1858 Rem / Pietta Balls

[Brik847]

Anyone using .451's instead of .454's? When I bought it at Cabelas they only had .451's but then I read the instructions and I should be using .454's. I guess I shoot'em up, but do you think my accuracy will be seriously impaired?

Thanks - just getting back to shooting after a couple three very busy years.

 

[boom]

Just make sure that after one shot that the rest
of the balls have not moved forward, due to slack fit. :thumbsup:

 

[Zonie]

All of the Remington 1858's made by Pietta that are listed in the Dixie Gunworks 2009 catalog have chambers that are smaller than .447" so your .451 diameter balls should work.

There is always a chance that the chamber diameters on your gun are oversize so carefully watch each ball as it is rammed into its chamber.
You should see a small ring of lead sheared off of the ball to be sure that the ball is sealing the mouth of the chamber.

If one or more chambers do not shear off this lead ring I suggest that you do not use the .451 diameter balls.

 

[boom]

Stick to 454, i have had lots of 58s over a 17
years and allways kept to 454 or 457, just because
its made by the same maker does not mean they take
the same size ball. :shake:

 

[denster]

If you just recently purchased it it is virtually guaranteed to have .447 chambers and you will loose nothing with the .451 balls and gain easier loading.

 

[rafterob]

Shoot up the .451's and then get the .454. They are a better fit for the Pietta. If you are just starting to shoot this gun you will not notice a difference in accuracy between the two. It will take you awhile to get consistent accuracy with this gun anyway, so by the time you have used up the .451's you'll be that much more practiced.

 

[denster]

Now why would you expect better accuracy with the .454 ball? Both sizes are .447 once they are in the chambers.

 

[Zonie]

When the ball is sheared down to the chamber size it leaves a cylindrical surface.
The length of this surface is a good indication of the length of lead that will engage the rifling in the barrel.

The length of the cylindrical surface on a .451 diameter ball sheared down to a .447 diameter cylinder is .060. About 1/16 of an inch.

The length of the cylindrical surface on a .454 diameter ball sheared down to a .447 diameter cylinder is .0794 making it 32 percent longer then the .451's cylinder.

Simply put, there is more lead to grab the rifling in the barrel when the .454 diameter ball is used.

 

[denster]

You might want to check your math on those dimensions of the flat left with the different size balls.

 

[curator]

Since the Pietta's grove diameter is probably .452+, a bullet swaged down to .447 is not expected to be particularly accurate regardless of the size it started out at. IF the chamber diameter is properly sized at .4525 then a larger ball will give better accuracy in part because there is more bearing surface, and part because it provides more start friction, higher pressure, and more uniform burn.

 

[Zonie]

No doubt about it. If the chamber is resized to match the bore the accuracy will improve. Problem is this topic isn't about resizing the chamber to match the bore.

DennisA
I rechecked my math and I don't see a problem.

The answer represents two right triangles back to back and is calculated by obtaining the answer for one of the triangles and then doubling it.

In the case of the .454 diameter ball, the hypotenuse is the radius of the .454 diameter ball. The base of the triangle is the radius of the .447 diameter cylinder.
The square root of the radius of the hypotenuse squared minus the radius of the cylinder squared gives the length of the short leg of the triangle.

The radius of a .454 ball is .2270
The radius of the .447 chamber is .2235

The Square Root of the quantity .2270 squared minus .2235 equals .03971.

This is the distance from a line that is perpendicular to the bore passing thru the center of the ball with the answer representing either the forward end or the rearward end of the newly formed cylinder as measured from this perpendicular line.

Lets say it is the forward dimension. We must also add in the reward dimension which is the same value so we have .03971 + .03971 = .07942.

Looks good to me.

 

[rafterob]

Thanks Zonie for putting in Technical terms what I have observed in practice. I did not say you would get better accuracy, just a better "fit". For me, I'm having a hell of a time getting accuracy with my '58, but I chalk that up to lack of practice. Typically, if I can at least hit the scoring rings I consider it a success. Once in awhile I'll even get some black and an occaisional 10 spot. Any way it goes there is some real fun factor involved :thumbsup:

 

[denster]

I can't quite relate that formula but presuming it is correct the difference in cylindrical surface is a scant .019. This cylindrical surface is still under the groove to groove diameter. One of the reasons to use pure lead in revolvers is that they will obdurate to fill the bore. Which they do nicely. If you doubt this fire some into a ten gallon bucket filled with water (from the top not through the sides) and look at the recovered bullets with a magnifier. You will see toolmark striations and a significant flattening on the portion of the ball that contacted the grooves. I cast both 451 and 454(for Uberti) and with the Pietta I use which ever I have on hand at the moment. I've not noticed any difference in accuracy. For that matter back when I used to ream the chambers to groove diameter I didn't notice any change in accuracy which is why I no longer bother. Matching chambers to bore is useful in modern revolvers that use alloyed bullets that resist obduration.