Lee Conicals in .36 Navy

I've got an older Uberti 1861, and Pietta 1851 and 1858's in .36 cal & have been using roundballs for decades. Has anyone used the Lee .375 conical mold? I've cast the conicals in an old Italian brass mold, and although the base is rebated, they were difficult to load. Do these seat straighter & what kind of powder capacity will the longer bullet leave in an 1851 or 1861 chamber?

Looks like the Lee bullet has grease grooves, so it won't be necessary to use felt or paper wads.

FYI...the rebate on the base of the conical bullet is for using the bullet in a paper cartridge. This makes loading the bullet straight and/or consistently very difficult. I once used the Lee bullets in a Ruger Old Army. The rebate on them is designed to fit the chamber mouth and to be loaded like a regular ball. It was better than the historic conical, but I still went back to using a round ball because it had better accuracy.

Lee conicals are pretty much all I shoot out of my 1851 and there alright not as accurate as a .380 round ball but hit alot harder but there harder to load as well but good made paper cartridges help.

I made a simple die to re-size the rebate on a .375 Lee conical to the same general diameter as the lower lube ring. The result is more secure bullet attachment to the cartridge, and no hassle loading the cartridges into a Pieta navy.

Are you referring to the Lee #MOLD D C 375-130-1R? I can't comment on the .36 version but I have tried the #MOLD D C 375-130-1R in a Uberti with the chambers reamed to .456" and a new forcing cone. First the Lee bullet has a progressively larger diameter as you go up the bullet. the base ring is the smallest with the next ring being larger and the top is the actual listed size which makes for easy loading and helps load straight. It is actually a well designed bullet. I lubed the groves, loaded off the gun in a press and put lube over the top, old habits die hard. Since neither of the smaller rings fitted the chamber perfectly I can't be positive the bullets were exactly centered in the chamber but it was very close. The fit of the base would be subject to the chamber sizes of the individual revolver. They loaded easily and kept the bore reasonably clean. They shot a fair 25 yard group but not nearly good as the round balls and as this was my wife's match gun I abandoned further experiments with them. Actually the group nearly doubled in size. I blame this on the twist not being fast enough and it's my opinion that all the Italian revolvers (that I have ever shot) would benefit from a faster twist even with a round ball. My experiences with conversion cylinders in a couple of guns backs this up.

I hope your mold was sized for a 44 caliber pistol. Can you verify your mold number.

I didn't find any 44 cap and ball conical molds on the Lyman web site.

The mold I used was a Lee #MOLD D C 456-220-1R which is .456" dia. and was intended for use in the Ruger Old Army. My chambers were reamed to .456" and I had cut a new 11 degree forcing cone to suit. If you read the thread completely there is no mention of Lyman bullets, only Lee.

Please note that in my post above I had put the .375" mold number in where I had intended to put this #: MOLD D C 456-220-1R. Sorry for the confusion, I should have checked when I cut and pasted.

Pete G said:

FYI...the rebate on the base of the conical bullet is for using the bullet in a paper cartridge. This makes loading the bullet straight and/or consistently very difficult. I once used the Lee bullets in a Ruger Old Army. The rebate on them is designed to fit the chamber mouth and to be loaded like a regular ball. It was better than the historic conical, but I still went back to using a round ball because it had better accuracy.

Click to expand...

Pete, thanks for the post ... I have long tinkered with the idea of buying the conical mold for my ROA, but never got around to it ... I haven't tried it myself, but I am given to understand that a roundball through this system over even a modest load will go through three or four gallon water jugs - in other words, through pretty much any hostile beastie (four or two legged) which I might encounter.

I'll save my loot and not buy the mold, instead i'll spend the money on powder ... you can never be too thin, too rich, or have too much FFFg (especially in the current political climate).

Make good smoke! :grin:

Here's a cartridge with modified rebate loaded into a Pieta London navy and ready to ram.

MSW said:

Pete G said:

FYI...the rebate on the base of the conical bullet is for using the bullet in a paper cartridge. This makes loading the bullet straight and/or consistently very difficult. I once used the Lee bullets in a Ruger Old Army. The rebate on them is designed to fit the chamber mouth and to be loaded like a regular ball. It was better than the historic conical, but I still went back to using a round ball because it had better accuracy.

Click to expand...

Pete, thanks for the post ... I have long tinkered with the idea of buying the conical mold for my ROA, but never got around to it ... I haven't tried it myself, but I am given to understand that a roundball through this system over even a modest load will go through three or four gallon water jugs - in other words, through pretty much any hostile beastie (four or two legged) which I might encounter.

I'll save my loot and not buy the mold, instead i'll spend the money on powder ... you can never be too thin, too rich, or have too much FFFg (especially in the current political climate).

Make good smoke! :grin:

Click to expand...

I bought my ROA in the mid 70's from my mentor. It came with a mold that throws a single RB and a conical. I made some but they were not as accurate as the RB and have never made any more (some may recall my posts about being banned from casting due to the garage smoke incident) :shake:

My 375-130-1R Lee mold delivered this afternoon & I cast up a few hundred. The base slipfits easily into the chamber mouth & looks like that it will have plenty of bearing surface contact traveling down the bore after passing thru the forcing cone.

Do lighter or heavier powder loads give better accuracy?

For those paper cartridges, it looks like cigarette paper treated with Potassium Nitrate. Can you get them to completely combust in the cylinder or is there still residual paper you must remove prior to reloading? I tried several different kinds of paper ctg about 30 yers ago & never could get the paper to burn up completely.

I tried several different conicals in my ROA, ocluding the Lee. None worked worth squat, compared to RB's.

The cartridges are made from cotton rag paper that weighs 20 grams per square meter, which works out to a thickness of about .004 inches, which is why the rebate has to be re-sized on a Lee .375 conical to readily fit into a Pieta navy. The cartridge paper has been converted chemically into a version of magician's flash paper, so it burns away completely when the cartridge is fired.
Conicals are less accurate in modern percussion revolvers than roundballs, but I prefer using conicals in cartridges because they glue more securely; creating cartridges which are more durable. They're great for a day of shooting pop cans, but not the best choice for precision shooting.

Tell me about doing the chemical conversion into magician's flash paper, and how durable is it to carry around as a loaded ctg?