I'm considering getting one of the Howell 6 shot .45 Colt conversion cylinders for my Pietta 1858 Remington, but what loads could it actually handle?
Could it handle 30-40 grains of 3F (the same maximum load as with cap and ball)? What about 4F Swiss? Or can it only handle popgun loads?
OK
The Howell Arms Cylinders are rated for SAAMI pressure 45 Colt. That includes Black Powder and APP. Do remember smokeless powders and Black Powder have entirely different pressure curves/levels. 4F is not intended for use in cartridges.
Quote from: Coffinmaker on November 09, 2024, 09:21:11 AMOK
The Howell Arms Cylinders are rated for SAAMI pressure 45 Colt. That includes Black Powder and APP. Do remember smokeless powders and Black Powder have entirely different pressure curves/levels. 4F is not intended for use in cartridges.
4F Is normally priming powder only, but there is some confusion with the Swiss, the labeling and the existence of 0b seems to suggest 4F Swiss was intended for pistols, while 0b is the priming powder, which confuses me, hence the question, is Swiss different?
SAAMI pressure? Are you sure? Great if correct, but Howell's site cautions against loads over 850 fps. Has anything official come out from Howell on this? So I assume a maximum (full case, no filler) load of black powder would work safely then?
Edit: If it's SAAMI spec, could Howell just be saying that because of the frames?
Coffinmaker is correct (and he knows more than i do!) , both Howell and Kirst are spec'd at "standard for old guns and modern italian guns" SAAMI .45 colt pressures.
They started saying 850 fps because few if anyy cartridge companys show their pressure specs, and many cartridge companies will how either "fps" or "cowboy loads".
Also few reloading folks have pressure equipment, but some do get chronometers, so...
But if loading your own you need to get several manuals, read the "non recipe" pages thoroughly, and get and understand pressure curve data and burn speed data.
If using swiss, contact them.
P
Quote from: Professor Marvel on November 09, 2024, 02:19:35 PMCoffinmaker is correct (and he knows more than i do!) , both Howell and Kirst are spec'd at "standard for old guns and modern italian guns" SAAMI .45 colt pressures.
They started saying 850 fps because few if anyy cartridge companys show their pressure specs, and many cartridge companies will how either "fps" or "cowboy loads".
Also few reloading folks have pressure equipment, but some do get chronometers, so...
But if loading your own you need to get several manuals, read the "non recipe" pages thoroughly, and get and understand pressure curve data and burn speed data.
If using swiss, contact them.
P
Thankyou, that explains quite a lot, I was unaware that there was more than one SAAMI spec for .45 Colt, which confused me because some of those modern smokeless loads for .45 Colt can be a bit "warm" to say the least!
But what you said makes perfect sense. Do you happen to know the maximum safe charge for black powder? (At the moment the only reloading manual I have is the Hornady one) I know the cap and ball cylinders can handle about 35 grains with conicals and 40 with ball (with a good bit of compression) so would it be safe to assume that the conversions can too or are they paradoxically weaker?
>:( OK :(
You missed a point here. Professor Marvel expressed you need to "get several reloading manuals." Allow me to reiterate what the good Professor stated. "You need to get several Reloading Manuals." Failing that, your local Library??
A suggestion: NEVER, EVER, TRUST loading data provided or found from persons unknown. It can rapidly lead to disaster. Search for reputable Web Sites. DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH.
However, before getting yourself into real trouble, Pyrodex is a rusting Agent that just happens to Burn. Stay away from it. Tripple Seven (777) is not recommended for cartridges. It was developed as a BP Substitute for muzzle loading rifles. Commercial Conversion Cylinders are made from very High Grade stuff and are NOT the weak link. The weak link is the gun Frame itself.
Swiss blackpowder is generally considered to be 15% more powerful than the equivalent amount of Goex / Wano etc. "Olde Eynsford" is the closest American blackpowder to Swiss.
If you want to load & shoot ".45 Colt Blackpowder Magnum"-loads I would suggest getting a Ruger Old Army, an Uberti Dragoon or Uberti Walker. These three have way thicker cylinder-walls in their respective conversion cylinders than the Remington-replicas.
The Kirst 5-shot conversion cylinders for Remingtons leaves a little more steel in the chambers compared to the 6-shot R & Ds / Howells.
A final word of caution: if getting a 6-shot conversion cylinder, check that the firing pin at the 6 o'clock position does not contact the rear of the frame during recoil.
That was the case with my 1996-vintage Uberti 1858 Percussion Revolving Carbine.
A little "Dremel-work" on the lower, rear corner of the frame eliminated this hazard.
A big difference between the Howell and Kirst cylinders for Remington revolvers can be seen at the back end of the cylinder. The Kirst cyls use a stationary plate whereas the Howell uses a "cap". The stationary plate offers 100% support for the cartridge case to back up against . . . the cap on the other hand is rounded to mimic the profile of the c&b cyl. and offers 3/4 support at best. That being the case, I would use nothing more than tier1 loads in a Howell cylinder.
I have not run any tests on a Remington platform revolver but have done fairly extensive tests on Uberti open-top platforms and can say it is a rather robust setup when the platform is built to design. I would recommend an 11° fc be cut / cleaned up if your chamber throats are correct for .452 bullets to ensure pressure consistency as well as revolver longevity.
Mike
Quote from: 45 Dragoon on November 09, 2024, 08:00:17 PMA big difference between the Howell and Kirst cylinders for Remington revolvers can be seen at the back end of the cylinder. The Kirst cyls use a stationary plate whereas the Howell uses a "cap". The stationary plate offers 100% support for the cartridge case to back up against . . . the cap on the other hand is rounded to mimic the profile of the c&b cyl. and offers 3/4 support at best. That being the case, I would use nothing more than tier1 loads in a Howell cylinder.
I have not run any tests on a Remington platform revolver but have done fairly extensive tests on Uberti open-top platforms and can say it is a rather robust setup when the platform is built to design. I would recommend an 11° fc be cut / cleaned up if your chamber throats are correct for .452 bullets to ensure pressure consistency as well as revolver longevity.
Mike
I'm confused what you mean by "stationary plate" vs "cap," do you have any pictures? I always thought the back plate worked the same way.
I'm loath to use the Kirst if I can avoid it just because I would lose a cartridge (also the only original .45 Colt conversion example I have seen was a 6 shot, albeit using balloon head style cases).
On a side note, I wish either Kirst or Howell would make another run of .44 Colt conversions.
Stationary meaning "doesn't revolve with". The Kirst's have a conversion "plate or "ring" with a single firing pin. The Howell has a "cap" that fits on the back of the cylinder ( thus turns with the cyl) with a firing pin for each chamber. Therefore, the "footprint" for the fired case would be the same as for the cap cylinder with the outer edges of the "cap" unsupported. That means no heavy loads. Walt Kirst has told me he will never make a 6 shot cyl for Remingtons because of the angling of the cartridge and thinness of material. The 5 shot Kirst cylinder allows for safe cary of a fully loaded cyl and with the odd number of chambers you have the locking notch between chambers for maximum strength. As I said, I haven't done any testing of the Remington platform yet but my Uberti '60 Armys and Dragoons get a steady diet of 45acp +p's and 45C +p's respectively. This isn't a recommendation though as I have set these revolvers up for testing purposes of the platform . . . not the cylinder. The cylinder is already "known " and I won't divulge that on a forum.
So, staying within tier1 loads, you should be fine with a Howell cylinder.
Mike
Quote from: 45 Dragoon on November 09, 2024, 10:15:37 PMStationary meaning "doesn't revolve with". The Kirst's have a conversion "plate or "ring" with a single firing pin. The Howell has a "cap" that fits on the back of the cylinder ( thus turns with the cyl) with a firing pin for each chamber. Therefore, the "footprint" for the fired case would be the same as for the cap cylinder with the outer edges of the "cap" unsupported. That means no heavy loads. Walt Kirst has told me he will never make a 6 shot cyl for Remingtons because of the angling of the cartridge and thinness of material. The 5 shot Kirst cylinder allows for safe cary of a fully loaded cyl and with the odd number of chambers you have the locking notch between chambers for maximum strength. As I said, I haven't done any testing of the Remington platform yet but my Uberti '60 Armys and Dragoons get a steady diet of 45acp +p's and 45C +p's respectively. This isn't a recommendation though as I have set these revolvers up for testing purposes of the platform . . . not the cylinder. The cylinder is already "known " and I won't divulge that on a forum.
So, staying within tier1 loads, you should be fine with a Howell cylinder.
Mike
Thanks, that makes sense. I should point out though that the Howell does have the safety notch as well, though I don't know why it's only one.
So as I understand it, the Kirst cylinder functions more like a modern revolver and basically just adds a backplate, sort of like a gated conversion without the gate, while the Howell is more like the original (two piece cylinder type) 19th century conversions (although those seem to just have a hole for a modified fixed firing pin hammer vs separate pins, and then just the Navys, though I did see one picture of an experimental Army one from the Springfield Armory that did use separate pins). Is that right?
What do you mean by tier 1?
Is there an issue with the angled chambers? I thought the only "issue" was a patent?
I have no intention of using smokeless loads in these, but that it can take +p is impressive!
Yes, that's how the Kirst functions. I'm not sure which looks more like actual 19th century conversions of Remingtons, as I haven't gone looking. I do know that a lot of gated conversions functioned more like the Kirst with a stationary backing plate, but with the plate permanently fastened to the revolver frame. For non-gated conversions, I wouldn't know. I do know the Kirst style supports the base of the cartridge better, as stated before.
Tier 1 loads would be those intended for normal .45 Colt revolvers. Reloading manuals typically have two sections of .45 Colt loads: a section for normal firearms, and a section with stiffer loads for stronger guns like the Ruger Blackhawk or T/C Contender.
(Like others have stated, I also strongly recommend getting a few more reloading handbooks and reading them before starting any load development. With your interest in black powder, that should definitely include a Lyman Black Powder Handbook and/or Lyman Cast Bullet Handbook. Yes, it's another expense, but personally I'd look on the used market while still trying to get fairly close to current editions. If you go back far enough, the pressure testing wasn't always as thorough, so the older recommendations aren't always as reliable.)
A patent on angled chambers is an "issue" itself, as it means that other parties can't produce them without paying royalties and signing a contract (which the patent holder might be unwilling to sign at all). But probably the issue Walt Kirst was referring to is this: the angled chambers are closer to the outside of the cylinder at the rear (so there's more room between chambers for wider rims at the base of the cartridges). That means that the outside wall of the chamber is very thin because the chamber is so close to the edge of the cylinder. Howell thinks it's still thick enough; Kirst apparently thinks it's thin enough he won't do it.
FYI, one other reason a conversion cylinder might be weaker than expected compared to a cap-and-ball cylinder, is that even with the same diameter bullet (e.g. .451), the conversion cylinder needs to have chambers wide enough for the cartridge case. A .45 Colt cartridge case is wider than the bullet (because the brass fits around the bullet). Since the base of a .45 Colt cartridge is supposed to be .480 diameter, the chamber needs to be at least that wide at the base (.4862 per SAAMI). The wider hole in the cylinder leaves less room for chamber walls, weakening the cylinder. Manufacturers will account for that when deciding what type of steel to use, how hard to make the cylinder, etc....and whether to make a certain type of cylinder at all.
Finally, read carefully! The mention of +p was only with reference to '60 Armys and Dragoons. Just because it works in a different style of gun, doesn't mean it would be safe in the Remington. Mike (45 Dragoon) is a highly rated gunsmith particularly skilled in Colt-style conversions, and knows what he's doing. Until he says you can do it in the Remingtons, I wouldn't. And I at least expect it shouldn't be done in a Howell conversion of the Remington, both because of the angled cylinders and because of the less-supported case head. And 45 Dragoon already recommended only Tier 1 loads in the Howell, i.e. NOT +p.
Quote from: 9245 on November 09, 2024, 11:54:55 PMWhat do you mean by tier 1?
Is there an issue with the angled chambers? I thought the only "issue" was a patent?
I have no intention of using smokeless loads in these, but that it can take +p is impressive!
1. Tier1 are the loads listed for 14,000 psi and under.
2. The issue with angled chambers for Kirst is "angled chambers" and strength compromise. Patent is no longer protected.
3. I never said the Howell will handle any +p ammo!!! All my converted revolvers have Kirst gated conversions in them (except for ROA's which are not gated). KIRST cyls in my '60 Army's and Dragoons are for testing, I don't even own a Howell cylinder. So, make sure you understand that really well!!
Mike
Edit: Thanks Hair Trigger Jim for reiterating that Howell cyl is NOT safe with +p pressures !!! Saw 9245's post this morning and thought Holy Cow, didn't make myself clear enough I reckon!
Quote from: Hair Trigger Jim on November 10, 2024, 06:49:42 AMYes, that's how the Kirst functions. I'm not sure which looks more like actual 19th century conversions of Remingtons, as I haven't gone looking. I do know that a lot of gated conversions functioned more like the Kirst with a stationary backing plate, but with the plate permanently fastened to the revolver frame. For non-gated conversions, I wouldn't know. I do know the Kirst style supports the base of the cartridge better, as stated before.
Tier 1 loads would be those intended for normal .45 Colt revolvers. Reloading manuals typically have two sections of .45 Colt loads: a section for normal firearms, and a section with stiffer loads for stronger guns like the Ruger Blackhawk or T/C Contender.
(Like others have stated, I also strongly recommend getting a few more reloading handbooks and reading them before starting any load development. With your interest in black powder, that should definitely include a Lyman Black Powder Handbook and/or Lyman Cast Bullet Handbook. Yes, it's another expense, but personally I'd look on the used market while still trying to get fairly close to current editions. If you go back far enough, the pressure testing wasn't always as thorough, so the older recommendations aren't always as reliable.)
A patent on angled chambers is an "issue" itself, as it means that other parties can't produce them without paying royalties and signing a contract (which the patent holder might be unwilling to sign at all). But probably the issue Walt Kirst was referring to is this: the angled chambers are closer to the outside of the cylinder at the rear (so there's more room between chambers for wider rims at the base of the cartridges). That means that the outside wall of the chamber is very thin because the chamber is so close to the edge of the cylinder. Howell thinks it's still thick enough; Kirst apparently thinks it's thin enough he won't do it.
FYI, one other reason a conversion cylinder might be weaker than expected compared to a cap-and-ball cylinder, is that even with the same diameter bullet (e.g. .451), the conversion cylinder needs to have chambers wide enough for the cartridge case. A .45 Colt cartridge case is wider than the bullet (because the brass fits around the bullet). Since the base of a .45 Colt cartridge is supposed to be .480 diameter, the chamber needs to be at least that wide at the base (.4862 per SAAMI). The wider hole in the cylinder leaves less room for chamber walls, weakening the cylinder. Manufacturers will account for that when deciding what type of steel to use, how hard to make the cylinder, etc....and whether to make a certain type of cylinder at all.
Finally, read carefully! The mention of +p was only with reference to '60 Armys and Dragoons. Just because it works in a different style of gun, doesn't mean it would be safe in the Remington. Mike (45 Dragoon) is a highly rated gunsmith particularly skilled in Colt-style conversions, and knows what he's doing. Until he says you can do it in the Remingtons, I wouldn't. And I at least expect it shouldn't be done in a Howell conversion of the Remington, both because of the angled cylinders and because of the less-supported case head. And 45 Dragoon already recommended only Tier 1 loads in the Howell, i.e. NOT +p.
Thanks, that clears it up. I suppose I have some books to find.
Quote from: 45 Dragoon on November 10, 2024, 07:07:35 AM1. Tier1 are the loads listed for 14,000 psi and under.
2. The issue with angled chambers for Kirst is "angled chambers" and strength compromise. Patent is no longer protected.
3. I never said the Howell will handle any +p ammo!!! All my converted revolvers have Kirst gated conversions in them (except for ROA's which are not gated). KIRST cyls in my '60 Army's and Dragoons are for testing, I don't even own a Howell cylinder. So, make sure you understand that really well!!
Mike
Edit: Thanks Hair Trigger Jim for reiterating that Howell cyl is NOT safe with +p pressures !!! Saw 9245's post this morning and thought Holy Cow, didn't make myself clear enough I reckon!
It was a little confusing, but then I suppose I was too. I figured out that you were talking about the Kirst ones, I was just saying that I was impressed. :)
Bonus I suppose for those interested. I would hardly call myself an expert as I have only recently begun researching this but it seems there were a few known conversion types on originals, some factory, some gunsmith.
The gateless gate loader (factory style), either a new cylinder (factory conversions) or a cap and ball cylinder that has had the back removed and a new back welded or brazed on (gunsmith). Just a straight gate loading conversion but WITHOUT a full conversion ring, and without an actual gate (if you aimed up your cartridges might fall out), these were typically made so that you could still use a cap and ball cylinder, and many have been found in cases sets with both. Handy if you might not have access to metallic cartridges. I have seen some with crude hinged gunsmith aftermarket gates installed, lousy gate design, but better than nothing.
The gated conversion (both factory and gunsmith), very similar to a modern Kirst or Howell gated conversion, but typically only seen on Navy models, not Armys.
Rimfire conversion (gunsmith). Very similar to the modern Howell gateless cylinders, but with a simple slot cut for a fixed firing pin hammer to reach the cartridge base instead of individual firing pins. Modified hammer.
Gateless centerfire conversions (gunsmith), same as above except with a hole in the center instead.
Experimental centerfire type. I have seen only one picture of this, it was a prototype made by Springfield Armory. Very similar to the Howell gateless cylinders, complete with individual firing pins, but the back of the cylinder "attached" in a bit different way. It was an Army model, not the Navy.
I saw a few other one offs too, like an interesting gateless one that used a two piece cylinder simular to a Merwin and Hulbert, without looking it up again I think it was made by Whitney.
I have seen only one .45 Colt, it was a 6 shot (balloon head cases, so no angled chambers required), and was of the gateless gated type with one of the crude gates apparently added. It looked like a factory conversion (probably .46 Remington) that was then gunsmith altered with a custom .45 Colt cylinder and the gate.
So none of the modern gateless conversion cylinders are 100% correct, but of the two available the Howell is probably the closest to what existed in period (though it would not shock me if a one off gunsmith example exists somewhere that was near identical, in fact it would surprise me if it didn't). As far as the gated conversion cylinders, both the Howell and the Kirst would be near dead on when used in Navys, but again, it would not shock me at all if an army example existed somewhere and I would be more surprised if it didn't, I just have not seen one yet. However (in terms of Armys) I would give the edge to Howell just because it's a 6 shot and the only .45 colt original I have seen was too, albeit of a different type.
In terms of sheer shootability I suppose either would work depending on what you wanted to do, but it appears the Kirst (though Howell makes a 5 shot as well) may have an edge on strength, if you can get over losing 1 shot. If you can't, the Howell is the only way to get full capacity.
9245: IMO why a Kirst cylinder is much better than a Howell has nothing to do with quality/strength. The Howell's are a quality product, BUT 1) With a Kirst you don't have to take the cylinder out after firing, unload, reload, and then reinstall. Seems to be steps not needed, not any faster than a percussion reload, besides IMO the more you disassemble, the more wear and tear you put on your revolver-don't care what those who say it doesn't. 2)The five vs 6 round argument really isn't all it's argued to be. If yer shooting SASS/NCOWS, you load only five rds per revolver. You're not under attack by hostile tribes, nor facing a showdown in Dodge City, and you get used to it.
I believe if a shooter gets used to shooting a revolver with only a five round cylinder they won't think about it after a while (get used to it)! To me, the PITA of disassembling a open-top style Colt revolver into three pieces or even the hassle of taking out a Howell cylinder in a Remington is the 'biggy'! I currently don't have a conversion cylinder for my Remington's, maybe someday, but I don't plan on facing the bad guys as on Main St in Pale Rider either. If some scenario like that occurred, hopefully I'm armed to the teeth with some of my modern day revolvers/pistols, wearing a ballistic vest, and behind strong cover with a AR at my side.
(Edit)I edited this post as I incorrectly posted that my Krist 45 Colt cylinder was a five shot when it is a six shooter. I initially posted my 3rd Model Colt Dragoon had a Krist five shot cylinder but was thinking along the lines of something else. Didn't proof read as I should have as the Mrs. was advising we had to leave for church and I posted it as is. Not a smart way of posting!!!!
Quote from: Crow Choker on November 10, 2024, 09:24:55 AM9245: IMO why a Kirst cylinder is much better than a Howell has nothing to do with quality/strength. The Howell's are a quality product, BUT 1) With a Kirst you don't have to take the cylinder out after firing, unload, reload, and then reinstall. Seems to be steps not needed, not any faster than a percussion reload, besides IMO the more you disassemble, the more wear and tear you put on your revolver-don't care what those who say it doesn't. 2)The five vs 6 round argument really isn't all it's argued to be. If yer shooting SASS/NCOWS, you load only five rds per revolver. You're not under attack by hostile tribes, nor facing a showdown in Dodge City, and you get used to it.
Before I bought a 3rd Model Dragoon with a 45 Colt five shot Kirst cylinder I bemoaned the lose of one round. Anymore I don't think anything about it. To me, the PITA of disassembling a open-top style Colt revolver into three pieces or even the hassle of taking out a Howell cylinder in a Remington is the 'biggy'! I currently don't have a conversion cylinder for my Remington's, maybe someday, but I don't plan on facing the bad guys as on Main St in Pale Rider either. If some scenario like that occurred, hopefully I'm armed to the teeth with some of my modern day revolvers/pistols, wearing a ballistic vest, and behind strong cover with a AR at my side.
Am I missing something obvious here? Don't the gateless Kirst and Howells function the exact same way? Don't they both have to be removed to reload?
Both Kirst and Howell have a gated version, if that's what you mean.
I think for me the whole 6 vs. 5 shot thing is a mental block, I feel like I'm losing something. Also in my mind a revolver is "supposed" to have 6. This is all a me issue though, just the way I'm wired. Now if I GAINED something by going to 5... that's a different story.
You are right about cap and ball vs gate loading reloading though, it's a break even, that's one of the reasons people still used cap and balls well in to the cartridge era, they did not really gain much by switching, at least not when the alternative is a gate loader. The only real advantage was more weather proof ammo and as time went on paper cartridges becoming scarce. For me, in 2024, I just like the conversion ascetic and convenience.
As far as practical uses I see only one, hunting, the extra shot could come in handy, potentially (I doubt it, but maybe). In cap and ball configuration I could add usefulness in ammo shortages and panics (the original reason I got my cap and balls, in the last great panic I got frustrated with my inability to get to the range for fear of wasting precious irreplaceable ammo and foresaw the possibility of one day having such a situation become long term, but obviously that has zero to do with cartridge conversions).
Ok, before any more "confusion" happens, a Dragoon is a 6 shot shooter whether cap gun or converted. The '60 Army is a 6 shot cap gun but a 5 shot conversion in 45C or 45acp. Maybe Mr. Crow Choker is "mis-remembering". The Kirst cyls have a "hammer down safety" position between the chambers except for the ROA cyls. The Howell cylinders for ROA's don't come with the safety notch but one can be ground in (since it uses the "cyl cap" setup). Both manufacturers ROA cyls are 6 shot cyls as well.
I have never talked with Mr. Howell but I do like his product for the Remington platform, I'm just much more familiar with Mr. Kirst's cyls and have talked with him extensively about them. I'm not affiliated with the Kirst business in any way and their instructions say Not For +p Ammo just to make that clear!
The reason I use Kirst cyls for testing the Open Top platform is because -1. I know the parameters of them so I can stay safe and 2. You can't stress the O.T. platform with bp or any of the replacement powders. The loading tables give you a better indication of pressures involved, likewise "trusted loads" from Brian Pearce (and others) can help as well.
Mike
;) Allow me to also address this "Mental Block" and "Revolvers are suppose to have 6" thing. We're talking cartridge revolvers here. Until the advent of the modern Double Action and Transfer Bar single action, NO cartridge revolvers were carried with 6 rounds in the cylinder. PERIOD. There has ALWAYS been an empty chamber under the hammer of single action cartridge guns.
If you wish to stay all hell bent on authenticity, forget "Pale Rider" and gun fights in the midst of High Street. That is strictly Hollyweird. In the age of percussion guns, nobody attempted to reload in the middle of the of a fight. They grabbed another fully loaded gun. Percussion guns carried 6 up with the hammer down on the safety pin. Single actions?? That wern't happening. Bad guys reloaded the same old way, grabbing a previously loaded gun with the hammer down on an empty chamber.
If you ponder for just a moment though, you will realize you DO actually gain something going to 5. You eliminate the happenstance of shooting yourself in the foot, the thigh or the calf by doing something stupid. Kirst gated conversions have a recess between chambers to capture the firing pin and prevent the cylinder from turning. Howell Gated conversions operate quite similar. Locking the cylinder in the middle.
The Howell, R & D (Howell) and Kirst two piece cylinders DO have to be removed to reload. Whether you use them in a Replicant Remington or Colt Pattern gun, the cylinder has to come out to reload. This method is slow and cumbersome. Reloading with a gated conversion is also slow and cumbersome. My personal CAS Match guns are Cap Guns that I reload on a cylinder loading stand (gun apart), or Kirst Konverter conversions I reload in the common SAA fashion. Neither is "FAST." In an actual emergency situation, nobody reloads in the middle of a fight. You either get it done with what is in the gun or you die. It Is Just That Simple. Get over yourself.
Plus One and Like buttons to Coffin and Goon
My good 9245
Firstly, there is ONLY ONE SAAMI spec for .45 colt.
For the 45 Colt, it is 14,000cup and 14,000psi
Found here, a transcribed version of the now not accessible saami page.
https://www.theballisticassistant.com/saami-pistol-cartridge-catalog/
There is so much confusion involved, such as what units were used, LUP ( lead unit of pressure)
CUP ( copper unit if pressure) or PSI .
Then the different "load maximum". SAAMI has only the one. Other modernisch guns such as
The .45 colt Ruger revolver, .45 colt Marlin rifle, etc can handle much higher pressures and thus
Get their own loading data.
This is why it pays to get SEVERAL really good loading manuals. Not those little pamphlets on the the pegboard at the local sports store.
I recommend the latest books, but I have
2021 Modern Reloading Manual 2nd Edition - LEE PRECISION
Lyman 51st Reloading Handbook
An older Speer Reloading Manual
You should also get some of the ones listed here,
https://www.midwayusa.com/reloading-manuals/br?cid=19845&srsltid=AfmBOoqHAP28nDI4L5wJnxIREUCI2kJ3q4z2ObDqJtxvuqmm4nX14sY5 (https://www.midwayusa.com/reloading-manuals/br?cid=19845&srsltid=AfmBOoqHAP28nDI4L5wJnxIREUCI2kJ3q4z2ObDqJtxvuqmm4nX14sY5)
such as the ABC's of Relaoding and the
Lyman Black Powder Handbook and Loading Manual: All New 2nd Edition Reloading Manual
I prefer these more independant loading references, traditionally they have had their own
Labs and writers thta test stuff in the real world. powder companies books, are far more
Limited and I fear that in the currently times of cutbacks and layoffs, the big corporations
Just dont care any more. they have their lucrative military contracts and dont care about
Joe Citizen Reloader.
I also dont trust online books much, or strange offering by amazon... i ordered out half a dozen promising
Books on welding and brazing and jewelry making from amazon, and they all turned out to be
" The Childrens Big Book of" fill-in-the -blank. I actually believe that they were cobbled together
Using Artificial Intelligence, since i could not find ANY info on the authors , etc.
At least amazon accepted the return and i got my money back. Then my review got several replies
Such as "thanks for the warning!"
The quality good books may be pricy but a small price to pay to gain knowledge, understanding, and
Avoid blowing up your gun and the hospital bills and permanent disabilities.
SOOOOOOOO
Our illustrious forum members have described the differences and issues betwtixt and between the Howell and Kirst converters quite well!
In order to help with understanding here are a few pictures linked shamelessely from the web
Historically, when cartridge conversions came out there were four "main" styles:
1) 2 piece cylinder , cylinder and backplate, with individual firing pins on backplate.
These came as 5 round and 6 round as explained above and as seen in the movie
"Pale Rider" . This allows the user to easily shoot cartridges with the conversion cylinder
Or loose ball and powder via the percussion cylinder.
5 round 2 piece:
(https://howellarms.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/StainlessCylinder.jpeg)
6 round 2 piece:
(https://imageshack.com/i/pnprcb2qj)
2) thin plate conversions like this remington, which was a "permanent change" due to the long firing pin
And the plate permanently attached to the frame and a channel cut in the frame for cartridge loading
Like this kirst
(https://www.kirstkonverter.com/firearms/type_2_main.jpg)
More fotos on the kirst website here
https://www.kirstkonverter.com/remington-thin-plate.html (https://www.kirstkonverter.com/remington-thin-plate.html)
3) thick plate two piece conversion cylinder. This one also allows the user to easily shoot cartridges with the conversion cylinder Or loose ball and powder via the percussion cylinder. This thick plate
Has a fixed firing pin on the backplate which is a loose friction fit to the frame.
(https://kirstkonverter.com/1-21-21/pale-rider-equalizer-1.jpg)
4) thick plate gated conversion. These need a channel machined into the frame, and come with a gate
These are from kirst
(https://kirstkonverter.com/1-21-21/equalizer-gated-konverter.jpg)
Here is another view with the ejector rod kit
(https://kirstkonverter.com/1-21-21/equalizer-and-ejector-1.jpg)
5) gateless gated conversion these require the channel to be cut in the frame but come without an actual gate. the theory is that when the cylinder is at rest the cartridges do not line
Up with the gate channel and thus are not supposed to fall out. Sometimes the theory doesnt work so well
This thin plate conversion from kirst has no gate, just a port cut for the cartridge
(https://forums.sassnet.com/uploads/monthly_2017_11/3.jpg.61216000731a45ca4bdc81fcc67509a8.jpg)
The colts were also done both thin plate and thick plate in similar manners.
Hope these visuals help
you have a lot of reading to do before you start spending money on hardware.
YHS
PROF MARVEL
Well thanks Perfesser !!! Very informative post!! The saami ballistic copy with the pressures listed is interesting as well!! The one Brian Pearce load I've been using in my testing is what he calls 45C +p. The loads he developed for multiple bullet weights top out at 23,000 psi (same as 45acp +p) and is published in Handloader Magazine (April 2022 no.337).
The conversion cylinders we have available today are all really nice and the reproductions we have to put them in are a much better platform than the originals (material wise) and that is what allows the testing of the DESIGN and performance as if it were a modern design. The results are quite amazing!!
Mike
Edit - To be clear, the 45C testing is done on the Dragoon platform and the 45acp testing is done on the '60 Army platform. All the "testbeds" were manufactured in the last 12 yrs and are Uberti products.
I tried to answer a question on Percussion Guns in the other thread but it was locked before I got my comment posted. So Here Goes:
Percussion Guns haven't really gone away. There are more guns available than ever and many more players of Cap Guns. There is the ongoing problem of Cap Gunners reverting to Suppositories as we become more "seasoned" and running Cap Guns becomes a real chore. Suppositories are in fact much more convenient, easier to load and at a certain point, become more funner. Were I suggesting (I am) I would suggest you contact "Bullets by Scarlet" and source up a case of APP 3F. A case will last you a goodly long time and eliminate some Black Powder shooting hassle's, like "Lubes." Pay on-going attention to the common purveyors of components and when Caps become available, buy in bulk.
I will also reiterate, when it comes to Percussion Cylinders or two-piece conversion cylinders, NEVER, EVER, carry them LOADED in a pouch. If dropped, they become live grenades. Also, in the games we play, carrying a loaded cylinder is strictly VERBOTEN.
Quote from: 45 Dragoon on November 10, 2024, 11:38:12 AMOk, before any more "confusion" happens, a Dragoon is a 6 shot shooter whether cap gun or converted. The '60 Army is a 6 shot cap gun but a 5 shot conversion in 45C or 45acp. Maybe Mr. Crow Choker is "mis-remembering". The Kirst cyls have a "hammer down safety" position between the chambers except for the ROA cyls. The Howell cylinders for ROA's don't come with the safety notch but one can be ground in (since it uses the "cyl cap" setup). Both manufacturers ROA cyls are 6 shot cyls as well.
Mike
Yes Mike, I was "mis-remembering", more truthfully I was typing and thinking from two different planets. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. My 3rd Model Colt Dragoon has a '6-shot' cylinder actually chambered for the 45 Casull cartridge to be used with black powder. All I shoot out of it though are black powdered fueled 45 Colt cast round flat nose bullets. I bought the Dragoon from another forum member who had it 'smithed' and Kirst cylinder installed by forum member Hoof Hearted (Gary Barnes). Great shooter, has right side milled for loading and ejection. No ejector though, must use a fancy rod to poke cases out.
I believe I was thinking of the Colt Model 1860 Kirst cylinder which is a 5 shot affair available I believe with two styles of cylinders. One ya have to disassemble the revolver (as with a Howell) or one with an available loading gate where it is necessary to mill the right recoil shield of the frame. I was in a hurry to finish the post as I started it while the Mrs. was getting ready for church. I was all set to go but started the post and was spending more time than I should. The Mrs. was advising we needed to leave 'now' so I hurriedly finished, didn't proof read as I should have, and hit the post button. My apologies for the confusion and my temporary 'brainlessness'! Good grief Charlie Brown!! ;D
Quote from: Coffinmaker on November 10, 2024, 12:24:07 PMThe Howell, R & D (Howell) and Kirst two piece cylinders DO have to be removed to reload. Whether you use them in a Replicant Remington or Colt Pattern gun, the cylinder has to come out to reload. This method is slow and cumbersome. Reloading with a gated conversion is also slow and cumbersome.
Not 100% Coffinmaker. Krist does offer their conversion's for the 1851 and 1860 Colts with a gated cylinder with also an ejector for more $$. Not sure if you have to buy the hinged gate, but it is available. You can mill the right side of the recoil shield to load and unload from what I see on their website. My 3rd Dragoon Kirst cylinder has the right recoil shield milled but no gate. The cylinder while firing index's in such a way that none of the bases of the brass are lined up in such a way to allow any unintentional ejection. As I advised it is a six bored cylinder, I assume the 5 shot versions also have the same timing. I don't have to disassemble my 3rd Model Dragoon to reload.
Reloading with a gated conversion isn't slow and cumbersome if you have a ejector rod attached to the barrel as in any other modern single action revolver or Peacemaker style 1873 single action revolver. I will admit as in the case of my 3rd Dragoon Colt that still has the percussion loading lever attached it is a 'tis' slower than having an ejector rod and having to use a slender rod to poke out the brass, but it's light years ahead of having to disassemble the Dragoon into its three main units. I wouldn't have the revolver if that was needed. I also have the percussion cylinder to convert it back to cap and ball original use.
The Remington Krist cylinders from what I see do need to have the cylinder taken out. IMO reloading percussion revolvers on a stand takes the fun out of loading with a lever and necessitates disassembling the revolver. OK I suppose for formal range shooting where you have a bench to lay everything on but even then I'd bypass that style, enjoy working that ol lever and/or not having to disassemble a Colt type into its three main units or the hassle of taking out a cylinder on a ROA or Remington type. I'll bypass on any conversion cylinder also for my Ruger Old Army. To much a PITA to go through all of the steps of taking cylinder off, breaking the cylinder, brass eject, load and reassemble. A friend had a Krist cylinder for his ROA and got rid of it due to all of the steps needed to load and reload.
Good information Professor, high fives to the rest of ya also with exception of a few minor points I mentioned. To '9245' and any one else wondering, YEPPER, get, borrow, check out copies of as many current (and older) reloading manuals/books as possible, ask questions of experienced shooters/reloaders The Lyman black powder ones are great as are Lyman's general smokeless ones. RCBS, Hornady, and Speer are all great also, use them all of the time. As far as info posted on this forum, others, and anywhere online, when I see something interesting, I always refer to the information posted with information I can compare it with in known and reliable reloading manuals. The popular shooting/reloading magazines are great for alot of information with great authors, but I still cross reference. Also FWIW shoot and reload for what the firearm was designed for, not going off the reservation in shooting more modern styles of ammo even if it fits the diameter of the original bore and fits in the cylinder and/or try to make your hand gun a hand held howitzer. JMO, mess around a bit and you may pay the price of stepping off the reservation. Take care all. CC
Quote from: Crow Choker on November 11, 2024, 10:09:20 PM...The Remington Krist cylinders from what I see do need to have the cylinder taken out...
Howdy CC, Kirst makes them both ways. As the Perfesser showed above, Kirst does make a gated Konverter for the Remington, plus a cool new design spring loaded ejector that attaches to the cylinder pin. They also have a stainless version of it which I am thinking about since I just won a pair of stainless '58's. :)
Yer right on that Abilene. Guess I didn't do my homework thoroughly. Was intent on my argument that having to remove the cylinder of what formally was a percussion revolver to reload metallic cartridges defeated the purpose of going the conversion cylinder route for faster reloading, esp with Colts. I enjoy reloading a percussion revolver as designed (and can do it pretty fast if I want to) and enjoy shooting all three of my Uberti factory conversions plus the Krist 3rd Dragoon percussion conversion without having to remove the cylinder every time to load/unload.
Having to break down a Colt and/or removing a cylinder on Rem's and ROA's, then separating the cylinder and backing plate is sort of like IMO (and proven facts) trading off a well designed good mileage gasoline powered vehicle for an electric vehicle to save on paying for overly priced fuel. Then you have the hassle of long charges at home (not cheap) and (where its not just plugged into any old 110V outlet), battery weardown on long trips, over heated batteries in hot weather, diminished battery performance in cold weather, and few and far between charging stations where ya sit for long periods of time (some with limited time allowed) making for extended travel time. What have you gained?
Quote from: Crow Choker on November 12, 2024, 07:17:11 AMYer right on that Abilene. Guess I didn't do my homework thoroughly. Was intent on my argument that having to remove the cylinder of what formally was a percussion revolver to reload metallic cartridges defeated the purpose of going the conversion cylinder route for faster reloading, esp with Colts. I enjoy reloading a percussion revolver as designed (and can do it pretty fast if I want to) and enjoy shooting all three of my Uberti factory conversions plus the Krist 3rd Dragoon percussion conversion without having to remove the cylinder every time to load/unload.
Having to break down a Colt and/or removing a cylinder on Rem's and ROA's, then separating the cylinder and backing plate is sort of like IMO (and proven facts) trading off a well designed good mileage gasoline powered vehicle for an electric vehicle to save on paying for overly priced fuel. Then you have the hassle of long charges at home (not cheap) and (where its not just plugged into any old 110V outlet), battery weardown on long trips, over heated batteries in hot weather, diminished battery performance in cold weather, and few and far between charging stations where ya sit for long periods of time (some with limited time allowed) making for extended travel time. What have you gained?
The idea I had was to use the end of the loading lever as an ejector rod. Basically push out the cylinder, hold the revolver and the base plate in the off hand, eject the cartridges with the strong hand, transfer the revolver to the support side armpit, shift the cylinder to the support hand, load from the belt, put the base plate back on, shift the cylinder back to the support hand, retrieve the revolver with the strong hand, and then reinstall the cylinder. A dance to be sure, but with practice I would imagine that it would work nearly as well as a gate loader. I'm just trying to think how they would have used two piece cylinder style conversions in period and that was all that made sense.
9245,
You're not paying attention "again." My statement you so aptly quoted specifically applied to the TWO PIECE conversion cylinders. I addressed gated conversions SEPARATELY.
Comparing reloading SAA pattern guns, and Remington pattern guns to modern swing out cylinders with speed loaders or moon clips or self loaders, a reload of the 19th century pattern guns IS slow and cumbersome especially if someone is shooting at you. I don't much care if there is an attached ejector or not, Reloading an SAA pattern gun is slow and cumbersome. By the way, I'm really good at it. Been doing it for around 50 years. Wanna Race??
>:( Aw Krap :(
My apologies 9245. Twaz my own reading caused me to take an un-kind whack atcha for not paying attention. The guilty party in this instance was Crow Choker. And myself. I shouldn't be commenting when my Caffeine LOW LIGHT is glowing brightly.
Howsomeever. There is no "fast" way to reload a two-piece cylinder. I've been using conversions with two-piece cylinders as Main Match guns for the last 7-9 years and they work quite well for Fun and Games. Not so much if it's for survival. If the adrenaline is running high and you're scared for your life you ARE going to drop something. For playing our game, taking the gun apart is a great idea, as I wipe down the Cylinder Face, Barrel Breach and Arbor so the gun runs as well on stage 6 or 10 as it does on the first stage. Since I shoot Gunfighter, I cannot afford ANY of my guns to have "hiccups."
Hopefully this makes sense. Oh, I forgot to mention. I have just ordered TWO brandy knew Kirst Konverters for the guns with R & D two-piece in them. Taking the guns apart every stage, punching the empties out (some don't "fall" out) and reloading has become a Royal PITA. Stay Tuna.
Quote from: Coffinmaker on November 12, 2024, 09:45:06 AM>:( Aw Krap :(
My apologies 9245. Twaz my own reading caused me to take an un-kind whack atcha for not paying attention. The guilty party in this instance was Crow Choker. And myself. I shouldn't be commenting when my Caffeine LOW LIGHT is glowing brightly.
Huh!?!? I'm just a young lad fresh of of the farm, innocent as the wind driven snow ;D
I'll admit my posts haven't been the best I've ever written on the Forum. First one hurried to make it to church on time, the 2nd one I wrote over the course of two hours during commercials of two of the only 4-5 show the Mrs. and I turn on the Boob-Tube for. BUT, pretty much what I posted is learning, experience, and observations since buying my first revolver in April of 1970 (Ruger SS6 .22) and since 1972 when buying my first cap and ball revolver (Euroarms 1851 .44). Alot added since which includes around 13-14 cappers and four conversions.
I'll stand by what I've posted about it being a PITA to dissemble what was a percussion revolver after turning it into a cartridge one or even doing so if it is still percussion. IMO it is easier to reload a percussion revolver with loose powder, ball, and cap than have to dismantle a revolver no matter what brand or model it is to get rid of fired brass and reload. Even if having a table, bench, flat rock, whatever to reload, I wouldn't shoot a converted or even an unaltered percussion revolver by breaking it down to do so. Stickin to my story, don't care how many empty brass are tossed at me.
;D
Quote from: 9245 on November 12, 2024, 08:15:29 AMThe idea I had was to use the end of the loading lever as an ejector rod. Basically push out the cylinder, hold the revolver and the base plate in the off hand, eject the cartridges with the strong hand, transfer the revolver to the support side armpit, shift the cylinder to the support hand, load from the belt, put the base plate back on, shift the cylinder back to the support hand, retrieve the revolver with the strong hand, and then reinstall the cylinder. A dance to be sure, but with practice I would imagine that it would work nearly as well as a gate loader. I'm just trying to think how they would have used two piece cylinder style conversions in period and that was all that made sense.
Lots of luck 9245 with that procedure. May sound easy, simple, and efficient thinking mentally about doing so, but that won't be the way it goes everytime. You'll soon depart from it after seeing how difficult it is. Sort of like trying to thread a needle IMO holding on to a couple of watermelons. Best way to do it if you go the conversion route on your Remington is to get it, install it properly, and then by trial and error find the most efficient way to reload.
On another forum posters were asking how did shooters reload back in the day in gun fights, riding a horse, running from hostiles/bandits. The knowledgeable posters just advised that's why in the 1800's they carried 2-3 guns on person, maybe 2 attached to the saddle-maybe an extra cylinder or two, but try changing cylinders running or on a horse at full lope. Something's gonna drop.
My advice is to go with a gated cylinder conversion, if you can't mill the right recoil shield properly for loading/unloading, search out someone to do so and properly install and time the revolver. You'll be alot happier I believe going that route no matter what any extra cost may be. Loading channels/gates forever. Keep asking questions, wish a forum like this was around back in the 70's when I started the percussion game. Those were the days!!!!! CC
A like for Crow Choker.
ABSOLUTELY a LIKE for Crow Choker's latest.
It be Spot On.
Quote from: Crow Choker on November 12, 2024, 12:49:01 PMHuh!?!? I'm just a young lad fresh of of the farm, innocent as the wind driven snow ;D
I'll admit my posts haven't been the best I've ever written on the Forum. First one hurried to make it to church on time, the 2nd one I wrote over the course of two hours during commercials of two of the only 4-5 show the Mrs. and I turn on the Boob-Tube for. BUT, pretty much what I posted is learning, experience, and observations since buying my first revolver in April of 1970 (Ruger SS6 .22) and since 1972 when buying my first cap and ball revolver (Euroarms 1851 .44). Alot added since which includes around 13-14 cappers and four conversions.
I'll stand by what I've posted about it being a PITA to dissemble what was a percussion revolver after turning it into a cartridge one or even doing so if it is still percussion. IMO it is easier to reload a percussion revolver with loose powder, ball, and cap than have to dismantle a revolver no matter what brand or model it is to get rid of fired brass and reload. Even if having a table, bench, flat rock, whatever to reload, I wouldn't shoot a converted or even an unaltered percussion revolver by breaking it down to do so. Stickin to my story, don't care how many empty brass are tossed at me.
;D
Lots of luck 9245 with that procedure. May sound easy, simple, and efficient thinking mentally about doing so, but that won't be the way it goes everytime. You'll soon depart from it after seeing how difficult it is. Sort of like trying to thread a needle IMO holding on to a couple of watermelons. Best way to do it if you go the conversion route on your Remington is to get it, install it properly, and then by trial and error find the most efficient way to reload.
On another forum posters were asking how did shooters reload back in the day in gun fights, riding a horse, running from hostiles/bandits. The knowledgeable posters just advised that's why in the 1800's they carried 2-3 guns on person, maybe 2 attached to the saddle-maybe an extra cylinder or two, but try changing cylinders running or on a horse at full lope. Something's gonna drop.
My advice is to go with a gated cylinder conversion, if you can't mill the right recoil shield properly for loading/unloading, search out someone to do so and properly install and time the revolver. You'll be alot happier I believe going that route no matter what any extra cost may be. Loading channels/gates forever. Keep asking questions, wish a forum like this was around back in the 70's when I started the percussion game. Those were the days!!!!! CC
I was just brain storming how it might have been done. I foresee no realistic scenario where I would actually have to do that.
I will throw my change in here as i have both conversion cylinders on Remingtons. I prefer the Howell. It is two piece. I eject as 9245 described, drop the cylinder backplate quickly goes to vest pocket and the loading lever pokes out spent cartridges. Load 5 or 6 more from other vest pocket, put on back plate and back in pistol. I am faster with that than the gated conversion with spring ejector. It is my preferred reloading method and do it at GAF each year, as it is my go to pistol. As to loads, i use 30 grains of ffg goex, fibre wad and a 250 grain bullet. It has knock down power, makes a great boom and lots of smoke. Between stages a quick wile down and relube of pin keeps it rolling all day. I have a pietta peacemaker in 45 colt as well but the howell conversion gets used 90% of the time. I do not shoot SASS but do Gaf and NCOWS regularly. Am an NCOWS senetor and out Posse hosted NCOWS nationals last 4 years. Letting another posse have the fun this year.