doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Wiggle in the Barrels

I have two hammerguns that wiggle on the action when I have the forend off. I can't see light between the breech face and the barrels yet and the movement is slight at this point, although one is worse that the other. I suppose my question is...how long should I tolerate this situation before sending them off for new hinge pins? I am fairly fastidious with my guns and so my inclination is to send them off sooner rather than later, but I may delay a bit if that is the consensus.

Now. Actually, I would’ve sent them off when you first detected movement or could see light. All that looseness is only going to get worse and down the road cause stress on other parts like the action, locking bolts, forends & loop, etc. that’ll need to be addressed and subsequently cost more mullah to make right.

Could be the hinge pin or the hook or the underbolts if it has them. Unfortunately the looseness won’t fix itself. Get the guns repaired sooner rather than later.

Have you ever seen a mechanical problem that stopped getting worse with use? I haven't.

Get in line to have them fixed, now. It won't get done in a week or two, and by starting early you will be ahead of the game.

Could just be a worn sliding bolt, Or could be coming off face. If it’s just a worn sliding bolt that’s a pretty easy fix, and it’s repair alone may negate more involved repairs for many years of service.

Thank you gents good advice. I guess I just needed a confirmation of my inclination to initiate a repair at this juncture! Fingers crossed for the worn Sliding bolt.

If the wiggle is only evident with the forends removed there may be no need to do anything.

Take it to someone you can trust to do the work if needed, but also to tell you if nothing needs doing.

Start with a strip and clean.

Owen,
I had purchased a gun that had a suspected off face issue. After having it looked at by a very good gunsmith, it was determined that the locking bolt/lever only needed a micro weld and refitting to make things right again. Things turned out well, and I'm glad I didn't pass on the purchase simply because of a possible issue without having it checked out.
Hope this helps,
Karl

Closing the gun with forend in place solves a multitude of problems. Maybe "gunmaker" will comment.

Remove the forend and hold the top lever open and also holding the barrel tightly down on the action see if there is any horizontal movement (side to side) in the barrels. If there is any movement then the gun is off face. With the forend off and the top lever closed see if there is any vertical movement (up and down) in the barrels. If there is then most likely the locking bolt is either worn or confirmation the gun is off face. Refitting the hinge often sets the barrels back far enough that the locking bolt problem is solved.

Place a one thousandth inch feeler gauge across the standing face. If the gun will close on this gauge, it is off face (and it may very well close on a thicker one).
End of argument.

Dewey would not approve of the midway method

There's a long list of things Dewey does not approve of. And, no one alive, besides him, know what they all are.

an same fur most uv the rest uv us, one wood think...

I tend to sympathize with Dewey - when one does a job properly, one gets tired of seeing the half-assery and advice on how to do it on the cheap. There is no "good and cheap" in the fine hand built gun business. I was in it long enough to know.
One thing's for sure, you ain't going to wish it back on the face....

here's how i see it...

when a gun is fully assembled and ready to fire...and one finds the barrels wiggle, it is an indication that the bolting system is worn and in need of repair...so long as there is no day light between the face of the action and the breeches of the barrels the gun is not off face...

once daylight begins to appear, then the gun is off face...wiggle or not...question is, how much day light is unsafe? .004 is the number i remember from years ago... in reality, any day light, even .001 makes a gun difficult to sell...

as for fixing off face...hinge pins are hardened...barrel hooks are not...so it makes sense to add metal to the barrel hook before rotating or replacing the hinge pin...

mike, good and cheap has its place...

beer can shimming of the barrel hook, which can bring a gun back on face, will work for some..and when done multiple times can become a routine semi permanent fix...

welding up the barrel hook should last much longer than a beer can shim...

and if neither of the above do not work, then hinge pin rotation or replacement seem to be the last resort?

is mike rowe your real name? and when and where did you create fine hand built guns?

and here are two great videos on the subjects of wiggle and off face...

https://vimeo.com/352928443 about wiggle...

and this one about off face...

It seemed to me that the things Dewey did not approve of were poor workmanship, poor gun designs, poor repairs, and fools.... not necessarily in that order.

I cannot recall any instance where anyone was able to prove that any of his sometimes strong opinions or observations were incorrect. When he gave advice, it was well worth listening to. It isn't often that anyone who even approached his level of skill and talent has been willing to share it with us. And he wasn't here utilizing free advertising to sell stock making classes, gun importations, or to sell firearms. I understand why he left this forum, but really wish he hadn't. Nobody here is perfect, but I can easily think of some much more deserving of criticism.

ed

yes - Mike Rowe is my real name. I don't hide behind pseudonyms. I retired from this business several years ago. Just someone who quietly worked away in the background. I was always covered up with work without having to have any flashy advertising. Perhaps there's a reason for that.

mike, nice to know you...

advertising helps, but best source of new business are referrals from happy customers...

reduces the qualifying time significantly...

One eye-opening opinion of Dewey was in regard to the mechanical measurement of wall thickness. In his opinion, current favorite devices are inaccurate because the internal arm of the device is affected by gravity deflection. He relies on an electronic device that emits some sort of signal (sonic? xray? radio? ) through the metal and the return signal somehow triggers an electronic readout. The device is more expensive than the purely mechanical devices. The device is used in industrial applications. Gil

small minds discuss people...

Gil, I've heard more than a couple people opine on the inherent inaccuracy of mechanical BWT gauges.

Much of the potential inaccuracy of mechanical barrel wall thickness gauges stems from having the unit set up horizontally. In this orientation, gravity can have the greatest effect of creating a slight deflection of the internal rod, due to lateral forces applied by both gravity and the operator. This is why many guys mount them vertically. Another source of inaccuracy comes from operator error. Not zeroing the dial or digital indicator, moving along too fast, not measuring all possible areas, can all provide false or inaccurate readings. The measuring end must be exactly perpendicular to the axis of the bore, as any deviation will give a larger than actual measurement.

There are several methods of NDT (Non-Destructive Testing) that could provide measurements of tube wall thickness. The most common used in industry is Ultrasonic NDT, and I'd guess that method might be the most affordable to a well equipped gunsmith or machine shop. There are several other methods of NDT testing of tubes that could provide wall thickness measurements including Eddy Current NDT, and radiographic X-ray gauges. I've worked on Ultrasonic NDT measuring equipment, and IMS X-Ray gauges numerous times, but don't pretend to be an expert on them. I can definitely say that X-Ray IMS gauges are not going to be found in any gunsmith shop because of the enormous cost, and the fact that they use a radioactive isotope source such as Cesium 137. Naturally, they can be dangerous to untrained personnel, and they are strictly regulated by the State and Federal Government. I always used a Geiger Counter to confirm that the shutters were closed on the Cesium 137 sources, and in particular on one occasion when a proximity switch for shutter closed position had failed on one source unit, and had to be replaced.

From what I do know about Ultrasonic NDT, it would have the same problem as mechanical units with wall measurements on double barrels in all areas between the barrels, and under the ribs. Fortunately, those areas are least likely to be externally struck thin during manufacture or refinishing. But there would be no way to measure the depth of pitting in those areas. And I would think that Ultrasonic NDT would not be at all useful for Damascus barrels due to the fact that they contain literally hundreds of inches of welds running between the iron and steel layers. So it would be very difficult or impossible to interpret the transducer feedback coming back from all of those welds within the barrel walls, at all different depths. I suppose a large pit or inclusion might still stand out from all that noise though, but that's just an educated guess.

doc drew...what say you...

I used to use the ultrasonic thickness units at work to measure internal corrosion pit depth in oil and gas pipelines. Great tools, but their one weakness was when measuring pits with very steep walls they wouldn't measure the full depth. A shallow mesa type pit gave reliable measurements.

There is an addendum to feeling for looseness of barrels. If you are looking at a Beesley action as Purdey uses you have to take the lockplates off, as the kickers pushing on the barrels mitigates looseness.

Retired pipeliner myself Amoco then BP finished up in GOM deepwater.