Timing Problems, Colt vs. S&W
I have handled a large number of revolvers over the past 30 years.
Probably 80% of the Colts have timing problems vs. 0% of the S&W's.
Can any one explain why there is such a disparity?
The only other revolvers I have had issues with are my own Taurus Model 85 that developed timing problems and a brand new Taurus revolver that came into the shop from the manufacturer just last week.
And yes, I know what I am doing.
Probably 80% of the Colts have timing problems vs. 0% of the S&W's.
Can any one explain why there is such a disparity?
The only other revolvers I have had issues with are my own Taurus Model 85 that developed timing problems and a brand new Taurus revolver that came into the shop from the manufacturer just last week.
And yes, I know what I am doing.
0
-
I experienced the timing problem on a Colt .357 I carried as a sidearm. The timing problem was caused by a worn hand. It just didn't push the cyl quite for enough to go into battery. A Colt factory rep told me the problem could be corrected by peening the hand to stretch it. Sure enough that was easy enough but caused other parts to be out of fit. I finally removed metal from some contact points and got it to working but it was tedious and slow. This is a problem that needs to be corrected by a pistolsmith. I don't know why S & W revolvers don't experience the same wear and problem. 0 -
Can't speak for Colt, but I have a 1948 K-22 that has been well used for over 60 years and still has no timing issues and locks up tighter than a crabs........!
Other K-22's, 24's, 29's, K-38 etc. have also been great.
Only problem I ever had was about 30 years ago when the hammer spur fell off during a dry firing session while the gun was barely out of the wrapper. I was the first owner, never dropped or anything like that. Smith took care of it, no questions asked, and I mention it only as a curiosity since I never heard of this happening to anyone else.
UPDATE, 4-5-10
JudgeColt, Good explanation of the innerworking of the Colts and Smiths. One question though: as nice as it is to have the Colt always "locked solid" at the moment of firing, are "tight" and "in-time", necessarily the same thing? What if cylinder and barrel aren't properly aligned, and the hand is forcing maintenance of that misalighnment at firing? I guess the question is, in defining "timing", do we consider the position of the cylinder chambers relative to the barrel or only the ability of bolt to lock into the cylinder cut outs prior to firing? (A sad mess of semi-appropriate terminology, I'm sure. Hope the idea comes through.)
UPDATE, STILL 4-05,
Thanks, Joe. Not confused at all, makes perfect sense, and thanks.0 -
My answer to these Colt versus Smith & Wesson timing discussions is that, yes, double action Colt revolvers do go out of time with extended use, but double action Smith & Wesson revolvers are always out of time!
The common Colt double action design (as introduced in the 1898 New Service and the 1908 Army Special, and finally ending with the Python in 2006) is such that, as the trigger is pulled, the cylinder is rotated tightly against the cylinder stop, eliminating ALL play in the cylinder at the moment of firing. The hand is what applies the pressure to the cylinder to hold it against the cylinder stop(the bolt), so the shock of firing causes wear on the hand. The wear on the hand will slowly progress to the point that the hand will not rotate the cylinder into final lockup if the hammer is cocked slowly. However, pulling the trigger will always force the cylinder into tight lockup at the moment of firing, so the worn hand really has no effect on function of the gun at the moment of firing. Inertia from more rapid cocking will also carry the cylinder into preliminary lockup with the bolt in the cylinder stop notch even before the trigger is pulled and the hand applies pressure to the cylinder.
On the Smith & Wesson double action design as introduced on the Military & Police in 1899, the hand does not lock up the cylinder at any time, and does not take the shock of firing. The cylinder is free to "float" at the moment of firing, held only by the bolt in the cylinder stop notch. The amount of play in the cylinder varies from gun to gun. (Older Smiths tend to have less play.) The only Smith I have that does not have play at the moment of firing is an early Triple Lock, which is about the finest fitted firearm I have ever seen of any brand. The cylinder on every other Smith revolver I have has some play at the moment of firing. The Colt Mark III/V action is like the Smith action in that the hand does not apply pressure to cylinder at any time after rotating it into firing position. (The Colt Mark III/V action is actually more like a Ruger action since it uses a transfer bar ignition system.)
This lack of play in a Colt at the moment of firing is said to be the reason for the generally superior accuracy of a Colt revolver. Replacement of the hand on a Colt from time to time is the price paid for the Colt "bank vault lockup" system. As mentioned, a Colt hand can be "stretched" by peening and, if done properly, can double or triple the life of a Colt hand (and will not cause "...other parts to be out of fit."). (I do not understand how removing "... metal from some contact points..." could restore the timing, but that is irrelevant to this discussion.)
RCrosby, I got one of the new Ruger Single Six revolvers shortly after they came out in 1953 and dry fired it so much (practicing "fast draw" as a young teenager) that the hammer spur eventually fell off. Ruger SENT ME a new hammer and I installed it myself! THAT would not happen today.0 -
One system depends on the single action and double action release points being at the same hammer angle; the other doesn't.
Where hands are attached to the hammer, the lesser angle wont lift
the hand high enough to index the cylinder to the next chamber.
S&W internal parts are case hardened and not likely to wear.0 -
In Kuhnhausen's (sp?) book on colts there are 7 (seven) pages on just fitting the 'hand'. This should tell you something (Like buy a Smith[;)]). 0 -
In all the years of working on revolvers, I have only seen one Smith out of time. And it was just last week. It is a 32 hand ejector, that is the worst POS I have ever seen. I don't think there is one part worth saving in it. Maby the screws. I have never seen a gun that worn out in my life. 0 -
RCrosby: I know you addressed Judge Colt, but may I throw in my .02c?
On Colts, when the locking block (bolt) starts to have side-play in the frame, or the bolt itself wears a little (less likely-harder steel), the hand will still be exerting upward pressure on the extractor ratchet. What that means:
The bolt having some 'slop' will allow the cylinder to have a few 'minutes-of-angle' greater than when it left the factory. In other words, the cylinder will experience [very minute] overtravel during lockup, and the force of the sudden re-alignment to 'true' that occurs while the bullet is in transit from the cylinder to the barrel is going to be resisted by the hand. In effect, since the hand is slightly harder than the ratcheting extractor, the extractor will start to pien (again, microscopically).
Over time, (and I'm talking many years of use, here) lockup will still have no slop, but the revolver will be shooting with the cylinder/barrel alignment a 'tad' into overtravel.
Confused yet?
Best, Joe
[:D][:D]0 -
quote:Originally posted by MIKE WISKEY
In Kuhnhausen's (sp?) book on colts there are 7 (seven) pages on just fitting the 'hand'. This should tell you something (Like buy a Smith[;)]).
And they cost about 4 times as much too. [:(]
I've replaced more S & W hands than Colt - an oversized Smith hand from Brownells goes in with about 5 minutes of work. Just a touch of stoning on the top inside leading edge of the hand to make certain it "rolls past" the ratchet on the extractor without a hitch and you're fine.
The Colt is alot more work and has to be fitted so it doesn't move the cylinder too quickly, before the cylinder bolt drops, and to ensure tight lock up.
Basically the Colt hand is a two stage that acts vertically on the ratchet to achieve lock up and never moves past it, the Smith is a single stage hand that acts horizontally on the ratchet to achieve lock up and does move past it.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
8 comments