RugerForum.com

This is a Ruger Firearms enthusiast's forum, but it is in no way affiliated with, nor does it represent Sturm Ruger & Company Inc. of Southport, CT.
It is currently Mon Dec 22, 2014 8:59 pm

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 6:33 am 
Offline
Blackhawk
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 1:33 pm
Posts: 955
I recently purchased a Ruger Blackhawk. My first revolver ever. When you open the loading gate and advance the cylinder until it clicks, the chamber is not lined up with the gate. It is partially past the gate, not allowing a round to be loaded. I have to advance the cylinder 'half a click' to load. (AND unload).

My google search turned up a thread indicating this is normal: http://rugerforum.net/ruger-single-acti ... stion.html

Can someone give me their take as to why this is? Why not have gate moved to match a 'click'. Is it a safety issue?

Either way, I've had this gun for months, and did not fire it after purchasing it on gunbroker. At the very least, I should be admonished for not posting a photo of it - it is gorgeous in my humble opinion, thought plain and jane.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 6:58 am 
Offline
Hunter

Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 2:01 am
Posts: 3811
Location: wisconsin
You can fit it with a free-spin pawl that will allow you to "back up" the cylinder to load/unload.

That minor annoyance is one of the many reasons the old 3-screw single actions are preferred to the new models.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 7:46 am 
Offline
Blackhawk

Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 11:44 pm
Posts: 982
The new small frame flattops have a separate spring and plunger that stops the cylinder at the right place.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 7:56 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2001 1:01 am
Posts: 31581
Location: Star Valley, WY
You are experiencing one of the odd features of Ruger's New Model single actions. If one has a properly sized and fitted "half cock notch" added to the hammer and the trigger's sear thinned so it'll fit into a "half cock notch" then things begin to work a little better. It takes a skilled 'smith to modify the original hammer and trigger and/or there may be aftermarket parts available. It's been so long since I've dealt with one of these projects (all my shooters are already "fixed") that I honestly do NOT know the status of availability of aftermarket parts.

And, yes, gmartinnc is absolutely correct. Some of the later issue guns have a "reverse indexing pawl" that helps with the "lack of a half cock notch".

flatgate


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 8:14 am 
Offline
Buckeye
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 2:47 pm
Posts: 1388
Location: NW Kansas
I would guess that the reason it does that stems back to when the blackhawk did not have a transfer bar safety system. With the Old Model Blackhawks (and I assume probably any Colt style single action that uses the same style mechanism) you loaded and unloaded the gun by bringing the hammer back to the half cock position. When doing this the cylinder indexing pawl is at a position that allows the chambers in the cylinder to align with the loading gate. When the mechanism was changed to use the transfer bar, there was no "need" to place the hammer on half cock. This causes the pawl to index the cylinder too far past the loading gate.

If the New Models still had a half cock on the hammer the cylinder would index correctly with the hammer set to half cock. So to make it work "correctly" you need to convert to a half cock hammer. It's a little more than just dropping in the hammer as I hear you also need to do some material removal on the transfer bar. I believe there is a hammer available to do this, I think it's a Power Customs product. The other option is to either install a free spin pawl or modify your existing pawl for a free spin. What this does is eliminates the indexing of the cylinder when the loading gate is open, i.e. the index pawl does not contact the ratchet on the cylinder when the loading gate is open. This way the cylinder free spins in both directions. If you over shoot the loading gate you can back up the cylinder. Some issues with that is you don't get any feedback, audible or physical, when you have the chamber aligned to the port. I have several of my guns modified for the free spin option and I like it.

As gmartimc mention, the mid size frame flatops and the New Vaqueros have an indexing plunger that engages the cylinder ratchet so that the cylinder indexes correctly when the loading gate is opened.

_________________
Over the Mountains Of the Moon, Down the Valley of the Shadow, Ride, boldly ride if you seek for El Dorado!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 5:15 pm 
Offline
Hunter

Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 7:01 pm
Posts: 4446
Location: People's Republik of Kalifornia
ruggedruger,

To avoid confusion, the standard New Models like you have, only have a cyl pawl (or hand) the "indexing pawl" is the new device in the NM flat top mid frames and New Vaqueros as JWhitmore44 mentioned, but they are also in the NM large frame flat tops.

Here are three easy ways to improve loading and unloading alignment on the original NMs; from no cost to a little over $125:

Solution 1. Free wheel cylinder pawl: No cost and almost no skill required:

http://marauder.homestead.com/files/FreeSpin.html (see below)

Your cylinder will freewheel in both directions with loading gate opened. The great benefit here is that if you load a round that might have a high primer, pulled bullet or other problem that makes the cylinder tight to turn, you don't have to pull the cylinder to unload it, just turn the cylinder in reverse and unload it thru the loading gate. I prefer this to solution #2.

Solution 2. Do #1 above and purchase and install three little parts listed below by their correct Ruger names that comprise the New Vaq and NM Flat Top Blackhawk 'cylinder alignment indexing pawl' shown below. $10 in parts, must have skill to drill small hole and tap threads.
Name & Part #s:
Cylinder rotation Stop Spring KMVQ04500
Cylinder Rotation Stop Screw KMVQ04501
Ejector Alignment Pawl (not to be confused with the Cyl pawl) KMVQ04502

Image

Image

If you do this in conjunction with Solution #1, you will not need to order and fit a new Ruger free spin cylinder pawl or grind a small divot in the top of the trigger guard strap (under the frame) required for the factory cyl pawl.
Cylinder chambers will align with loading gate opening exactly like the New Vaq., NM Flat Tops and the Old Models.

Solution 3. Install a Ron Powers replacement 1/2 cock hammer about $125. By cocking the hammer to 1/2 cock the NMs will work just like OM Rugers by aligning the chamber and loading gate. You can also do this on New Vaq and NM Flat Tops if you want them to operate the same as Old Models.


Do you work on your guns? If not, here's a video to show how simple they are to disassemble and re-assemble:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfOXBa8K8Ow
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zEKDqwk ... re=related

_________________
Jim
Ruger single action "collector, accumulator, builder and shooter"
NRA Life
CRPA Life
CRPC Life
SASS Life
SWCA
RCA


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 04, 2013 8:20 am 
Offline
Blackhawk

Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 11:44 pm
Posts: 982
Question about the ejector alignment pawl. With the cylinder removed, what keeps the spring from pushing it all the way out? Also, how do you locate the hole in the right place? Sure wouldn't want to put it in the wrong place! I'm thinking adding this to a older blackhawk and would like to hear from someone that has installed them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 04, 2013 1:34 pm 
Offline
Hawkeye

Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 1:01 am
Posts: 6033
Location: Cut 'N Shoot, Texas
ruggedruger wrote:
I recently purchased a Ruger Blackhawk. My first revolver ever. When you open the loading gate and advance the cylinder until it clicks, the chamber is not lined up with the gate. It is partially past the gate, not allowing a round to be loaded. I have to advance the cylinder 'half a click' to load. (AND unload).

My google search turned up a thread indicating this is normal: http://rugerforum.net/ruger-single-acti ... stion.html

Can someone give me their take as to why this is? Why not have gate moved to match a 'click'. Is it a safety issue?

Either way, I've had this gun for months, and did not fire it after purchasing it on gunbroker. At the very least, I should be admonished for not posting a photo of it - it is gorgeous in my humble opinion, thought plain and jane.


What you are experiencing is just the way it is.

The link you found is correct in that the matter at hand is indeed "normal" for the NM-type of action.

Why?....simply put, because Mr Ruger chose it to be that way.

Is it due to a safety issue?...only if one subscribes to the theory that it's possible to create an idiot-proof machine. Personally, I don't. Personally, I much rather be able to buy a new, properly-timed SA revolver from Ruger instead of having to throw money at it to make it so, or needing to "re-engineer" it's action parts, or pay the extra that Ruger spent in order to address but one of the aspects of the basic design being "out of time".
Apparently, there's a bunch of NM shooters who don't agree with me about that, and apparently, neither did Mr Ruger. That said though, there are ways to "fix" the various "problems" of the gun....if you think that they are indeed, a problem.

Also bear in mind that when ones modifies an existing gun design, he is also forgoing any factory backing should an AD, a component failure, or most-any other type of accident were to happen. In other words, you'd probably find that you'd be solely on your own in that arena.

DGW


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 04, 2013 7:54 pm 
Offline
Hunter

Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 7:01 pm
Posts: 4446
Location: People's Republik of Kalifornia
gmartinnc wrote:
Question about the ejector alignment pawl. With the cylinder removed, what keeps the spring from pushing it all the way out? Also, how do you locate the hole in the right place? Sure wouldn't want to put it in the wrong place! I'm thinking adding this to a older blackhawk and would like to hear from someone that has installed them.


Hi,

It works the same way as the firing pin. The hole for the indexing pawl is smaller in front and the pawl has a shoulder on it. It must be installed from the rear end of the hole. The location of the hole must be measured from a gun that has it. I'll take the measurements in .001 of an inch if you want to install the pawl.

_________________
Jim
Ruger single action "collector, accumulator, builder and shooter"
NRA Life
CRPA Life
CRPC Life
SASS Life
SWCA
RCA


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 04, 2013 8:19 pm 
Offline
Blackhawk

Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 11:44 pm
Posts: 982
So, there would have to be two bits used and the depth of the larger one would be pretty critical, because it would determine where the pawl stopped at.
On second thought, if I decide to do this, it will go to a gunsmith because that, I ain't.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 04, 2013 8:31 pm 
Offline
Hunter

Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 7:01 pm
Posts: 4446
Location: People's Republik of Kalifornia
DGW1949 wrote:
ruggedruger wrote:
I recently purchased a Ruger Blackhawk. My first revolver ever. When you open the loading gate and advance the cylinder until it clicks, the chamber is not lined up with the gate. It is partially past the gate, not allowing a round to be loaded. I have to advance the cylinder 'half a click' to load. (AND unload).

My google search turned up a thread indicating this is normal: http://rugerforum.net/ruger-single-acti ... stion.html

Can someone give me their take as to why this is? Why not have gate moved to match a 'click'. Is it a safety issue?

Either way, I've had this gun for months, and did not fire it after purchasing it on gunbroker. At the very least, I should be admonished for not posting a photo of it - it is gorgeous in my humble opinion, thought plain and jane.


What you are experiencing is just the way it is.

The link you found is correct in that the matter at hand is indeed "normal" for the NM-type of action.

Why?....simply put, because Mr Ruger chose it to be that way.

Is it due to a safety issue?...only if one subscribes to the theory that it's possible to create an idiot-proof machine. Personally, I don't. Personally, I much rather be able to buy a new, properly-timed SA revolver from Ruger instead of having to throw money at it to make it so, or needing to "re-engineer" it's action parts, or pay the extra that Ruger spent in order to address but one of the aspects of the basic design being "out of time".
Apparently, there's a bunch of NM shooters who don't agree with me about that, and apparently, neither did Mr Ruger. That said though, there are ways to "fix" the various "problems" of the gun....if you think that they are indeed, a problem.

Also bear in mind that when ones modifies an existing gun design, he is also forgoing any factory backing should an AD, a component failure, or most-any other type of accident were to happen. In other words, you'd probably find that you'd be solely on your own in that arena.

DGW


JWhitmoore covered it well and to add to it, not having to manipulate the hammer while loading is part of the safety strategy. It provides zero potential for an accidental discharge while lowering the hammer after reloading live rounds while the gun may not be pointed at the target.

So to restate, the miss-alignment is a result of not having the hammer in the 1/2 cock position when loading. The hammer controls the cyl pawl position and the pawl in turn controls the position of the cylinder. So when the hammer is all the way down, the pawl positions the cylinder only halfway to aligning the chamber with the loading gate. The cyl hasn't moved too far, it actually hasn't moved far enough to align.

Ruger has corrected the miss-alignment issue in the New Vaquero and new FT Blackhawk by installing an indexing system to align the chamber and loading gate even when the hammer is down. It can be retroffited to any New Model.

I seriously doubt that upgrading an older new model with the factory's own "indexing system" would negate any factory backing when done correctly.

Actually my preference is the factory free spin cyl pawl w/o the indexing pawl for maximum safe manipulation of the cyl while loading and unloading. Being able to reverse the cyl rotation to remove a round with high primer, bullet pulled from recoil, etc., is a huge safety advantage and convenience, because you don't have to pull the cylinder with live rounds in it to unload it.

_________________
Jim
Ruger single action "collector, accumulator, builder and shooter"
NRA Life
CRPA Life
CRPC Life
SASS Life
SWCA
RCA


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 04, 2013 9:04 pm 
Offline
Hunter

Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 7:01 pm
Posts: 4446
Location: People's Republik of Kalifornia
gmartinnc wrote:
So, there would have to be two bits used and the depth of the larger one would be pretty critical, because it would determine where the pawl stopped at.
On second thought, if I decide to do this, it will go to a gunsmith because that, I ain't.


Correct, the hole has two different diameters and has to be drilled all the way thru with one drill bit 1st, then countersunk with a larger size part way thru. But the depth of the countersink does not determine where the cyl stops, it's the hole location that's critical.

_________________
Jim
Ruger single action "collector, accumulator, builder and shooter"
NRA Life
CRPA Life
CRPC Life
SASS Life
SWCA
RCA


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 12:13 am 
Offline
Hawkeye

Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 1:01 am
Posts: 6033
Location: Cut 'N Shoot, Texas
Hello Jim,

I read the post you mention, and agree that yes, there are "fixes" for the problem which concerns the OP. You may have missed where I already stated that directly to the OP, and also mentioned in a round-about way that Mr Ruger addressed it on some models himself. Them models however, do not include the model that the OP has...which is why I didn't bother with explaining the difference.

I'll stand by my remark that the model which the OP has was built "out of time" because it was/is....in more ways than one. In retrospect, I probably should have expanded on that a bit more. At the time though, I saw no need to, mostly because there was just that one aspect which being asked about.
Perhaps he may ask later why it's latch drops way too early, or why his hammer can be cocked before the cylinder locks up. If he does, I guess we'll cross that bridge when we get to it.

FWIW, I agree that high primers and bullets that jump their crimp are a pain to deal with. To me though, those things are cartridge issues, not something that I'd redesign a gun over.
But hey, to each his own, eh?

I apologize to you, the group, and (especially) the OP for possibly misleading him as to Ruger's stance on accepting liability for an altered gun. The truth be known, I hadn't consulted them before posting what I did about that, so it could be that I'm wrong. It could be that they are perfectly fine with an owner modifying it's hammer 'n action parts, re-machining the frame so's it'll take parts from a different model, and/or substituting the same type of hammer that they spent considerable effort and money to get rid of due to safety concerns....I really dunno....Like I said, I never even bothered to ask them before posting.
Maybe I should though.
Maybe I should also quote their answer right here on the Forum.
You know, just so we'd all know for sure what Ruger's stance on the matter is.
Whatcha think...would something like that be worth the trouble?...or do ya think that most people are inclined to do what they want to do regardless?

No offense meant.

DGW


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 07, 2013 9:46 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2001 1:01 am
Posts: 31581
Location: Star Valley, WY
Interesting rhetoric. Yes, many ways to "mess with" Ruger's New Model Lockwork. I have my favorite..... :D

I strongly suggest that Joe Schmoe leaves his very well made Ruger Single Action revolver ALONE and enjoys the very reliable designs that permit one to shoot and enjoy the robust lockwork that'll darn near last forever....... :)

Just my humble opinion,

flatgate


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 07, 2013 12:08 pm 
Offline
Hunter

Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 2:01 am
Posts: 2047
Something to consider on this indexing plunger-
I have heard of it jamming in place & impeding cylinder rotation.
Not saying it occurs regularly, but if you think about it the possibility is certainly there.
I've removed mine on the two Blackhawks that had them. The cylinders are now free-spinners with no possibility whatever of the plungers getting bent, rusting, or getting gunked up with burned powder residue.

I may, after experiencing a frozen-in-place basepin plunger that rendered an SS unreliable years ago, be a little more sensitive to such things than most.

Those two Blackhawks are not range toys & MUST function. So, I've removed what, in my case & my mind, is more of a liability than a benefit. :)

Emphasize that's just MY case.
If having the cylinder index exactly on each chamber is important to you, then you have a different need than I do. :)
Just something to think about.
Denis


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bnewberry, gbmills, joew, Landrum, MaxP, rmcn35, s4s4u, Srb08, Terry T and 14 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group