I’m having a barrel swap done, and my fine gunsmith said that he shoots for .003” of end shake. Said it helps with thermal expansion, but I’m not a competitive shooter. Any thoughts?
I’m having a barrel swap done, and my fine gunsmith said that he shoots for .003” of end shake. Said it helps with thermal expansion, but I’m not a competitive shooter. Any thoughts?
I know there is a spec on it, and it isn’t “zero “, so some is necessary for the thermal expansion and dirt build up that is inevitable.
Too much will lead possibly to light strikes, but 0.003 sounds reasonable.
It depends on the manufacturer & model.
For example, Ruger's DA spec is looser than the S&W one posted.
Just as Kuhnhausen suggests, I shoot for ~001". I would consider .003" excessive. Easier for the gunsmith, but would be unacceptable to me ....ymmv
Setting barrel-cylinder gap to not less than 0.003" pass and 0.004" hold provides sufficient clearance for free cylinder rotation with thermal expansion and normal accumulation of powder fouling. Mean Assembly Tolerance in a new revolver before proofing is 0.005 pass/0.006 hold. In .357 Magnum it is normal for gap to open up to 0.001" in proofing.
Head clearance from the firing pin bushing in the frame with rear gage in place should be in the range of 0.001-0.002" and the headspace dimension from the rear face of the cylinder in .38/.357 0.059-0.062 before proofing and 0.065 max in customer service.
Intentionally fitting a gun with more than 0.002" end shake, rather than properly fitting the cylinder yoke, bushing and extractor to have correct barrel-cylinder gap and adequate head clearance for free cylinder rotation dimensions is "jackleg". End shake which can be "felt" (about 0.003") absolutely should be corrected, otherwise forceful longitudinal slamming of the cylinder during recoil will eventually stretch the topstrap and peen the frame to loosen the gun further if shooting anything heavier than .22 LR or .38 wadcutter...
In response to the OP’s original question,
NO.
The first indication a bad guy should have that I'm dangerous is when his
disembodied soul is looking down at his own corpse wondering what happened.
A few years ago I acquired a S&W M29 that had excessive endshake, really excessive. I gave it a tune up and also replaced the hand a couple of months later when the original broke. The cylinder now locks up tight as a bank vault, with zero endshake or side play. Roughly 2k rounds later it has yet to seize up due to any heat expansion. my vote is, "No". In years past, I'd been told by a couple of old time revolver smiths that necessary endshake was a myth or a lazy mans excuse for fitting up a revolver. I tend to agree.
We may lose and we may win, but we will never be here again.......