Pietta 1858 New Army and Conicals.

[mikewinn]

Hi. New at this forum. Has anyone tried using conicals in their Pietta 1858 New Army? I know the typical reply is to use RB but from some ballistic tests I have seen I like the muzzle energy a conical produces over a RB with the same powder charge. Just curious. Thanks

 

[azmntman]

My Pietta 58 will accept .457 conicals from Horady (base a bit thin and they load very easy). It also will take a .457 rb and shave goodring though "a lil tight". Some .454 rings shaved are only half or 3/4 rings. .451 worked very well but lil shaving noted. Have yet to shoot enough of the conicals vs RB to discuss accuracy but per recoil its a bit more powerful.

 

[mikewinn]

Thanks for the reply. Did you have to do ANY modifying to your 1858? I've been talking to another guy who's the editor for a Muzzle Shooting magizine and he says that no modifications are needed. What conicals do you use i.e. brand or do you cast your own?

 

[azmntman]

No modifications at all They are (I believe) Buffalo Bullet CO .457 revolver bullets. Blue box of 100 I believe. I go check in a bit and say if incorrect.

 

[mikewinn]

Thanks I appreciate that. Hey have you seen a topic here where some guy sludded the barrel of his 1858 and then had the cylinder rimmed to match the grooves? I read it but now I can't find it.

 

[garry robinson]

I read that too but cant remeber where it was. My 58 shoots a .457 ball way more accurate than a conical. I dont know why cause it looks like a bullet would be better than a round ball. Theyr odd critters aint they. All like diffrent loads and diffrent lead.

 

[mikewinn]

well I've seen several videos made by a Mike Beliveau and as far as concerned he proved that a conical is more accurate and has more muzzle energy with the same powder charge as you'd use with a RB. That's enough for me.

 

[nkbj]

With the Pietta .44's rather than remove metal from the chamber walls first, I have been experimenting with making bullets to fit the factory revolvers. Instead of altering a mold to fit the chambers I decided to first try using a sizer to make the hind ends of commonly available molds slip into the chambers. So the castings were first sized to .450" and then the hind end to .443".
From my experiments with the 1858 and previously with a 3rd Model Dragoon and a Walker what I've come up with is just this:
Our fore-bearers weren't too wrapped up with velocity. Looks like what they wanted was to put a hole through something and within reason and the available tech did what it took to do the job. If it made the hole then by golly it was respectable. Hence, the move towards heavier pieces of lead.
What they did didn't particularly translate into the ultimate accuracy with their percussion revolvers or with ultimate accuracy with modern day reproductions. What they wanted was to hole somebody, mostly in cooler and wet climes of the eastern United States in the mid 1800's.

 

[rodwha]

I worked with Accurate Molds and designed a 170 grn and 195 grn WFN conical for my '58.

The 170 grn is only .400" long, and the 195 grn is .460" long and both shoot well out of my Pietta, but I did have to modify the frame.

 

[BowerR64]

Thanks I appreciate that. Hey have you seen a topic here where some guy sludded the barrel of his 1858 and then had the cylinder rimmed to match the grooves? I read it but now I can't find it.

Many guys do it to improve accuracy. (a little off topic)

Here is what you do: First remove the cylinder. Then get a new ball and using a wooden dowel or a cleaning rod hammer the ball from the muzzle of the gun down to the forcing cone till it drops out.

Now take that ball you just rammed threw the barrel and try and insert it into the chambers of the cylinder. If its "correct" it should just slip down into the chambers of the cylinder with very little pressure.

If its wrong the slugged ball will not drop into the cylinder wich means the chambers in the cylinder are smaller then the bore.

What you want is for the ball to exit the chamber larger and the forcing cone sizes it down so that as the ball runs threw the bore it completly seals as it twists down the barrel. This will give you the best accuracy the most consistantly.

Most guns are good enough but if your serious about accuracy you want the gun right. IMO this is alot more fun. Most arnt off by much but every little bit counts specially the further away your target is. 25-50 yards this makes all the difference!

Most of the reporductions do the tooling the cheap way. They use the same tool to make the chambers as they do the bore. THEN they go back and put the rifeling in it wich then makes the bore slightly larger.

I found conicals to be more accurate myself and they give a bigger kick wich can cause the muzzle to jump up more. They take up more space in the chamber figure about a ball and a half in size.

 

[swathdiver]

Has anyone tried using conicals in their Pietta 1858 New Army?

We've shot the 240 grain Kaido conicals and 144 grain .36 caliber Kaidos in our Remingtons. Just as accurate if not more so than round ball and lots more knock down power on big nasty hogs.