1860 44 cal Navy replica

Colonial Boy · Dec 15, 2024

Re the .44 1851 Navy, there is a slight justification for it, Colt made an experimental .44 ‘’Navy’’ when developing the 1860 Army.
Pity is that the modern makers didn’t copy it exactly.

WadeP · Dec 15, 2024

Smokerr said:
I think all of us would like to see the Citation of a Colt paper, chamfering cylinders aka the source?

Now Colt was not the only mfg and no one I know of has cited a source that says a Remington, S&B etc called for and issued goop with their guns. Caps, balls/bullets powder flasks, yes.

On the Application of Machinery to the Manufacture of Rotating Chambered-breech Fire-arms
by Samuel Colt

Page 9 and 10.

https://ia902807.us.archive.org/33/items/onapplicationma00coltgoog/onapplicationma00coltgoog.pdf

Dude · Monday at 3:23 PM

Ever see the flash from the cylinder/forcing cone gap? How many shots does it take before all the grease smeared on the cylinder is blown away?

D Yager · Monday at 9:45 PM

Wouldn't that be the reason for putting lube over the ball/ bullet? And preventing chain fires?

rodwha · Tuesday at 8:18 AM

D Yager said:
Wouldn't that be the reason for putting lube over the ball/ bullet? And preventing chain fires?

If the heat from firing melts it and recoil knocks it off how will it help with much of anything?

I’m sure there are some recipes for a thicker lube that might work well, there’s plenty, such as just Crisco, that I’ve read just really makes one heckuva mess.

This is why people like lubed felt wads. Or they use lube in the lube grooves of their bullets.

rodwha · Tuesday at 9:38 AM

D Yager said:
Wouldn't that be the reason for putting lube over the ball/ bullet? And preventing chain fires?

I’ve only ever witnessed one chainfire. It was my father shooting an ASM 1860 using felt wads.

If your chambers aren’t ovaled out of round or otherwise damaged I don’t see how a chainfire can happen from the front. I’m not a believer that a grain of powder is harder than lead and can create a channel of powder to act as a fuse. But my sense of logic has failed me before

maillemaker · Tuesday at 9:47 AM

A nice video of the benefits of lube over the bullet:

From the video:

Left: No lube. Right: Lube over bullet.

D Yager · Tuesday at 10:41 AM

rodwha said:
I’ve only ever witnessed one chainfire. It was my father shooting an ASM 1860 using felt wads.

If your chambers aren’t ovaled out of round or otherwise damaged I don’t see how a chainfire can happen from the front. I’m not a believer that a grain of powder is harder than lead and can create a channel of powder to act as a fuse. But my sense of logic has failed me before

I was in the same frame of mind as you until I had a chain fire on an 1860 Navy. I got sloppy and spilled some powder in the front of the cylinder. The chambers were covered with lube so it shouldn't have caused any problem. Pistol fired 3 chambers. I always believed chainfires came from the back of the cylinder and poorly fitted caps. That showed me it can come from either end.

rodwha · Tuesday at 10:51 AM

D Yager said:
I was in the same frame of mind as you until I had a chain fire on an 1860 Navy. I got sloppy and spilled some powder in the front of the cylinder. The chambers were covered with lube so it shouldn't have caused any problem. Pistol fired 3 chambers. I always believed chainfires came from the back of the cylinder and poorly fitted caps. That showed me it can come from either end.

If your chambers were covered with lube, along with having a ball loaded, how can you be sure it came from the front? Seems you had everything you needed up front to keep that from happening.

I don’t discount chainfires being possible from the front since I cannot prove it false. At the same time it seems near impossible for the flames to lick around and into the nipple’s flash channel. None of it seems all that logical to my thinking, and yet it happens.

Dude · Tuesday at 11:25 AM

I recall a video where the guy shot one chamber at a time with the others uncapped. No chainfire.

sethwyo · Tuesday at 12:00 PM

when I had my first sixgun, I believed , for awhile, all the things some told me about ~ you hafto have exactly the same powder charge in each chamber,
an only one specific amount of powder,
You MUST use wads,
you MUST use lube.
the sixgun got loaded at the reloading bench like all reloading was done .

sethwyo · Tuesday at 12:03 PM

but after a few hundred shots wore fired, an I began to notice most people say things that aren't true.

I began to load in the field, no wads, no lube, no powder measure,
Carried powder caps an bullets in a ammu pouch.

sethwyo · Tuesday at 12:20 PM

Colonial Boy said:
Re the .44 1851 Navy, there is a slight justification for it, Colt made an experimental .44 ‘’Navy’’ when developing the 1860 Army.
Pity is that the modern makers didn’t copy it exactly.

Don't need no justifactin . No commandment from the Almighty that

" a sixgun has to be a copy of another sixgun"
or
'it MUST BE historical correctness'

I don't figure that when the first sixguns wore held by frontiersmen, that they said,
"oh, these aren't the same as the handguns that wore made a hundred years ago , these are different , these arnt historical correct with handguns that wire made 100 years ago, so these are no good "

I'd like to see some people hafto walk or rude a horse 150 miles to the black powder shoot, then they can complain about their historical correctnes

maillemaker · Tuesday at 12:23 PM

sethwyo said:
Don't need no justifactin . No commandment from the Almighty that

" a sixgun has to be a copy of another sixgun"
or
'it MUST BE historical correctness'

I don't figure that when the first sixguns wore held by frontiersmen, that they said,
"oh, these aren't the same as the handguns that wore made a hundred years ago , these are different , these arnt historical correct with handguns that wire made 100 years ago, so these are no good "

I'd like to see some people hafto walk or rude a horse 150 miles to the black powder shoot, then they can complain about their historical correctnes

There is no requirement that you shoot a historically-correct replica of a firearm, anymore than there is requirement to spell properly when corresponding over the internet.

Some people still appreciate the effort, though.

sethwyo · Tuesday at 12:46 PM

good thing I , an others, don't car what some think

Dark Angel · Wednesday at 9:40 AM

Have been shooting C&B revolvers for ages, or so it seems, over 40 years and never had a chain fire. (Old timers called the ring fires.) Perhaps I'm just fortunate. When I loaded with loose powder, would wipe the cylinder face then apply lube to the chambers over the bullets. Seemed to work. The lube I used was called, 'Grease Ball.' Haven't seen or heard of it in years. It was messy, nasty and smelly, but it worked.

D Yager · Wednesday at 4:30 PM

rodwha said:
If your chambers were covered with lube, along with having a ball loaded, how can you be sure it came from the front? Seems you had everything you needed up front to keep that from happening.

I don’t discount chainfires being possible from the front since I cannot prove it false. At the same time it seems near impossible for the flames to lick around and into the nipple’s flash channel. None of it seems all that logical to my thinking, and yet it happens.

I really don't believe that chain fire came from the back of the cylinder. I think the amount of powder that was embedded in the lube at the front may have been responsible. Regardless it was the first and only time that pistol has chain fired.

rodwha · Wednesday at 8:11 PM

D Yager said:
I really don't believe that chain fire came from the back of the cylinder. I think the amount of powder that was embedded in the lube at the front may have been responsible. Regardless it was the first and only time that pistol has chain fired.

But it baffles me how powder under looks be that’s been slathered over the chamber mouths can allow the flames to penetrate and ignite it and then last the projectile as well.

BPnut@.50cal · Wednesday at 8:21 PM

sethwyo said:
good thing I , an others, don't car what some think

That part is obvious....

D Yager · Wednesday at 9:09 PM

rodwha said:
But it baffles me how powder under looks be that’s been slathered over the chamber mouths can allow the flames to penetrate and ignite it and then last the projectile as well.

Agreed, it boggles the mind. One way or another it lit off 3 chambers. The only thing that changed in the all the times I shot this pistol was the spilled powder all over the front of the cylinder.

1860 44 cal Navy replica

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

40 Cal.

32 Cal

45 Cal.

Pilgrim

58 Cal.

58 Cal.

45 Cal.

Pilgrim

58 Cal.

45 Cal.

58 Cal.

58 Cal.

58 Cal.

45 Cal.

58 Cal.

40 Cal

Pilgrim

58 Cal.

45 Cal.

Pilgrim

Similar threads

Join the conversation!

Join today and get all the highlights of this community direct to your inbox. It's FREE!