Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

"Big Boston"

Members
  • Posts

    162
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by "Big Boston"

  1. Good Luck indeed. IMHO more than good luck is required. As Garrison Joe stated, The kit comes with a new finger lever, and does not include a new carrier lever. IMHO, the write up is wrong, lost something in the translation to English. Of course, without any instructions, it's hard to tell if the parts require machining to blueprint or not. I'm guessing they should be plug and play. After a couple hours of attempting to put these pieces in my rifle, I gave up and put all the original pieces back in. I'm no gunsmith, but I've worked on and fixed a fair number of guns. This one had me baffled. One of the first issues was fit. The center link pin would not fit in the new finger lever, a bit of 800 on a mandrel remedied that issue, and the same method was used on the links to get them to drop onto the pins in the bolt. Here's where the steamboat ran aground. At the point in the stroke that the carrier lever is about to do its thing, the bolt is trying to cock the hammer and the links bind on the center link pin. Geometry up to that point seems good. The center link pin hardly moves in the link slot, a smooth and frictionless motion. As soon as the center link pin has to slide in the slot, things come to a halt. Oh, you can force the lever through to the end, but in reality it takes more force than I'm comfortable in using. Not knowing or being able to guess where the design and/or manufacturing went awry, it is hard to continue. Bottom line, I'm not impressed. A few years back I installed a Pioneer kit in my '66, and other than fine tuning the timing, installation was only moderately difficult. The instructions and videos available on the Pioneer site are fairly detailed and accurate, I had no issues with the instruction or the parts. I did have to grind a bit more clearance for the ladle, to make loading smoother, but that was it. So, sorry to disappoint, my intensions were good, but the parts beat me. I would not recommend the Uberti AS5 Short Stroke kit to anyone. I did measure the arc that the finger lever operates on with the kit installed. It is app 60º. The kit would offer a nice shortening of the stroke. Big Boston.
  2. Yesterday the order from the supplier arrived. I've leveled the crushed limestone on my driveway and it's raining, and the Uberti short stroke kit is todays project. If there is enough interest I'll document the evaluation of this kit. I've attached page 1. These write-ups are a bit above my pay grade, and take some effort and time on my part. A couple of likes would be encouraging. The Uberti Short Stroke Kit AS5.pdf
  3. Not too different than most of the replies. I have some arthritis in my thumbs, and the result was that my thumb would slip off the hammer and I'd have to cock again and then cock several times to get the 5th shot off. It was frustrating to say the least. Therefore I contemplated shooting duelest/double duelest. I've never fired left handed, but thought to myself, it's just a learned skill, why not go for it, so I did. And like it's been said, a gun that fit my right hand, felt foreign in my left. And my left hand is more arthritic than my right, so it can't tolerate excessive recoil. Hammers was another issue, shooting with 2 hands works better with a SASS or a Super Blackhawk hammer. Shooting duelest feels best with a New Vaquero or Colt hammer. Therefore it was back to the parts bin and more hammer changes. Also, because adjustable sights are not allowed, a couple of my Blackhawks went to the back of the safe. I like to change it up, and have several combinations. I also like the big bores, in moderation, so for my right hand I shoot a 44-40 or a 45 Colt, both original Vaqueros. One has a SBH hammer, the other has a stock hammer. Or I shoot a SASS New Vaquero in 357/38. The left hand has a New Vaquero or a New Vaquero SASS. An Original Vaquero does not feel right in my left hand. The point is; that to expect your left hand to be the mirror image of your right may be unrealistic. You may find a pair that works, but that would be boring IMHO. Our club is small, a meet usually has between 10 and 20 participants. To accommodate the shooters, at the last meet they allowed a 1911 to be used instead of 2 pistols. I really liked this concept, it was fun. I call it Wild Cowboy, and you come to the line with a holstered 1911, with a mag in, loaded with 5, and instead of shooting a second pistol, you load another mag. I had fears that my wrist might complain, but I shot 6 scenarios with any wrist pain. Having old bones and muscles sucks sometimes. BB
  4. FWIW: My 1873 is closer to 451, and that is what I size them at. Therefore I'd endorse the advice to slug the barrel. I chose a 250 grain, just because the former owner said that is what he shot and it worked for him. Within safe pressures I think that you could perhaps get a bit more velocity out of the 200, but I'm guessing at about 600 yards the 250 would probably have dropped less. The old Winchester barrel mounted ladder sight was calibrated out to 900 yards, but IMHO that seems a bit optimistic. I have a '66 Cimarron that I've tried out to app 275, and with the ladder at 300, it was working. You do need a long neck to be able to line up the sights and still have the butt on your shoulder. I believe Elmer said that having "a jaw like a jackass" made sighting possible. BB
  5. Slightly above my pay grade, so I checked the FBI data base. https://www.ilrc.ucf.edu/powders/sample_detail.php?s_reference=&s_content_source=4&s_source_reference=&s_product_use=1&s_distributor=&s_product_name=Clays&s_date_obtained=&s_lot_number=&s_date_analyzed=&s_manufacturer=&s_date_manufactured=&s_notes=&s_shape_id=&s_color_id=&s_luster_id=&s_dia_min=&s_dia_max=&s_dia_avg=&s_dia_tol=&s_length_min=&s_length_max=&s_len_avg=&s_len_tol=&display_image=20&powder_id=136 Cholla Bob may have the answer, it does appear as if the older Clays had the look of floor sweepings off the powder room floor. Perhaps post a picture of the containers. Just for reference I have an old container of Clays, purchased from the widow of one the Cowboys that shot at our club. A responsible fellow, I do not think that it is a mixed up powder. It is a bit darker than the photo shows, but i think you get the picture (no pun intended) I would like to add that you may not want to just dump the two together, IOW not mix them together. I've been using Trap 100 and AA452 for years, and when I need to start using a new batch, I clear the measure and start using the new/different lot/batch. In my experience, when using powder that is ten or so years old, it can be just a bit different from another batch. I've had to change primers and/or change the charge by a tenth or two in order to maintain the same velocity. The difference was subtle, but measurable. FWIW. BB
  6. Progressive lenses work OK for me, they won't clear up the beginning of cataracts, but once your brain gets used to them, they do work. I use them for shooting, and honestly can't blame the misses on the glasses. I find that if the sights are not pointed at the target when the trigger is pulled, the bullet usually does not hit the target. It was a bit of a struggle getting used to them, "New users can experience dizziness or even nausea until they get used to them." And that was my problem. In addition, straight lines do not look straight. I found trifocals got too busy, and in order to work you needed big lenses, which make me look older than I want to look.
  7. Not my first step down this particular rabbit hole. I searched and researched this topic ad-nauseum. And at the end of it all, I've come to my own conclusions and opinions. Miller formula aside, I'd rather own a 1:20 twist 44 or 45 cal, rifle than one with a 1:36 twist. The original centerfire 44 cal rifle cartridge was the 44 WCF or 44-40. The twist rate on it was 1:36, the bore was .4225", +.001. Rifling consisted of six grooves, .003" deep, and .1327" wide. The propellant was black powder and the bullet was 200 gr and made of soft lead. I assume it worked, as the spec remains unchanged to this day. It is interesting to note that Uberti uses a completely different spec for their 44-40 barrels. According to the literature, the twist is 1:20, the bore in.4215 and the grooves are .429. My Uberti, 2018 production, has a bore closer to .417", and I shoot 200 gr bullets without any issues that I've noticed. However, my bullets aren't soft lead, they are sized .429 to .430 and have a BHN of app 14. The interesting thing is that I had an original 1892 in 44-40 that was absent of any rifling for the last 6 inches of the barrel, it shot a bit worse, but still decently. The conclusion I came to was that a 44-40 does require some rifling, and that rifling should twist a bit. I assume that the shallower the rifling, the slower the twist needs to be. I was of the opinion that a 44 Mag rifle would not be hard to load for, especially if I didn't vary much from 44-40 specs. Interestingly, the 44 Mag pistol is an entirely different beast. Elmer Keith and the powers in charge at that time made the bore/groove 417/429, with a 1:20 twist, and the min. bore/groove area was .1405 SQ IN. It stabilizes bullets. The MS for a 240 gr 429421 is 4.3 and it will hit deer out to 600 yards. So along comes Marlin, and their rather feeble attempt to make this fine hangun cartridge into a rifle cartridge. I have no way of knowing the rational, I can only assume that they attempted to use the pistol specs and came up with a rifle that was not shootable. Therefore; Marlin decided that their 44 Magnum rifle would have a bore/groove of 424/431 (Minimum), with a 1:38 twist, with 12 grooves 0.055" wide, and a Min bore/groove area of .1435 SQ IN. The Microgroove design didn't sell guns, so Marlin switched to 6 grooves, I'm assuming .110" wide. They were still only 0.0035" deep, but apparently that is deep enough to be called Ballard like rifling. The MS for that barrel would be 1.3 with a 429421 at 1600 fps. With a 200 gr Cowboy bullet it is 1.8 at a cowboy velocity of 1000 fps. Perhaps Miller may not have sold that rifle, but there was no way in Hades I was keeping that rifle. Perhaps if I were to buy a mold that would cast a 432 or 435 bullet it may have worked. I'd already thrown about 30# of lead and several kegs of powder at the project. And purchased a Weaver base, a hammer extension and a 10X target scope as my eyes would strain after firing up to 100 rounds a day. My sons Rossi '92 shoots whatever I load, 1:20 twist. My Uberti in 44-40 with a 44 mag pistol spec barrel is OK with my cowboy loads, and they worked in a Winchester Commemorative as well, yep, 44 mag pistol spec barrel. I also own a 45 Colt Uberti '73 with a deep groove fast twist barrel shoots just fine as well. I realize one Marlin in 44 Mag may not be a large enough sample size to be conclusive, but it's a large enough sample size for me to form an opinion. When Ruger bought Marlin I sent an email to them, pleading with them not to follow the folly of Remington. Remington chose to change nothing, except the initial quality control, and that era of Remington no longer exists. Please don't offer to send me a Marlin 1894 in 44 Mag to test, unless it's been fitted with a pistol spec barrel. I have an open mind, (perhaps), and in all likelihood the generous groove diameter may have been the underlying fly in the ointment. I believe bullet fit may need to be optimum before twist rate can be evaluated. But I've not experienced any fast twist gremlins, and I've owned a few of those beasts. In closing I'll quote a muzzle loaders musings: Just going from personal experience, the round balls do poorly in fast twist barrels because the patch strips in the fast twist rifling and the ball doesn't get consistent spin shot to shot, and the stripped patch allows gas blowby. I've picked up shredded patches from 1:24 rifling with even light charges of powder, but my T/C Hawken with a charge of 70 grains and a tight patched ball and 1:48 twist doesn't do that and is pretty darned accurate. I don't think the fast twist is the problem; I think it's the inability to get a tight enough seal with the patched ball to prevent the patched ball from stripping in the rifling." If I still owned that Marlin 44 Mag, I think I'd fill the case full of BP, cover it with an card wad and chamber it. Then I'd take a patched ball and load it from the muzzle. If that would work I'd have to accept the twist rate as being OK. But I'll stand behind my first decision, to just sell the lemon. BB
  8. I took a few days for the supplier to get back to me with a picture. The Uberti approach seems to be to alter the lever and links.
  9. A bit off topic, but still pertinent. I'd live to set up my Mec to load a Low Recoil equivalent, but to date, I've not found a recipe. Could you please share your recipe. Ideally, I'd like it if someone would load Cowboy specific ammunition, in a paper case using fiber wads. I was a youngster when paper shells were still available, and the smell of a freshly fired paper shotgun shell still brings a smile to my face. Some vintage 16 ga 2 9/16 shells for my 97. I'd use it for cowboy, but I can't bring myself to cut down the barrel, and 16 ga ammo is not readily available.
  10. The "Marlin Rifling" was the reason i sold my 1894 in 44 Mag/Spl. The shallow rifling and slow twist rate were not something I could live with. Companies fail when they do not adapt to market demands and trends. You have to admire Rugers approach, researching which products sold the best and made the most profit. And as that core product line sells well and is profitable, you can expand and meet the needs of the niche demands. Ruger has a history of making runs of odd combinations, consider the Lipsey's Specials, bulk, prepaid production runs of somewhat eclectic products. My dream rifle would be a short stroke 1894 Ruger-Marlin in 38 Long Colt. A 16" SRC would be perfect. But, I'll probably line up and buy their 357 1894 when the product hits the shelves in Canada.
  11. Back on topic: If the lot is big enough, from a tire shop, I sort first. It a bit labor intensive, but given the amount of non-lead weights, it is worth it. Zinc goes in one pile, steel in another. Clip on gets separated from stick on: clip on are harder, higher in antimony. Stick on are mostly soft lead. Outdoors: the clip on get smelted first, use paraffin to flux, or oil, any cheap stuff like canola or whatever. I use a temp gauge, don't go much over 600 ºF. If any zinc got into the mix it will float. After all the clips and crap are skimmed off, I clean the alloy with a sawdust flux, followed by a paraffin or 2. Basically i've found it better to have a clean alloy than to try and save the valuable Sb and Sn. The trick is to not touch the alloy if it is below 600 ºF and not to let it get any hotter than 700 ºF. I pour it into ingots, count them and that # becomes my batch #. A clean alloy will remain shiny for a while after fluxing. Also, it will have a slight convex surface. Sawdust will remove some of the zinc, sometimes. It will also help take out some of the copper. Sometimes you'll get some unknown stuff, and you may be able to separate them out. The trick is to have the temp exactly at 600 ºF and swirl the alloy. The contaminates, being lighter than lead will "swim" to the center, scoop them off. OR, just buy 94-4-2 from a metal supplier. It will be clean, and it's just melt and cast. Old motor oil is a bad thing to use as flux, nasty stuff when it starts smoking. Beeswax isn't nasty, but the yellow residue is annoying. Paraffin burns pretty clean. I usually enrich my COWW alloy with a bit of lino, and perhaps some tin. Most of the time my bullets are nice, sometimes not, such are the joys of making your own alloy without the benefit of an handheld xrf metal analyzer. Commercial casters are fairly competitive, buying bullets lets me save a bit of time. But, for those specialty loads, sometimes you just have to cast your own. BB
  12. In the category of S&G, I tested some 125 gr Hy-Tek coated bullets. I'd say that 1100 fps was the practical limit. My load wasn't that good, Es/Sd were a bit high. The bullets I was using still had a lube groove, so I tried them with lube, and probably gained a bit, but not enough to make it worth while IMHO. Accuracy seems to be an issue, my theory is that the coating reduces leading, but you begin to over run the BHN of the bullet. The limitation is velocity, so I believe as heavy a bullet as practicable would be where I'd gravitate to. At least 158 gr. for starters. The 125 would be better in a 38 Spl case. I ended up using them in a 38 LC case, at Cowboy velocities. BB
  13. The combo seat/crimp die works well, until it doesn't. Any time you combine the seating and crimping in one step, the setup is very dependent on the components. Any variation and things go south quickly. I was seating and crimping 44-40 in one step, and it was working well. I changed to a different mold, bullet sized the same, but there was enough of a variation that things went south fast. Although possible, I think it's poor policy with a progressive. When verifying the setup, it's easier if each stage has only one task, or multiple separate ones. For example, on a 4 stage like the 550: The first stage FL sizes, expels the fired primer, and seats a new primer. The tasks are not interrelated to an extent that one has any great influence on the other. The second stage expands the neck, bells the mouth, and dispenses the powder. Two separate operations to verify. The third stage can be used to seat the bullet, or seat the bullet and crimp. The seating and crimping tasks are very much interrelated. The bullet is still being seated as the crimp is being applied, and therefore the bullet shape and cannelure shape can be interfere with the seating task as the crimp is being applied. It can be made to work, but any variation can cause an error. If you seat only on stage three, stage four is used to crimp. The application of the crimp is on a case with an already seated bullet. The bullet is static, the crimp is applied unencumbered by any bullet movement. In a progressive there is also a slightly smoother feel to the stroke of the handle. It is subtle, but noticeable. In my die setup I was using a Redding seat/crimp die. An excellent die, made to some pretty exact tolerances. Too exact for my combination of components. The bullets I were using were a 429-200-RF and a 427666, which were around 0.429" out of the mold. I don't have a 429 sizer, so I lubed them with a 430. Seat and crimp in one operation, no issues. I had sold my 429-200-RF, and was using up my stash of previously cast bullets, and had ordered a new 6 cavity 429-200-RF. This mold dropped the bullets a wee bit larger, and they would be sized a bit going though the 430 lube/sizer die. This slight increase in diameter, was enough to cause an issue. Details: The Redding seat/crimp die is made to guide the neck of the case, center the case, and seat the bullet with no concentricity issues, and apply the crimp at the top of the stroke. But, in order to work as designed, with 427 bullets, the tolerance on the neck portion of the die were such that as the bullet was seating, the bell on the case was being ironed out, and as the newer bullets were a bit larger than 429, it would shave some lead before the crimp was applied. I seem to recall Winchester brass was OK, but Starline was not. The difference between joy and disaster was less than a 0.001" apart. That, IMHO, was too close for Cowboy work. The solution was to press a LEE seating die into service, and use it for seating only. I first modified the seating stem by flattening the stem to push on the flat meplat of the bullet. Also, IMHO the LEE seating/crimp die has to be the worst such die of all the manufacturers, YMMV, but that is my opinion. So, that solved stage three, and for crimping, I just removed the seating stem from the Redding seat/crimp die and used it for crimping. It irons out the bell before seating, and support the neck while applying the crimp, problem solved. Like I said, seating and crimping in one operation works well, until it doesn't. BB
  14. For what it's worth, I did read that willow makes the best charcoal. I was tempted to make some, until I got to the part where you use stale urine to wet the mixture. Printed in 1979, Foxfire 5 has a good article on making your own BP. BB Foxfire 5 BP.pdf
  15. Between some of Midway USA videos and some of Anvils videos, I've fixed some pretty ugly ones. Plan out your work first, your first kick at the cat is your best opportunity for success. The 97 in the pictures has dowels, arsenal pins, glue and epoxy. The shotgun was pretty much garbage to begin with, it took lots of work and parts. That poor forend was in 4 pieces, at the time I could not find a three screw forend for sale. I'm no craftsman, and the pictures are just to illustrate what can be done if you think things out and take your time.
  16. I'll second the comment above about resale. I'd say tacks on a rifle will cut the customer base in half, and the ones that like tacks, may not want your design. If it's your keeper, and you love tacks, research the designs and install them nicely. Case in point, I just bought a 44-40 Uberti SRC in 44-40, and it is tacked up. Tacks are not something I like, but I'm not going to remove them, too many holes to fill. The rifle is 2018 production, and with shipping, the cost in USD was $630. In addition to the tacks, it was dirty, rusty and had a broken rear sight. I cleaned her up, replaced the remnants of the rear ladder sight with a Short Low Marbles and went shooting. I also shined up the tacks, so I reckon I don't actually hate them that much.
  17. I see the LEE 429-200-RF mentioned, and I too use and like this bullet. As mentioned, it casts a bunch of bullets fairly quickly, is not a fussy mold, (although I do like to "Tune" the mold before using). I shoot smokeless, usually TB, and find that it uses less lube than the Lyman 427666, which is also a pretty good bullet. I've tested it with only 1 groove with lube and it is still OK in a Vaquero. However, I just lube both, and use them in both handgun and rifle. LEE seems to be stuck on having their 44 cal molds cast no bigger than the label on the box says. I just bought a new 429-200-RF, I had to wait for my supplier to get in stock from LEE. It will cast a wee bit larger, and I size @ 430, and cull any that are small, (visible lube overflowing the lube grooves. I cast with COWW enriched with a bit of tin and lino for a BHN of almost 15. Here's the caveat, my groove diameters are around 430, on both my firearms, Size matters, some 44-40's need smaller bullets. I'm not sure how much sizing a 429-250-RF can take, my guess on mine would be 428 before they would look a bit squeezed. If I keep my temperature right, and my alloy proper(ish) my 427666 will cast around 429 and sizes (just barely) in a 430. It would size down to 426 or 427, IMO. The lube groove is a bit big for low pressure smokeless, and they give off a distinct puff of smoke on firing. As far as COL, my 429-250-RF is at 1.560".
  18. I forgot that detail, yes, lots of leakage with fine powder. I avoid the fine powders, old 452AA was the worst. BB
  19. I've probably owned about a half dozen LEE LoadAlls, 12, 16 and 20. They are better than the price point would suggest. Even the plastic ones will load ammo. I also own or have owned: MEC 600's, Sizemasters and a Grabber. They do work well. A grabber is a progressive, made for pumping out a lot of one load. The 600 is MECs entry level press, it works, but IMHO the SizeMaster is the better choice. The Universal charge bar isn't something I'd recommend. I've had several, and sold all except one that I use for 410. The 410 is a fussy beggar to load, being able to fine tune the shot is handy. But, bottom line, for trying different loads and loading a box or 2 it'll work for you. I have discovered that most manuals list mostly loads 1200 fps or faster, Cowboy loads can be slower. I can't readily or inexpensively get the 980 fps Winchester ammo, the Low Noise Low Recoil, 28 gram load. I have managed to squirrel away some 7/8 1200 fps ammo that Cabelas was clearing out. They had too many complaints that it would not cycle an auto. I suppose the point I'm trying to make, is that to cut down on recoil, you can reduce the weight of shot, or you can reduce the velocity, or both if you can. The core criteria is keeping the pressure within the normal range. IOW, the maximum average pressure for 12 ga 2 3/4 shotshells is 11,500 psi. It has been my experience that if the pressure is significantly lower than that, you can encounter issues. Wads won't seal, inconsistent velocities and incomplete burning of powder. I don't know how low in pressure you can go, and still have reliable ammunition, but if I were to guess, I'd say anything under 6,000 psi will potentially have issues. A good goal may be around 8,000 to 9,000. If you look at the SAAMI standards, the shot can vary from 7/8 oz to 1 5/8 oz, but the max pressure is always the same. Therefore to get a light load to work correctly, the powder burn rate has to be faster than for a 1 5/8 load. This somewhat limits the suitable powders. Winchester SuperLite was designed with light loads, low velocity, and normal pressure in mind. Unfortunately it has been discontinued. Sadly, that is where my experience ends, I've tried a few recipes with very little success. Oddly, there is an ideal powder for light loads, with low velocity. and that is Black Powder. BP is the original shotshell powder, all the pressures and Dram Eq. stuff is all BP based. https://www.ballisticproducts.com/load14_09_12.htm Basically, these BP recipes will do the trick, and for smokeless, the goal will be to duplicate these. BB
  20. I have to admit, when I read " Over-the-top reloads " I was a bit surprised. Cowboys don't usually want +P reloads. Then it was clarified. I'm not fast at it, in a match I'm probably better off to take the miss. I have a '66 in 38Spl and '73's in 357, 44-40 and 45 Colt. I seem to recall a post or video that advised that you can speed up the process by having shorter ammo for the extra shot, that can be used to load over the top. This makes sense, a shorter round is easier to drop on top of the depressed or lowered lifter block. To that end I have a few 38 Long Colt rounds handy for that added round. for when I shoot my 38 or 357 rifles. I have some 45 S&W Spl brass that I can and probably will load for that purpose as well. For 44-40 and 38-40, because of the taper on the cartridge, it does tend to somewhat drop partially into the chamber, I'm fairly new to 44-40, when I have the opportunity, I'll give it a try. My procedure is on the last round out of the magazine, I leave the lever down, lifter at the top, and with my finger or the round in my fingers push on the lifter, and drop in the round. The lifter will drop to the mid position, and depending on how the timing is set, the bolt only come forward a small amount. I've installed one short stroke kit, and my rifles have not been slicked. Therefore all the springs are as issued, and the lever spring has enough tension to stop the lifter from going to the bottom. I'd like to learn how to do this faster, perhaps someone could post a video or direct us to a video on this process. BB PS: A short stroke kit will cause the bolt to move forward more than the normal toggles, when the lifter is pushed down.
  21. In Canada: "The current blood lead intervention level is 10 µg/dL. This is the level at which action is recommended to reduce exposure. However, there is evidence to indicate that negative health effects are occurring at lower levels of exposure than previously thought." In the USA: ◆ At levels above 80 µg/dL, serious, permanent health damage may occur (extremely dangerous). ◆ Between 40 and 80 µg/dL, serious health damage may be occuring, even if there are no symptoms (seriously elevated). ◆ Between 25 and 40 µg/dL, regular exposure is occuring. There is some evidence of potential physiologic problems (elevated). ◆ Between 10 and 25 µg/dL, lead is building up in the body and some exposure is occuring. The typical level for U.S. adults is less than 10 µg/dL (mean = 3 µg/dL). My lead/blood test results have 2 measurements, umol/L and ug/L To convert ug/L (micro grams per liter) to ug/dL (micro grams per demi liter) you would divide by 10. My last test came in at 44.7 ug/L or 4.47 ug/dL. At 10 ug/dl, I would require intervention. However, it is flagged on my results as being "Above High Normal". As stated above, spent primers are probably the more common and prevalent source of lead exposure for shooters. Indoor ranges require ventilation, and it needs to be fairly large to keep the air clean. Centrum: Interesting, I'll be doing some research on that. I appreciate shooter sharing their test levels, it creates a real life standard, but to be comparable, the units of measurement are required as well. For example, if I reported my level as being 44.7, which is exactly the level listed on my report, it would seem to be higher than those of Scarlett, but without knowing the units of measurement, it would be hard to compare readings. The other number on my report is 0.22, again meaningless without the units of measurement listed. The standard for limits set by OSHA and other agencies seem to be in ug/dL, but not all labs give their results in those units. BB
  22. https://www.wolverinesupplies.com/ProductDetail/UBEAS5_-Uberti-Short-Stroke-for-Kit-Winchester-1873- Keep in mind, that the price is in CAD. In USD that would be $169.73. In addition Wolverine is not a discount store, prices are close to MSRP. My last kit was imported, and cost me $300 CAD, or $237 USD. back in 2018.
  23. The other day I saw an advertisement for a '66/'73 short stroke kit made by Uberti. P/N AS5. What appeals to me is that it is in stock and available in Canada. With my '66 in 38 Spl I installed a PGW short stroke kit, (Not Super short) and it's worked well for me. CAS is my main hobby and since setting up in 38/357, I've added other calibers. I now have a '73 in 45 Colt and one in 44-40. I've left them as issued, it's not that I don't want to short stroke them, it's just pretty spendy to import a kit from the U.S. Does anyone have any experience with the Uberti kit? If so, how would you rate the product? how easy was the installation? any issues? Thanks, Big Boston.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.