Little help? Lead confusion for .44 1858 Pietta

[perldog007]

Okay, I think that I am learning that hard cast lead bullets like my favorite .45 slug, the 255 gr Keith are not good for or even dangerous in my BP revolver? Is this true?

If I obtained a mold and used 'pure lead' like for round balls will this work?

Can I cast the slug in soft lead and shoot it?

if I can cast it soft, does a slug of this size (255 gr .452 ) need to go in a cartridge and a conversion cylinder or can I get a table stand and load it with BP?

I have read about folks using 'regular' lead rounds in conversion cylinders that are low pressure/bp equivalent. Others say that hard cast lead will stress the frame going into the forcing cone, that the barrel will suffer, what is the truth or your best versions thereof?

 

[72coupe]

Pure lead or near pure lead is the ideal. Anything harder is more difficult to load. I have used chilled lead shot in 31 caliber revolvers and it shoots ok, just hard to load.

As far as the Kieth style bullet I am sure you can load it and shoot it with no problem. My guess is that you can load it right on the pistol.

I haven't shot any hard cast bullets in my stuff but I am skeptical of them being dangerous.

 

[D. Buck Stopshere]

Trying to load hard cast bullets or balls can lead to straining your loading lever to the breaking point.
Don't ask me how I know that.:banghead:

Someone gave me some round balls that he cast. Turns out the lead had tin mixed in with it. That was an expen$ive outing at the range.

If you can't gouge a groove in the ball with your thumbnail, don't use it.

 

[rodwha]

I know that Kaido casts his bullets (custom version of Lee 255 grn .45 Colt bullets) a little harder at 7-11 BHN for repros. This is nothing compared to hard cast though. "Pure" from what I understand is something on the lines of 5-7.

Bullets designed for use in a cap and ball pistol usually have a rebated base so that they easily drop down into the chamber which ensures they are lined up straight. If they don't have this they may tilt.

I had a custom mold maker design me a few different bullets for my percussion revolvers that have a very wide meplat. They have a small seating band of .445" and driving bands of .456".

I've heard of someone using a resizing die to resize the base of bullets meant for cartridges so that they'd load straight easily.

 

[alexander45]

A 255 is big for a bp revolver you can shoot it buy your going to have to down load it quite a bit which will take all the fun and power out of it

 

[rodwha]

Kaido has Lee modify their 255 grn .45 Colt bullet for percussion revolvers. These have gone nose to tail through hogs on their hunts. They do use the more energetic powders though. He makes a 240 grn version meant for repros and the 255 grn for Rugers.

Mike Beliveau tested balls, Lee conicals, and Kaido's 255 grn bullets in Rugers and with a reduced load of 3F T7 with mild compression of the 25 grn charge produced 920 fps and 479 ft/lbs of energy. Not bad at all, and it produced more energy than the Lee conical with 30 grns and the ball with 33 grns.

 

[rodwha]

With regular Goex he loaded up 30 grns of 3F behind a 255 grn Kaido bullet. Of course the performance suffered from a weak powder and only produced 744 fps with 314 ft/lbs.

There's no reason to reduce the load of T7 for safety. Their site states the reason is to replicate the velocity of BP loads. It also doesn't say that a mild compression is used for anything other loading cartridges, but states to load firmly in anything else.

But Swiss and Goex's Olde Eynsford also produce similar velocities as T7, and so a 30 grn charge can obviously be used. I wonder what an additional 5 grns of energetic powder would produce if a reduced charge gives nearly 500 ft/lbs?

It's a 6 part video series. Here's the last showing all of the performance figures:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LP_dwo2nThA

 

[Crawdad1]

Out of his Remington he was getting these numbers from Trip 7.

30 grain Triple Seven 140 grain, .454 ball 1070 ft/s 356 ft-lbs.
35 grain Triple Seven 140 grain, .454 ball 1174 ft/s 428 ft-lbs.
40 grain Triple Seven 140 grain, .454 ball 1229 ft/s 470 ft-lbs.

Those are some impressive numbers he was generating equaling or pushing passed most modern non-magnum cartridges. Most 44 caliber revolvers can handle 30 or 35 grains or even 40 grains chamber capacity, if you don't have enough capacity then don't use a wad under the ball and just add grease over the top of the chamber to keep foiling soft, but like you say Rodwha if Swiss or Olde Eynsford can duplicate Trip 7's performance you have a pretty good hunting weapon right there whether you use a soft lead conical or a round ball.

 

[rodwha]

Who got those results? Is there a link I can follow?

I certainly wish I had a chronograph so that I can see what my 30 grn 3F charge with both my 170 grn bullet and 195 grn bullet, and my 35 grn charge with my 195 grn bullet achieves. I use both Olde Eynsford and Triple 7 powders.

I had assumed my 170 grn bullet pushed by 30 grns likely produced between 325-375 ft/lbs, and that my 195 grn bullet pushed by 35 grns likely produced about 400-450 ft/lbs. Looking at those numbers I think I'd be in the ballpark. Maybe it would be a bit more.

 

[Crawdad1]

Rodwha, here you go.

http://poconoshooting.com/blackpowderballistics.html


To give credit where credit is due.

Contact me at [email protected] to schedule training.
www.poconoshooting.com
Swords, Guns and Fighter Jets in relation to Liberty


If I recall correctly the muzzle energy calculation relies heavily on velocity of the projectile in that velocity is squared in the calculation so a heavier projectile may not achieve so high a velocity. Still even a sleek 1860 Army, the Walker or any of the Dragoon models can easily fit that much powder, has the chamber capacity to load up 40 grains of black powder where compression is not a concern as it is in Trip 7 I believe.

 

[Zeke/PA]

Stick with pure lead.
I think that your best accuracy will be from round balls also.
Round balls in my ROA result in the most accurate handgun in my arsenal.
They also shoot great in my 1858 Remington.

 

[Crawdad1]

I had assumed my 170 grn bullet pushed by 30 grns likely produced between 325-375 ft/lbs, and that my 195 grn bullet pushed by 35 grns likely produced about 400-450 ft/lbs. Looking at those numbers I think I'd be in the ballpark. Maybe it would be a bit more.

You would have to push your 170 grain conical out between 925 and 1,000 feet per second to get between 325 to 375 foot pounds of energy.

Doable with any of the high energy powders including Swiss or Olde Eynsford.

 

[DD4lifeusmc]

velocity etc

Foot pounds of force from a gun is figured with this formula.

velocity squared divided by 7000 divided by 64.32 x bullet weight in grains.

using this you can figure the impact force when it leaves the muzzle.
or downrange.

850 to 900 fps muzzle velocity is common for our revolvers.

so 850 x 850 = 722500 / 7000 = 103.214285714 / 64.32 =1.604699716

x 140 gr (avg .454 RB) =224.657960199 ft lb of force

Now jump up to the 195 custom conical I produce

850 x 850 = 722500 / 7000 = 103.214285714 / 64.32 =1.604699716
x 195gr = 312.916444563

 

[rodwha]

The accuracy may or may not be better with a ball. Look again at the group sizes that Mr. Beliveau had using 2 different bullets and a ball. He's a fair shot I might add.

And again looking at the velocities he attained with T7 shows the Lee 220 grn conical achieved 968 fps with a 30 grn charge. I'd have to say with that same charge a 170 grn bullet ought to go quite a bit faster. Even a 195 grn bullet with that charge ought to break 1000 fps. And that's not even a max load.

However with a weaker powder with a heavier charge the velocities fall in that 800-900 fps realm. Just look at the reduced charge with mild compression of T7 (25 grns) with the Kaido 255 grn bullet clocked at 920 fps vs a 40 grn charge of standard Goex and a .457" ball at 812 fps, or the Lee 220 grn conical with 35 grns of standard Goex traveling at 805 fps.

And look at pocono's results with a ball. Even a smaller charge of 30 grns of T7 pushes a ball beyond 1000 fps.

So we see that despite a reduced charge of T7 every projectile was beyond the 900 fps mark, and from the little choreographed side by side tests I've seen Swiss, Olde Eynsford, and Triple 7 all produce very similar velocities with the same volume of powder (within about 50 fps of each other).

 

[rodwha]

Comparing to different projectiles at the same velocity isn't an accurate way to compare these. You'd have to use a smaller powder charge with the lighter, smaller projectile to likely get the same velocity, and I know of no one who'd do such a thing if energy was what they were after.

 

[StrawHat]

Unless things have changes, the fellows who won the revolver competitions at Friendship used round ball. If the conical was more accurate, they'd be using it. To them, it is all about accuracy.

Kevin

 

[Crawdad1]

And again looking at the velocities he attained with T7 shows the Lee 220 grn conical achieved 968 fps with a 30 grn charge. I'd have to say with that same charge a 170 grn bullet ought to go quite a bit faster.

A 220 grain conical at 968 ft/sec is generating 458 ft/lbs of muzzle energy which equals to or pushes it passed a lot of the factory 40 S&W, 45 ACP loads, most 38 Special, most 9mm factory loadings and all of the 380 ACP factory loadings. Impressive!!

But aren't conicals a double edge sword? Where you are gaining bullet weight but that weight takes up space in your chamber for the powder and reduced powder means lower velocity??

 

[perldog007]

Thanks Gang!!

I believe I can get a few grains of pyrodex under this slug and load it with a table stand. Having said that..... I'll load them up with my Lee Loader and shoot them in my Model 25 ( with good shot placement they drop deer just like a hot .44 mag... ) at around 800 fps.

I want to use the NMA as a finishing pistol / small pig plinker / backup to my Marlin 30/30 ..

Most of the time I envision using the round balls loaded near max in the field, and loaded for plinking/paper/smaller game most of the time.

Given the penetration plain jane RNL .45 loads give I'm thinking I should have a conical load or two worked up in case penetration means more than accuracy.

I think I'll try a 190 first and go from there. Thanks for the input, verdict is I'll save that box of Keiths' for the Model 25. It seems to love them loaded at 760 maybe a little more. I used to push them about 900 fps but my first N frame stretched out of time with ten boxes of factory .44 ammo so..... I am definitely going to look into the 240 GR kAIDO MOLD... that sounds promising.

That slug has been more accurate than me at any velocity out of anything I've tried it in..

 

[rodwha]

"Unless things have changes, the fellows who won the revolver competitions at Friendship used round ball. If the conical was more accurate, they'd be using it. To them, it is all about accuracy."

I've certainly heard that myself. I certainly cannot say they exhausted all means and found a ball more accurate though. And maybe a part of it is the powder puff charges they use which helps reduce recoil. I'd also venture to guess many, once they find their sweet spot, won't look at any changes.

And then for some of us the performance is a factor. There's no way I'd ever use a powder puff charge as it's not useful for anything more than punching paper, though it would work well for small game.

I'm no pistolero but offhand shots at 15 yds are quite similar with everything I've shot from my Ruger (~3 1/2"). As I intend to carry mine while hunting with the idea I may have to track a wounded hog I'll take a WFN bullet over a ball every time, especially since there isn't a reduction of accuracy, and if there is it may only be 1/4" for me.

But here I showed Mr Beliveau who is a fair shot often gets better accuracy with conicals/bullets over a ball when using a more useful load. So that goes to show that what's often said about a ball being far more accurate just isn't always true. It seems it would depend on the rifling twist and/or the powder charge.

 

[rodwha]

"But aren't conicals a double edge sword? Where you are gaining bullet weight but that weight takes up space in your chamber for the powder and reduced powder means lower velocity??"

That certainly depends. With most it is true. But I had read of a fellow who had made a light weight (160 grn?) .45 Colt load into a percussion revolver and had good results. He made the comment that it was no longer than a ball and wouldn't take up powder capacity, which got my gears turning.

I working with Tom at Accurate Molds to create something like that but with a wide meplat. I ended up with a heavier bullet than I expected and so I had him work on a shorter version too. The 195C is only .460" long and might reduce your max load by a grain or three at best. The 170C is only .400" long and would increase the powder capacity and yet still have increased mass.

I don't work my loads to be the most powerful, but make mine the most accurate with a useful charge. My Pietta Remington does best with 30 grns of 3F Olde Eynsford or Triple 7 with both projectiles, and my Ruger likes 35 grns. I could probably load another 10 grns of powder behind the 170 in my Remington as there's about 1/4" left.

I have been considering trying felt wads as filler to see how that improves things.

 

[rodwha]

DD4lifeusmc has several different projectiles he casts and sells for these. I've tried a few and have dealt with him several times. You might be interested in what he has, and his prices are very reasonable.

 

[perldog007]

Everything I've read ( they can't put it on the internet if'n it ain't true, right? ) Tends to suggest that the replica's are rifled for round ball and get the best accuracy from round ball in general.


I can give up an inch or two at 25 yds for the penetration I've seen from my .45 Colt with those slow moving slugs or near to it.

Hell, I'd just take the model .25 if it was a bit more 'rugged'. But I wanted a single action and upon further review... learning about how many people still used C&B after fixed cartridges were available I started to wonder why. Then I started seeing all these YouTube videos and range reports with velocity and accuracy that got my attention.

I can see the advantage of having a good penetrator worked up. The only report I read of round ball versus big hog was involving a dragoon, near max loads and pretty dismal terminal performance concerning the gristle plate. A bullet broke the spine or the author is pretty sure that hog wasn't going down.

Decent size hogs have fallen to air rifles with a head shot and on the farm we often used a cb cap or .22 short, never more than a .22 lr for the coup de grace ..

In the field maybe something that ill punch a gristle plate if you take a shot at hog over 180 lbs or so might come in handy. I got the weapon for the round ball ballistics, but hey - if you can get old school .45 Colt penetration too...

 

[Crawdad1]

I working with Tom at Accurate Molds to create something like that but with a wide meplat. I ended up with a heavier bullet than I expected and so I had him work on a shorter version too. The 195C is only .460" long and might reduce your max load by a grain or three at best. The 170C is only .400" long and would increase the powder capacity and yet still have increased mass.

My 1860 Army does not have the chamber space your 58 Remmy has so I'm a bit more sensitive to chamber space. But those conicals look like they would be the ticket as I know for sure that my Colt's chambers could handle 35 grains and that sized conical. I'm thinking if I need more chamber space I'll just go without an over-the-powder wad and just add grease over the chamber mouths.

 

[rodwha]

"Everything I've read ( they can't put it on the internet if'n it ain't true, right? ) Tends to suggest that the replica's are rifled for round ball and get the best accuracy from round ball in general."

I've read that the older model Pietta Remington's (and others?) have a 1:30" twist or so that doesn't stabilize conicals/bullets well giving sloppy groups. Mine has a 1:16" twist I measured but it's from Christmas '13 and of their newer make having upgraded their tooling.

The 1:16" twist is the same used for typical .45 Colt/ACP barrels.

Kaido, the guy who has Lee make his custom bullets from their 255 grn .45 Colt bullet hunts with several guys for hogs using percussion revolvers. Most of them use Kaido's bullets in their Remington's, Colt 1860 Army's, and Rugers, but one fellow uses his Colt Walker with a full load of 2F Triple and prefers a ball inside 25 yds saying the wound the ball gives is much more wicked.

 

[rodwha]

My Ruger holds about 40 grns of 3F Olde E and my Remington holds maybe 35 grns of Olde E.