1858 New Army Revolver

[rodwha]

Mr Beliveau's testing showed that with a reduced charge of 33 grns of T7 and a RB produced 1062 fps and 371 ft/lbs, and penetrated 6 of those 1 gal water jugs.

His standard Goex powder charge and 255 grn Kaido conical produced 744 fps and 314 ft/lbs, and penetrated 10 of those 1 gal water jugs.

 

[M. De Land]

I wonder how one of my 45 cast ACP 200 grainers would work in my ROA. Their heeled at the base and rather short, with a flat point and truncate ogive.
I would need an insert for the loading stem to keep the ends flat when loading them. I'll check this out as the diameter should be about right if I remember correctly. Mike D.

 

[M. De Land]

Yeah, it will work as the base is .451 at the lowest point and out of round to .453. The ROA chamber mouths are .4515 to .452.
These are #2 alloy as well and should hold together well for shoulder hits.
My guess from putting them on the side of the chamber and using a milk carton wad under the base is that they will allow about 20-25 grains of 3F under them. It will be interesting to see if they will stay put under recoil.
If they will stay in the chamber mouth without creeping out under recoil they should be and excellent game load with the flat point and sharp shoulder at the bottom of the truncate. Mike D.
PS. The ball goes down further into the chamber mouth than the bullet base does making it look like it is much shorter in cross section than the bullet is tall.

 

[M. De Land]

Can't wait to try this out as I think this may be a very good weight and shape for a balance of bullet mass and velocity.
I cast these from a two cavity Lyman mold and they are my favorite bullet in a Colt 1911 .45 ACP. I have shot them in a ransom rest and they would do an inch at 25 yards with some loads so they should do well in the ROA if they can be seated straight. Be interesting to test them. Mike D.

 

[Zonie]

IMO, people wanting to shoot slugs in their C&B revolvers would be wise to use a cylinder loading press.

The slugs take a lot more pressure to load and the loading lever on most cap and ball guns is fairly weak.

Damage the lever or cylinder pin on a ROA and your in a heap of trouble.
Replacements aren't available, as I understand it.

 

[M. De Land]

Yeah, I think that would probably be wise especially with some of the harder alloys for hunting bullets.
I'm pretty certain I could whittle another base pin out in an hour or two for a ROA if push came to shove. MD

 

[vervillev]

The energy level produced by even the heaviest load in an 1858 ,is at best marginal on deer sized game. It's no mystery that more soldiers went to meet their makers in the Civil War with this revolver. But deer sized game need at least 600 pounds of energy on impact to do the do. I know some gents here locally that have done deer in with .22 long rifle with a head shot. I do not condone that practice! Look at the ballistics needed for deer sized game and abide by what's tried and true.

 

[nkbj]

Fellas, two thoughts for your consideration concerning hunting loads.
1. Nothing can be gained by using any alloys in percussion revolvers. Hardened lead will not increase the added penetration obtained by using a heavier than RB projectile. Hardened lead makes accuracy harder to obtain. Hardened lead makes it harder to get a good seal in the chamber.
2. If the point is to obtain extra penetration then the powder charge should not be sacrificed for more lead. In other words, use a projectile that is a close to a wadcutter as you can get and don't use lube grooves as they are not needed and only take up that precious limited powder space.

If you can find an old used mold for a light weight .44 bullet and alter it to suit your revolvers chambers it would be the best bullet you could get.

 

[rodwha]

"The energy level produced by even the heaviest load in an 1858 ,is at best marginal on deer sized game. It's no mystery that more soldiers went to meet their makers in the Civil War with this revolver. But deer sized game need at least 600 pounds of energy on impact to do the do."

Then I suppose I should leave my .50 cal muzzleloader and PRB's at home if I plan to hunt beyond 50 yds since an 80 grn charge wouldn't give it enough energy to kill a deer. I suppose all of the fellows here who have spoken of complete passthroughs on deer beyond 75 yds are quite lucky.

Those types of pistols seem to be working quite well on hogs nearly 300 lbs. They have compiled quite a photo book.

The .50 cal pistol suggested with a 45 grn charge (max) and a PRB only has 800 fps and 252 ft/lbs at the muzzle.

The charges and velocities are from Hodgdon's site using Pyrodex, which gives very similar numbers to Goex and other BP's other than Swiss and Olde Eynsford.

 

[Black Jack]

I understand where you are coming from, as I have undergone similar experiences for many years. I love the challenge, and also the romance of using the same guns as our ancestors. All I am saying is that regardless of the above, sportsmanship and a clean, humane kill trump these other aspects. Pennsylvania, for example, allows muzzleloading rifles of .44 cal and above. Muzzleloading pistols must be .50 or above. The same guiding principles do not allow one to hunt deer with a 20 lb. bow or a .380 acp. I have no doubt that I could kill a deer with my 1858 army under ideal circumstances, but the chance of wounding an animal and causing unnecessary suffering are too great for me to consider it sportsmanlike. Respectfully, JMHO.

 

[M. De Land]

Well, let me test them and get back to you on that in a cap-n-ball revolver.
It most certainly is not true for smokeless projectiles in a revolver as alloy bullets out penetrate pure lead by a wide margin and are more accurate. I have shot tens of thousands of rounds of alloy bullets in .357,.44 and .45 caliber hand guns. Pure lead does not work for beans in them in my experience.
They don't need to bump up to seal when they are already over cylinder mouth diameter when seated. A correctly set up revolver should have the cylinder mouth at least of groove diameter and often do well when .001 over groove width. Mike D.

 

[rodwha]

If the projectiles are capable of penetrating from nose to tail through an adult hog I'd not see why it wouldn't be humane as long as the one using it for thus can hit what he/she is aiming at.

 

[crockett]

I've said this before on the foot pounds of energy and I don't mean to repeat myself but IMHO we all read the national hunting magazines and books and all the articles talk about foot pounds of energy and pretty soon that is the only thing we think about. I include myself in this- I tend to look at foot pounds of energy at the muzzle and forget everything else. That 600 ft lbs for deer, I'm pretty sure that was worked out to determine what would work as the minimum for a modern cartridge- say a 30-06 bullet weighing 150 grains. Let's say the energy is down to 600 ft lbs at 400 plus yards. At that point the bullet is going so slow that it probably won't expand, it will act like a full metal jacket and bore a .308 hole through the deer. On a .454 diameter projectile of soft lead, I would think the same 600 ft lbs of energy would create a more damaging wound.
To be honest, I think there are a lot of gray areas. I like science as much as the next guy but lately I have started to change how I evaluate things- I want field experience. If a lot of hunters have taken game with a particular gun and the results are good- I tend to put a lot of faith in that.
I think that is one big value of this forum- the chance to learn from what others have used.

 

[rodwha]

That's pretty much what many of the people here have shown me, that muzzleloaders don't work by the same principals as modern stuff.

Much like you, I look at other's experiences in regards to this. I have none of my own.

From what I thought I knew you needed a heavy for caliber projectile with plenty of energy if you wanted to humanely take game. Those silly little balls with little energy couldn't possibly be very good or efficient, yet I've continually read of great results out at 125 yds even.

And that's what I've been reading in regards to cap n ball handguns, mostly used on hogs, but on deer as well.

There's even the one account (late 1800's) of the soldier's shooting the grizzly with their .36 cal pistols doing little harm until 2 shots from a .44 cal pistol put it down (Dragoon?). Not that I'd use one for hunting brown bears!

 

[M. De Land]

I remember reading and account of a Walker being used to kill buffalo from horse back with little difficulty. It would drive a ball clear through the lites as they called it. Presumably a double lung shot from a high angle, up on the back as a horse mount would provide. Mike D.

 

[timothymattson]

Speaking of the Walker, I ecall reading an aritcle on it, and that one of the driving factors
for making this was it had the power to take down a soldiers horse, I guess the idea being a horse is a much larger target, and doing so would somewhat rendor a soldier useless?
AAnyway, as I stated before, if I am not confident with my 1858 for deer I will not use it, worse case I will take it as a secondary gun and only use at very close range.

 

[nkbj]

Well, let me test them and get back to you on that in a cap-n-ball revolver.
It most certainly is not true for smokeless projectiles in a revolver as alloy bullets out penetrate pure lead by a wide margin and are more accurate. I have shot tens of thousands of rounds of alloy bullets in .357,.44 and .45 caliber hand guns. Pure lead does not work for beans in them in my experience.
They don't need to bump up to seal when they are already over cylinder mouth diameter when seated. A correctly set up revolver should have the cylinder mouth at least of groove diameter and often do well when .001 over groove width. Mike D.

Couldn't agree with you more.
I'm still pondering on whether or not to spring for the chambers being reamed or to get a sizer die to make the hind end of bullets to fit the chambers or to get a mold altered to fit the chambers.
Also, just for grins I'm threatening to try out this mold (without the gas check of course) but 1/16" will have to be shaved off the noses to fit the length to the distance under the ram.

It has a stepped base so maybe it could be loaded just like the "conicals" used in the 1860's even though it will waste a bunch of powder space.


Want to try this one too if I can figure out making the base slip into the chambers.

 

[TFoley]

Damage the lever or cylinder pin on a ROA and your in a heap of trouble.

Indeed so.

Replacements aren't available, as I understand it.

As true today as the day I wrote it. Unless you buy one with a revolver attached to it.

tac

 

[nkbj]

Damage the lever or cylinder pin on a ROA and your in a heap of trouble.

Indeed so.

Replacements aren't available, as I understand it.

As true today as the day I wrote it. Unless you buy one with a revolver attached to it.

tac

No hardened alloys or your can be a .

 

[crockett]

M.D.- George A. Custer in Life on the Plains wrote about killing buffalo with a 44 Army, He would ride up on horseback and shoot at point blank range. It seemed almost impossible to me but someone said that the 44 Dragoons were also considered an "Army" since they were used by the army and Custer might have been using a dragoon.
Getting back to relying on field experience. If you shoot a deer with a 30-30 and it runs a 100 yards before dropping- the reason is "you didn't have enough gun". If the same thing happens with a 30-06, then the reason the deer ran 100 yards was the unusual vitality of the deer or poor bullet placement, etc. It seems to me there is a gray area that can't be reduced to a clear black and white answer. I think foot pounds of energy is a value measurement and the best we have but it isn't everything. I think a lot more focus needs to be given to the type of projectile and what happens with that projectile when it hits a game animal. In any event,on percussion revolvers for deer. I think maybe the best we can do is figure at 30 yards or less if you can take a broadside shot through both lungs, the percussion revolver will kill a deer. If you have a heavy conical and maximum powder charge and the deer is small or average, a shoulder shot SHOULD be okay but less reliable.
With all of the borderline type weapons and loads there is a limiting factor. You need to consider range and the type of shot (broadside, shoulder) that is available. There is the reality that in some situations a shot must be passed up with a revolver, etc that you could have taken with a rifle. Does this mean the revolver should never be used? I don't think so. In bowhunting there are many shots you cannot take (80 yards, etc)that you could take with a rifle but no one is giving up bowhunting.