.36 Remingtons

[nkbj]

Has anyone tried conicals in the reproduction .36 Remingtons? Looks as though altering existing .38 molds should make it easy to have a conical that loads properly to fit any given revolver. Any how, thought I'd ask to see if anyone has given it a try in the 1858.
Once made my own for an 1861 by reaming out a Lee 9mm mold. Crude but they worked great.

 

[CoyoteJoe]

I once altered one by replacing the barrel with a .357" bore and lining the chambers to use a .357" hollow base wadcutter. I thought I was making the ultimate target revolver but accuracy was no better than my Navy Colt with balls, not that an inch-and-a-half at 25 yards is at all terrible.
I think you're trying to re-invent the wheel. People have been shooting cap & ball revolvers in competition for 3/4 of a century now and if conical bullets offered any advantage that is what we all would be shooting.
The .36 caliber C&B revolvers generally have a bore around .375", molds made for modern .38's run .357-.361" and trying to enlarge a mold by .020" is not a kitchen table job. Also the C&B revolver bores generally are rifled with a rather slow twist, fine for balls but really too slow to stabilize any bullet much longer than a ball.
I'd just ream the chambers to .375", lightly chamfer the chamber mouths, load .380" balls and you'll have a .36 about as accurate as can be easily made.
Conical bullets do offer more penetration than the balls but that is pretty much their only advantage. Balls are generally more accurate, achieve higher velocity with less recoil and according to Civil War vets the balls were considered to be better "man-stoppers".
But far be it from me to discourage your experiment, I believe it will end in disappointment, but I'm sure you can handle it. :haha:

 

[Don]

Lee has a mould for .36 cap and ball revolvers. It makes a 130 grain bullet that shoots pretty good out of my remmies and colts.

Don

 

[cowpoke1955]

Don is right. Here is a picture of the conical: http://factorysales.com/html/xcart/catalog/blackpow.html . F&M Reloading has the Lee double cavity mold for $16.58: http://www.fmreloading.com/Merchan...de=90378&Category_Code=Lee+Black+Powder+Molds . Why go through all that work and expense when it's already done for you?

 

[phoenix511]

I'll add my second to CoyoteJoe's comments.

Why conicals? The NMLRA pistol champion shooters use RB, and I suspect that loading a conical can easily get off-centered when pressing it into the cylinder, resulting in poor accuracy.

The round ball kinetic energy, at least according to my Lyman's "Black Powder Handbook", is essentially the same for conicals and round balls. The conicals, being heavier, have a lower velocity but greater mass.

For accuracy, I think you want the cylinder diameter to be equal or slightly greater than the groove diameter of the barrel. There are recent threads on the Forum addressing this issue and reaming the cylinders.

Perhaps I've been lucky with my 36 cal revolvers. Using a telescoping gauge and a mic, the cylinders on my two 36 cal Pietta's came out at 0.368", and a barrel groove diameter also of 0.368, but I'll admit there are better ways to get the groove diameter than the way I did it with a digital caliper.

 

[Gatofeo]

I've used the Lee .36 conical, and other conicals, in my Remington and Colt .36s. I've found no advantage over a ball. In fact, every conical I've tried was not as accurate as a ball, and that includes the conicals sold by Dixie Gun Works that are exact duplicates of the old, original moulds.
The best I can get with any .36 conical is about 3" groups at 25 yards from a benchrest. The same gun, with .380" balls, will generally shoot 1-1/2 to 2 inch groups.
The worst conical I've found is that made by Buffalo Bullet. It's shaped like a modern wadcutter, but with a heel. Cuts a nice, clean hole in the target. All over the target. From every .36 I own.
At $15 for 50, it's not worth the bother to determine the cause or a better load.
Now, the Lee .44 conical is very accurate. But the .36 version -- not a duplicate of the .44 design by any means -- is just not very accurate in my guns. I get around 3 or 4" groups at 25 yards from a benchrest, from any of my .36s.
Yet, my Uberti-made Remington will put all six .44 Lee conicals into 2" regularly, and often into 1-1/2 inches or less.
All of my conicals that have grease grooves are lubricated with my homebrew Gatofeo No. 1 Lubricant. Search the internet for instructions on making it. It's also posted on this site.
If the conical has no grease groove, like the old original designs, I put Crisco or a mix of beeswax and olive oil over the seated conical.

Forget fiddling around with conicals, unless you plan to hunt coyote-sized game at close range. The humble ball works best, if it's properly oversized: .454 for the .44s, and .380 for the .36s.
Put a greased, felt wad twixt ball and powder and the ball will amaze you with its accuracy.
The Lee .44 conical is also a winner. Most accurate conical I've found, but no one offers it commercially. You have to cast your own, or find someone who does.
For nearly all purposes, the .454 ball is best.