Ruger Old Army Conicals vs Roundballs

[duelist1954]

In this three part series I'll test the performance of round balls against two different conical bullet designs in a custom 14-inch barreled Ruger Old Army Buntline cap and ball revolver. This is part one of the series. It documents the performance of round balls.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOyfkUsgIvE

 

[zimmerstutzen]

Because the primary limitation is the powder capacity of the chambers, many conicals lose any advantage by the powder space they occupy.

Do you have access to any flat wad cutter bullets that take up less space than the normal conical.

Here is a picture of a bullet I use. Keep in mind, I seat it in the chamber backwards. so it takes less powder space.

This comes out of the mold measuring .456 and weighs 192 grains.

 

[wattlebuster]

Cool test Mike. The old army I've got is the most accurate pistol I own an that includes the 2 modern pistols. :hatsoff:

 

[rodwha]

Quite interested in your test. Do you have a 7 1/2" to test it next to?

I'm curious as to how well this gun (7 1/2" version) will do as a hunting firearm (primary). I've read it's power is on par with a 38 Spl +P to a 9mm 147 grn to a 357 Mag to even a 41 Mag. A lot of conflicting reports. I'd be happy with 45 Colt performance with a conical/bullet.

 

[rodwha]

I was going to order a small sample of Kaido's 240 grn custom bullets to try, but I have read many accounts of it loading easily and straight, and without the need to pull the cylinder off of the gun to do so.

Are you using Ruger nipples?

 

[Dphar]

In this three part series I'll test the performance of round balls against two different conical bullet designs in a custom 14-inch barreled Ruger Old Army Buntline cap and ball revolver. This is part one of the series. It documents the performance of round balls.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOyfkUsgIvE[/quote]

Sigh.... Gunwriter stuff.
I never had a C&B revolver that I thought shot best will the ball not right at the cylinder face so he is not using enough powder. Probably could use near 40 gr without the wad but I have not owned a ROA in decades and did not document it for the short time I had it. The low velocity, the barrel is near carbine length after all, shows there is problem of some sort.
Next if that revolver will not shoot into one hole at 15 yards?!! The guy that built it was a dufus. Or the guy shooting it can't shoot. Take your choice. But of then who does accuracy testing on a steel plate?

The 6 jugs of penetration indicates that the RB would work fine for self-defense, against people anyway.

Dan

 

[nkbj]

A .45 pistol is at it's very best using the same general range of projectile weights and velocities used by the larger percussion revolver conicals right on up to the 1911 Colt. The designers did what works. While I'd dearly love to have a percussion revolver made to use .53 round ball, if that was better then a contractor in New England would have been selling them to the Union army.

 

[zimmerstutzen]

Tranter sold about 12 different calibers of c&b revs inclding a 58.

 

[cynthialee]

nvm

 

[necchi]

But of then who does accuracy testing on a steel plate?

Cowboy action shooters.
duelist1954 has done several "test" on video that has been a tremendous help to many that are just entering and/or shoot C&B revolvers.
If you look at the stuff he offers in his many videos,,
Well, It's Fountain of Priceless information

Thank You duelist :hatsoff: :thumbsup:

 

[gl1200a]

When doing a comparison on bullets, would it not be beneficial to use a "common" firearm?

Maybe it's just me?

Show of hands, who all has a 14" barreled ROA?

 

[zimmerstutzen]

What is supposed to be comparing?
Energy, accuracy?

Will any of it translate to the common ruger

 

[Dickydalton]

Step right up here and show us your one hole, 15 yard targets, please. :bow:

 

[gl1200a]

A standard 7 1/2" ROA at 15yds from a rest is sub 1" groups.
What was shot in the video out of the 14" barrel, could be debated isn't even a group. I can't read the ruler but it's certainly > 2" maybe 3.
This was the accuracy test?
If it were my gun, it would of failed miserably.

Then again, swaged balls, 30gr Goex, and Oxyoke wad isn't a very accurate load anyhow for small groups.

 

[gl1200a]

What is supposed to be comparing?
Energy, accuracy?

Will any of it translate to the common ruger

Exactly!

 

[zimmerstutzen]

I'll admit, I have been in search of a projectile for my ruger that can still permit room for max powder. The problem with most conicals, as I said above, is that they take up valuable room that could be used for powder.I could jam a 310 grain 45-70 slug in over 15 grains of powder, but such a load would be about useless.

My thoughts would be to get a wad cutter type cylindrical shaped bullet to use up the front of the chamber that a ball does not, but still permit 95% of the same max load as a round ball load.

As long as the conical used in the test reduces powder capacity significantly, the round ball's extra speed will win in ft pounds of energy.

As for the shape of the conical, the nose shape is less important. We aren't talking a 100 yd hunting load for deer anyway. Maybe a 50 yd.

 

[duelist1954]

Sorry, but that's the only Ruger I own. Since they are discontinued, I can't call Ruger and ask them to send me a T&E gun. But, if one of you guys want to loan me a 7.5" ROA, I'll do a test on it.

BTW, on my channel I have a similar series using an Uberti 1860 Army with a standard 8" barrel, if you want something more generally available.

 

[nkbj]

I'll admit, I have been in search of a projectile for my ruger that can still permit room for max powder. The problem with most conicals, as I said above, is that they take up valuable room that could be used for powder.I could jam a 310 grain 45-70 slug in over 15 grains of powder, but such a load would be about useless.

My thoughts would be to get a wad cutter type cylindrical shaped bullet to use up the front of the chamber that a ball does not, but still permit 95% of the same max load as a round ball load.

As long as the conical used in the test reduces powder capacity significantly, the round ball's extra speed will win in ft pounds of energy.

As for the shape of the conical, the nose shape is less important. We aren't talking a 100 yd hunting load for deer anyway. Maybe a 50 yd.

This .36 bullet is my latest experiment in having an adjustable length cylindrical portion. The short hemispherical nose seems to be suitable to most any purpose. Toying with the idea of having an extra .451 round ball mold altered but I'm still working on finding time for the .36.

 

[zimmerstutzen]

Cut off the ball and you have something

 

[nkbj]

Cut off the ball and you have something

That's my grease groove.