bullets for old army

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
.452" diameter bullets would be way too small for use in either revolver. Maybe .454s or bigger in the Remington and .457s in the Ruger.
 
If they shave an even ring of lead off as you seat them they should work. If they don't, they are too loose and will either walk out of the chamber under recoil or the gap flash can get by them and cause a chain-fire. This is bad for you and bad for the gun. You also need to be sure the caps are firmly seated on the nipples.
 
bubba15301 said:
anybody ever try .452 200gr bullets in an old army or remington repro 44??

Dear bubba - this really should be made a sticky as it has been covered about half a billion times, but the Ruger Old Army was MADE to take a .457" diameter ball or conical - as stated in the instructions. Lee even makes a special-sized mould for this weapon, and actually call it 'Ruger Old Army bullet mould', just to let you know. :wink:

There have been quite a few makers of Remington Model 1858 revolvers over the years, but asking six of the owners with whom I shoot, regardless of the maker - Pietta, Pedersoli or Uberti - they ALL shoot a .451' ball, which shaves off a small ring on loading, as it should.

Hope this helps.

tac
 
bubba15301 said:
i have some .454 full wadcutters would they work?250 gr wt
What alloy? If they're like the WC's I have they are way too hard to swage a ring of lead; you're likely to damage the loader.

Commercially made modern pistol bullets are often too hard for use in replica percussion revolvers.
 
Never could get any conical to seat straight in the chamber... they always wanted to go in at some angle. Round ball has never failed me though.
 
Evil Dog said:
Never could get any conical to seat straight in the chamber... they always wanted to go in at some angle. Round ball has never failed me though.

I find that the conical LEE bullet has a reduced diameter base that is a snug fit into the chamber, and then follows with the larger diameter that produces the shaving - in fact, I shot sixty of them this morning to good effect.

tac
 
tac said:
Evil Dog said:
Never could get any conical to seat straight in the chamber... they always wanted to go in at some angle. Round ball has never failed me though.

I find that the conical LEE bullet has a reduced diameter base that is a snug fit into the chamber, and then follows with the larger diameter that produces the shaving - in fact, I shot sixty of them this morning to good effect.

tac

I have the Lee mould also and the bullets are great shooters. The seat straight and easy.

HD
 
I've never used conicals in it, but my Uberti Remington takes .454" balls and shaves a nice even ring in each chamber. A .451 just slides in with little effort and doesn't shave any lead at all.
 
Huntin Dawg said:
I have the Lee mould also and the bullets are great shooters. The seat straight and easy.

HD

Yuppers. They gots more 'Whump!', too!!
tac, missing his .44 Mags..... :thumbsup:
 
I cast Lee mold conicals for both a '58 Rem Pietta and an ROA from as soft lead as I can get.
they do well over stout charge of 3F and a felt.
definitly more 'whack' to them.
I haven't shot rb's from either in some time but have some on hand.
 
tac said:
- this really should be made a sticky as it has been covered about half a billion times, but the Ruger Old Army was MADE to take a .457" diameter ball or conical - as stated in the instructions.

tac

My instruction manual says: The "Old Army" was designed to use a .457" diameter round ball or .454" conical bullet of pure lead. A .457 conical may work but it may be a bit snug. Also, conicals are known for being harder to start and load straight. Using a .454" may help some.

Cage :v
 
.451 ball? Strange, mine takes .454 (Pietta) and shaves a neat little ring. I wouldn't use the .451 in mine, just not tight enough.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top