443 ft-lbs for a brass rem58 8" barrel. Am I crazy?

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

darkerx

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2011
Messages
151
I have had many discussions about it already... But the responses I received where only based on traditions... Not facts and/or knowledge.
("you must not do this or you will break your gun...your hand...yourself...your neighbours..etc.").

Well... I like the people giving warnings... They care about others, and I respect it. But I know that earth is not flat, because it has been demonstrated... Not because I have been told it is. (If every Muslim Christian etc. Would be kind enough to follow the same kind of path before killing other humans for some stupid "beliefs"... The world would be a lot safer...).

Then.. Is it still safe to reach 443ft-lbs (600 joules) in the rem58? (or 880 joules in a walker, or 954 joules in a 18" rem 58)). Let's gather what we know:
-proofhouses in Europe are using 1400bars to proof black powder guns (1200 bars when below .44)
-common standard use is considered "safe" when having 30 to 50% margin below proofing load. For instance when scuba diving, the air bottles have been proofed to 300bars, and are being used at 200bars on a daily basis.
-In Lyman books you will find test reports giving actual measures of pressures vs speed for rem58 8": 284m/s 470 bars (371 joules), 298m/s 506 bars (408joules).

Well.. we can now calculate a relationship between joules and pressure within a rem58: .8 (thank you Lyman). Which gives 750bars for the load that gave 600 joules in my own rem58. Which gives a 46% of margin... Good enough for recurring use. ;)

Now it is true that brass/steel/whatever will wear faster with higher pressures... And accuracy will be lower... But If you keep in mind that we are speaking about weapons (not only plinking toys)... 46% margin is much better than what we have in most missiles... :D
 
@Mykeal: yes ... There is a reason... You can't use knowledge against beliefs... And I can't argue with people whose knowledge come from movies...

It doesn't matter... I just like the way humans react... Grown ups are just bigger... :)
 
Darkerx
Please tell us that you are not imagining your .8 ratio of energy to pressure is linear ad infinitum?
 
Quite easily.

Load as per any customary instruction. Fire 2 rounds. There, you should have easily crested your stated goal.
 
@Mr Pale Horse: those energy have been measured, they are not a goal (I was willing to know what those weapons should do with swiss black powder...).

@MutinousDoug: of course the .8 is valid only for speeds around 300m/s. It represents an agregate of constant values (surface of ball, lenght of barrel, etc.) and the energy lost through friction. It will increase with velocity to reach a maximum of 2 (when friction will be negligible in front of energy) : for instance 600000 joules=300000bars * 2=3000000Newton*0.2m(lenght of the barrel).
In an iideal world (no friction) 300 bars would be enough to have 600 joules (443 ft-lbs) through a 8" (.2m) barrel.
On the opposite it can be much lower when your energy is on par with friction... And you can have 0 joules in the end, while having applied a pressure... Because of static friction being too strong.

To sum up: I used .8 because I wanted to maximize the pressure calculated for 600 joules (it is safer)... And also I had no other data ... :D

;)
 
If you are talking about muzzle energy you would need about 1203 fps with a 138 grain ball to get that. It has been awhile since I checked velocity on my cap and ball revolvers, but if memory serves that is perhaps a wee bit more than I was getting from my Walker. A lot less powder capacity in the 1858 makes me seriously doubt whether you could reach that, but maybe I'll have to find out next time I'm out and about with one of my Remingtons. Sounds like a good experiment to run and I hope you share the results if you decide to do so.
 
@44-HENRY: those are my actual results obtained with Swiss 1 black powder (.226-.508mm particles) at full load behind a .457 RB (143gr), which gives 1182 ft/s in the rem58 and 1430 in the walker. I was just explaining why the 3 guns didn't explode.
:)
 
Last edited:
Seriously, though, when I first saw the title of this thread I thought you were asking about torque specs for the barrel.
Then I read the thread and found it was about muzzle energy. Nowhere near as interesting as if you had tried to torque the barrel to 443 ft-lbs.
 
Last edited:
There are probably fewer people interested by dismantling their guns, than by shooting with it...

Well... Maybe you are right after all... Most people are plinkers, not shooters. Why would they be interested by knowing the actual power those weapons had with real black powder?

If I was to dismantle the barrel, I would check the torque with the manufacturer... Or use a "torque spanner" to dismantle it and check the torque I would have To apply.
 
I don't plan on ever removing the barrel from my Pietta 58 Army.
I'm a mechanic, so it is natural that I first thought of torque, not muzzle energy, when I saw ft-lbs.

If you want some serious power from it, you could load the chambers full of Winchester Superlite. You'd have to put a priming charge of about 5-10 grains of fffG black powder in each chamber, first.
Then there's the little problem of the gun blowing apart due to being stuffed to the gills with smokeless powder.

DON'T load your black powder revolver with ANY smokeless powder. My comment above was meant purely as a joke. I'd hate for anyone to hurt themselves.
 
I can't agree more... Smokeless powders are just perfect nonsense for those weapons... These firearms will blow up fast with smokeless loads. And loading mistakes are much easier with smokeless...

Plus, when using high quality real black powder (swiss 1 or swiss 2, or alike) you really have very potent weapons (more powerfull than .45 acp is enough for me) while having pressures far below proofing pressures. So why bother using something else?

(It is a pity that everybody think that black powders' .44 are on par with only the 38special, just because they are using low grade BP (there is not much choice left... I must admit...). Those chemical to kinetic energy converters deserves being better considered).
 
darkerx said:
I can't agree more... Smokeless powders are just perfect nonsense for those weapons... These firearms will blow up fast with smokeless loads. And loading mistakes are much easier with smokeless...

Plus, when using high quality real black powder (swiss 1 or swiss 2, or alike) you really have very potent weapons (more powerfull than .45 acp is enough for me) while having pressures far below proofing pressures. So why bother using something else?

(It is a pity that everybody think that black powders' .44 are on par with only the 38special, just because they are using low grade BP (there is not much choice left... I must admit...). Those chemical to kinetic energy converters deserves being better considered).
Click to expand...
darkerx, how do you think that proofing is done? Do you think they can somehow proof at a higher pressure than what you are shooting with black powder? You seem to think they proof at pressure 46% higher than what your loads develop, but can you tell me how you believe they do so?
 
Proofing is done by having experts preparing loads to reach 1400bars. Which is very easy ... My own loads are made with .508-.226mm particles and. 10000-15000 corns per grain. There are much faster. Powders : .190-.226 and 100000 corns per grain... I think it should be enough... If not, they can use stronger bullets or duplex loads...
 
I reached 1200 fps with an original '58 fully loaded with Pyrodex P and a .457 ball a while back. So clearly it's possible. But those loads puts a lot of wear on a nice old gun - not something I'd do on a regular basis.
 
@dlon21: Those kind of loads are around 750bars... far below proofing pressures. BUT I agree with you, the wear remain more intense than with "plinking/38special equivalent loads".

And it would probably be a very bad idea to use this kind of loads with original or even old guns... as every device subjected to pressure cycles has a finite number of cycles before blowing up finally (planes, scuba air bottles, guns, submarines, etc.). But you can have it re-proofed to test the remaining margins (if it resists, you can shoot some thousand rounds more... :) )
 
darkerx said:
Proofing is done by having experts preparing loads to reach 1400bars. Which is very easy ... My own loads are made with .508-.226mm particles and. 10000-15000 corns per grain. There are much faster. Powders : .190-.226 and 100000 corns per grain... I think it should be enough... If not, they can use stronger bullets or duplex loads...
Click to expand...
darkerx, your posts are interesting, in what you say, and how you say it.

But...

I think you forgot to mention that Proof Houses also use Pixie Dust. That is why they can create over-pressured loads with blackpowder, and why you are unable to ever overpressure or overstress your own guns using BP loads. :rolleyes:

Try as you might, you can only estimate peak pressure by extrapolating it from pressure and velocity data points (in a different firearm, and under different conditions too, no doubt.). Your "estimates" about chamber pressure could be too high (unlikely), or your estimates about your chamber pressure could be lower than they are in reality.

I've said this before, and I will say it again. Overpressure loadings, such as proof loads, can and will cause failures. It is only a question of how many times until that happens. But I don't expect you to take my word... You won't. Because I don't believe you are interested in hearing anything that contradicts your own opinion.

We don't write the laws of physics, but we certainly must live by them! And they cannot be circumvented by simply imagining they do not exist.
 
@Lunie: Hum... I don't understand your post at all... you write the exact same things than me, then imply that you are contradicting me... I don't see where and/or how...

By the way, I have no opinion... I can have theories and/or make estimates but no opinion or beliefs... I'm just not built that way. (I try to explain my logic everytime, to allow people to challenge me and/or improve my estimates...)

By the way (bis), I bought a chrony and a walker because (on an other forum), people were believing that my estimations of speed were wrong (supersonic load)... then I found it interesting to check that my extrapolation were 95% correct. I won't buy a piezo pressure probe... I don't have the time right now.
 
Nothing wrong with .38 special ME from a .44 bullet. The broader surface area of the .44 ball will give better energy dump than a .38 round nosed bullet.
I like 35 grains of fffG Goex BP in my Pietta 58. Haven't chronographed it yet. Have no clue as to velocity, but it's punchy.
It's not like I plan on hunting Hogzilla with it. That's why I have a .50 cal TC Renegade, and a 20 gauge Pedersoli Howdah pistol.
The 58 would be a backup to the backup. The last BP gun I'd use on a hog, before having to resort to a spear, sword, axe, or knife. And I'd only use it at close range.
 
Lunie,
You're just enabling the delusion to continue. As one engineer to another "don't feed the bears" and just move along from the scene of the accident. Too many "rubber neckers" and it will just be the cause for a bigger one. This is just how the huge chain reaction accidents happen on the highways.

You tried...

Have a great day,
Mako
 
Tssss.... you are so right Mako... I don't even understand why you didn't PMed Lunie, instead of bringing this thread up one more time... :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
Why I regard my MEC so highly...
Replies
14
Views
795
Dave McCracken
D
ilbob
  • Locked
Honing .50-caliber machine gun barrels no easy shot
Replies
4
Views
3K
Old Grump
O
Back
Top