How is it that repro revolvers can't use smokeless powder, but can fire smokless rounds from.....
- Thread starter londez
- Start date
- Status
arcticap
Member
It's well known that the Ruger Old Army was originally proofed with chambers full of Bullseye powder.
Of course the ROAl is only recommended for use with black powder but it's a testament to its strength and quality of OEM construction materials.
This was reported in a published interview or book with the person who originally worked on building it as a new model.
Of course the ROAl is only recommended for use with black powder but it's a testament to its strength and quality of OEM construction materials.
This was reported in a published interview or book with the person who originally worked on building it as a new model.
Last edited:
Tommygunn
Member
With regard to c&b revolvers being made of softer metals, while I agree, it's also variable.
I got into these revolvers in the very early 1990s, acquiring a Remmie and Colt 1860 from Gander Mtn. They were both ASM made guns, a company that would later go broke. As I gained more experience and knowledge, I realized that;
1. Both revolvers were finished very crudely.
2. Both were made of very soft metal.
Later I acquired some Pietta and Uberti revolvers, and both were made of stronger metal and better finished. I suspect the ASM were made late in the life of the company and that's why they were so ...... cheap.
B. T. W., I later saw a ASM revolver that was made much earlier than those I owned. I thought it was top notch quality, and thought it was a Uberti until I saw it closely .... so you guys that have early ASM revolvers, don't feel disdained by this post!
I got into these revolvers in the very early 1990s, acquiring a Remmie and Colt 1860 from Gander Mtn. They were both ASM made guns, a company that would later go broke. As I gained more experience and knowledge, I realized that;
1. Both revolvers were finished very crudely.
2. Both were made of very soft metal.
Later I acquired some Pietta and Uberti revolvers, and both were made of stronger metal and better finished. I suspect the ASM were made late in the life of the company and that's why they were so ...... cheap.
B. T. W., I later saw a ASM revolver that was made much earlier than those I owned. I thought it was top notch quality, and thought it was a Uberti until I saw it closely .... so you guys that have early ASM revolvers, don't feel disdained by this post!
Last edited:
Arkansas Paul
Member
Trail Boss is not a BP substitute and should NEVER be used in firearms designed for BP or substitutes.
Trail Boss can have very high pressure spikes when compressed.
This is a recipe for disaster. Please don't.
BCRider
Member
In support of the well intentioned warnings given so far you can see pressure numbers in any reloading data book. Lots of powders that deliver the same muzzle velocity but which have a pretty wide variation in peak chamber pressures. So as mentioned muzzle velocity is not the be all and end all.
One of the worst (best) examples of this can be found when you start using Trail Boss in rifle rounds. Low muzzle velocities but often peak pressures that are well above other powders. Yet due to the low muzzle velocity folks typically think that they are low peak pressures. But the reloading data quickly shows the fallacy of such belief. Yet Trail Boss is a great powder to use in handgun cartridges... for use in suitable guns of course.
Those of us that work with metal also understand that a slowly applied pressure affects the metal in a different way from a sudden shock. Fast but graduated buildups of pressure are easily handled where a sudden hammer blow like spike affects the metal in other ways that can lead to peening or cracking.
One of the worst (best) examples of this can be found when you start using Trail Boss in rifle rounds. Low muzzle velocities but often peak pressures that are well above other powders. Yet due to the low muzzle velocity folks typically think that they are low peak pressures. But the reloading data quickly shows the fallacy of such belief. Yet Trail Boss is a great powder to use in handgun cartridges... for use in suitable guns of course.
Those of us that work with metal also understand that a slowly applied pressure affects the metal in a different way from a sudden shock. Fast but graduated buildups of pressure are easily handled where a sudden hammer blow like spike affects the metal in other ways that can lead to peening or cracking.
midland man
Member
so why is it that the Naa cap and ball revolvers used to could use smokeless in them and they didn't blow up?
arcticap
Member
Because the powder charges are relatively small and probably because they're American made from a higher quality stainless steel.
Most folks who have posted about them here do load them with Bullseye smokeless powder.
Malachi Leviticus Blue
Member
This has already been eluded to, but the main reason I see that using smokeless is a bad idea is that a very small error in measurement of the powder can make a catastrophic pressure increase and the nipple threaded into the cylinder is a weak point that could turn the nipple into a projectile going the wrong way.
Jenrick
Member
The two main factors to be worried about are the overall pressure that is generated by your charge, and the speed in which it reaches that pressure. Either one, if of a sufficient overmatch is more than enough to kill or maim you or other shooters. The third variable is the strength of the barrel and cylinder (assuming a revolver). With proper lab testing or a known pedigree to the metal, it would be possible to find all kinds of propellants that would work, and do so safely. Absent that there are a very limited number of choices that can be safely used without exhaustive precautions to avoid a potential catastrophic failure.
In short the prohibition to avoid smokeless in black powder arms, is to address the 99.999% of uses that people will ever use their firearms for. And in 99.999% of all uses of smokeless powder in a black powder firearm, the shooter is operating with a far smaller safety margin than would be prudent.
In short the prohibition to avoid smokeless in black powder arms, is to address the 99.999% of uses that people will ever use their firearms for. And in 99.999% of all uses of smokeless powder in a black powder firearm, the shooter is operating with a far smaller safety margin than would be prudent.
Design. The percussion system and the practice of compressing a ball on top of a powder charge is NOT A DESIGN AND PRACTICE SUITABLE FOR SMOKELESS POWDER.
Most are not made out of the highest quality materials (except the Ruger Old Army and a very few others) They are made using softer easy to machine steel and you know what it works fine, as long as low pressure powders that behave like black powder and/or black powder with soft lead are used.
When a coversion cylinder is used the design is changed significantly. You now have a fully enclosed cartridge case (9 out of 10 times brass) in a fully supported chamber (fully enclosed cylinder [conversion cylinder] The bullet is crimped in place at a predetermined distance from a carefully weighed powder charge which upon firing the brass expands sealing even the tinyiest nook and crany. No flying nipples no nasty shower of hot gas flashing into your face, no violent hammer blowback (a warning sign of high pressure.)
A Ruger Old Army had a kaboom once but it turns out that the Ruger Old Army had no damage at all despite the catastrophic failure. The conversion cylinder which happens to be perfectly safe for "cowboy loads" which to be honest in my opinion are not too bad blew up. The person thought it was "alright" to use a load with more punch, as I always say maybe, but you take the risk. I would decline.
The North American Arms mini derringers as far as I know use modern steel and although they sell percussion system guns they hold a significantly small charge however some of their offerings hold .22 magnum sized charges in which case I would be very cautious using large amounts of smokeless. NAA was threatened by the ATF with being forced to classify their percussion guns as modern firearms so they stopped providing instructions on using smokeless loads and now tell people not to use smokeless at all in their percussion products.
I can understand that some people want to have a converted cap and ball gun because of the unique feel and look of an old fashioned percussion gun. They are also historically correct since a lot of old guns were converted to black powder cartridge guns and although smokeless powder was around black powder was still in plentiful supply and a lot of guns still used it. Firearms made for black powder using lesser quality steel which otherwise worked fine with black powder did not fare well with smokeless or any of the smokeless black powder mixtures. That did not take long to figure out.
I would suggest if possible get a firearm made of modern steel designed from the ground up (maybe even a copy of an antique) to handle all SAAMI spec smokeless charges for your caliber of choice if you can.
Most are not made out of the highest quality materials (except the Ruger Old Army and a very few others) They are made using softer easy to machine steel and you know what it works fine, as long as low pressure powders that behave like black powder and/or black powder with soft lead are used.
When a coversion cylinder is used the design is changed significantly. You now have a fully enclosed cartridge case (9 out of 10 times brass) in a fully supported chamber (fully enclosed cylinder [conversion cylinder] The bullet is crimped in place at a predetermined distance from a carefully weighed powder charge which upon firing the brass expands sealing even the tinyiest nook and crany. No flying nipples no nasty shower of hot gas flashing into your face, no violent hammer blowback (a warning sign of high pressure.)
A Ruger Old Army had a kaboom once but it turns out that the Ruger Old Army had no damage at all despite the catastrophic failure. The conversion cylinder which happens to be perfectly safe for "cowboy loads" which to be honest in my opinion are not too bad blew up. The person thought it was "alright" to use a load with more punch, as I always say maybe, but you take the risk. I would decline.
The North American Arms mini derringers as far as I know use modern steel and although they sell percussion system guns they hold a significantly small charge however some of their offerings hold .22 magnum sized charges in which case I would be very cautious using large amounts of smokeless. NAA was threatened by the ATF with being forced to classify their percussion guns as modern firearms so they stopped providing instructions on using smokeless loads and now tell people not to use smokeless at all in their percussion products.
I can understand that some people want to have a converted cap and ball gun because of the unique feel and look of an old fashioned percussion gun. They are also historically correct since a lot of old guns were converted to black powder cartridge guns and although smokeless powder was around black powder was still in plentiful supply and a lot of guns still used it. Firearms made for black powder using lesser quality steel which otherwise worked fine with black powder did not fare well with smokeless or any of the smokeless black powder mixtures. That did not take long to figure out.
I would suggest if possible get a firearm made of modern steel designed from the ground up (maybe even a copy of an antique) to handle all SAAMI spec smokeless charges for your caliber of choice if you can.
Last edited:
Thanks for all the info everyone! Firearms make physics so much more interesting. Lol, but why should I be looking out for black helicopters?
Tommygunn
Member
Attachments
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
