Pietta 1858 Remington Review
- Thread starter bearbullets
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
.454 work fine in mine. Tried .451, thin to half a ring shaved. :td:
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2009
- Messages
- 13,238
- Reaction score
- 7,591
Any yall bevel the chambers' lips to swage in the balls rather than cutting the metal off?
rodwha
58 Cal.
Yes. But also had my chambers reamed to 0.449" and use my 0.457" ball or 0.456" conicals. I'm considering going further to 0.452-3".
Although a chamfer will "swage" the lead, it really won't have any different effect on the ball than just forcing the ball into chambers with a sharp corner.
Lead is too soft and malleable to have any memory of its former shape so it will not "spring back" after it has passed the chamfer to grip or seal the chamber.
At one time, Colt patented the idea of using a chamfered chamber mouth but the idea was not to form a better fit of the ball with the chamber.
The idea was to deflect the flames from the chamber being fired from the mouths of the adjacent chambers.
Some of Colts pistols have this patented feature but most don't.
Lead is too soft and malleable to have any memory of its former shape so it will not "spring back" after it has passed the chamfer to grip or seal the chamber.
At one time, Colt patented the idea of using a chamfered chamber mouth but the idea was not to form a better fit of the ball with the chamber.
The idea was to deflect the flames from the chamber being fired from the mouths of the adjacent chambers.
Some of Colts pistols have this patented feature but most don't.
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2009
- Messages
- 13,238
- Reaction score
- 7,591
rodwha said:
If you would, please let me know who did the chambers' reaming work for you and how it turned out. My Pietta 5 1/2" barrel has very different reaming from one chamber to the other. The depths and therefore the diameters differ. With the shorter barrel being more sensitive to changes in charges and ball travel it really is a point of frustration for the shooter (that's me).
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2009
- Messages
- 13,238
- Reaction score
- 7,591
Chamfering the mouths of the chambers; the metal gets swaged in rather than partially removed. Did this in the 70's with good results. Hence I asked the question as to whether anyone was currently shooting that way.
rodwha
58 Cal.
A fellow who guys by the name Fly did it in exchange for a box of my cast cap n ball conicals.
As far as I can tell he did an excellent job, though all I have are calipers so I wouldn't be able to get an accurate measurement.
For my application (using my ROA projectiles) I feel it reduces the additional stress when loading.
As far as I can tell he did an excellent job, though all I have are calipers so I wouldn't be able to get an accurate measurement.
For my application (using my ROA projectiles) I feel it reduces the additional stress when loading.
Superunknown29
32 Cal.
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2017
- Messages
- 8
- Reaction score
- 0
interesting. I do love mine though as is from pietta
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2013
- Messages
- 121
- Reaction score
- 4
LEM said:
Did you really mean 25 grains of ffffg? I shoot the same measure of fff.
Love my 1858's one Sheriffs model tgt and one SS
7-1/2"bbl tgt model.
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2011
- Messages
- 9,504
- Reaction score
- 4,661
I worked over an early target model 58 Pietta bought some 30 years ago. A barrel spud made to hold a chucking reamer through the barrel hole in the frame after removing the barrel.
The shank of the reamer was made a very close slip fit through the spud to align it into the chamber mouths when installed in the frame barrel hole, indexed by the bolt in the gun.
Each chamber was reamed to .450 and to exact depth which uniformed chamber mouths and aligned them each with the barrel.
The barrel was lapped out to .449 as I remember it and the forcing cone reamed a bit deeper.
Shoots better than my ROA.
The shank of the reamer was made a very close slip fit through the spud to align it into the chamber mouths when installed in the frame barrel hole, indexed by the bolt in the gun.
Each chamber was reamed to .450 and to exact depth which uniformed chamber mouths and aligned them each with the barrel.
The barrel was lapped out to .449 as I remember it and the forcing cone reamed a bit deeper.
Shoots better than my ROA.
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2013
- Messages
- 121
- Reaction score
- 4
:wink:
rdstrain49
40 Cal.
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2010
- Messages
- 460
- Reaction score
- 3
Bear, I think that the reviewers "group" shot one hand at seven yards says it all. If I couldn't shoot any better than that, I'd keep my opinions to myself and practice. He looses all credibility in my mind with such a poor demonstration of his total lack shooting abilities. I don't feel I am being unfair or over critical, after all, he is the one that put himself out there, not me.
As for me, I don't care for the Remingtons all that much, BUT they can be phenomenally accurate. I have a 36, 44, and 45 Colt. Just for fun I routinely shoot them at an IDPA silhouette targets at 100 yards and normally keep all rounds in the A zone. Don't fit me very well but they sure will shoot.
As for me, I don't care for the Remingtons all that much, BUT they can be phenomenally accurate. I have a 36, 44, and 45 Colt. Just for fun I routinely shoot them at an IDPA silhouette targets at 100 yards and normally keep all rounds in the A zone. Don't fit me very well but they sure will shoot.
My thoughts exactly and that is not a "4in group" for sure.
Similar threads
