Conicals for revolvers

[nick_1]

After shooting the 200g lee conical in my 1858 for the last few weeks I am completely hooked. I put a brand new front sight on the 1858 from Taylors and benched it for a few shots. ground down the sight and then a few more shots until I got a 6 o'clock hold that I am happy with. I have not gone crazy benching the gun or trying to get perfect groups on paper off hand so don't have any pretty pictures for you. I mostly shoot steel and am happy when I can consistently get hits on 5" steel @ 25yrds and 6" steel at 40 yrds. I shoot a little bit of paper 50 and 60 yrds and am happy if I can get on an 8 1/2 x11 letter sheet and ecstatic if I occasionally hit my hand drawn bullseye with a revolver with crappy trigger. . no luck yet hitting the 50yrd 6" steel off hand with the revolver. I do not have the bench set up on that 50 yrd target but perhaps I will do that today.

Pros. I feel I am getting better consistency with conicals than I was with RB.

Once the bullets are waxed the loading process is faster and easier than RB. No looking for and positioning the spru, less pressure on the loading lever, no need to lube after loading.

Better reliability? perhaps its the wax seal? perhaps not using bore butter as a rb lube? but I have not had any slow fires or missfires since switching to conicals. Don't know the exact reason but not complaining.

Historically accurate. Any union soldier would have been issued paper cartridges with conicals. Any western lawman would have bought paper cartridges at the hardware store. This is what the gun was designed to shoot. It feels much more powerful and I am getting good hits.

The conicals are easy to cast and fall out of the mold easier than RB. perhaps I just have a lucky Mold.

Cons. They use a lot more lead to cast.
Applying the wax lube takes extra time and effort.

Summary. I wish I had started shooting conicals 50 years ago. its a hoot.

 

[rodwha]

After shooting the 200g lee conical in my 1858 for the last few weeks I am completely hooked. I put a brand new front sight on the 1858 from Taylors and benched it for a few shots. ground down the sight and then a few more shots until I got a 6 o'clock hold that I am happy with. I have not gone crazy benching the gun or trying to get perfect groups on paper off hand so don't have any pretty pictures for you. I mostly shoot steel and am happy when I can consistently get hits on 5" steel @ 25yrds and 6" steel at 40 yrds. I shoot a little bit of paper 50 and 60 yrds and am happy if I can get on an 8 1/2 x11 letter sheet and ecstatic if I occasionally hit my hand drawn bullseye with a revolver with crappy trigger. . no luck yet hitting the 50yrd 6" steel off hand with the revolver. I do not have the bench set up on that 50 yrd target but perhaps I will do that today.

Pros. I feel I am getting better consistency with conicals than I was with RB.

Once the bullets are waxed the loading process is faster and easier than RB. No looking for and positioning the spru, less pressure on the loading lever, no need to lube after loading.

Better reliability? perhaps its the wax seal? perhaps not using bore butter as a rb lube? but I have not had any slow fires or missfires since switching to conicals. Don't know the exact reason but not complaining.

Historically accurate. Any union soldier would have been issued paper cartridges with conicals. Any western lawman would have bought paper cartridges at the hardware store. This is what the gun was designed to shoot. It feels much more powerful and I am getting good hits.

The conicals are easy to cast and fall out of the mold easier than RB. perhaps I just have a lucky Mold.

Cons. They use a lot more lead to cast.
Applying the wax lube takes extra time and effort.

Summary. I wish I had started shooting conicals 50 years ago. its a hoot.

I had been working on finding both my New Model Army and Old Army pistols and then create a universal bullet for them. I ended up moving to a place where I couldn’t shoot black powder and so I only had two range days in 9 years and lost my proficiency with them. But we’ve moved back and I’m there once a month at least again.

What I had worked up at that point was my NMA did well with a weighed 32.5 grns of 3F Olde Eynsford and the ROA with 37.5 grns and the leftover chamber capacity looks to hold about a 230-240 grn wide meplat bullet for hunting. I use Accurate Molds to create mold designs, and use a small single lube groove and wide nose which makes for a heavy for its length bullet.

The big difference between the conicals you and I are using is that they aren’t very pointy. The army loved them as they penetrated horses but because pointy slow bullets allow the flesh to stretch thereby creating a smaller than caliber hole it wasn’t as effective on men. It seems the soldiers preferred a ball as its stated it took the fight out of a man. Your round nose design should act similarly to a ball. A wide flat meplat cuts a larger than caliber hole even at very slow speeds. Since we can’t rely on expansion I like a wide flat nose plus it allows for more mass giving better penetration. We have hogs galore here so I want a lot of damage.

 

[ChuckJonesWagon]

I’ve been killing whitetails for years from my 50 cal flinty rifle using Hornady Pa conicals.

All advantages you have stated apply. Accurate out to my max range of 100 yards.

 

[nick_1]

these things are cast with soft lead. they expand just fine.

 

[rodwha]

these things are cast with soft lead. they expand just fine.

At these velocities you can’t be so sure. I’ve talked with a lot of people over the years when I first started making my own designs and the general consensus is pure lead needs to be traveling over 1100 fps to readily expand without hitting bone. You aren’t getting 1000 fps, especially if it’s a 25 grn powder charge as I think you said. I don’t know what kind of deformation one can expect at 850-900 fps.

I’ve been told many stories of finding a ball bulged on the offside of a deer that looked nearly pristine when shot further out like 100 yds. At 100 yds a .490” ball is traveling just around 1060 fps according to my ballistics calculator. Faster than your RN at the muzzle.

I read a lot about developments by Elmer Keith as well as bullet designs for the .45-70 shooting long range. A wide meplat was what they found ideal. A RN isn’t a bad design, but it’s not as good as a wide meplat.

 

[rodwha]

these things are cast with soft lead. they expand just fine.

There was a military video from the 60’s where they showed various arms, including old black powder guns to include an 1860 Army. It was loaded with weak powder as the ball was traveling around 700 fps, but it went through ballistics gel and through the bone and made a perfect hole without deforming the ball at all.

 

[AlexB]

I shoot taped and compressed romance novels my wife brings home.
Best use scenario for such things and was a real eye opener regards projectile performance.
The most surprising to me was the .50 rifle and prb.

 

[nick_1]

I am not volunteering to stand in front of these things.