootin iron. __________________ Seek truth. Relax. Take a breath.

April 20, 2009, 10:48 AM	#1
Doc Hoy Senior Member Join Date: October 24, 2008 Location: Naples, Fl Posts: 5,440	More news from the novice Fellas, I bought my first two tins of CCI caps. (Number 10). I figured that number ten caps should be essentially the same size, regardless of who makes them. So yesterday, some education occured. Number 10 CCIs will not fit my ROA. I used them very well on the Remington (ASM) and the Colt (Euroarms). In fact for those pistols I will begin using CCIs exclusively. For the ROA I am going back to Remington 10s or perhaps try CCI 11s. What do you experts think? Also, Do I imagine correctly that CCIs provide a little better ignition? Maybe hotter or more consistent manufacturing than Remington? __________________ Seek truth. Relax. Take a breath.

April 20, 2009, 01:06 PM	#3
mykeal Senior Member Join Date: October 8, 2006 Location: Northern Michigan Posts: 2,772	First, here's my (by now) well published size comparison chart; these are averages of at least 20 samples of each brand and size listed. The opening diameter measurement is very hard to make, so the implication of 3 decimal place precision is misleading; the error is probably on the order of .002" to .004". Second, there is no standard specification for cap sizes. One brand's No. 10 is NOT the same as another brand's No. 10. Also, they vary in size between batches of the same brands, so the ones you buy may not be the same size as the ones you buy next year. You don't get .001" precision for 4 cents apiece. My ROA accepts either Remington size and RWS 1075's, but again, what works for me is no guarantee, or even a good hint, at what will work for you. These things vary all over the place.

April 20, 2009, 02:28 PM	#4
ClemBert Senior Member Join Date: March 2, 2009 Location: Orlando Posts: 936	Doc, read this thread Percussion Cap Misfires

April 21, 2009, 11:35 PM	#9
gmatov Junior member Join Date: September 20, 2005 Posts: 346	mykeal, I believe your chart is valid, BUT, I have Rem 10 and 11, CCI 10 and 11 and Dynamit Nobel 1075 and none of them fit my Uberti Walker. I have to crimp them all. I am ready to order a new set of nipples to allow me to use what I have with this revolver without pinching them. To measure them accurately, you would need to buy a set of ground gage pins. Your chart shows the 10 as bigger than the 11 for the Rems. That SHOULD not be, but maybe it is so. I have about 1800 caps that I bought from a store that was clearing BP supplies, going out of that business, strictly fishing, now. Powder, tho', they would not reduce. Still bought out their stock of Goex. 13 per pound. Cheers, George

April 22, 2009, 03:24 AM	#11
Hawg Senior Member Join Date: September 8, 2007 Location: Mississippi Posts: 16,190	I've had the missing compound problem with Remington and not with CCI's. I use factory nipples and CCI fit better than Remington which are too tight. I would like to swap nipples out on my 60 Colt to take #11 like my 58 does. All I can get in a #10 is Remintgon and have to drive 60 miles one way to get them.

April 22, 2009, 06:23 AM	#12
Doc Hoy Senior Member Join Date: October 24, 2008 Location: Naples, Fl Posts: 5,440	To gmatov Goex for 13.00 a pound!? Cripes! I bought Triple 7 at 22.00 a pound at the gun show a couple weeks ago and thought I was doing good. __________________ Seek truth. Relax. Take a breath.

April 22, 2009, 12:43 PM	#15
mykeal Senior Member Join Date: October 8, 2006 Location: Northern Michigan Posts: 2,772	The point isn't that my data, or anyone else's for that matter, is valid or invalid; it's that cap sizes are a crap shoot. Gmatov's post actually agrees with and reinforces my thesis, whether he understood that or not.

April 22, 2009, 11:38 PM	#16
gmatov Junior member Join Date: September 20, 2005 Posts: 346	mykeal, Oh, I do INDEED agree. I have said that NONE of mine fit my new Walker without crimping. I tried crimping a bunch and loading the capper, but you know what? That damned hole will not accept a crimped cap. Makes them oval and they don't fit the fill hole. So, back to thumbing them on. Can't handle them li'l sumbitches when it's under about 55 F, fingers get all fumbly. Same with the Rems, I haven't modified the cappers to fit that space and get them on right. Thumb them on. Gotta take a file and a stone to them. Surprise is that the LENGTH is the major difference. Never measured that. ID is about the same, well within reasonable error in measurement. The surprise is that the length of the cone must be the determinant of the size you need. The further down the cone you push it, the tighter it seems to get. I'd have thought, without checking, that the flash hole end of the cone was larger on one pistol or the other to need larger or smaller caps. I posted a measurement a long time ago on another forum. Never thought to measure the length. Someone said you learn something new every day. I have today. I think I will go to Track or someone and buy a whole bunch of new nipples. I think Treso makes them all to fit one size cap. Or you can buy them all to fit one size cap. I would rather have 10,000 of one size than 2,000 of each size, one size for each pistol. I take a different mix out each outing. Don't want to have to make sure I grab the right ammo each time. Like grabbing 44 Mag when you take the 357 out, or vice versa. Thanks for the measurements. Cheers, George mykeal= Michael?

April 23, 2009, 12:02 PM	#18
Doc Hoy Senior Member Join Date: October 24, 2008 Location: Naples, Fl Posts: 5,440	Mykeal I love it when the questions I ask generate a lot of conversation. I value the inputs and always wind up smarter as the posts continue. You said something a while back that went (to paraphrase) ....at four to five cents a piece for caps you can't expect much in the way of accuracy or consistency of manufacture. I apologize if my interpretation of your comment is not accurate. Those of you who shoot enough to make purchases of caps in the 5000 lot range seem to accept that in stride. When I buy caps I buy two to five tins. What I am reading is that there is little reason to hope that my next batch of caps will be anything like my last batch. So my resolution, stated in the opening post to use only CCI caps might be rethought. It does seem to me as though the industrial process could be controlled closely enough that one could trust that a number 11 cap will consistently be larger than a number 10. I would add that in my opinion this should be applicable across company lines. BUT...The market (that would be us) seems unwilling to demand these standards. In our discussion, no concensus emerged as to the desirability of one brand over another. Indeed we seemed to be surprised at your chart which showed the dscrepancy in the relative size of caps from different manufs. Two things to me seem to be important: 1. Consistent fit on the nipple. That is to say that if I find that number 11 CCIs fit my ROA today, they should fit my ROA 25 years from now. 2. Consistently acceptable ignition. The number of cap associated misfires should be extremely low. If the market were able to come to a decision we would do it by purchasing caps with more consistent standards in higher numbers. The manufacturers whose volume declines would have to figure out what was wrong and fix it, or start trying to sell candy. (No one cares about nipple fit or consistent ignition in M&Ms) __________________ Seek truth. Relax. Take a breath. Last edited by Doc Hoy; April 23, 2009 at 12:26 PM.

April 23, 2009, 12:43 PM	#19
arcticap Senior Member Join Date: March 15, 2005 Location: Central Connecticut Posts: 3,166	I think that the nipples are more to blame than the caps since many guns have inconsistently sized nipples. I thought that the older ROA's were made with larger nipples and then at some point Ruger switched and started making them smaller. Remington did the same thing with the size of their #11 caps about 10 years ago when they were the size of #11.5 - #12, until they totally revamped production for their current new cap style and size.

April 23, 2009, 12:58 PM	#20
ClemBert Senior Member Join Date: March 2, 2009 Location: Orlando Posts: 936	What I walked away with is "expect consistent inconsistency".

April 23, 2009, 01:22 PM	#21
Doc Hoy Senior Member Join Date: October 24, 2008 Location: Naples, Fl Posts: 5,440	Articap You said, "the nipples are more to blame than the caps". My problem is that I assumed incorrectly, that my successful use of nr 10 Remingtons on the ROA (My one and only ROA in which I have yet to change nipples) was an indication that the choice of cap size for the pistol is nr 10 regardless of who made the caps. Now I have learned that it don't work that way. __________________ Seek truth. Relax. Take a breath.

April 23, 2009, 01:46 PM	#22
madcratebuilder Senior Member Join Date: November 2, 2007 Location: Northern Orygun Posts: 4,923	I have found it easier to find a revolver to fit my caps. I must have over a dozen different tins of caps and no two alike. I just go through my revolvers till I find a good match and then that tin stays with that revolver. The only revolvers I have found that I had to change nipples on are Pietta Remingtons. The angle of the nipples, and it seems the hammer always hits them on a new revolver, deforms them.

April 23, 2009, 03:44 PM	#23
arcticap Senior Member Join Date: March 15, 2005 Location: Central Connecticut Posts: 3,166	It's like buying a pair of shoes and with so many of them being made in China now, some brands always seem to be made too narrow. I'm curious about how old your Ruger is and when Ruger may have switched their nipple size, if at all? Ruger serial number history: http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Firear...erHistory.html