1858 New Model Army

[Fieldpiece]

I recently purchased a Traditions New Model Army 44. Can any one tell me if I can fire bullets other than rounds balls with it?

 

[TRWXXA]

Yes. Conical bullets can be fired, but round bullets are easier to load and often more accurate. Getting conical bullets to seat properly can be difficult, and that can cause them to wobble in flight.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I recently purchased a Traditions New Model Army 44. Can any one tell me if I can fire bullets other than rounds balls with it?

Don't try square cubes. They won't work.

 

[Claddagh]

Dixie Gun Works offers (or at least used to) cast lead conicals of the original factory/commercial designs for both Colt 1860 and Remington NMA cap&ball revolvers. They come/came in "Bull Durham" style sacks of 50 and aren't too costly.

Sadly most seem to come with a pronounced sprue on the base, as they appear to have been cast in the antique "tong" style molds. Kind of a drag removing that with a file or whatever, but at least the noses are shaped to fit the respective rammers found on the original revolvers correctly. Still, getting them to seat concentricly with the bore can be tricky as has been said.

With the sprue removed I've used them to produce my own replicas of the paper "cartidges" which were sold commercially during that era. I include a lubed felt wad between the bullet and the powder charge, which wasn't included in the originals but certainly seems to help make cleaning less of a chore. The charge I use is 25 gr. (by volume) of Pyrodex P.

While they don't generally group as well as swaged RBs, it's been my experience that they do generally shoot a lot closer, elevation-wise, to POA at 25 and 50 yds. than the RB loads in my replica revolvers with unmodified/altered sights. This leads me to believe that original revolvers may well have had their sights calibrated with the use of the respective "factory" cartridges in mind.

By far the most accurate and consistent conicals I've ever found are the ones which Buffalo Bore used to sell. They were made of swaged lead with a "knurled" driving portion and a ''ball" shaped nose, coated with a wax-type lube. They came in plastic boxes of 50 with a supply of "Wonder Wads" and cost (last time I bought some) about $10/box. Accuracy is closely comparable to RBs in most all of my replicas and bests them in some, particularly in my 8" and 5 1/2" Pietta 1860 Armys and my Uberti "Millenium" model Remington.

FWIW, these conicals over a 30 gr. Pyrodex pellet or an equivalent volume of Pyrodex P are the only loads I've ever had that shot precisely to my POA at 25 yds. without altering the factory sights in all three of these revolvers.

Only wish I'd stocked up more while they were easy to find, as I'm down to my last couple of boxes in .44 cal. and just one in .36 cal.

 

[Beowulf]

Dixie Gun Works offers (or at least used to) cast lead conicals of the original factory/commercial designs for both Colt 1860 and Remington NMA cap&ball revolvers. They come/came in "Bull Durham" style sacks of 50 and aren't too costly.

Sadly most seem to come with a pronounced sprue on the base, as they appear to have been cast in the antique "tong" style molds. Kind of a drag removing that with a file or whatever, but at least the noses are shaped to fit the respective rammers found on the original revolvers correctly. Still, getting them to seat concentricly with the bore can be tricky as has been said.

With the sprue removed I've used them to produce my own replicas of the paper "cartidges" which were sold commercially during that era. I include a lubed felt wad between the bullet and the powder charge, which wasn't included in the originals but certainly seems to help make cleaning less of a chore. The charge I use is 25 gr. (by volume) of Pyrodex P.

While they don't generally group as well as swaged RBs, it's been my experience that they do generally shoot a lot closer, elevation-wise, to POA at 25 and 50 yds. than the RB loads in my replica revolvers with unmodified/altered sights. This leads me to believe that original revolvers may well have had their sights calibrated with the use of the respective "factory" cartridges in mind.

By far the most accurate and consistent conicals I've ever found are the ones which Buffalo Bore used to sell. They were made of swaged lead with a "knurled" driving portion and a ''ball" shaped nose, coated with a wax-type lube. They came in plastic boxes of 50 with a supply of "Wonder Wads" and cost (last time I bought some) about $10/box. Accuracy is closely comparable to RBs in most all of my replicas and bests them in some, particularly in my 8" and 5 1/2" Pietta 1860 Armys and my Uberti "Millenium" model Remington.

FWIW, these conicals over a 30 gr. Pyrodex pellet or an equivalent volume of Pyrodex P are the only loads I've ever had that shot precisely to my POA at 25 yds. without altering the factory sights in all three of these revolvers.

Only wish I'd stocked up more while they were easy to find, as I'm down to my last couple of boxes in .44 cal. and just one in .36 cal.

Do you have any pictures of those paper cartridges you make with more details? That sounds pretty neat and a lot easier at the range than loose powder and balls (and yes, I know how that sounds).

 

[Grizhicks]

couple of questions:
(1) do you plan on shooting it much?
(2) is it a brass frame or steel frame?

if you plan on shooting it much, and it is a brass frame; then you need to sell it and get a steel frame

just my 2-cents, Greg/Grizhicks

 

[Claddagh]

There's a section in the Dixie Gun Works catalog that'll show you how this type of cartidges are made better than I can describe it for you. Cost is only $5.00 and there's a wealth of other handy info on things related to shooting BP firearms in there, too. Plus, they have all sorts of guns, parts, tools, gadgets, gizmos, reference books and accessories to drool over.

I use plain ol' cigarette papers for mine. The resulting cartidges may be a mite more fragile than the originals were, but they work just fine. Haven't ever had an instance where the cap flash wasn't enough to ignite one and the paper burns without leaving a whole lot of ash. FWIW, you can use round balls to make them just as easily and not inconsiderably cheaper to boot.

 

[warren5421]

I have shoot cap and ball pistols since the 5th grade. I'm 67 years old. I have tried the paper loadings and would rather use a powder flask with a calibrated spout. I load the powder, then a felt wad soaked in bore butter or SPG Lube, and then a round ball at.454 dia. To spring a brass framed Remington you would need to shoot upwards of 100,000 full house rounds. I have shoot about 10 years of SASS, 1 match per month, using Ruger old Army or Colt 1851 Navy cap and ball guns. I have never seen a brass framed Colt style gun spring the frame from shooting. It can be done at least on paper just remember on paper a bumble bee can't fly.

Shoot your gun and enjoy. Loads of good info can be had on the SASS web site SASS Wire Forum for black powder shooting.

 

[straight-shooter]

^^ Very well said Warren. I'm not even going to try and add anything here.

 

[Claddagh]

I usually do the same thing (load using a flask, etc.) when I go out to play. I'm 64 and also have been shooting replica (never could afford a shootable condition original) C&B revolvers since I was in my late teens. I didn't even know that there were conical projectiles or "factory" loads made for C&B revolvers until I started reading about their history and saw pictures of original boxes of them.

Of course, that got my curiousity going and I just had to find out how practical they might've been compared to using RBs and a flask. At the time, Lee hadn't started to make molds for their "modern" conicals yet and the only options I could find were replicas of the various brass and iron "tong/scissor" type molds from the period. Compared to the modern molds I had been using for my .357 and .45 ACP slugs, they proved to be a real PITA to use and the sheer tedium from the 'extra' processes necessary in order to get a reasonable number of usable bullets chilled my enthusiasm for the experiment in rather short order. I went back to using my RBs and flask exclusively again.

A few years later when I found that I could buy basically the same slugs from Dixie and thus forego most all of the hassles involved in casting them myself, I started fooling around with conical bullets and paper cartridges once more. I've concluded that while premade cartridges do make it a markedly faster process to recharge a revolver's cylinder, and the conical projectiles are theoretically capable of delivering significantly more energy on-target than RBs due to their greater mass, neither of those things would seem to really matter enough to bother about unless one is a contemplating being in a situation where they're facing targets that might be shooting back.

I still mess around with them a bit, just for grins. In purely practical terms though, I think that the Lee conicals and (especially!) the Buffalo Bore conicals are both worlds better than any of the original designs I've tried.

 

[indy1919a4]

Do you have any pictures of those paper cartridges you make with more details? That sounds pretty neat and a lot easier at the range than loose powder and balls (and yes, I know how that sounds).

Here are a couple of visuals I have used.. The second one will have you setting on the edge of your seat..



[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2f_PrH1D_Hk[/ame]



[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vx_nQphKO4[/ame]


Needless to say the workmanship of this guys cartridges are a work of art.. Almost a darn shame to shoot them... Well Almost.. Mine have never ever gotten that purdy

 

[JB357Mag]

Jimmy