1858 Pietta Remington

[R. Flux]

Gentlemen, collectively you have an incredible about of experience. I have a new Pietta 5 ½" Stainless 1858 Remington Revolver (Proof "CD" = 2009) and want to develop reasonably accurate, effective and fun loads, both roundball & conicals.  Fit and finish are pretty good with no play, but the internals could benefit from a light stoning.  I solicit your advice.

Let's start with roundball and boolit selection.  I have seen it said for 1858 Pietta new production, .440 land and .446 for both groove and chamber diameters, but not authoritatively.
My actual measurements obtained by miked ball gauge:
Barrel Land- .4368" averaged from 6 measurements; range .4365" to .4370"
Barrel Groove- not measured easily from a slug (and the barrel could be smoother)
Barrel throat- entrance about .4653"; about midway .4453" (rough finish)
Barrel throat length to full land- about .17"
Cylinder Chamber   1-   .447"
         2-   .447"         
         3-   .447"         
         4-   .447"                     
         5-   .447"         
         6-   .447" (good news I think)
Ram Clearance (ram to cylinder face) - .47" (maximum conical length loaded with ram on pistol.)

What is the optimal roundball size?  .448"?  .449"?

Whose roundball molds do you like best? Consider accuracy, ease of use, price, production rates?

What is an optimal roundball alloy? (pure lead, Pb+2%Sn, WW, WW+2%Sn, range scrap, 50% PB & 50% WW, harder or softer?)

I have made and shot cast for many years in 6.5mm Sw Mausers, .30 cal, wonder nines (mostly using LBT Blue lube), flinters .50 BP English style rifle and .75 Brown Bess, but I am new to cap & ball.  I read the Stickys and most of the forums, but would like to hone in on a few basic points.

Original Remington conical loads where around 216 gr. and 30 gr. BP.  A 200 to 230 gr. conical seems to be a good start.
What boolit style and molds are most successful? (truncated cone, RNFP, EPP-UG, R.E.A.L., LBT, others)
If a Flat Point, meplat size?  62% - 65% or so?

What about bevel base? (in wonder nines they have worked well for me). If you shave off a few thousandths of lead off a roundball into the Cylinder you sort of get a very short beveled base round nose slug.

What is an optimal cast alloy? (pure lead, Pb+2%Sn, WW, ½ & ½, WW+2%Sn, range scrap, how hard (somewhere I have a little foundry metal and linotype).  Is it different for roundball versus conical?  In cast rifle and pistol I have favored water quenched WW+2%Sn.

What should conicals be sized? (.001 to .002 over land diameter?) or to snuggly fit the Cylinder?
Or is used as cast optimal? (Obviously less work)

Should conicals be pan lubed or lubed in a lubersizer?
If sized how many lube grooves filled? (SPG, felix, Pearl II, LBT Blue or what?)

Is LBT Blue more appropriate to a smokeless or BP replacement?

Assuming well cast rounds, at pistol ranges I don't think I need to weigh and group each cast, but what else should I watch out for after a visual inspection?

Should I ask if hollowpoints make a difference in accuracy of low velocity BP revolver?  Using hollowpoints to change sectional density can make a big difference in long range cast rifle shooting.

If you have multiple cylinders do you have differing loads for each?

Another time maybe we can chat about what else could be done to improve accuracy?  (lap cylinders? barrel?, throat, etc.)  Or maybe types of BP, BP substitutes, optimal loads and wad/card/grease & lube particularities.

Finding the balance between complexity and fun can be challenging.  All thoughts welcome.

Regards,
R. Flux

[Flint]

The bore diameter is hard to measure as there are 7 grooves, and you can't measure across an odd number.

Piettas seem to be about 451.

The bullet recommended is 451, and I prefer Speer to Hornady, as the Speer are rounder.  The Pietta will also work well with 454 balls.

I found a good bullet as a conical to be the Speer 200 gr SWC made for the 45 ACP, though the ram will reshape the nose a bit.  This is a swaged lead bullet, not a hard alloy.

Round balls and bullets for cap & ball should always be pure lead, any harder alloy can be hard to load and damage link or bend the loading lever.

Lube with SPG or equivalent blacl powder lube, never smokeless lube with black powder.

Generally, additional cylinders by the same maker will use the same loads.

I found, upon fitting spare cylinders for a friend, that the new Pietta cylinders have a full width locking notch, and require a full width bolt head.  Older (only by a few years) Pietta revolvers had a narrower slot and the bolt was tapered to fit, apparently they needed to tune the guns to align the chambers to the bore.  The newer CNC made guns must have tight enough tolerances to allow the wider cylinder notch.  The older notches were .136 wide, the new notches are .156 wide.  The wider notches will work in an older Pietta, but have sideplay, the older cylinders will not lock up in a nrewe revolver without recutting the notches with a Woodruff Key cutter. (5/32 X 3/4)

[44caliberkid]

Just use .451 round balls, pure lead if you can.  Lyman makes a nice 2 ball mould.  Lee's are cheap but they work.   You don't have to weigh charges, just load by volume.  Use a powder flask with a 25 grain spout.   You'll find that 1858's are pretty accurate.  I have Uberti's, Pietta's, ASM's, and Euroarms and all of them shoot well.
  Just looking at your first post, you've put a lot of thought into a pretty simple operation.   It's not rocket science, just black powder.

[madcratebuilder]

I would use .454 rb with those .447 chambers.  They should cut a nice ring and have good contact area with the rifling.
Pure lead only for c&b rb, you risk damage to the loading lever if you use hard lead.
Reaming the chambers to groove diameter well improve accuracy. 
Spec for the seven groove Pietta barrel is .440/.446, 1-32.  Slugging the barrel may show a different spec.

[Wolfgang]

I started on my first Pietta useing the .451 balls that came in a "Starter Kit" from Cabellas and leaded eh barrel badly.   I went to .457 balls  ( which shave a real nice ring of lead ) and have had no more trouble.  My normal load is 30gr as thrown by a flask spout.  I have also used 40 gr. which is STOUT  .   Initially I used "Farmer John" brand lube over the balls  ( ie.  Hog Lard ).  Godo but gets messy . . .  I now use a 50/50 mix of olive oil & toilet bowl wax.   Hollow based connical bullets shoot GREAT but are pricy.  

Good shootin' . . . . .  

A few '58 Remingtons at :
www.drburkholter.com/cf6.html

[Professor Marvel]

Greetings my Dear Rflux -

How gratifying it is to find another netizen whose verbosity matches if not exceeds my own! I applaud your detailed and well-thought missive.

First I would like to point out that I am one of those cheap frugal individuals who cannot bear to part with a single copper if it can be helped, and who keeps virtually anything that appears to be of value for use in future repairs or construction. I have been known to clean house with a FrankenHoover of my own construction and am in fact typing now on an overly aged laptop which was repaired from parts scrounged from 3 others. With that in mind, I will gladly share my meager experiences.

I cast .454 RB and cylindericals of pure lead using the Lee molds:
Lee RB .454  90442
Lee Rem Concial 44 Cal. Rem. 450-200-IR
seen here http://www.leeprecision.com/html/catalog/blackpow.html

the so-called .450 has a smaller base for ease of seating in the cylinder mouth.
I have also shot 230 gr .45 ACP bullet 452-228-1R but the length can be an issue.

Some folks have used the 452-160-RF to good effect, it is a lighter conical,  and saves 1/3 of your lead.

Since the Remy was originally designed around a RB, a lighter cylinderical is generally easier on the frame, and while a bevel base bullet offers ease in loading, it does not seem to make a great deal of difference in accuracy. Out to 75 yards or so, RB is entirely accurate and obdurates nicely on impact if that is desired.

I shoot "as cast" with good results. There is no real point in swaging since your cylinder mouth will do that for you. It appears your cylinder mouths are wonderfully uniform and do not require reaming; if there are tool marks a light but uniform polishing could be nice but should not be overdone and may in fact have little practical effect.

Pure lead is best, so that it can swage easily. You don't want to be bending or breaking your loading lever, and hard alloys can be hard on these C&B revolver designs.  If you use any alloy you want an alloy that is soft enough to swage easily. I save WW and harder for cartridges, but scrounged and sorted range lead (did I mention I was cheap?) can be pretty soft. 

I have some older iron molds, obtained cheaply on evil-bay, but in general I use Lee molds and am quite happy with the results. If you treat them well, they will last quite a while. Some folks really like the 6-gang production molds, but I get by nicely with 2 cavity molds.

With your background in casting and ML, you should have few issues. (I too, am a rondy refugee). The only difference in casting and loading is the fact that you are not using a patch. Many folks prefer to use RB, over conicals as they load easily, the lead ball will be swaged to provide a nice bearing surface, and they only need to be lubed when loaded.

Some individuals prefer a waxed or greased wad, usually under the ball, but many of us do well with a dab of stiff non-petroleum grease over the ball. I mention non-petroleum products as it has been seen that petroleum based lubes react poorly with BP, producing a particularly nasty and hard fouling. I am unfamiliar with LBT lube, and usually use one of the several Crisco, or beeswax & oil DIY mixes (did I mention I was cheap frugal ?)

Regarding casting quality control, unless you are intending to compete in 50 yard bulleye events, merely eyeballing your cast projectile should suffice. I have not found the use of hollowpoints in pure cast lead C&B to be at all efficacious - in A C&B revolver, the pure lead RB or flat point cylinderical has proven to "do the job" in the hands of the gentlemen who used them daily "back in the day". Elsewhere I have seen posts from individuals who have successfully used the Remmies for hunting small deer or boar, often sticking with RB.

If you should ever choose to add a cartridge conversion cylinder, that is when you might wish to look into Conicals more deeply, with a 200 gr to 250 gr flat point lead bullet with large and deep lube grooves providing a more harmonious outcome. Be warned, however that the Remmy frame is really not an optimal design for heavier bullets and charges that the model P replicas can tolerate - exceeding the typical/optimal 30-35 gr (by volume) BP + roundball could lead to excessive wear.

I hope this helps
yhs
Prof Marvel

[Montana Slim]

A friend of mine has won/placed a number of times shooting pistol matches at Friendship. He uses a standard Pietta NM 1863 Army model (Pietta mistakenly markets their firearm as a Model "1858", but it ain't)......For accuracy, my friend recommends 10 grains of 3F, topped with cornmeal filler to the top, press either a .451 or .454 (you'll have to test to see which size is most accurate). Then a dollup of crisco or other lube over the ball.

I like a little more boom, so I use 22 grains of 3F, no filler.

Your Remmington will handle any combination of black powder & lead you can fit in there.

Have fun.

Regards,
Slim

[Noz]

Round balls generally give the best accuracy. .454 for all 44s
I use a felt wad soaked in bullet lube over the powder. Bullet lube from the 1700s. 1 part tallow, 1 part paraffin, 1/2 part beeswax.
I don't like max loads in any of my revolvers. I've settled between 25/28 grs of FFFg.
Solve a lot of cap fit problems by buying the appropriate TRESO nipples and #10 Reminton caps.

My 2¢

[R. Flux]

Update
Thanks for all the good ideas and great responses.  There is much to chew on.  I'll need to set up a range of ammo components to test.   Here is a little more information that should have been in the original post.
-   Pietta manual & Web says use 3F, .454 (11.55mm) RB (shaving .007"), 12-15 grs 3F BP. (However, is this pre CNC, post CNC or composite/generic recommendation?) (15 grs BP is pretty low!) ( I may have a faster slingshot)

-   Cabela's manual: roundball .451 (shaving .004").  Standard Cylinder Capacity is 35 grs G-O 3F.

-   The groove diameter is approximately .466".  This was derived from ball gauge and slug data.  I don't have access to a proper machinist's V measurement block (to cope with the 7 grooves.) (CBA [Cast Bullet Assoc.] used to have a service to do this, it was great.)  This is GOOD, as my cylinder is .01 larger than the land and .001 than the groove.

I think I need to concentrate on the fit and finish of the revolver, light stoning, polishing/burnishing the cylinder and the roundball load and it components. And stronger thumbs for cocking to minimize barrel wiggle!

The first key is bullet fit, the groove must be smaller than the Cylinder diameter.  With my Brown Bess half the battle is to not bounce the ball down that long smooth barrel; with modern rifle fit is crucial.   The more you shave the RB, the more you get a short slug and not a RB.  When fired, as the land displaces Pb and the grooves fill, the projo increasingly becomes more a slug than ball.  So... if it is fire formed into a round nosed & round butt slug, shouldn't a properly fitted conical, who starts that way, perform significantly better?  Less mechanical stress, longer bearing surface, lubrication possibilities, better (longer) sectional density, meplat capabilities, (ballistic coefficient not so important on these short ranges)  Am I going to far afield?.  Many forum comments say RB is more accurate.  Why?

The fire formed slug/nee RB spins on the barrel axis and is no longer round.  Was RB preferred because it was easy to orient in loading?  Or are the differences to small to effect performance?

Further, if shaving the RB some is good, is shaving a greater amount better?  Maybe we should load the cylinder off weapon, in a stand and with compound leverage to really swage a slug out of a larger RB?  With pure Pb or a soft alloy (less than 10 BHN?) a large RB can easily be made a slug in the Cylinder.  With the right ram shape you could change the nose shape too.

Please further enlighten me.  I am an old artilleryman, so internal and external ballistics are in my blood.  I'm used to LARGER projos, 33lb used to be minimum weight, but I'm a man, I can change; I guess.

Made a nipple wrench from a 5mm ¼" Drive deep well socket yesterday, works great.

Regards,
R. Flux

[Noz]

I too was an Artilleryman. My projos were closer to 200 ls out of the 8".

Don't try to make a rather crude sport with 1850-60 engineering into rocket surgery.

Most of the CAS level revolver shooting is fast and dirty with very little concern for anything other than does it work.

I have never tried the conicals but do know that "standard knowledge" says they aren't worth the trouble.

I use 454 round balls(dead soft lead) because on occasion when I rammed a 451 ball the ball would adhere to the face of the rammer enough to lift it out of contact with the powder.  454s don't.  457s take too much effort to seat.

I won't have 1 out of 100 caps fall between hammer and frame which is the one you want to avoid.  I use that percentage because I can't remember when the last time was.  Last spring I think. 
The reasons:
Filled the safety notch in the hammer face with JB weld to keep the cap from sticking.
Adjusted my load level until I get a satisfying boom with accompaning Smoke and fire but not enough blowback to lift the cap off of the nipple.
TRESO nipples and #10 Remington Caps.
I've done a lot of smoothing, stoning and sanding to make the old engineering work as well as possible then forget about it and go shoot. You should expect some difficulties with guns of this era as they were made with primitive tools under a press for time.  Accept it and go on.
Or buy modern guns, ROA,  and have most of the trouble taken care of by modern engineering.

[kflach]

If you're interested in loading the cylinder off-weapon, there's one option available here: http://www.biglube.com/

Dick Dastardly is a member here and although I haven't used this stand I've heard real good things about it and the service he gives. When I can afford one I won't hesitate to buy one of his stands myself.

I load just my powder and wads off weapon but that's because I'd bought a real cheap loading stand when I first started that I ended up not being happy with. The plunger didn't have any kind of guide to it so I had to manually align it with the chambers. When the powder and wads are loaded I put the cylinder back into my Pietta '58 Remmington and use the plunger on the gun for the balls. (.454 Hornadys).

I'm new to this (I just shot my 400th ball last weekend) and the things I fired in the past didn't travel through barrels, so I can't speak about the technicalities of the projectile. I do, however, find that by loading the powder and wad on the stand I can see what I'm doing, double-check and make sure that I haven't accidentally double-filled (or forgotten) any chamber, and I can take the opportunity now and then to quickly wipe fouling off my cylinder pin and other appropriate areas. When I get the chance I'll buy one of Dick's stands.

In the meantime, I'm doing what Noz said, accepting the idiosyncrasies of the engineering of that era and going out and shooting. An I'm having a wonderful time doing it!