'62 Pocket Navy/Police Loading Levers

[rodwha]

What is the real difference between the '62 Pocket Navy's and '62 Pocket Police's loading lever operation?

 

[DOUBLEDEUCE 1]

The 1862 Pocket Police Model has the creeping loading lever like the 1860 Army. The 1862 Pocket Navy has the link type lever like the 1851 Navy.

 

[rodwha]

But what does that equate to? From what I read the creeping style seems stronger. But what would that really mean?

 

[F.G. Ford]

The 1860 army type ( rack & pinion ) seems stronger.
If the ball/bullet is too hard you can cause damage to the lever.
If there is too much powder in the chamber, and you compress too hard to seat the ball/ bullet
you can do damage to the lever.
Also pressing too hard you can bend the lever.
So which is better?
Fred

 

[rodwha]

That's kinda what ran through my mind... Maybe it would help if using harder lead balls. I doubt I'd use heavy loads as accuracy would be the most important (small game/plinking gun).

I'd probably have to try some conicals just 'cause...

 

[DanChamberlain]

There's absolutely no advantage to using harder balls. They are harder to load and you won't find accuracy improved by them. Use soft lead and enjoy it.

Dan

 

[rodwha]

I hear of people using WW quite often

 

[F.G. Ford]

Those little loading levers are easy to bend and break.
I would not use hard lead.
I have bent the loading leaver on a 1849 .31 Colt,
also sheared the screw on a small Remington.
Fred

 

[Poor Private]

Noper don't use wheel weights. too much impurities in them. Spend the extra 50cents for better lead.

 

[rodwha]

I had figured if/when I get into casting that I'd try to use pure lead, but wouldn't pass on any free impure lead, which I'd toss in with the other lead so as not to have higher levels of hardening elements in it.

But I had considered trying WW or such in my Old Army for hunting balls/conicals figuring they would penetrate better. Now that I've compromised my base pin I'm not sure if that's a good idea any more... :slap: