I've been searching for info on the loads used back in the 1850s in Colt and Remington revolvers, without much success. Particularly I'd like to know about conical bullet loads (bullet weight and charge weight). The Remington frame appears to have been specifically designed to accommodate conical bullets, and it is my understandiong that there were factory paper cartridges that used conicals.
Anyone have any specific information on the actual, period loadings?
Omnivore,
Check the Dixie Gun Works catalog.
The stuff in the info pages in the back has it, IIRC.
Buckshot
According to the 1861 Ordnance Manual, powder charge for an "Army" (.44 caliber) revolver should be 30 grains and bullet weight should be 216 grains. If you're really interested in this, buy or borrow a copy of the book Round Ball to Rimfire (volume 3). It contains a wealth of information on the different kinds of revolver cartridges used during the Civil War, along with the various known types of bullets and their dimensions and weights.
30 grains of powder on top of a conical.
Keep in mind that a lot of people back then still preferred the older round ball loadings. The bullet is lighter, but faster and their terminal behavior is better.
These views are not representative of those held by the US Army, US DoD, or US Government.
JefftheBaptist.blogspot.com
Great leads there. Thanks to all.
I've always stuck to 25 grains in both my 44 and 36 cal Remingtons. I found a 30gr load was not very accurate. 25gr. had me shooting spot on.
I got a new 1911 for my wife... I think it was a pretty good trade.
1858 Remington...my experience mirrors yours...and like many, I've pondered on that.
I'd have to assume that the results were the same in "those days" as it is now...and the reason probably being because the need for killing power at sword-fighting distance trumped the need for accuracy.
In years gone by, I kept my hands and clothes covered with black smudges with those things...and I loved it. My first replica was a Navy Arms .36 caliber Sheriff's model bought at age 17 for the princely sum of 40 bucks out the door.
Speak kindly to me, beloved master. Revel in my unconditional love, and give me every minute that you can spare, for my time with you is short.
--Your faithful dog
http://www.collierescue.net/available/index.html
To see my real work:
http://www.pets-r-great.org:80/magaz...ue1/cover.html
I will have to make a few bullets as I have a colt and Remington molds these are original.
Am I the only one who rather prefers to put the powder under the ball/bullet?30 grains of powder on top of a conical.
Bart Noir
Who has managed to get the sequence wrong with a muzzle-stuffer.
To each his own.Am I the only one who rather prefers to put the powder under the ball/bullet?
I read the the standard revolver load furnished in paper cartridges was 27 grains along with a conical bullet. This was cited as the load the seargent killed John Wilkes Booth with.
Copyright 2006 by Gatofeo. Used with permission;
The February 1975 issue of the American Rifleman has an interesting article on what loads were used in Civil War .36 and .44-caliber paper cartridges for Colt revolvers.
No mention is made of Remington or other cap and ball revolver charges but they were likely identical or nearly so.
No granulation (FFG or FFFG) is noted in the article. Round balls were not used in paper cartridges, but were loaded loosely.
There was a surprising disparity in bullet weights and powder charges in paper combustible cartridges for the Colts, according to the article.
Conical bullets for the Colt M1860 Army .44-caliber revolver ranged from 207 grs. to 260 grs. Powder charges ranged from 17 to 36 grains of black powder.
Conical bullets for the Colt .36 Navy ranged from 139 to 155 grs. Charges ranged from 12 to 21 grains.
Nearly all of these variations are found in prepared, paper cartridges manufactured by private contractors. It appears that U.S. government arsenals made few paper revolver cartridges, preferring to contract this task.
Union Army ordnance manuals of 1861 specify a load of 30 grs of powder with a .46-caliber, 216 gr. conical ball in Colt M1860 revolvers of .44-caliber.
The same manual specifies a .39-caliber conical bullet of 145 grs., over 17 grs. of powder, for the .36-caliber revolvers.
An official Confederate States publication specifies a 250 gr. conical bullet over 30 grs. of powder for the Colt M1860 revolver.
The Confederate specification for the Colt Navy is the same as the Union (.39 caliber conical of 145 grs. over 17 grs. powder).
In the 1860s an average load for the Colt M1860 .44 revolver was 25 grs. of powder with a 146 gr. (about 460" diameter) round ball or a conical bullet of about 230 grs.
The average load for the Colt Navy was 15 grs. of powder with an 81 gr. (about .380" diameter) round ball or a conical bullet of about 146 grs.
Old loadings will occasionally list a 218 gr. conical bullet with a 40 to 50 gr. powder charge. This is intended for the Colt Model 1847 Walker or the later Dragoons, which have a larger capacity than the Colt M1860 .44 revolver.
Of great interest in this article is the apparent dissection of original paper cartridges and the weighing of their powder charge and conical ball weight.
The results follow:
COLT ARMY .44
Hazard Powder Co. - 211 gr. conical / 36 grs. powder
Bartholow's - 260 gr. conical / 19 grs. powder
Johnston & Dow - 242 gr. conical / 35 grs. powder
Unknown - 257 gr. conical / 17 grs. powder
Unknown - 207 gr. conical / 22 grs. powder
Hotchkiss - 207 gr. conical / 22 grs. powder
COLT NAVY .36
Hazard Powder Co. - 141 gr. conical / 21 grs. powder
Bartholow's - 139 gr. conical / 14 grs. powder
Johnston & Dow - 150 gr. conical / 17 grs. powder
Unknown - 155 gr. conical / 12 grs. powder
Unknown - 149 gr. conical / 13 grs. powder
The 2003 Dixie Gun Works catalogue recommends loads very closely resembling the above, but with a ball, not a conical bullet.
All .36 caliber revolvers: .376 inch ball over 22 grs. FFFG black power.
.44 Remington and Colt original gun: .453 inch ball over 28 grs. FFFG black powder
.44 Remington and Colt reproductions: .451 inch ball over 28 grs. FFFG black powder
In my own experience, I've obtained the best accuracy in reproduction guns with balls measuring .380 inch in the .36 and .454 or .457 inch in the .44 Remington and Colt. I have never fired an original cap and ball revolver.
In "A History of the Colt Revolver From 1836 to 1940" by Charles T. Haven and Frank E. Belden, the authors list load recommendations from Colt in the 1850s and 1860s.
Haven and Belden note, "FFG black powder is best for the large and medium-size revolvers, and FFFG for the small pocket models, but any grade that is available will work reasonably well."
Gatofeo notes: In my own experience, I use FFFG in my .31, .36 and .44 revolvers with fine accuracy. I don't see much need to use FFG powder in the .36 and .44 revolvers if you can get FFFG.
Colt recommended the following, more than 125 years ago:
1 dram = 27.3 grains (grs.)
.44 Dragoon: 1-1/2 drams of black powder (41 grs.) and a round bullet of 48 to the pound (about 146 grs, which calculates at about .46 caliber) or a conical bullet of 32 to the pound (about 219 grains).
.44 M1860 Army - Powder charge about 1/3 less than the Dragoon, or 27 grains. A conical bullet of 212 grains (33 to the pound) or the same round ball used in the Dragoon above (about .46-caliber or 146 grs. weight).
.36 M1851 Navy - Powder charge of 3/4 of a dram (20 grs.) and conical bullet 140 grs. (50 to the pound ). Or a round ball of 81 grs. (86 to the pound, which would be about .379 or .380 diameter).
.36 M1862 Pocket and Police - Conical bullet over 15 grs. of powder. No weight is given the conical bullet for this model but it's known that it had its own bullet mould, casting a shorter and lighter conical bullet than the Navy .36 revolver.
Presumably, the .380 ball above is used with the same powder charge. In my own 1862 reproduction, I use 20 grs. of FFFG under a .380 inch ball.
.31 Old and New Model Pocket Pistols - Conical bullet of 76 grains (92 to the pound) over half a dram (13.5 grains) of powder, or a round ball of 50 grs. (140 to the pound and about .320 inch diameter).
Gatofeo notes: Present day 0 buckshot measures about .320 inch and makes an excellent ball for the .31-caliber cap and ball revolvers. Cheap too!
.265 M1855 Sidehammer: Ball of 35 grains (200 to the pound, about .285 diameter) or a 55 gr. (128 to the pound) conical bullet. No charge is listed, but I would guess that 10 grains of powder would be correct.
The late gun writer Elmer Keith (1898 - 1984) wrote a book, "Sixguns" in the mid 1950s. In it, he included a chapter on cap and ball revolvers.
Keith learned how to load and shoot these revolvers from Civil War veterans when he grew up in Helena, Montana. In 1912, at the age of 14, he began carrying a Colt 1851 Navy in .36 caliber.
Keith recommended FFFG black powder for the .28 and .31 caliber revolvers, and FFG black powder for theh .36 and .44 guns.
He didn't list loads by weight, but he instructed to pour in the powder until it almost filled the chamber, leaving room for a greased felt wad.
Keith punched felt wads from an old hat, and soaked them in a lubricant made of melted beeswax and tallow.
Gatofeo notes: I use a mix of paraffin, beeswax and mutton tallow. I use canning paraffin, regular beeswax and order mutton tallow from Dixie Gun Works.
This wad was placed over the powder, then the ball rammed down with it until the ball was slightly below flush of the chamber.
Gatofeo notes: I seat the wad as a separate operation, then seat the ball.
Keith noted, "A percussion sixgun thus loaded will shoot clean all day if you blow your breath through the bore a few times after each six rounds are fired. It will also shoot very accurately if it is a good gun."
"I had one .36 Navy Colt that had a pitted barrel, but with the above load it would cut clover leaves for its six shots, at 20 yards, all day with seated back and head rest and two hands used between the knees to further holding," Keith wrote, adding that he later traded it for a modern .38 Special revolver that was never as accurate as that Navy.
Copyright 2006 by Gatofeo. Used with permission
So, as far as a "standard load" for the old Colts, there ain't no such animal! The soldiers used what they were issued, and that issued ammunition varied greatly.
__________________
Last edited by Omnivore; July 13th, 2011 at 05:54 PM. Reason: credit to Gatofeo
"I Smoke Black Powder" "Favor 1858 NMA Remington"
Mosby's Rangers 43rd Virginia Cavalry C.S.A.
SASS# 19634
The best pistol shot at our club shot a 2 inch 5 shot group with my Lyman 58 Remington replica at 50 yards.
The load was 30 grains of Pyrodex RS under a 210 grain Lee cast bullet.
Chronograph velocity is 915 with an unbelievable SD of 9.
Nice report, SG. Thank you.
Now I'm as confused as ever, though. The 1858 Remington frame has far more room under the loading lever, compared to the '51 and '60 Colts. I recently got hold of some 210 (IIRC) grain "DD-ROA" conicals, and had to modify both the '58 Remington frame and a new loading ram to have any chance of getting the longish bullet under the ram.
If they were at times using even heavier bullets, surely they must have had to remove the cylinder to load it. Either that or our modern replicas are pathetically far off spec from the originals (my '58 Remington is a very recent Pietta). Now, if the conicals of yore were tapered so that the base could drop far into the chamber before the ram was needed, maybe they could be loaded in the assembled Colts, but it would be a stretch. More of a stretch would be loading a whole cartridge with a long bullet in an assembled Colt without tearing the cartridge. What am I missing?
If I could only get hold of a time machine I could watch these guys loading their pieces back in the 1800s.
Omnivore, you got me curious enough to measure the distance between the cylinder and ram on a few pistols.
My Pietta 1858 is 1/2 inch, as is my 51 Navy Colt 2nd gen and Uberti 51. ROA is 5/8. 61 Navy Colt 2nd, 60 Army Centaure are 3/4 inch. Pietta .44 reb and Spiller and Burr are 3/8+.
I tried some Buffalo Bore conicals one time and had a problem getting them to start straight when the cylinder was in the frame. I can't imagine using the conical with a paper cartridge attached to it.
I have made some paper carts with rb, those are not to bad to load.
A Veteran, whether active duty, retired, national guard, or reserve, is someone who, at one point in his life, wrote a blank check made payable to “The United States of America” for an amount of “up to and including my life.”
madcrate; Yeah, you can get a .454 or .457 ball under the ram even if there's only 3/8" space, because the ball falls almost halfway into the cylinder prior to ramming. A conical with a square base sits right on top of the chamber, so you need the full length of the bullet as free space under the ram.
OK, maybe I'm just using the wrong conicals. Yes, that must be it, but still; a 200+ grain conical will still need to drop a long way into the chamber to work in my Pietta-Remington without modifying both the frame and the ram.
I've tried using cartridges with round ball in the Colt, and it's tough to do without tearing the cart. If I taper the cartridge a lot, it's doable. I could grind off the barrel wedge to make more room on the RH side of the gun for loading, but I've gone to using powder-only cartridges instead, placing the ball separately.
That lengthy discussion of historic loads for various cap and ball revolvers, posted by Smokin_Gun in 2009, was written by ME in 2006.
It was copied and pasted verbatim by Smokin_Gun.
I would have appreciated credit for my authorship.
I was searching for information on the original design of conical bullets for the 1851 Colt when I stumbled across this entry.
Webmaster, please edit it to include, "Copyright 2006 by Gatofeo. Used with permission" at the beginning and end of this piece.
Thank you.
"And therein did I see an ugly cat. Blue smoke. Brimstone. Holes in paper. And this ugly cat was much amused." --- the prophesies of Gatodamus (1503 - 1566).
G'day to you blokes from Down Under!!
I use 28 grs of either FFF or FFg under round ball in my old Remington, I use 5o grs of FFg under round ball in my Dragoon. and 20 grs of FFFg under round ball in my Colt Navy. I have never been able to use the conicals that are moulded from the supplied two cavity mould, cannot get them to sit right in the chamber. I use Alvania water pump grease to seal the chamber mouths and find I get good accuracy with the round ball.
Cheers all
Heelerau
Keep yor hoss well shod an' yor powdah dry !!
Gato; Done. Thanks. I later bought and read your book. Liked it a lot except for most of the photos which were rather small and hard to make out. There isn't much out there on the subject, and so you and your partner did us a real service.
You read, "Sexy Vixen Cowgirls & Their Amazing .44s" ... ? I didn't think it sold that well ...
Actually, I've never written a book.
Mike Cumpton wrote a very good book on cap and ball revolvers and single-shots, and thanked me in the dedication, but I didn't write it.
So, you've apparently you've mistaken me for some other author.
Cumpton's book is a good addition to any shooter's library.
I wrote the above, lengthy posting years ago because I was frustrated by the lack of information, and the proliferation of incorrect or misleading information, on the internet.
I figured I'd learned enough in years of shooting cap and ball revolvers that I could help out newcomers, and prompt experienced shooters to comment so I'd learn from them as well.
It's worked beautifully.
"And therein did I see an ugly cat. Blue smoke. Brimstone. Holes in paper. And this ugly cat was much amused." --- the prophesies of Gatodamus (1503 - 1566).
Ah Hah. For some reason I had surmised that you and Mike were the same person. I had read many of your posts on THR over the years, and many of Mike’s product reviews here and there (read one just today actually) and with your mention in the book, somehow I put two and two together and came up with ~6.397/42 times Pi. I never was great at math. There is, though, a very similar list of 1860s paper cartridge load specs in the book, and that was exactly the sort of thing I was looking for.
I now use the Lee 450-2001R mold (one of something like two mold I've found made with the shoulder for cap and ball revolvers - the other one is from Buffalo Arms here in Idaho, but they want a whole lot more money for theirs) and the lee .454 ball mold. I don't so much make the paper carts anymore, as I find them time consuming to make, for a relatively small advantage at the range. Still I make a few now and then.
Anyway; thanks for the clarification.
P.S. I didn't know until recently that the French had metalic cartridges of the pin fire variety, using bored-through cylinders, years before our War Between the States, and they had them in combat-worthy calibers such as 10 and 11 mm.
Yep, the French had those.
France was one of the most advanced munitions designers in the world.
It adopted the world's first smallbore cartridge for its Army, and to top it off loaded it from the beginning with smokeless powder. That was the 8mm Lebel, in 1886, when the U.S. was still using the 1873 "Trapdoor" and black powder .45-70 cartridges.
France made tons of pinfire calibers, ranging from tiny 3mm revolvers to 8 gauge shotgun. The pinfire priming system was fragile, and nearly impossible to reload, but far ahead of the muzzleloading and breechloading systems up through the 1860s.
I believe that pinfire shotgun shells were available as late as the 1970s. I have an unloaded 20 gauge pinfire shell in my collection that probably dates from then. European shooters bought the primed cases, and loaded them for their favorite pinfire shotgun.
I don't think anyone offers pinfire ammo or primed cases today; just too expensive to make and so little demand.
"And therein did I see an ugly cat. Blue smoke. Brimstone. Holes in paper. And this ugly cat was much amused." --- the prophesies of Gatodamus (1503 - 1566).
I knew that years ago during my wanderings thru online gun esoterica I cam across something about pinfire kits... took me a moment to find, but as far as I can tell the closest you can get to buying pinfire cartridges today is this:I don't think anyone offers pinfire ammo or primed cases today; just too expensive to make and so little demand.
http://hlebooks.com/pinfire/pin01.htm
Essentially, the heart of their kit consists of solid based reloadable cartridges, with appropriate holes and pins, and a rather clever little reusable brass insert that fits in the base of the cartridge and holds a standard percussion cap under the pin. You can buy a "5 round starter kit" for 7, 9, or 11 mm pinfire for c. $40, which includes bullets. $209 will get you 12 (reloadable) cases and pins and 25 bullets, plus tools. Not exactly cheap, but if you're desperate to revive and old pinfire...
they also make 12 and 16 gauge pinfire shotshells using the same system. Very interesting.
I'm a skinny, rather geeky, over-educated Englishman living in the small-town MidWest who believes in the 2nd Amendment and the RKBA... my existence messes with people's stereotypes :-)
http://www.hc-collection.com/PBSCCatalog.asp?PBMInit=1I don't think anyone offers pinfire ammo or primed cases today; just too expensive to make and so little demand.
My original 1858 Remington (actually 1858 Patent, Model of 1863, dated 1865)
Is set to load 30 grains. The charging lever won't depress enough for a smaller load.
With 15 grains it will bounce off a log at 2'. Though that may be due to the bores eroding slightly oversize.
http://SharpPointyThings.com
http://www.MichaelZWilliamson.com
FREEHOLD, Jan 04 from Baen Books
THE WEAPON, Aug 05 from Baen Books
CONFIRMED KILL, Sep 05 from HarperCollins
BETTER TO BEG FORGIVENESS..., Winter 07 from Baen Books
~~~
"The Finest battle implement ever devised." Ung the Caveman on the M1 Pointy Stick.
Nice, old Remington MadMike.
I have a friend who has an original Remington too. I've hinted at us getting together to fire it, but he's not interested. What interests me is that the exterior of the revolver looks bad, but the bore and chambers are in good shape. I'd like to try it for accuracy, just to see how an old gun would fare with its original rifling.
I know that the Colts had rifling with a gain twist, and I believe that the old Remingtons did too.
A gain twist is where the rifling has no set "1 turn in X inches" but instead, the rifling starts straight or slow at the rear of the bore, then increases in twist all the way to the muzzle.
Sam Colt's cap and ball revolvers were noted for their accuracy back in the day, and I believe that gain twist may be responsible.
Gain twist was dropped when cartridge revolvers came along, with their long projectiles. I've heard that gain twist doesn't work so well with long projectiles because the front portion of the bullet is turning at a faster rate than the rear. Something's gotta give, and the result is the long bullet stripping out of the rifling. Accuracy suffers.
But projectiles with short bearing bands, like a ball or stubby conical bullet, work fine in gain twist.
A few years ago I saw a finely made copy of the Remington 1858, in target grade with modern Patridge sights. It had gain twist, reportedly for enhanced accuracy.
Made for target competition, it was around $1,000. I lacked the money and inclination.
Anyway, nice Remington you have. Good to hear that you're allowing the ol' beast to talk once in a while.
Any idea how much powder it will hold and still allow a ball to be seated? The old-timers tended to use FFG grade in their revolvers, from what I've read. It would be interesting to learn its maximum load, but don't fire it! Pull the ball after seating. No sense straining a fine, old gun.
The chamber and bore dimensions would also be of interest. Our modern reproduction .44s typically have chamber mouths from .448 to .451. Wonder what your old Remington has?
Thanks for that photo and info.
"And therein did I see an ugly cat. Blue smoke. Brimstone. Holes in paper. And this ugly cat was much amused." --- the prophesies of Gatodamus (1503 - 1566).
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
