1851 navy hunting

Ok so I am interested but n hunting with a 1851 navy replica .44 cal revolver. I’ve read so many statements about how they never killed a thing and it was always the infection that did the job. Plenty of folks talking about how ineffective they are.


I’ve read they don’t hold a large enough powder charge to ethically take game as large as a deer. But in my research I did find a thread on another forum where a gentleman had successfully taken a white-tailed buck with an old army but with a 30 grain load which the navy will hold.

Anyone hunted game with a load that light around here? I archery hunt so I understand the concept of patiently waiting for the right shot, and would only take shots at distances I could be deadly accurate at. Probably no more than 25 yards.


What are your thoughts? Experiences?

Ethical is the key word. If you’re looking to prove something by using the least powerful gun possible then why not a 31 pocket pistol?
To hunt a rabbit or a fools hen is one thing but a deer is reaching too far.

I don't see why not. Archery hunting is a good preparation for handgun hunting in general. Take advice from dangerous game hunters - don't admire your shot, keep shooting until it falls down.

You should be able to get close to 44 magnum velocities of 1250 fps, probably 1090 more like it. Give triple 7 powder a try. Keep it 25 yards and under, careful use of shot angle, use a slightly harder cast ball or bullet and practice, practice practice, and you will be fine

russellshaffer said:

I don't see why not. Archery hunting is a good preparation for handgun hunting in general. Take advice from dangerous game hunters - don't admire your shot, keep shooting until it falls down.

Click to expand...

Well said!

bigstick6017555 said:

You should be able to get close to 44 magnum velocities of 1250 fps, probably 1090 more like it. Give triple 7 powder a try. Keep it 25 yards and under, careful use of shot angle, use a slightly harder cast ball or bullet and practice, practice practice, and you will be fine

Click to expand...

I am shooting triple 7. Once this new revolver comes in I will definitely get a bunch of trigger time behind it and be sure I’m on point before taking it afield. I inherited a 1851 navy for n .36 and finally learned to shoot it after a couple years. Now want to get into the field with one so I ordered one in .44



The wife is super happy I have a new hobby to delve into hahahahaha.

Phil Coffins said:

Ethical is the key word. If you’re looking to prove something by using the least powerful gun possible then why not a 31 pocket pistol?
To hunt a rabbit or a fools hen is one thing but a deer is reaching too far.

Click to expand...

What do you think is more ethical… someone ensuring to practice enough to know their true limitations with the weapon they choose. Or someone who always picks a magnum round expecting that alone to do the job for them?

Yall missed the key point, he is using a 44caliber, most definitely capable if you are.

Blackpowderart said:

Yall missed the key point, he is using a 44caliber, most definitely capable if you are.

Click to expand...

Right on.

bigstick6017555 said:

You should be able to get close to 44 magnum velocities of 1250 fps, probably 1090 more like it. Give triple 7 powder a try. Keep it 25 yards and under, careful use of shot angle, use a slightly harder cast ball or bullet and practice, practice practice, and you will be fine

Click to expand...

I'm not familiar with triple 7, but Lyman says the top load of fffg is 1032fps, with 326 ft/lbs, using the round ball. Which is equal to a mild 9mm load.

But the important thing to remember is that's using a 138gr Round Ball, not the 240gr used in the RM. The 44 RM with the 240gr pill has 741 ft/lbs energy, just for comparison.

Will the 44 CNB take a deer up close? Sure. Will it ever be close to a 44 magnum? No Way.

Btw, I've hunted with both the bow and arrow and the CNB revolver. I'll take the bow everytime. I was not impressed with the killing power of the RB on medium game.
I've cleanly taken several deer with the bow.
YMMV

Round here, Whitetails are not that big and they ARE classified as light, thin skinned medium game. They are not that hard to kill if you do your part. I've been taking them for table fare all of my life. For some reason people think you need a dang howitzer to take down a little ole white tail deer. Yes in the grand scheme of things they are small. Now with all that said. I would keep my shots CLOSE and I would stay away from that shoulder blade. I would put the ball ( if it were me wheel weight alloy) just behind the shoulder. That will give you a good vital kill shot. You should also look into a Conical bullet and try a few to see how they shoot. They will give you a bit more energy on the target. Go for it. Give one a dirt nap, then come straight back here and tell us about it. Good Hunting

Despite the figures a soft lead ball at them velocities won't flatten out and thus go deep enough if no shoulders are involved.

I've also read where the 1851 was not as effective in a clean kill. But the 51 was a 36 caliber and less chamber capacity. That is why the 1860 was more popular. So there might be some confusion there. Did you read about the 1851or the 44 caliber?

Frontstuffer070 said:

Round here, Whitetails are not that big and they ARE classified as light, thin skinned medium game. They are not that hard to kill if you do your part. I've been taking them for table fare all of my life. For some reason people think you need a dang howitzer to take down a little ole white tail deer. Yes in the grand scheme of things they are small. Now with all that said. I would keep my shots CLOSE and I would stay away from that shoulder blade. I would put the ball ( if it were me wheel weight alloy) just behind the shoulder. That will give you a good vital kill shot. You should also look into a Conical bullet and try a few to see how they shoot. They will give you a bit more energy on the target. Go for it. Give one a dirt nap, then come straight back here and tell us about it. Good Hunting

Click to expand...

Looking at the load recommendations I noticed you can’t pack as much powder behind the conicals. Had me wondering… with the lower powder charge are you really gaining the energy you hope to gain shooting conicals?

Jappo said:

I've also read where the 1851 was not as effective in a clean kill. But the 51 was a 36 caliber and less chamber capacity. That is why the 1860 was more popular. So there might be some confusion there. Did you read about the 1851or the 44 caliber?

Click to expand...

The gentleman I mentioned who posted a pic of his cap n ball buck was shooting the 1860. BUT… he said it was with 30 grains of powder behind that .454 round ball which is the .44 cal navy replicas max load.

Britsmoothy said:

Despite the figures a soft lead ball at them velocities won't flatten out and thus go deep enough if no shoulders are involved.

Click to expand...

I was setting up a salt stand on the property the day I shot the Griswold & Gunnison for the first time. I figured I’d shoot the 50 lb salt block to help break it up. Found out that day round balls at slow velocities don’t flatten out -__- hahaha. And they bounce right off a block of salt. Note taken that shoulders are a no go!

A lot of variables here, starting with the target. Big difference between a Northern Minnesota Whitetail at 275# or more and a Louisiana swamp Whitetail at 70# or less, I see you are from Arizona, so your equivalency would be a Coues deer from the SE in the Geronimo Mts. vs a Mule deer buck on the North Rim. For the smaller deer I say no problem, the larger ones would give me pause

Then there are your skills, not only with your accuracy, but your hunting skills in how close you can get.

There are going to be other variables, like terrain and brush, but the first two re definitely at the top of the list.

Can it be done? Yes, and undoubtedly has, many times. Is it ethical? That largely depends on your execution/capabilities. The key here is in getting close, real close, and not in your choice of weapon.

PowderCharge said:

What do you think is more ethical… someone ensuring to practice enough to know their true limitations with the weapon they choose. Or someone who always picks a magnum round expecting that alone to do the job for them?

Click to expand...

I don't think either of those two comparisons are applicable to the question.

Ethically speaking, Failure to practice isn't directly applicable to adequate killing capacity of the weapon.

PowderCharge said:

Looking at the load recommendations I noticed you can’t pack as much powder behind the conicals. Had me wondering… with the lower powder charge are you really gaining the energy you hope to gain shooting conicals?

Click to expand...

I don't see why a 44 call '51 Navy cylinder would have any less Volume than a 44 cal 1860 or 1858. I could be wrong tho. But I don't think you should have any trouble getting 30 grains 3F under a Conical. I can get 30 grains under a 240 grain Conical in my Uberit NMA.