Have any of you guys used the Taylor throating reamer sold by Brownells (made by Clymer)?
I was considering having this done to my Bisley Blackhawk 45 Colt, but found that I can buy the reamer from Brownell's cheaper, and since I'm a do-it-myself guy, that appeals to me even more.
Here's my situation, I'm open to input from you revolver guru's who are more experienced than I: The gun has a .452" bore, and I've opened the throats to .453". It did (does) have a slight frame constriction in the barrel, so I've firelapped a total of 18 rounds through it. It feels like there is still a slight constriction in the barrel, but I stopped firelapping because it was obvious that one side of the barrel/forcing cone area was being cut faster than the other. (cutting fast on the RH side). Evidently either the barrel and/or forcing cone is not aligned properly with the cylinder. After doing some reading on Taylor throating, this looks like it might be an effective way to remedy this. My current financial situation won't allow for a custom line bored cylinder to fix the misalignment. Any input?

How is the throating reamer going to address any barrel cylinder misalignment, or barrel constriction under the threads? I'm am not being sarcastic, I am asking. Maybe you see something I don't.
I would lap the bore some more, not fire lap, hand lap, in the area where it is smaller. And I think I might look into an 11 degree forcing cone reamer. The throating reamer only is designed to open the throats.
If there was cylinder/barrel misalignment, I wouldn't do anything until after Ruger addressed that issue, because that one is a BIGGIE. Get a tight fitting dowel to slide down the barrel and see if you really do have an issue first.

Sadsit, a Taylor throat specifically addresses the barrel constriction issue. You can find good info about it on Alphaprecision's and Lee Martin's websites.
I'm hoping someone here has either had this done or has used the reamer from Brownell's and can provide some input.

Okaaaay. If I could read I'd be okay. I see what you mean now. I was looking at the wrong reamers. This Taylor design does look like it addresses both the forcing cone issue and the bore tight thru the frame issue by creating a short freebore thru that area. I looked up several "articles" on the subject, and they read more like testimonials; no one had any bad experiences to relate. Some said that they picked up significant accuracy improvements.
How this would compare to having the rifling start earlier at the correct dimensions I do not know. Weatherby has been criticized by some for years for having freebore after the chamber and before the rifling starts in their rifles to reduce peak pressures, but Weatherbys in my experience have excellent accuracy. On the opposite end benchrest guys, who are the ultimate accuracy guys, load the rounds out so the bullet has no freebore and is actually touching the rifling.
In a handgun I would think the improvement from reducing the amout of bore pinching thru the frame and introducing that small amount of freebore might be very, very close to what you might achieve with a perfect zero bore pinching scenario, but I don't know if anyone has any comparitive data.
If you think you have a cylinder to bore alignment issue, I don't see where this addresses that, and I reiterate that I don't think that is at all an easy fix to address. If I thought it needed addressing, I would definitely get Ruger involved on that. However, because of the CNC processes employed, i would think the chances of having that problem are pretty slim compared to the other issues. But, it couldn't hurt to check that before doing the other work.
While that reamer isn't cheap, if you have several handguns in the same caliber I can see where it might be a real sound investment. Let me know how it works if you pursue it, I may just have to get one in .44.

No matter what you choose to do, I would fix the cylinder alignment first. It is so easy to do yourself that I would not even think of trying to correct it by spending more money first.

Thanks guys. You're right on the cylinder misalignment, I checked more carefully last night and found that it's worse than I originally thought; each chamber locks up about .010" off to the right.

bfrshooter, I was told on the castboolits forum that I can fix this by filing the cylinder stop slot in the frame on one side, and peening the other side to tighten it back up. Is this the method you would suggest as well? I figure if the chambers are off by .010", I'll need to move the slot about .015". I don't remember how much play the internals of the gun have in that area, hopefully there is room to move the stop over that much.

Yes, it is the only way but go real slow with the file and keep checking. Do NOT hog out a bunch because it might take very little metal removal. The measurements are NOT the same. Only go a few light strokes with the file at a time. Once you get good alignment by holding the cylinder snug, then peen the other side for a nice bolt fit.
Yeah, you need to put the gun back together a lot put not completely, just enough parts to check fit.
The secret is to GO SLOW.

Roger that on going slow. I think I put it back together about 20 times doing the trigger job and free spin pawl.
Thanks for the input.

A friend of mine once had a Redhawk that shot badly. We returned it to Ruger with a complaint about its accuracy and they reamed the cylinder for him and it came back shooting fine. I would suggest you call them and ask if they will correct the timing and alignment before you mess with it? They may keep some parts aside that are made off-center to correct that by drop-in? It depends how tight the bolt slot is?

On the alignment error, you could also have a twisted frame, which only the factory can correct because only they can handle the paperwork of destroying the original frame and re-issuing the serial number on a replacement. Charter did that for me on a 3" Bulldog 20-odd years ago, that was patterning like buckshot. It came back holding under 2" at 25 yards.

If you still have a constricted throat at the end of all this, the Taylor reamer is one approach. The other would be to get a pure lead slug with lube grooves and hand-lap the last bit out. That way you are only working the bore in the troubled area and not the rest of the bore or the throat. By the way, are you sure you actually made the throat oval, or did you just mark it heavily on one side? I've measured 0.001" throat movement from 20 rounds with 240 grit compound fired in the Garand. I don't know what you are using, but maybe it's too coarse? If it is Marshall's 320 grit compound, it is hard to imagine 18 rounds would inflict much harm.

It is expensive to send a gun anywhere these days, but given the cost of the reamer and the fact the frame could be involved, it is still likely to be the cheapest thing you can do. I don't know how they will look at the work already done? Under the GCA '68, you have the right to return a firearm to the factory without going through and FFL holder. It's an exception made to avoid discouraging people from getting dangerously faulty guns fixed. Unfortunately the carriers require you to use air freight now, so it isn't free. Just cheaper than too much do-it-yourself tooling and experimentation.

Ruger may be unwilling to replace the cylinder or the barrel, since you've worked on them, but they should fix the alignment on their dime, IMHO. I just wouldn't mention the other work. Let them see for themselves. You will lose any trigger work you've done because they always send the guns out with the trigger at factory spec for liability reasons, AFAIK.