eisenhower
Bearcat
Hi gents,
I recently bought one of the circa-2009 Lipsey's Flattop .44 Specials, blued, 5.5" barrel. I bought it new, unfired in the original box, so was thrilled to get it.
I have only shot 50 rounds through the pistol thus far, but doing some measurements, I want to ask about endshake of the cylinder, and what is acceptable vs. what should be sent to Ruger for examination.
By my measurements with feeler gauges, the cylinder endshake on this revolver measures .004 (determined by the difference in min/max cylinder-to-forcing cone dimensions of .002-.006). At the same time, if I press a feeler gauge into the space between the cylinder gas ring/bearing and frame, I can (with a tight fit) get a .005 feeler gauge into the space. So, all this together, I'm saying the cylinder endhshake is between .004-.005.
From reading here on the forum, it seems Ruger would say the maximum cylinder-forcing cone gap of .006 is within spec, but how about an endshake of .004-.005? My understanding is this is getting into the zone of "too much" and will only get worse. I realize it could be reduced with a shim, but is it too much to begin with for a new gun?
In your opinion, does this warrant a trip to Ruger?
Thanks,
eisenhower
I recently bought one of the circa-2009 Lipsey's Flattop .44 Specials, blued, 5.5" barrel. I bought it new, unfired in the original box, so was thrilled to get it.
I have only shot 50 rounds through the pistol thus far, but doing some measurements, I want to ask about endshake of the cylinder, and what is acceptable vs. what should be sent to Ruger for examination.
By my measurements with feeler gauges, the cylinder endshake on this revolver measures .004 (determined by the difference in min/max cylinder-to-forcing cone dimensions of .002-.006). At the same time, if I press a feeler gauge into the space between the cylinder gas ring/bearing and frame, I can (with a tight fit) get a .005 feeler gauge into the space. So, all this together, I'm saying the cylinder endhshake is between .004-.005.
From reading here on the forum, it seems Ruger would say the maximum cylinder-forcing cone gap of .006 is within spec, but how about an endshake of .004-.005? My understanding is this is getting into the zone of "too much" and will only get worse. I realize it could be reduced with a shim, but is it too much to begin with for a new gun?
In your opinion, does this warrant a trip to Ruger?
Thanks,
eisenhower