Can a Ruger 3 be turned into a Hall action?

That's it, Joe.  Stir the pot up and run!   

I'm thinking that with all of the computer sensors available off the shelf today, it should be very easy for one of our more savvy members to come up with a way to start and stop time with the click bang of a shot or even the click snap of a dry shot as generated by the breaking of the sear and the striking of the firing pin nose.  I'll ask around, but in the meantime, how about it guys?  D)

BTW, if this hypothetical setup were based on sound, the pickup mike would just have to be placed next to the action in action with no direct connection...you could check relative lock speed of actions as quickly as you could move and cock them. 

OK, that's MY pot stirring for the day, what do the rest of you lurkers think?   8)

Froggie

PS Concerning lock speed of coil vs flat spring 'walls...I've based my preferences on availability and need to maintain the particular rifle in question (application, in other words.)  I prefer to work on a flat spring gun for ease of smithing, but I have never seen a coil spring break from use.  FITZ got it best when he used a flat spring gun with a coil spring added.  Zowee!!   

Joe:

I agree whole heartedly with your first paragraph, even after looking up three words. <g>  Your accessment of the problem is spot on.

Howsomever, I do disagree a wee bit with the second part. While the differing mass of the two hammer certainly would enter into the equation, it is not a factor that should necessarily be left out. I reckon it depends on the purpose of the experiment. If you were doing a pure science sort of thing and just wanted to find out which spring was faster you would indeed want hammers with identical mass. Howsomever, if you wanted to decide the age long argument of which "Wall" had the shorter lock time then you would need to include the extra mass of the flat spring hammer.

I also agree that the best way to measure  the lock time would be some sort of transducer setup to read the break of the seat and the fall of the hammer. I did look into this once but found no one  in my circles that had the requisite skills to work it out.  Maybe we could hook up an action to an EKG. <g> In any event, if such a test could be conducted one could also use it to measure the time delay of a DST. I have theories about that...


Mr. Fitz's Nitrous Oxide powered hammer might well be great for offhand as it is undoubtedly fast. Howsomever, there is still no escaping the reaction of moving that mass. Don's momentum equation demonstrates that.  Boy oh boy, if we could get both springs on a low mass hammer! 

OK then. I am not going to make any gun show excuses. I am just going to run and hide.

Glenn

Joe: 

Welcome back. How was the gun show. Did you find anything that I cannot live without?



>>>>>I'd really be interested in only two things in this whole scenario: A) which hammer/mainspring setup is more accurate from the bench and B) how do the various lock times compare? <<<<<<

I will go out on the proverbial limb and say that the two will be different. I suspect testing will prove that the flat spring action is faster but the coil spring ultimately more accurate from a bench.

Howsomever, once upon a time we was talking about a Ruger action. <g>  I received the Hughes book and studied the picture of the Madole action. I think I have a pretty good idea how he went about  the conversion.  It sure be a pretty rifle. 

Glenn

Joe:

" Somebody told me there were no groundhogs in WI. Izzat true? Joe"


Well, let me say this about that... We do have groundhogs but they are called "woodchucks" up here. With the name comes higher status and they are sacred cows. Look but don't touch. Actually I am not completely sure that looking is ok, but such a law would be hard to enforce.

Glenn

Hmmmm - we seem to have gotten a little distracted here, but unless someone can remember what the topic was it doesn't matter . . . 

After  more scheming I'm thinking the biggest thing I want rid of from my Ruger is the "hanger", but how to replace it is the question.  I've looked at leaf springs like its progenitor the Fraser, but they still require a hanger of sorts.  The reason I want it gone is to enable practical takedown.  

So how about if I cut the hanger off and remount it to a plate that fastens to the front of the action between the barrel shank and the action, very much like a remington recoil lug or an 1885 takedown adaptor (which I have seen on the net, but now can't find, does anyone know who makes these ??).  I'm imagining that a "hanger plate" is permanently fastened to each barrel.

What think you all ??

Cheers - Foster

PS does the 1885 takedown work on both coil spring actions and leaf types ??

I'm a big fan of takedowns & have several of them as well as several takedown projects in the works. Please be advised that it's my personal opinion that a takedown is best accomplished on an action that has square threads, to avoid premature wear and loosening. I own and have owned several older takedown Marlin lever actions, all having square threads, and their takedown system appears to me to be much less subject to loosening than any of the Winchesters with their vee threads. Have also owned TD Winchesters, BTW, and have had to adjust every one of them eventually to take up the slack. The Winchester takedown slack adjusting system is OK on some of their shotguns but not so good on some of their rifles (two different systems).

I favor a TD system whereby there is a receiver extension attached to the chamber end of the barrel, with a method to tighten the joint mechanically when assembling the rifle. The Marlins use a simple little rotating spacer with an inclined plane that tightens the threads when rotated. This is too  complicated for most workmen (especially me) to fab properly and so I've had to think up something else.

My Borchardt TD project, unfortunately with vee threads, will use a small separate bench-made lever assembly to provide the tightening force. This lever assembly is fairly small and will be stored under the rifle's trapdoor buttplate. The separate assembly will allow for a much tighter barrel-to-receiver fit due to its superior leverage, and will significantly reduce the tendency to loosen prematurely.

Another way to reduce the tendency for the threads to wear prematurely is to burnish the threads in both pieces by first lubricating them well and then repeatedly working the assembly back and forth. I repeatedly sock the shoulders up to one another, using a lotta force, with a good coating of moly lube on everything. It doesn't take long for the high spots to disappear and the joint fit to stabilize, at which point the final fitting is begun.

Don't know how all this would work out on a Ruger.
Good luck, Joe