New to me Security Six

Help Support Ruger Forum:

Joined
Dec 8, 2005
Messages
4,448
Location
Lemont, PA, USA 16851
OK, here goes and please excuse some of the way I word things, I am by no means a professional writer but I think you'll get what I am trying to say.

The headspace and the B/C gap are controlled by 4 things; the size (length) of the cylinder, the barrel set back, the length of the crane barrel and the thickness of the ratchet. We will assume the cylinder is the correct dimensions (1.610 +/- 0.005 or so) and the ratchet is factory standard.

If the only problem is a too tight B/C gap, that is easily cured by taking a few thousandths off the rear of the barrel with a facing cutter.

If the crane barrel is too short, it would allow the cylinder to be forward too much, causing a too narrow B/C gap and too much headspace. It could also cause possible problems with the cylinder lock up due to the cylinder latch not mating with the cylinder latch slots - but there is probably enough play to lock up correctly. And being too short it could affect the ratchet/pawl (cocking, etc.) But a too short crane barrel can be stretched to make it longer and work correctly or shims can be added to lengthen it.

Now the fun part. If there is too little headspace, it could be several things. The ratchet may be too thin which allows the cylinder to go rearward too much but you would then probably see too much of a B/C gap or a lot of end play (forward and rearward motion of the cylinder within the frame when closed). This does not seem to apply in the OPs case. Or, the crane barrel is too long, thus pushing the cylinder to the rear.

The crane barrel is stopped inside the cylinder by a ridge/step (?) that is machined inside the cylinder at a specific depth. If the crane barrel is longer than normal, it will force the cylinder to the rear causing too little headspace and possibly causing the ratchet to bind against the frame. The binding can be fixed by removing some thickness of the ratchet but it would still have too little headspace.

My theory for the OPs gun - But I would really have to have it in front of me to do a close examination. First, remove a small amount of material from the rear of the crane barrel (amount to make the headspace correct, a few ten thousandths probably). This will then force the cylinder forward so next would be to use a facing cutter to bring the B/C gap to the correct dimensions. The amounts taken off the crane barrel would not (should not) affect the cylinder latch and cylinder slots alignment, nor affect the ratchet.

The crane barrel is such a length that it has enough room at the front (and in the retaining ball slot) to allow the cylinder to move forward this slight amount and it probably would not adversely affect anything else.

Just my thoughts, but again, after a close exam of what is going on, things may go in a whole different direction.

Oh, I did take an extra complete cylinder/crane assembly completely apart to look at everything to form my theory

Any thoughts, additonal things I might have forgotten about/overlooked, questions, etc. gladly accepted.
 

hittman

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jan 16, 2008
Messages
17,276
Location
Illinois
What I've determined …. Without any shadow of doubt …. Is that you guys are way way smarter than me!
 
Joined
Dec 8, 2005
Messages
4,448
Location
Lemont, PA, USA 16851
Terry, That is correct, I didn't see where removing any material from the recoil shield would be necessary. It seems to me that just a slight adjustment to the crane barrel and the barrel would set the headspace and the B/C gap so the gun would function as it should. Now upon a closer look it might be that some work might need to be done to the recoil shield but that would then require a bit more work to do that.
 

T.A. WORKMAN

Hunter
Joined
Mar 24, 2006
Messages
4,276
Location
MANSFIELD, OHIO USA
Ron,
Not disagreeing with your theory it sounds solid, the only reason that I ask was that when I bought my proto-type GP-100 and took it apart you could see where they were fitting the crane & cylinder (Security-Six parts) to the frame and the rough tool marks on the recoil shield.

That gun was fitted together so tightly I swore I would never again take it apart. Had a hellava time putting it back together. ;)
I had taken several pictures of the gun when it was apart showing the tool marks on the internal parts, but when I dumped Photo Bucket I lost them.
Like you said not having the gun in hand & not being able to eyeball things is a big handicap.

I went back and looked through my pictures and found the gun disassembled with some detailed pictures but Imgur has been giving me fits & still is. Can't get it to load squat!

Terry
 
Last edited:

hittman

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jan 16, 2008
Messages
17,276
Location
Illinois
Terry this may not make a difference in your case but …. A 3rd party hosting service is no longer needed to post pictures here. You can copy and paste whatever is on your computer or phone or other device, like the ipad I use.
 

T.A. WORKMAN

Hunter
Joined
Mar 24, 2006
Messages
4,276
Location
MANSFIELD, OHIO USA
Well I guess even a blind hog can find an acorn.... 🙂 (y) I don't know what I did right but it worked.
Pictures GP-100 Prototype disassembled. All the parts & barrel are Security-Six except the frame which is the new GP-100 frame.
Note the tool marks on barrel face, breach (recoil shield) Cylinder face & trigger group.
Ron, hope these help show you what I meant!
 

Attachments

  • 046.JPG
    046.JPG
    1.6 MB · Views: 72
  • 039.JPG
    039.JPG
    1.4 MB · Views: 75
  • 045.JPG
    045.JPG
    1.5 MB · Views: 77
  • 049.JPG
    049.JPG
    924.8 KB · Views: 67
  • 020.JPG
    020.JPG
    1.7 MB · Views: 73
  • 024.JPG
    024.JPG
    1.2 MB · Views: 76
  • 040.JPG
    040.JPG
    1.4 MB · Views: 60
  • 044.JPG
    044.JPG
    1.7 MB · Views: 64
Joined
Dec 8, 2005
Messages
4,448
Location
Lemont, PA, USA 16851
Terry, great pictures for me to study more tomorrow. I see what you mean about the recoil shield. But without seeing similar pictures of the OPs gun it's tough to make a guess. Some of what you show might have been due to it being a prototype and the tolerances may have been off with them putting those different parts together.
 

T.A. WORKMAN

Hunter
Joined
Mar 24, 2006
Messages
4,276
Location
MANSFIELD, OHIO USA
Terry, great pictures for me to study more tomorrow. I see what you mean about the recoil shield. But without seeing similar pictures of the OPs gun it's tough to make a guess. Some of what you show might have been due to it being a prototype and the tolerances may have been off with them putting those different parts together.
Ron,
I agree this was a tool room gun and far from a finished result. But the tedious work involved amazes me. You actually have to have it in hand to appreciate it.
I would like to see a picture of the recoil shield of the OP's gun myself.
Terry
 

saleen322

Bearcat
Joined
Feb 5, 2014
Messages
16
Location
Was western PA, now Florida
Ron and Terry, Thank you for all of the time you put into this.

I only have 1 Security 6 so I compared it to some revolvers we do have: a GP100, a Redhawk, a Blackhawk, a Smith, and some Dan Wessons. The machining marks are the most pronounced on the Security 6. I was going to stone the machine marks at least some to get a better surface and then measure from that point. I think then I will better know where the fitting stands.

I will post again as soon as I have some time to address it.
 
Top