1851 navy 36 caliber for deer and hogs will it be enough?

[expat_alaska]

Gotta say I don't much care for that fellows comments myself. This forum is about sharing information and insight, don't let some knothead turn you away from it. BTW I took 3 Jackrabbits down today with a 38 special, 2 were over 70 yards. I really gotta get me a 36 cal revolver and try it.

Jackrabbit, that made me think of a Johnny Cash song from the 50's. Yeah, I am that old and fried rabbit is always good (and I am a Yankee originally from Michigan):



Good shooting!

Jim

 

[Jackrabbit1957]

I too like fried rabbit, cotten tails. Jacrabbits are a whole different thing. One can make a stew, you need carrots, potatoes, seasonings to taste but the key ingredient is an old leather shoe. Cook for 4 hours and toss out the Jackrabbit and eat the shoe, it will be more tender and taste better.

 

[Eyrie G. Dogg]

An 1851 is a readily presentable and wieldable anti personnel device. It’s primarily for shooting humans and other creatures similarly constituted. It’s a great handgun, but trying to hope it into something it’s not and never intended to be is just wishful thinking and so unrealistic as to verge on the juvenile and corny.

 

[Slamfire]

Colt had competitors, Adams being one. Adams revolvers were larger caliber than the 36 Colts, and Adams brought out failures of the Colts in combat, to help sell his revolvers. One occurred during the Sepoy Mutiny. A British Officer emptied his Colt 36 into a sword bearing Sepoy, all six shots in the chest apparently, and the Sepoy cut the Officer's head from top, to teeth, before dying. These old pistols were not a lighting bolt from the gods, and it has been so long, that living memory of their failures is gone.

 

[Jackrabbit1957]

Shot placement might make a difference on that one. Heard it was reason for .45s in the Phillipines as well. The old .38 short and wimpy just didn t cut it when a sword swinging bad guy wrapped in rawhide was trying to take you out.

 

[Eyrie G. Dogg]

I understand that the British East Indian Company put in an emergency rush order for some Dragoons during the Sepoy Rebellion. Don’t know if they got there in time to retake Cawnpore but if they did a Dragoon would doubtlessly perform exemplary execution.

Same deal with the Moros during the Philippine Insurgency. Those guys would tie off their pressure points, smoke a bunch of hash, praise Allah and his Prophet and come a runnin’ with their kris or keris or whatever. Army issue .38’s (.38 Long Colt) just didn’t cut it.

 

[Venom007]

Ballistically it's like a .380 ball round, but with an even worse ballistic coefficient.

It had a reputation for being effective in combat, but in no way shape or form is it a good deer or hog round.

 

[Old No7]

okay guys...
but I do know for a fact they are proven mankillers back in the day...

"Back in the day" there were no ERs, ambulances or antibiotics, etc.

So chances are that many of those killed died hours or days later from infections -- so they were "killed", but not right away.

I'm thinking a wounded hog could do a lot of damage, and a wounded deer could cover a lot of distance, while you waited for the round ball to "kill" -- if it ever did at all...

Old No7

 

[Patocazador]

I just got in yesterday a new traditions/pietta 1851 navy colt 36 caliber revolver and so would this have enough power to take deer or wild hogs if needed??

NO!

 

[rodwha]

Colt had competitors, Adams being one. Adams revolvers were larger caliber than the 36 Colts, and Adams brought out failures of the Colts in combat, to help sell his revolvers. One occurred during the Sepoy Mutiny. A British

Ballistically it's like a .380 ball round, but with an even worse ballistic coefficient.

It had a reputation for being effective in combat, but in no way shape or form is it a good deer or hog round.

Indeed. A ball, being a bit more blunt than a typical RN type FMJ, will create just a little bit wider of a permanent wound track and will penetrate like one unless it hits bone possibly. And the typical pointy conicals used back then were worse as we know a pointy projectile allows the flesh to stretch thereby creating a smaller than caliber wound track.

Using a WFN bullet, or even modifying the ram to have a pin to keep the cavity from deforming upon loading would allow one to use HP, which might be better, though still not a good choice as even with a stout load of energetic powder will only produce about .38 Spl +P performance. With a WFN it will create a nice wound track and penetrate rather deeply, which would be a more ideal projectile for such, but outside of being in a bad situation not many would choose to use such a thing.

From Beartooth’s site:



Not a bad sized hole from a WFN style of bullet even at low velocities.

 

[rodwha]

Even striking bone isn’t necessarily going to make a soft lead ball expand though. Check out this old military video in which they compared old technology to what was new then. And note also that the dismal velocity of the 1860 Army is even lower than what typical common powders achieve, which is dismal compared to the energetic powders available.

 

[midland man]

well I baffles me as with 30grs of goex 3f powder and roundball with a lubed wad this 36 caliber pistol really sounds strong like the same loudness of my .380 acp so I can't see why this wouldn't kill anything? has anyone tried 30grs of 3f goex in their 36 caliber pistol infact someone suggested me using 30grs 4f goex and it will really wake up! so I may try that!

 

[Jackrabbit1957]

Don t sell the roundball short, l hit a deer between the eyes years ago with one at around 75 yards, instant kill with nothing left in the brain cavity. Of course it was a 50 cal. But seeing what a .36 does to small game l wouldn t count it out.

 

[rodwha]

well I baffles me as with 30grs of goex 3f powder and roundball with a lubed wad this 36 caliber pistol really sounds strong like the same loudness of my .380 acp so I can't see why this wouldn't kill anything? has anyone tried 30grs of 3f goex in their 36 caliber pistol infact someone suggested me using 30grs 4f goex and it will really wake up! so I may try that!

The sound doesn’t mean much of anything really. With standard Goex it’s really underpowered, but apparently it comes close to 380 ACP performance with ~170 ft/lbs. But with an energetic powder you can get about 250 ft/lbs. Use a bullet instead with that energetic powder and you can get roughly .38 Spl +P performance.

 

[John L Venable]

okay guys lol I love these comments but I do know for a fact they are proven mankillers back in the day so i'm sure they would still do the work if asked of it right??

Usually they died from an infection or internal bleeding over time. A 36 lead ball is not a knockdown round with ill venture, 175 ft lbs, about half of a 9mm impact. EDIT: and I take that hickock story with a lot of Salt. In USPSA there's a thing called the 75 yard standards. With a highly accurate tuned .38 super or .45 it's not a quick shot and 3 out of 5 on target stronghand is pretty fair shootin'

 

[grter]

Am I the only one here that thinks this is totally unsafe and some people keep insisting on trying. You even have one guy suggesting to cram the cylinder of a .36 caliber Italian import full of 4F powder behind a round ball,

In addition to getting stampeded, mauled, bitten or whatever you might blow up your cap and ball revolver in your hand as well. Good luck dodging the shrapnel.

There is also the thread suggesting hunting black bear with a cap and ball revolver.

These people wander why they are finally mocked after they defend these plans to do these crazy stunts using old west folklore and events where desperate people were lucky to survive using only what they had on hand as proof that that it can be done (maybe so but it's not smart) and encourage people to try. All despite multiple people with experience telling them it is not safe.

Then they complain about how poorly they are treated and threaten to leave a forum that is supposed to support and educate them while at the same time making every effort to explain away their plans to do unsafe and unethical stunts with firearms.

Then finally you have some guy making jokes about shooting hippies you know people.

This forum is for spreading firearms experience and knowledge not to spread false information based on myth and folklore or to encourage and demonstrate unsafe firearms use.

Despite all the previous whining I am going to say again doing these things amount to foolish and unethical stunts.

 

[Steel Hayes]

In addition to getting stampeded, mauled, bitten or whatever you might blow up your cap and ball revolver in your hand as well. Good luck dodging the shrapnel.

There is just not enough space in the cylinder to overload powder enough to grenade it.
While the .36 round ball is a fairly weak round for hunting larger animal, it was designed for taking out horse.
Even fully packed, anything under .44 it would be hard to take deer with.

 

[grter]

I don't think cramming the cylinder of a .36 caliber Italian import open top cap and ball revolver FULL of 4f that is ffffg flintlock priming powder and topping it off with a round ball is a good idea.

I wouldn't even try it on an 1858 steel frame remington design .44 cal or .36 cal.

4f (ffffg) is a super fine powder meant for priming flintlocks. Experiment at your own risk but stuffing a cylinder full of the stuff and packing it down is not something I would recommend and I would not dare use a conical. Some say 14 grains max of 4f in a .36 cal (some old lyman book UNVERIFIED INFORMATION) I say stick with 3f and be safe. A cylinder full of ffffg (4f) you're crazy.

This can done in a Ruger Old Army but a bad idea in just about anything else

 

[Jackrabbit1957]

With no hunting experience how can you be the one to tell anyone what will work or what will not? If you have only shot paper targets and never seen an animal in your sights and taken that shot you have no basis to be telling the rest of us what is a good load or projectile for deer, pigs, or chipmunks.

 

[rodwha]

Am I the only one here that thinks this is totally unsafe and some people keep insisting on trying. You even have one guy suggesting to cram the cylinder of a .36 caliber Italian import full of 4F powder behind a round ball,

In addition to getting stampeded, mauled, bitten or whatever you might blow up your cap and ball revolver in your hand as well. Good luck dodging the shrapnel.

There is also the thread suggesting hunting black bear with a cap and ball revolver.

These people wander why they are finally mocked after they defend these plans to do these crazy stunts using old west folklore and events where desperate people were lucky to survive using only what they had on hand as proof that that it can be done (maybe so but it's not smart) and encourage people to try. All despite multiple people with experience telling them it is not safe.

Then they complain about how poorly they are treated and threaten to leave a forum that is supposed to support and educate them while at the same time making every effort to explain away their plans to do unsafe and unethical stunts with firearms.

Then finally you have some guy making jokes about shooting hippies you know people.

This forum is for spreading firearms experience and knowledge not to spread false information based on myth and folklore or to encourage and demonstrate unsafe firearms use.

Despite all the previous whining I am going to say again doing these things amount to foolish and unethical stunts.

I assume I’m one you feel has been advocating for this. However I have not advocated for the intended use, but have shown what proof there is easy to post that the thoughts of some are unfounded and incorrect.

And Hazard’s Pistol Powder used 4F granulation with what was found to be energetic like Swiss powder in their Civil War cartridges. That’s 36 grns of powder pushing a 211 grn bullet. The fellow who published his research has given permission to download and share it. It’s lengthy so it has to be emailed. I’d gladly send it to anyone who would like to read it.

And there’s a museum curator who haunts some of these forums who disassembled black powder cartridges so they could be put on display and found even large caliber rounds contained 4F and even finer powders. The 1st edition Lyman Handbook has 4F Goex loads for the 1860 Army. Note the low pressure:



And note the Swiss powder bottles. 4F is used for pistols:

upload pictures

I would never attempt to convince someone to go against the manufacturer’s warning but the idea that 4F is only for a flash pan is 20th century BS. I don’t feel the need as the energetic powders in 3F give plenty of power for hunting and I can use it in my rifle as well meaning I don’t need several powder flasks or various powders to keep on hand.

 

[Jackrabbit1957]

Amen to that!! Take a look at 777, it has pretty fine granulation as well.

 

[rodwha]

I wish my 2nd edition showed the pressures. I’d be willing to bet 3F Swiss, Olde Eynsford, and Triple 7 create no less than what 4F standard Goex does, and likely more.

Regardless, using an energetic powder such as Swiss with 4F in those Hazard’s paper cartridges, and looking at their loads (.44 cal using 36 grns with a 211 grn bullet and .36 cal using 21 grns with a 141 grn bullet) these were likely about max loads knowing the bullets used then were rather pointy.

 

[grter]

The idea that no amount of any kind of black powder is enough to blow up the cylinder is boloney. Someone once burst the cylinder of an ASM Walker using between 40 and 52 grains of pyrodex 3f behind a 280 (correction 285 grain) grain conical designed for the Ruger Old Army.

The one who blew up his walker said he used 30 grains then changed his story to 40 grains (said he made a mistake.) The seller (correction designer) of the projectile said it was 52 grains of powder. Now 40 grains by weight is about 52 grains by volume when using 777 (correction pyrodex an even less energetic powder) according to a weight chart I read so I don't know if this guy weighed his charge or measured by volume, but it was 3f grade pyrodex so I don't think 4f would be safe but suffice to say it would all fit in the cylinder.

One guy on youtube loaded up the cylinders of a walker with 60 grains of 4f behind a round ball and shot it with no kabooms but that does not mean it was safe he was chastised by viewers in the comments and he finally agreed, and rightfully so, that what he did was not a good idea.

Granted these are two very different loads with the conical probably producing more pressure but it did all fit into the cylinder and ended up with a kaboom that these kind of ad hock loading practices can produce. Thankfully there were no injuries.

Thompson Center produced a very good instruction manual that provided a comprehensive list of maximum loads and projectile weights for their black powder rifles a lot of which were very powerful loads with heavy projectiles and good range.

They strongly state not to use 3f in the big bore rifles. They have actually researched the matter and found finer granulated powders produce significantly higher pressures than than the coarser powders and (pay really good attention to this) the increase in performance with the finer powders marginal. Thompson Center Made some super strong high quality side locks, that have actually researched the effects of finer powders and don't believe anything finer than 2f is safe in their large bore rifles or performs significantly better than their already super stout recommended 2f powder loads with heavy projectiles.

I am sure a 3f load can be safely when used in proper doses and many people routinely use 3f in TC as well as other side locks but I don't because I don't need to.

Granted the Italians have their recommended lawyer useless (unless you shoot paper and like low power loads) weak loads for their cap and ball guns but over the years (as far back as the Civil War) a general understanding of what these revolvers are capable of handling is known.

That is a far cry from telling people to just load as much of any grade of black powder into the cylinder behind a projectile of their choosing and not to worry about it.

That is bad advice and I don't think it's a smart thing to do.

Sir I just hope the shrapnel does not fly into you or anyone else.

I have had it here.

 

[maint1517]

Am I the only one here that thinks this is totally unsafe and some people keep insisting on trying. You even have one guy suggesting to cram the cylinder of a .36 caliber Italian import full of 4F powder behind a round ball,

In addition to getting stampeded, mauled, bitten or whatever you might blow up your cap and ball revolver in your hand as well. Good luck dodging the shrapnel.

There is also the thread suggesting hunting black bear with a cap and ball revolver.

These people wander why they are finally mocked after they defend these plans to do these crazy stunts using old west folklore and events where desperate people were lucky to survive using only what they had on hand as proof that that it can be done (maybe so but it's not smart) and encourage people to try. All despite multiple people with experience telling them it is not safe.

Then they complain about how poorly they are treated and threaten to leave a forum that is supposed to support and educate them while at the same time making every effort to explain away their plans to do unsafe and unethical stunts with firearms.

Then finally you have some guy making jokes about shooting hippies you know people.

This forum is for spreading firearms experience and knowledge not to spread false information based on myth and folklore or to encourage and demonstrate unsafe firearms use.

Despite all the previous whining I am going to say again doing these things amount to foolish and unethical stunts.

The thread wasn't suggesting useing c&b for black bear. It was asking about a load for it because I didn't know. Seems like you like to take bits and pieces from different posts and threads and spin them into your own version to create an argument.
There's a name for that. And it's number four in the rules under forum code of conduct.

 

[rodwha]

The idea that no amount of any kind of black powder is enough to blow up the cylinder is boloney. Someone once burst the cylinder of an ASM Walker using between 40 and 52 grains of 777 3f behind a 280 grain conical designed for the Ruger Old Army.

The one who blew up his walker said he used 30 grains then changed his story to 40 grains (said he made a mistake.) The seller of the projectile said it was 52 grains of powder. Now 40 grains by weight is about 52 grains by volume when using 777 according to a weight chart I read so I don't know if this guy weighed his charge or measured by volume, but it was 3f grade 777 so I don't think 4f would be safe but suffice to say it would all fit in the cylinder.

One guy on youtube loaded up the cylinders of a walker with 60 grains of 4f behind a round ball and shot it with no kabooms but that does not mean it was safe he was chastised by viewers in the comments and he finally agreed, and rightfully so, that what he did was not a good idea.

Granted these are two very different loads with the conical probably producing more pressure but it did all fit into the cylinder and ended up with a kaboom that these kind of ad hock loading practices can produce. Thankfully there were no injuries.

Thompson Center produced a very good instruction manual that provided a comprehensive list of maximum loads and projectile weights for their black powder rifles a lot of which were very powerful loads with heavy projectiles and good range.

They strongly state not to use 3f in the big bore rifles. They have actually researched the matter and found finer granulated powders produce significantly higher pressures than than the coarser powders and (pay really good attention to this) the increase in performance with the finer powders marginal. Thompson Center Made some super strong high quality side locks, that have actually researched the effects of finer powders and don't believe anything finer than 2f is safe in their large bore rifles or performs significantly better than their already super stout recommended 2f powder loads with heavy projectiles.

I am sure a 3f load can be safely when used in proper doses and many people routinely use 3f in TC as well as other side locks but I don't because I don't need to.

Granted the Italians have their recommended lawyer useless (unless you shoot paper and like low power loads) weak loads for their cap and ball guns but over the years (as far back as the Civil War) a general understanding of what these revolvers are capable of handling is known.

That is a far cry from telling people to just load as much of any grade of black powder into the cylinder behind a projectile of their choosing and not to worry about it.

That is bad advice and I don't think it's a smart thing to do.

Sir I just hope the shrapnel does not fly into you or anyone else.

I have had it here.

That 285 grn bullet was mine and not sold. I designed it specifically for my ROA thinking I was moving to VA and had the potential to hunt bears (with my .50 cal rifle using this as a backup). Wanting weight at the expense of powder capacity I specifically designed it with very wide driving bands to increase the pressure/velocity. That fellow decided to load it in his Walker and he has a 26 grn spout that he realized he double loaded. That’s an actual 52 grns of Pyrodex P. Dropping at .456” and being shaved down to what could well be under .450” would increase the length of the intended driving band. Couple that with the weight, which outweighs by far any projectile ever intended for these, and that it is greatly reduced in OAL for that weight allowing for a lot more powder to be used. And on top of that ASM was well known for having quality issues. So that was an exceptional incident.

This bullet was never intended to be used in anything other than a Ruger as I know it can handle the pressures.

http://accuratemolds.com/bullet_detail.php?bullet=45-285C-D.png