56-56 barrel liner

[Herbert]

I have fired over 5000 rounds through my Armi Sports Spencer 56-50 rifle yousing starline brass and CCI pistol primers with BP,and there is no cratering on my breach face at all,I have also yoused PP in my Martini Henry 577-450 with 85gr 1F BP and a 485gr bullet for the last 25 years with PP and there is no cratering on its breach face either,though the idear of having a recoil plate fitted does apeal to me

[5judge]

Ordered an Owziak 56-56 mould over the 'phone yesterday. Nice fellow. It should be here in three or so weeks. So far I've also got the following to try: hard lead slugs, soft lead slugs, pistol primers, rifle primers, at least three types of propellant, cardboard disc under the powder (I'm drinking orange juice from a cardboard carton for the raw material for wad making), drop tube, compressed, or merely poured powder, fire lapping the bore, lapping the bore, scrubbing the bore. Not a lot of consensis out there, one notes, but my friend Wormey will try all manner of these suggestions. And it didn't take long for the 56-50 sissies to try to hijack this thread!

[Herbert]

When you get the Owziak 56-56 mould could you give us a report(size,lenth,ect)pictures if posible and imformation on how to order it,56-56 moulds are hard to find .I would dtick with Aarizona Troopers advice on the loading the 56-56 as he has prooved he can get it to shoot,good luck

[5judge]

Wilco on sharing information on the Owsiak mould when it comes in. Mike Owsiak may be reached at 856-596-0177. He enjoyed chatting on the 'phone. He makes 56-56 Spencer moulds in .535 and .540. They are brass, two cavity, and sold w/o handles for $120. Appears North-South skirmishers favour his moulds in general.

[5judge]

Update, and it ain't pretty. My friend Wormey is trying to develop loads for our 56-56 Spencer carbines, as reported a month ago. He's an experienced reloader, has tried various combinations suggested on this forum, and with divers loads and powders and .535 and nominal .545 bullets. The results are regretably more-or-less the same: at 50 yards a decent deflection of around eight or fewer inches but a vertical dispersion of eighteen or so inches. Wormey thinks it may have to do with unequal bullet pull, cartridge to cartridge. Some bullets fit looser in their cases than others. It makes sense to me that this could be a cause of the excessive vertical dispersion. A problem, perhaps the problem, is the seeming impossibility of getting a good squeeze or crimp on the case mouth. Among ther things, the heeled bullet's wide driving band sited directly above the case mouth gets in the way. Suggestions (other than get a 56-50)? Thanks, Pards.

[Herbert]

Even with a not so good bore it should group beter than that,have you tryed new brass( you will get bad groups if your flash holes are oversized and difrent sizes)there are a few difrent ways to crimp healed base bullets the best is a variation of the lee factoy crimp die but it takes some skill to make one of these,or you can grind out a set of multy grips and weld a splt washer of the right diameter to the jaws so when locked it just crimps the top of the case slightly,I did this for a friends 56-56 ans allthough slow works very well,but I think there is somthing else causing the spread

[Trailrider]

While I have several Rapine moulds, which are excellent quality, but finally settled on a now-obsolete Lyman #533476AX Hollow Base 411 gr, cast from Lyman #2 equivalent, but using   smokeless powders.  In particular, IMR4227 produced 7-9 round groups of 3-5/8" - 4-5/8" groups at 50 yds. MV at 70 deg. F, and altitude 5400 ft MSL was in the 929 ft/sec range.  Lower temperatures dropped the MV to 850 ft/sec.  I sized these bullets to .535", so they would fit into the inside-reamed cut-down .50-70 brass.  The bullet is flat nosed for use in the tubular magazine. A firm crimp is mandatory, and the brass was annealed for half its length.

Let me state, that I have pretty much retired my Spencer in deference to its age. After all, the gun is 150 years old!  If I were to bring it out of retirement, I'd probably go to BP or a BP substitute.

Ride CAREFUL, Pard!  [I can assume NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE USE OF THE ABOVE INFORMATION, AND RECOMMEND AGAINST SHOOTING GUNS OF THIS AGE. The above information is for interest ONLY! Usual disclaimer.]

[Arizona Trooper]

Sorry for the delay answering. I've been out of town for work. Here is a shot of the Owziak mold and bullets. I have had very good results with it. Have you checked if your buttstock is tight, and fits the frame right? Good luck with it! 

[Herbert]

That is a very good desighn,there would be no wories about lack of lube with this bullet,defintly the one to havr for the 56-56

[Bead Swinger]

That's a purty mold.

One item to check carefully is rim thickness; Historically, this was an issue with consistency in shooting the Spencer. Modern CF brass is generally better, but it's worth looking at.

Good shootin'!

[5judge]

Wormey hopes to shoot a new round of trials Wednesday. Soft lead bullets from Owziak mould (he's a pleasant chap to talk to on the telephone), veggie wad, segregated brass, Triple Seven. Had some promising results last week. Spencer 56-56 definately needs to be consciously well lubed.

[Herbert]

For consinstant acuracy in any BP fiearm lube is 90% of the battle

[El Supremo]

Hello:
First, please allow me to say that while Trail Rider's posting caught my attention, the following is not a criticism of him.
I respectfully invite Two Flints to comment because it is his place to screen and manage safety issues.

Please note that it may be unwise to use smokeless powder in original and perhaps even some reproduction Spencer rifles/carbines.  This concern is based upon the design being for black powder and moreso that using smokeless powders that produce the SAME velocity as black powder have been shown to produce upwards of DOUBLE the pressure!

At one time, I researched this issue and was given a bound copy of Winchester's ballistics experiments on this subject,  namely pressure comparisons between black and smokeless powders, everything else- gun, bullet and its weight, velocity etc- being the SAME.  I then tried light "duplex" charges of black and at first 10% smokeless using 4759 and 4227.  BOTH these charges were 90% black and 10%, by WEIGHT.  Using Oehler equipment, including strain gauges on special test barrels, we learned in repeatedly consistent firing that even 10% smokeless produced only 10% more velocity, but at least 50% more pressure!  In addition to the strain gauge indications of much higher pressure, we observed materially distorted lead bullet shoulders, nose profiles and rifling length on the sides of bullets recovered on oiled sawdust recovery boxes.  In one case the 10% duplex charge repeatedly added 30% more penetration distance in the oiled sawdust!

I'm NOT saying that MODERN replicas made from high grade materials cannot handle smokeless.  That's for their makers to decide.  But I suggest we all be aware and extra careful based upon past testing by the likes of Winchester.

Very respectfully,
El Supremo

[5judge]

My friend Wormey is a tad slow these days. He's been pottering in his reloading shed, but has yet to get to the range to try out the latest incarnation of the combination which showed real promise in my 56-56 a couple weeks ago. He's got the right mould, is lubing out the wazoodle, is using a vegetable card wad, has segregated his brass, and is trying soft lead. The point made about lube seems spot on; first rounds fired grouped, later rounds were random, and it otherwise appeared lube was insufficient. Wormey's been shooting black powder for decades, we both appreciate the Spencer possesses a decidely weak action, and, heck, neither of us would enjoy our Civil War carbines unless they created clouds of smoke and smelled bad.

[Trailrider]

Hello:
First, please allow me to say that while Trail Rider's posting caught my attention, the following is not a criticism of him.
I respectfully invite Two Flints to comment because it is his place to screen and manage safety issues.

Please note that it may be unwise to use smokeless powder in original and perhaps even some reproduction Spencer rifles/carbines.  This concern is based upon the design being for black powder and moreso that using smokeless powders that produce the SAME velocity as black powder have been shown to produce upwards of DOUBLE the pressure!

At one time, I researched this issue and was given a bound copy of Winchester's ballistics experiments on this subject,  namely pressure comparisons between black and smokeless powders, everything else- gun, bullet and its weight, velocity etc- being the SAME.  I then tried light "duplex" charges of black and at first 10% smokeless using 4759 and 4227.  BOTH these charges were 90% black and 10%, by WEIGHT.  Using Oehler equipment, including strain gauges on special test barrels, we learned in repeatedly consistent firing that even 10% smokeless produced only 10% more velocity, but at least 50% more pressure!  In addition to the strain gauge indications of much higher pressure, we observed materially distorted lead bullet shoulders, nose profiles and rifling length on the sides of bullets recovered on oiled sawdust recovery boxes.  In one case the 10% duplex charge repeatedly added 30% more penetration distance in the oiled sawdust!

I'm NOT saying that MODERN replicas made from high grade materials cannot handle smokeless.  That's for their makers to decide.  But I suggest we all be aware and extra careful based upon past testing by the likes of Winchester.

Very respectfully,
El Supremo

While I haven't instrumented my Spencer, I have done quite a bit of testing on .45-70 using the Oehler M43 PBL, and while it takes a LOT of playing with various powders and loads, it is possible to match BP pressure-time curves.  I've also done quite a bitof work with the .45LC. Again, it is possible to match the P-T curves of BP.  BUT...to do so requires a LOT of work PLUS the use of the M43, which wasn't cheap when I bought it about 10 years or more ago.  The reason I mention .45LC is that modern .45 brass and .56-56 brass cut down from .50-70 brass, with bullets of similar Relative Sectional Density (weight in grams divided by 7000 divided by the square of the diameter) comes close to matching each other.

NEVERTHELESS, I'LL STAND BY MY STATEMENT THAT ORIGINAL SPENCERS ARE OLD ENOUGH TO BE RETIRED, REGARDLESS OF THE TYPE POWDER BEING USED. If you must shoot a Spencer, go with a repro chambered for a modern cartridge.

[pony express]

Here's a thread that discusses heel base bullets, mostly concerning pistol calibers, but maybe the guy that makes the modified Lee collet crimpers for them can make up something for 56-56 too.

EDIT: Oops, forgot the link: http://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php/topic,24202.msg315098.html#msg315098

[5judge]

        Re: "the Spencer is old enough to be retired". Maybe, but so am I. We (the Spencer and I) both seem to enjoy remaining in harness. I've not only got neckties older than some of the people with whom I deal professionally, I likely have underwear in that catagory, too. And almost everything I shoot is older than I am. Frankly, that's what's given me a major part of the enjoyment of shooting sports for 55 years. I also prefer riding behind antique steam engines and driving my '62 Corvette, other candidates old enough to be retired.
       My aged weapons, from a newish M1D sniper, through a 1864 Springfield, to my Maynard, Burnside, Sharps, and now Spencer are enjoyed in genteel, leisurely range or walk-in-the-woods sessions, not in CAS or CAS-like matches. Most of these character-drenched firearms were acquired before replicas were available, all are iron, steel, walnut, and brass. No polymar, no way. I believe all will cheerfully see me out and be passed on to the next owner not much worse for wear.
       I respect the opinion that the old iron should be retired because it's old. And I'm aware metal fatigues, steel crystalizes, wood dries, and the like. Even factoring that, my old man's 1920's vintage Model 97 Winchester lurks, with loaded magazine, in the closet and it's a 1918-date M.1911 Colt, boasting shiny new springs and stoked with G.I. hardball, by my bedstead for last ditch defense. For our nation's defense, B52s are in the air every day. The last new B52 airframe left the Boeing plant in 1962. They're scheduled to be in inventory for decades to come, flown presently by the grandchildren of the original generation of pilots. "Old" still shines, Pard!

[wolflobo76]

Update, and it ain't pretty. My friend Wormey is trying to develop loads for our 56-56 Spencer carbines, as reported a month ago. He's an experienced reloader, has tried various combinations suggested on this forum, and with divers loads and powders and .535 and nominal .545 bullets.

The results are regretably more-or-less the same: at 50 yards a decent deflection of around eight or fewer inches but a vertical dispersion of eighteen or so inches. Wormey thinks it may have to do with unequal bullet pull, cartridge to cartridge. Some bullets fit looser in their cases than others. It makes sense to me that this could be a cause of the excessive vertical dispersion. A problem, perhaps the problem, is the seeming impossibility of getting a good squeeze or crimp on the case mouth. Among ther things, the heeled bullet's wide driving band sited directly above the case mouth gets in the way. Suggestions (other than get a 56-50)? Thanks, Pards.

I have been experimenting with modified wire crimpers/strippers to use as a hand crimper for my 56/56.  I bought a new crimper and drilled a 1/2 [.50] hole in it then used a cone shaped grinding bit in a hand drill and enlarged the hole to about .52. Then i hold the crimper with the grounded side down and open it up and place it at the top of the loaded case and squeese just hard enough to crimp the bullet in place snuggly.

[Two Flints]

Wolflobo76,

Photos of your modified wire crimpers/strippers would be interesting to see.  Please post them adding them to your post.  Thanks.

Two Flints