Maybe a silly question...
- Thread starter NorEaster
- Start date
TiteGroups
Blackhawk
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2009
- Messages
- 513
Maybe the same machine that cuts the flutes does the beveling.
Boge
Single-Sixer
Because it's more stylish & historic plus a fluted cylinder w/o any bevel would have razor edge corners. :wink:
El Bibliotecario
Bearcat
My experience in life has told me the answer to most such quesitons is "money." Accordingly, I would speculate it is cheaper to make unfluted cylinders than fluted cylinders, and taking the cost cutting a step further, it is cheaper yet to omit the beveling step.
I'd be curious to hear comments from someone with hands on manufacturing knowledge confirm or refute this.
I'd be curious to hear comments from someone with hands on manufacturing knowledge confirm or refute this.
J Miller
Blackhawk
Any time a gun is used it's devalued. Smooth or fluted it don't make no difference.
I think if you'll look close at the standard Blackhawk fluted cylinder, and the SBH non fluted cylinder you'll see a very small angle at the front to break the edge.
The bevel and contours you see on some fluted cylinders is called the black powder bevel I believe and dates back to those days.
It is a classier looking set up and no doubt more expensive to make.
Joe
I think if you'll look close at the standard Blackhawk fluted cylinder, and the SBH non fluted cylinder you'll see a very small angle at the front to break the edge.
The bevel and contours you see on some fluted cylinders is called the black powder bevel I believe and dates back to those days.
It is a classier looking set up and no doubt more expensive to make.
Joe
mhblaw
Blackhawk
When doing revolver conversions, Bowen charges $60 for the "black powder bevel" on the cylinder. Looks nice too!
Cimarron/Uberti and USFA (likely Pietta too) have the accentuated "BP" bevel as standard. I wish Ruger did too. Ironically Colt does not (and has not since the 1st Gen guns)...unless they've changed recently, amazingly not even when you order the BP gun (SAA optional variant), which comes with the other features of that era (bullseye ej, frame-end retaining pin (screw), etc. I think it is an option, but not sure I've seen it on a 3rd Gen gun except the odd special edition. IOW, the BP gun isn't "fully BP." Very odd.
Ruger slyly lists a bevel as a feature on the New Vaqueros, but on closer examination it is just a very modest treatment (rounding) of the leading edge of the cylinder, and doesn't appreciably "hit" the flute corners which is what really characterizes what most people think of as a bevel, such as provided by the above manufacturers (and optional with the aforementioned Bowen, et al).
Ruger slyly lists a bevel as a feature on the New Vaqueros, but on closer examination it is just a very modest treatment (rounding) of the leading edge of the cylinder, and doesn't appreciably "hit" the flute corners which is what really characterizes what most people think of as a bevel, such as provided by the above manufacturers (and optional with the aforementioned Bowen, et al).
Driftwood Johnson
Blackhawk
Howdy
I designed machined parts as a mechanical designer for a good many years. Perhaps I can speak to this question with a little bit of authority.
When specifying machined parts, unless there is a specific reason to maintain a sharp edge, it is standard practice to specify a chamfer to break the edge. A chamfer is a flat surface connecting two other surfaces. This is done for several reasons. Primarily it is done to prevent injury to anyone who handles the parts. It is also called out because once parts have had a finish applied to them, like blueing in the case of a firearm, a sharp edge that has been bunged up will stand out like a sore thumb, whereas the finish will not be quite as easily damaged on the broader chamfered surface.
A chamfer will usually be relatively small, so as not to remove enough material to significantly weaken the part. Chamfers are usually called out as 45 degrees, unless a different angle is required. On turned parts such as a revolver cylinder, a chamfer is either made by feeding a cutting tool set at an angle into the edge of the part while the part is turning, or by feeding a cutting tool into the edge at the specified angle. This is a simple operation on a conventional lathe.
I don't own a Super Blackhawk, but here is a photo of a couple of replica Cap & Ball cylinders. The cylinder on the left is from a recent Pietta replica of the Colt 1860 Army and the cylinder on the right is from an old EuroArms 1858 Remington Replica. These chamfers are about .02 X 45 degrees. Both are relatively poorly done, exhibiting chatter marks. I also have a Stainless Uberti 1858 Cylinder, and it exhibits almost no chamfer at all.
In the 19th Century, standard machining practice would have been to cut the chamfer on a lathe as a final cut after many of the other major machining processes had been completed. Modern CNC tool centers can cut a chamfer like this as part of the machining program and would not require removing the part from the toolholder. Since my 1858 Uberti cylinder is relatively new, I suspect a tiny rounding over cut was made while the part was still on the tool holder, resulting in a broken edge that is barely visible, but still does not cut anybody handling the part.
This next photo shows two Colt cylinders on either side of a New Vaquero cylinder.
The cylinder on the right has what is known as the Black Powder Bevel. Notice the depth of the chamfer varies. This was a complicated cut, not possible to produce on a standard lathe. The chamfer would either have to have been cut on a special fixture that rotated the chamfered face past a grinding surface or a cutting tool, or it would have had to have been done by a very skilled worker manipulating the part by hand past a grinding surface. I do not know which method was used, but it would have added significant expense to the part.
The cylinder on the left is a standard 2nd Generation Colt cylinder. It exhibits a simple 45 degree chamfer running around the front of the cylinder, interrupted by the flutes. This chamfer is about .03 X 45 degrees. I have shot this cylinder a great deal, and you can see the typical holster wear patterns that form on the outer edges of the contours from repeated drawing and reholstering the gun.
Lastly, the New Vaquero cylinder in the center exhibits what Ruger was calling their version of the Black Powder Bevel when they first brought out the model. It bears little resemblance to a true Black Powder Bevel, nothing more than an exaggerated rounding over of the front edge of the cylinder.
This last photo shows an 'original model' Vaquero at the top and an Uberti Cattleman at the bottom.
The Vaquero cylinder is treated about the same as a 2nd Gen Colt. A simple 45 degree chamfer interrupting the flutes. The Cattleman does indeed exhibit a true Black Powder Bevel. Since the it was produced on modern CNC equipment, the Black Powder Bevel was probably produced by the CNC programming while the part was still on the toolholder, not requiring the expensive extra operations of the original Colt Black Powder Bevel.
You will hear a lot of explanations for why the Black Powder bevel existed. Ruger claimed that their version made the gun easier to return to leather, since the New Vaquero was designed originally for the Cowboy Shooting market. Frankly, I don't buy it, I don't have any difficulty returning any revolver to leather, no matter what type of bevel it has.
As to why Colt is not supplying the Black Powder Bevel today, that is a good question. In the days before CNC equipment, the old Black Powder Bevel was clearly more expensive to produce. That is why the 2nd Gen Colts did away with it starting in 1956.
Just about all modern revolvers will have their cylinders made on modern CNC equipment. So any good CNC programmer should be able to program the Black Powder Bevel into their programs. It would require a complex multi axis machine, capable of holding the part stationary while a spindle moved around the part, cutting the profile. Another way of doing it would be as a separate operation on a CNC miller. USFA seems to be providing the Black Powder Bevel in many of their single action revolvers, but not all. As I mentioned earlier, Uberti is doing it too, at least with the one that I own.
Make no mistake, cutting extra features onto any part is going to be more expensive. Modern production costs are directly related to 'tool time'. The amount of time the cutter is actually removing metal. Cutting a Black Powder Bevel will mean more time needed to cut the more sophisticated shape. Less parts can be produced per day, and that means it costs more. But USFA and Uberti seem to be doing it. Clearly not a priority with Ruger.
Personally, I find the true Black Powder Bevel to be more aesthetically pleasing to look at. I'm sure that's why it was done in the old days, when skilled labor was relatively cheap.
I designed machined parts as a mechanical designer for a good many years. Perhaps I can speak to this question with a little bit of authority.
When specifying machined parts, unless there is a specific reason to maintain a sharp edge, it is standard practice to specify a chamfer to break the edge. A chamfer is a flat surface connecting two other surfaces. This is done for several reasons. Primarily it is done to prevent injury to anyone who handles the parts. It is also called out because once parts have had a finish applied to them, like blueing in the case of a firearm, a sharp edge that has been bunged up will stand out like a sore thumb, whereas the finish will not be quite as easily damaged on the broader chamfered surface.
A chamfer will usually be relatively small, so as not to remove enough material to significantly weaken the part. Chamfers are usually called out as 45 degrees, unless a different angle is required. On turned parts such as a revolver cylinder, a chamfer is either made by feeding a cutting tool set at an angle into the edge of the part while the part is turning, or by feeding a cutting tool into the edge at the specified angle. This is a simple operation on a conventional lathe.
I don't own a Super Blackhawk, but here is a photo of a couple of replica Cap & Ball cylinders. The cylinder on the left is from a recent Pietta replica of the Colt 1860 Army and the cylinder on the right is from an old EuroArms 1858 Remington Replica. These chamfers are about .02 X 45 degrees. Both are relatively poorly done, exhibiting chatter marks. I also have a Stainless Uberti 1858 Cylinder, and it exhibits almost no chamfer at all.
In the 19th Century, standard machining practice would have been to cut the chamfer on a lathe as a final cut after many of the other major machining processes had been completed. Modern CNC tool centers can cut a chamfer like this as part of the machining program and would not require removing the part from the toolholder. Since my 1858 Uberti cylinder is relatively new, I suspect a tiny rounding over cut was made while the part was still on the tool holder, resulting in a broken edge that is barely visible, but still does not cut anybody handling the part.
This next photo shows two Colt cylinders on either side of a New Vaquero cylinder.
The cylinder on the right has what is known as the Black Powder Bevel. Notice the depth of the chamfer varies. This was a complicated cut, not possible to produce on a standard lathe. The chamfer would either have to have been cut on a special fixture that rotated the chamfered face past a grinding surface or a cutting tool, or it would have had to have been done by a very skilled worker manipulating the part by hand past a grinding surface. I do not know which method was used, but it would have added significant expense to the part.
The cylinder on the left is a standard 2nd Generation Colt cylinder. It exhibits a simple 45 degree chamfer running around the front of the cylinder, interrupted by the flutes. This chamfer is about .03 X 45 degrees. I have shot this cylinder a great deal, and you can see the typical holster wear patterns that form on the outer edges of the contours from repeated drawing and reholstering the gun.
Lastly, the New Vaquero cylinder in the center exhibits what Ruger was calling their version of the Black Powder Bevel when they first brought out the model. It bears little resemblance to a true Black Powder Bevel, nothing more than an exaggerated rounding over of the front edge of the cylinder.
This last photo shows an 'original model' Vaquero at the top and an Uberti Cattleman at the bottom.
The Vaquero cylinder is treated about the same as a 2nd Gen Colt. A simple 45 degree chamfer interrupting the flutes. The Cattleman does indeed exhibit a true Black Powder Bevel. Since the it was produced on modern CNC equipment, the Black Powder Bevel was probably produced by the CNC programming while the part was still on the toolholder, not requiring the expensive extra operations of the original Colt Black Powder Bevel.
You will hear a lot of explanations for why the Black Powder bevel existed. Ruger claimed that their version made the gun easier to return to leather, since the New Vaquero was designed originally for the Cowboy Shooting market. Frankly, I don't buy it, I don't have any difficulty returning any revolver to leather, no matter what type of bevel it has.
As to why Colt is not supplying the Black Powder Bevel today, that is a good question. In the days before CNC equipment, the old Black Powder Bevel was clearly more expensive to produce. That is why the 2nd Gen Colts did away with it starting in 1956.
Just about all modern revolvers will have their cylinders made on modern CNC equipment. So any good CNC programmer should be able to program the Black Powder Bevel into their programs. It would require a complex multi axis machine, capable of holding the part stationary while a spindle moved around the part, cutting the profile. Another way of doing it would be as a separate operation on a CNC miller. USFA seems to be providing the Black Powder Bevel in many of their single action revolvers, but not all. As I mentioned earlier, Uberti is doing it too, at least with the one that I own.
Make no mistake, cutting extra features onto any part is going to be more expensive. Modern production costs are directly related to 'tool time'. The amount of time the cutter is actually removing metal. Cutting a Black Powder Bevel will mean more time needed to cut the more sophisticated shape. Less parts can be produced per day, and that means it costs more. But USFA and Uberti seem to be doing it. Clearly not a priority with Ruger.
Personally, I find the true Black Powder Bevel to be more aesthetically pleasing to look at. I'm sure that's why it was done in the old days, when skilled labor was relatively cheap.
Driftwood, very good report. As you can see, most of the Rugers and recent era Colts--if at all--are very modest bevels. Ruger, at least on NVs, Montados, still claims a bevel as a special feature if you look at the corporate write-up,...still pretty darned modest bevel if you ask me, and as mentioned just leading edge of the cylinder and no flute work. The Cimarrons (Uberties) I think have always had a pretty decent "original 1st Gen style" bevel--at least as far back as I recall, some before CNC'ing. So that begs the question as to how/why the "cheap Italians" had them and not the sophisticated Americans? I agree with you, Driftwood, I find the true bevel on a SAA design much more aesthetically pleasing, and these more exaggerated chamfers probably do clear leather (or more like re-holster) better. Some folks may be entirely indifferent to the bevel and "sure wouldn't pay more for the feature," but if offered as a standard feature--which USFA does by the way on all SAA-based models--wouldn't likely say they don't want it on there. It'd be a real minority that wouldn't want it on a traditional cowboy" gun.
IMO, Ruger should "program" as you say a true bevel (ie lop off the corners of the flutes) on the New Vaquero as yet another "special" feature distinguishing them from the adjustable sight SAs. Ditto Colt,...would bring it closer into parity with USFA (and even the Italians) in this regard, ironically as Colt started (SAA) it some 140 years ago! The bevel should at least be standard on/part of the "Blackpwder" package they do sell, and not optional extra.
IMO, Ruger should "program" as you say a true bevel (ie lop off the corners of the flutes) on the New Vaquero as yet another "special" feature distinguishing them from the adjustable sight SAs. Ditto Colt,...would bring it closer into parity with USFA (and even the Italians) in this regard, ironically as Colt started (SAA) it some 140 years ago! The bevel should at least be standard on/part of the "Blackpwder" package they do sell, and not optional extra.
Driftwood Johnson
Blackhawk
All I can tell you is that years ago I was doing some CNC programming for some ancient CNC Bridgeports that were made around 1968. Maybe the Italians had them then too.
stantheman86
Buckeye
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2010
- Messages
- 1,103
Ironically unfluted cylinders in S&W revolvers like 686's and 629's are highly desired.....so a cheaper to make part increases the value of the revolver 8)
I'm not a single action type guy, so I can't comment on any BP beveling or any history of SA revolvers since all I own is 1 .357 Blackhawk and a few Uberti cap and ballers.......
I'm not a single action type guy, so I can't comment on any BP beveling or any history of SA revolvers since all I own is 1 .357 Blackhawk and a few Uberti cap and ballers.......
Bucks Owin
Hunter
I expect the same principle applies with firearms as with critical racing engine components. A sharp edged machined part is a more likely place for a stress riser than one that's radiused/chamfered...
2 centavos FWIW... :wink:
2 centavos FWIW... :wink:
Lowly Uberti (Cimarron P) - factory bevel (but post purchase antiquing incl Colt grips)
Lowly Rodeo - factory bevel (but post purchase antiquing) - sorry for resolution on these
Flash is nicely exaggerating for this purpose, but in "real" lighting the bevels are still pretty nicely pronounced.
Lowly Rodeo - factory bevel (but post purchase antiquing) - sorry for resolution on these
Flash is nicely exaggerating for this purpose, but in "real" lighting the bevels are still pretty nicely pronounced.
Driftwood Johnson
Blackhawk
Howdy Again
Technically, yes, but stress risers created by sharp corners and edges are more likely to damage inside corners than outside corners. The outer edge of a cylinder where the bevel is is not very subject to such damage.
However, the traditional split style leaf spring that Colt uses for the bolt and trigger of a Single Action Army is very much subject to breaking from such stress risers. Here is a photo of a couple of broken Colt parts. The spring at top is a bolt/trigger spring of mine that let go last year. Completely typical break. Right across one leg of the spring, right near the sharp radius. As a matter of fact, such breaks are exactly why Bill Ruger designed all the old style flat springs out of his guns way back when he first introduced the Single Six. Coil springs are much less likely to break.
The other object in the photo is a bit more unusual, a bolt that broke right across the thin area around the pivot hole. Even though the bolt did break at an obvious weak point, breakage of this part is relatively rare.
typical of "mass produced" guns, anything to "save money/cut cost" (also time........)
aesthetics and what folks like or prefer, if the "custom" guys can make money doing it, they will..nice ,concise detail 'driftwood' and great pictures too...... :wink:
Once sold, any "new" gun is like a car, "pre owned"....technically "used" but if the "used" means fired and REALLY" used", the values will be 'less' for it, versus a "as new in the box" ( and no such thing as "unfired") as they are ALL?? "test fired"" per past posts on the forum..........symantics, and yes even as to the "bevel", just how much it is actually.............if sharp , it can and will cut skin and slice open,shave any leather holster.....gotta 'break that edge........... :roll:
aesthetics and what folks like or prefer, if the "custom" guys can make money doing it, they will..nice ,concise detail 'driftwood' and great pictures too...... :wink:
Once sold, any "new" gun is like a car, "pre owned"....technically "used" but if the "used" means fired and REALLY" used", the values will be 'less' for it, versus a "as new in the box" ( and no such thing as "unfired") as they are ALL?? "test fired"" per past posts on the forum..........symantics, and yes even as to the "bevel", just how much it is actually.............if sharp , it can and will cut skin and slice open,shave any leather holster.....gotta 'break that edge........... :roll:
Similar threads
