On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 21:51:37 -0400, Artemia Salina
wrote:

On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 17:25:48 -0700, Eric R Snow wrote:

The back end of the barrel is indeed chamfered.

I must point out that this chamfer is very important.
It is called a "forcing cone" and does indeed guide
the projectile into the barrel. I would hesitate to
tamper with it too much.

I read your response to my comments, and I'm still
concerned about that cylinder. From your description
it sounds like the rims of the shells are touching the
back of the frame and therefor are taking up the play,
forcing the cylinder forward. That sounds potentially
very dangerous given that these are rim fire shells.
If the pistol were to be dropped in such a way that
the front of the cylinder was struck there is a chance
that the shells might detonate.

Actually, very safe and common practice. It takes far more than a drop
to detonate the priming compound in the rims.

I still think that the main problem is in the play in
the cylinder, and that as DoN says, there may be a worn
bushing at the back of the cylinder (or it could be a
design flaw or other defect from the factory).

I wish Jack Erbes was here! He'd know for sure!

P.S. Have you asked on rec.guns yet?

Sounds like a worn bushing..however...the weapon in question was built
to very loose tolernences
Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner