Has anybody heard of a mid-frame Ruger SA with mis-matched t

[JimMarch1]

Folks,

I'm trying to confirm something that used to be posted in the Gunblast reviews of the NewVaq but is now gone: that the New Vaquero and it's various cousins (Montado, 50th 357, the new 44spl etc.) have their cylinders reamed on a machine that does one bore at a time in sequence with the same bit/reamer set.

I could have sworn that was in one of the first two NewVaq articles of 2004 and 2005. I could be wrong, but I *know* I heard the NewVaq cylinders were reamed one at a time, and I've heard zero complaints of mis-matches since. Having bought a NewVaq (by far the best gun I've ever owned) I've watched this issue carefully.

We know the large-frames at least used to have all six bores done at once on a machine with six bits/reamers. We know that for a fact due to reports of mismatched throats.

Has *anybody* heard of mis-matched throats or other chamber dimensions on a a mid-frame's cylinder? Or is the information I originally had on the NewVaq's cylinder making process correct and mis-matches are basically impossible?

 

[flatgate]

Well, nothing's impossible, but, I also recall a "news leak" that Ruger switched to a singular tool.

It's somewhat of a moot point, IMHO, with the easy availability of Manson's reamers.....

JMHO,

flatgate

 

[JimMarch1]

>>It's somewhat of a moot point, IMHO, with the easy availability of Manson's reamers.....<<

I don't think it's "moot". Chamber uniformity isn't just about the throats, it's about the whole cylinder bore. To a lesser degree of course, but still. Revolver accuracy starts with the cylinder, and uniform bores (from one end to the other) matter.

 

[Onty]

…Has *anybody* heard of mis-matched throats or other chamber dimensions on a a mid-frame's cylinder? Or is the information I originally had on the NewVaq's cylinder making process correct and mis-matches are basically impossible?

Not a mid frame but I had 357 Bisley that will make consistently with some loads three 1-1.5" inch group, overall group vas around 3.5". I might be wrong but seems to me that boring head used to cut holes has 3 tools, looks to me that 6-tool head is very difficult to manufacture; bores are too close to each other.

 

[JimMarch1]

>>I might be wrong but seems to me that boring head used to cut holes has 3 tools, looks to me that 6-tool head is very difficult to manufacture; bores are too close to each other.<<

OK. Well whatever's going on with the tooling, the straight truth seems to be that some large-frames have mis-matched bores.

Question one is, did they fix that on the mid-frames. Answer SO FAR appears to be "yes". Next is, have they fixed it on recent (for example, underbarrel warning label) large-frames?

 

[flatgate]

JimMarch,

You are preaching to the choir.



flatgate

 

[rugerguy]

yessir, if the accuracy "suffers" and you can properly measure each bore and there is an "issue" , return it and they will fix ( replace) the cylinder.....cutting tools/reamers can and will "go bad, break or dull up...."

 

[cas6969]

I remember the reports of that, but never saw anything I would call fact, just theories. I'd love to see how they chamber them.

You'll also hear quite often that they "chamber all six at once" which I don't see how that's even remotely possible.

Personally I think the uneven holes are more likely due to tool run out, loose fixtures, misaligned parts or any number of things. Because you see plenty of chambers that are not only the wrong size, but out of line and/or with oblong throats.


I have people send me the mid frame cylinder. Generally they're not as bad as the large frame, but still small. I don't see a fraction of as many though. I would assume mostly because there are only a fraction of as many out there... and in small part because everyone's been told "these are okay".

 

[JimMarch1]

CAS, thank you for your reply. You've likely seen more Ruger cylinders than anybody here.

What I seem to be hearing is "quality control is better" on the mid-frame cylinders, which matches what I've heard.

Does it seem likely that the small number of requests to clean up the mid-frame cylinders is perhaps because a large number are 357s like mine? Even on the large frames, Ruger appears to have always been able to keep those closer to "in spec"?

 

[cas6969]

I think there are a lot of factors in play that we don't realize. For example after all these years and lord knows how many cylinders, I still cant explain why one cuts well and one doesn't. I can have two cylinders from the same model and caliber, roughly the same vintage sitting on the bench side by side. Using the same reamer, same cutting oil same everything.... I can ream all 12 chambers. One cylinder will finish like glass and one will look awful, all swirl and tool marks. How is that possible? The metal must be different. Even though it's the same grade of steel, and presumably within the same hardness range... it's not the same. Beats the heck out of me. (and gives me headaches and heartaches)

Another thing about the smaller framed 45's... the throat is MUCH shorter, so there's less to make wrong/right.
:wink: