Speaking of big iron

Status
Not open for further replies.
Interesting, my buddy Steve has one with the vertical latch, we've never had it drop even with full house loads. I find it difficult to use that latch though.
 
Dave Markowitz said:
So, something I only learned recently is that the Rogers & Spencer can hold 50 grains of powder under a round ball, which is the same as a Dragoon. Blackie Thomas posted about this on YouTube. He also just posted a video in which he ran these loads over a chronograph. He put 5 rounds over it with 1 error reading, but the average of the other 4 shots was 1150 FPS.



I have fired my R&S 35 grains of Triple 7 under a .454 ball and that was a bit of a handful. Triple 7 has a bit more oomph than real BP so it was probably equivalent to ~40 grains of Swiss 3Fg.
Click to expand...


That's funny, not a big fan of Blackie, but I've been binge-watching R&S videos lately, and both of those were interesting. (I skipped over them quite a few times, until I started running out of others) Up until those I hadn't seen any where any mention of chamber capacity. Seemed like everyone was loading them with 20 grains, and end of story. Also didn't know those suckers weighed 47 ounces. !! One ounce heavier than my Super Blackhawk when it still had the 7.5" barrel.
 
Dave Markowitz said:
I have fired my R&S 35 grains of Triple 7 under a .454 ball and that was a bit of a handful. Triple 7 has a bit more oomph than real BP so it was probably equivalent to ~40 grains of Swiss 3Fg.
Click to expand...

I would guess that 35 grains of 4fg, especially Swiss, would be as potent as 35 grains of 777. Just guessing though.
 
Ugly Sauce said:
That's funny, not a big fan of Blackie, but I've been binge-watching R&S videos lately, and both of those were interesting. (I skipped over them quite a few times, until I started running out of others) Up until those I hadn't seen any where any mention of chamber capacity. Seemed like everyone was loading them with 20 grains, and end of story. Also didn't know those suckers weighed 47 ounces. !! One ounce heavier than my Super Blackhawk when it still had the 7.5" barrel.
Click to expand...

I like some of Blackie's videos but mostly he moves too slowly for me. Must be a Louisiana vs. Northeastern US thing. :)

The R&S is really quite a good design, probably the most advanced of the 19th Century American percussion revolvers. The loading lever, base pin, and flash shield were copied for the Ruger Old Army. The big dished out area around each nipple seems to make them immune to cap jams. Cap fragments just fall out of the gun.

Also, compared with Colts or Remingtons, the R&S has a short action. I.e., the hammer fall is shorter. It still smacks the cap with plenty of authority, however.

Mine is one of the London Grey models.

DSCN1446.jpg

If I ever run across one of the target models with adjustable sights it'll be really tempting to pick up.
 
Considering that people were smaller on average back then I imagine that walkers and dragoons must have really seemed huge in comparison. They were probably on average stronger pound for pound so they might not have thought as much about the size and weight. Still, when you’re loading up to go into battle, losing pounds makes good sense. An 1860 must have been a godsend for cavalrymen.
 
So to follow up on my post upthread about loading 50 grains in a Rogers & Spencer, at least in my gun that's not possible. I tried it today and 50 grains completely filled the chamber. I backed it off to 40 grains and had to hammer the ball in. ASSuming that Blackie Thomas actually got 50 grains of powder into his R&S his gun must have had the chambers reamed deeper by a previous owner.

IMO, 35 - 38 grains is a more realistic max load in the R&S. I'll stick with 30 for general shooting. It gives plenty of power for my needs, is accurate, and doesn't beat up the gun.

I also managed to break the hand in my R&S today. I seem to have chipped the end when removing the cylinder. Luckily, I bought a good set of spare parts several years ago so I don't need to find a replacement, but I'm going to make a detailed drawing of the replacement before installing it, so if this ever happens again I can fabricate one.
 
Dave Markowitz said:
I like some of Blackie's videos but mostly he moves too slowly for me. Must be a Louisiana vs. Northeastern US thing. :)

The R&S is really quite a good design, probably the most advanced of the 19th Century American percussion revolvers. The loading lever, base pin, and flash shield were copied for the Ruger Old Army. The big dished out area around each nipple seems to make them immune to cap jams. Cap fragments just fall out of the gun.

Also, compared with Colts or Remingtons, the R&S has a short action. I.e., the hammer fall is shorter. It still smacks the cap with plenty of authority, however.

Mine is one of the London Grey models.

View attachment 1091473

If I ever run across one of the target models with adjustable sights it'll be really tempting to pick up.
Click to expand...

Beautiful pistol, is that a hard-chrome finish, or bead blasted stainless? Boy that's nice.

Yes exactly, Blackie moves too slowly, and beats around the bush. Kind of why I don't like hickcock, takes him a half hour to cover a 15 minute subject, and still does not cover everything. And, his methods of evaluating accuracy and penetration are sloppy at best, and that's being polite. Clear and concise, and to the point is what I like. I think it's more of a "get to the point" thing.
 
Last edited:
dickydalton said:
I shot 30 and 35 grains of Swiss 3F with a 457 ball in my Tom Ball R&S.
4oqbdNph

4oqbdNph

Click to expand...

What is a "Tom Ball"? And what finish is on that? Yes, seems like 35 to 40 grains of Swiss would cover all bases. But again, I find it puzzling that so many youtubers were stuck on the 20 grains in such a big pistol.
 
Dave Markowitz said:
So to follow up on my post upthread about loading 50 grains in a Rogers & Spencer, at least in my gun that's not possible.
Click to expand...

I suppose the R&S replicas could have varied on how the cylinders were machined. I don't remember if he was going by weight or volume either. Equal weights of different granulations will bulk up differently. 30 grains of 4fg by weight takes up much less space than 30 grains of 1fg, just as a for instance. And volume measures might differ greatly I would guess. Possibly he was loading a much lighter charge, by weight. However, the velocity he was getting did indicate he was possibly getting 50 grains in there. ??? Just some wild guesses.
 
Ugly Sauce said:
What is a "Tom Ball"? And what finish is on that? Yes, seems like 35 to 40 grains of Swiss would cover all bases. But again, I find it puzzling that so many youtubers were stuck on the 20 grains in such a big pistol.
Click to expand...
Tom Ball was an acclaimed gunsmith that died in 1999. Here's a quote from another forum. All the revolvers that Tom did a full accuriz job on have a new barrel with a different rate of twist and has Ball Accuracy stamped on the bottom of the barrel. The cylinder's are reamed to 457 plus have a 11 degree forcing cone in the barrel.
The finish is real aging I believe.
 
Ugly Sauce said:
Beautiful pistol, is that a hard-chrome finish, or bead blasted stainless? Boy that's nice.
Click to expand...
Ugly Sauce said:
And what finish is on that?
Click to expand...

Answer:
Dave Markowitz said:
Mine is one of the London Grey models.
Click to expand...

The finish is Euroarms' "London Gray!"
http://www.euroarms.net/euroarms_netPDF/CATALOG_2006_3.pdf
http://www.euroarms.net/euroarms_netcompany_file/company_profile.htm

This seems to prove that it IS plating:
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/help-needed-with-damage-to-gun-finish.772086/
Also several posts mention that it is magnetic.

Tom Ball R&S:
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/rogers-spencer-44-cal-revolver.883126/
 
The gun in the Tom Ball R&S link is my gun now. I bought it from electric factory last year. This is another one that is on the way to another gentleman on here!
index.php
 
Ugly Sauce said:
I suppose the R&S replicas could have varied on how the cylinders were machined. I don't remember if he was going by weight or volume either. Equal weights of different granulations will bulk up differently. 30 grains of 4fg by weight takes up much less space than 30 grains of 1fg, just as a for instance. And volume measures might differ greatly I would guess. Possibly he was loading a much lighter charge, by weight. However, the velocity he was getting did indicate he was possibly getting 50 grains in there. ??? Just some wild guesses.
Click to expand...

He showed a volumetric measure. I used one very similar to his if not identical.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

tark
  • Locked
Uberti 1876 in 50-95
2
Replies
34
Views
6K
eastbank
eastbank
T
  • Locked
The guns of The Hills Have Eyes
Replies
24
Views
2K
atek3
atek3
ClemBert
  • Locked
Loading a Walker with 2Fg instead of 3Fg?
2
Replies
26
Views
3K
ClemBert
ClemBert
Hoyte
  • Locked
Pietta 1851 Navy vs CVA Walker
2
Replies
25
Views
3K
Jackrabbit1957
J
J
  • Locked
Giant Rabbit terrorize farmers in English village
2 3
Replies
65
Views
3K
Darlene
D
Back
Top