Quick question on powder charge

[Poboy]

I got a new Pietta .44 cal 1851 Confederate Navy revolver today. When I ordered it, I didn't even think about it being a brass frame making it weaker.

Cabelas paperwork and a member here both recommend no more than 26 grains. So my question is how much larger a charge can be loaded into a steel frame .44 cal. revolver, and how much difference does it make in bullet performance in a hunting situation.

 

[hawkeye2]

You can shoot 30 grains of 3f easily with no harm to the gun. It may be possible to get 35 grains in there, I have never tried it and I'm sorry say to date I have never hunted with one so I'm of little help there.

As to the brass .44 I would keep the loads in the 20 grains area (3f). 26 may not harm it but 20 is easier yet and in all the years I have shot in copmetition I have found 20 +/- to be the most accurate load in my .44 guns. I would hesitate to call the brase frame "weaker" as it will stand everything the steel frame will however heavy loads will lead to issues not related to strength but caused by battering the softer frame increasing cylinder end play and excessive barrel/cylinder gap. In short you will never blow it up but heavy loads will render it unservicable far sooner than light ones. With a little common sense you can look forward to years of fun with a brass frame gun. I have 4, one of which was my match gun for a year or two and another that was my wife's match gun for over a year till she got a Remington.

 

[Poboy]

Thanks Hawkeye. I actually want to use that gun as a backup on a hog hunt. As far as target shooting, I'm fine with 20 grains.

I'll probably load 30 on the hog hunt, as chances are very good it won't even get fired once anyway.

Then again, I may pick up a .50 cal Kentucky pistol for a quick follow up, but I like the idea of 6 shots.

Looking at my .45 Kentucky long rifle's powder measure it looks like it's set on 50 grains. I could have sworn it was much more than that when I worked up the load, but that was over 20 years ago. ( Coulda swore it was 90, but maybe I went all the way to 90, but 50 was more accurate and seems to pack plenty of punch on trees and fence posts.)

 

[gary peacemaker]

I have both 1851 brass and steel. I use 20 grains with corm meal filler at 15 grains,in the brass. Steel I use 35 grains , been using that for years.brass verry accurate to about 30 yards,steel good to 50 yards but only 6 to 8 inch group under that in the 10 ring at 30 yard. All on me not guns.i have shot 35 grains in the brass,but not any more.

 

[Poboy]

Thanks Gary, I may even load 35 on the hog hunt. I just want the umph. Like I said, probably won't even get fired. I'm pretty much a " one shot, one kill, always have, always will" kinda guy. Everyday shooting, 20 seems reasonable. Even then, I won't be wearing the bore out on it, not for lack of want, but lack of access to a place to do it!

 

[rodwha]

For backup and hogs you might want to consider a conical with a wide meplat. Creates a bigger permanent wound channel.

Also the powder you use can make a significant difference. Swiss, Olde Eynsford, and Triple 7 give much higher velocities.

Of course a more energetic powder and a heavier projectile will likely be harder on a brass frames pistol.

 

[rodwha]

Oh, my Pietta NMA does better (hunting loads which I began at 25 grns and worked up) with 30 grns. When I weighed this using 3F Olde Eynsford it weighed about 33 grns. I typically load my 195 grn WFN (.375” and 83%) conical which is roughly the length of a ball at .460” and find that there’s room for a few more grains of powder.

The above load, estimating by similar chronographed loads using energetic powders, is likely in the standard .45 ACP performance range. Using standard Goex or other not so energetic powders and the figures would likely be closer to a .38 Spl.

 

[Eterry]

I retired my cap n ball pistols after a couple disappointing incidents as a young man. I have had 31, 36, and 44 revolvers, I don't think I would depend on one for backup. They certainly will "kill", but I haven't been convinced that they would "Stop" a critter the size of a hog, unless brain or spine was hit. This is based on a couple of 1st hand episodes I experienced with the 36 and 44. The 31 was mostly a toy...although I don't wanna end up on the wrong end of one.

Having said that...I've spent plenty of time in the woods, killed several hogs with c'tridge arms and never had one CHARGE!! I just think they ( cap-n-balls) don't pack much energy to be sporting.

 

[rodwha]

I retired my cap n ball pistols after a couple disappointing incidents as a young man. I have had 31, 36, and 44 revolvers, I don't think I would depend on one for backup. They certainly will "kill", but I haven't been convinced that they would "Stop" a critter the size of a hog, unless brain or spine was hit. This is based on a couple of 1st hand episodes I experienced with the 36 and 44. The 31 was mostly a toy...although I don't wanna end up on the wrong end of one.

Having said that...I've spent plenty of time in the woods, killed several hogs with c'tridge arms and never had one CHARGE!! I just think they ( cap-n-balls) don't pack much energy to be sporting.

To be fair the powder(s) you likely used weren’t of the energetic variety. Swiss wasn’t common here in the western half, and Olde E wasn’t developed (it’s merely a few years old now). All of the other black powders seem to run close to 200 fps slower with a 30 grn charge and a ball, which is why performance for such a thing as hunting is dismal. With the proper powders this isn’t so. My ROA with its favored 35 grn charge (weighs about 38 grns) is closer to +P levels looking at various chronographed loads that are similar.

A ball creates a fair permanent wound channel. From what I’ve seen from gel tests it’s usually close to caliber size. But a wide meplat creates well over caliber size and still penetrates quite nicely.

According to Beartooth Bullets a .370” meplat on a .45 cal at 900 fps should create a permanent wound 0.833” wide. That’s a little bigger than what’s typical of the mushroomed modern HP. And that’s why I created wide nosed conicals. A big hole with nose to tail penetration capabilities when using an energetic powder.

At 700 fps that .370” meplat is said to create a 0.648” wound. Not bad.

 

[Gee Dog]

Thirty-five grains in a brass .44 is definitely excessive. Thirty grains is really pushing it. Some owners consider their brassers as disposable items while others treat them as durables, meant to last. They will last too, if treated properly. Otherwise one will soon have a wall-hanger or a nice paper weight - but it won't be a real gun anymore.

Some owners say a brass frame .44 will "handle" thirty grains but they never say for how long.

 

[bang]

I got a new Pietta .44 cal 1851 Confederate Navy revolver today. When I ordered it, I didn't even think about it being a brass frame making it weaker.

Cabelas paperwork and a member here both recommend no more than 26 grains. So my question is how much larger a charge can be loaded into a steel frame .44 cal. revolver, and how much difference does it make in bullet performance in a hunting situation.

I advise keeping the charge on any open to to minimums. Especially brass.
A good way to get a safe average load for ball is:
Bore radius sqd x 3.1416 x barrel length x 15.72.
Always worked for me.

 

[Gee Dog]

Hi Bang - In your formula what does the 15.72 represent?

 

[rodwha]

I advise keeping the charge on any open to to minimums. Especially brass.
A good way to get a safe average load for ball is:
Bore radius sqd x 3.1416 x barrel length x 15.72.
Always worked for me.

??? A good safe average load?

So my Pietta NMA has a .452” bore. The radius would then be .226”. Following the equation this would mean the good safe average load (for a ball, which I don’t use any longer) in my 5.5” version would be rounded up to 13.9 grns. This isn’t any “safer” than the more accurate load for hunting I found being 30 grns. It may be more accurate though. I’ve never tried anything below 25 grns as this is meant for hunting and what I typically saw was 25 grns and a lighter weight conical would produce higher end .44 Spl performance with an energetic powder, which, to me, would be about the minimum to feel it being a humane load capable of deep penetration.

If you look at the paper cartridge loads from the Civil War you’d see that most used more than 14 grns and this was with projectiles heavier than a ball. I’d venture to guess if the above load were recommended to top military officials then it would be dismissed as being ineffective. Supposedly the steel used in the reproductions is stronger than what was used then. There’d be no reason to believe that to be safe these guns would need to be loaded as mentioned.

 

[SDSmlf]

Hi Bang - In your formula what does the 15.72 represent?

5 times Pi?

 

[bang]

??? A good safe average load?

So my Pietta NMA has a .452” bore. The radius would then be .226”. Following the equation this would mean the good safe average load (for a ball, which I don’t use any longer) in my 5.5” version would be rounded up to 13.9 grns. This isn’t any “safer” than the more accurate load for hunting I found being 30 grns. It may be more accurate though. I’ve never tried anything below 25 grns as this is meant for hunting and what I typically saw was 25 grns and a lighter weight conical would produce higher end .44 Spl performance with an energetic powder, which, to me, would be about the minimum to feel it being a humane load capable of deep penetration.

If you look at the paper cartridge loads from the Civil War you’d see that most used more than 14 grns and this was with projectiles heavier than a ball. I’d venture to guess if the above load were recommended to top military officials then it would be dismissed as being ineffective. Supposedly the steel used in the reproductions is stronger than what was used then. There’d be no reason to believe that to be safe these guns would need to be loaded as mentioned.

Just a starting place.

 

[bang]

5 times Pi?

A constant used regardless of other variables. This is just for a starting point. I reversed worked it from an article I read many moons ago about shooting the 28 inch .45 hawkin. The auther had surmised that a 70 gn powder load with a patched ball was a peak efficient pressure load for the bore volume and ball wieght. It's easy enough to adjust the constant to what you believe fits your needs. I've found that it just provides a reasonable start then adjust powder from there. Most beleivers in heavy loads will consider the answer too low. All I know from my 40 years experience is heavy doesn't always equal better, for shot or gun. One example is my 45 hawkin. Ball and 70 can hit 9 of 10 in bull at 100 yards. Shoot 290 hollow base with 70 it will walk 6 inches at 100. Drop powder 20%, adjust elevation and they will fall right on.