Vintage U.M.C. .45 Colt 28 gr Cartridge Recreation

[w44wcf]

This historic cartridge was introduced by U.M.C. in 1889 and was offered in addition to their standard 40 gr loading.  It was intended to reduce recoil but still provide plenty of power.  



Testing of original U.M.C. .45 Colt 40 gr. 45 Colt cartridges in both a peacemaker and 24" rifle indicated that the powder U.M.C. used had the ballistic strength of today's Olde Enysford FFG and Swiss FFG and that was a century ago!

So assuming that the same powder was used in the 28 gr loading,  I tested 28 grs. by weight of Olde Enysford FFG and used a 1/8" wad to take up the powder space. U.M.C. would likely have used a 3/16" wad due to the larger case capacity of the balloon head case.

Average velocities were:  
7 1/2 " barrel - 811 f.p.s.
.....24" barrel - 1,027 f.p.s.  

I decided to test the 28 gr. cartridge in my Marlin Cowboy rifle for accuracy at 50 yards. Instead of the traditional 452190 bullet I decided to use the Accurate 45-260B which still follows the traditional 2 lube groove style but with the nose profile of another vintage rifle bullet ..... the 44-40.  



I sure like recreating history.....

w44wcf

[dusty texian]

Great post w44wcf. Always enjoy your post. Makes me want to go out and shoot some. Thanks for passing this along. ,,,DT

[Hambone Dave]

Wow nice group.
I am probably wasting powder cause I load 35grs 2F under 230grRN for my SAA.
I think maybe I will reduce to the 28grs.
Good information.

[Thumb Buster]

Nice grouping for sure.  Sure would be nice if someone around this parts would market Olde Eynsford so I could try it.  Graf and Goex Red is about it...but I don't complain as they still go 'BOOM' and make smoke. 

[Blackpowder Burn]

Very informative, as always.  Thanks for all your good work.

[Cholla Hill Tirador]

Good stuff, very interesting. I really appreciate it when someone takes the time to test loads and firearms for accuracy, then goes on to show us the results rather than just stating "...it shot real good."

  Fast is fine, accuracy is final.

[Buck Stinson]

You're posts are always interesting.  Where did you find the UMC .45 Colt box?  I have one of these in my collection and I've always thought the graphics and paper wrap on this box was outstanding.  A lot of ammo collectors are obsessed with Winchester boxes as am I, but I never pass up a chance to buy good UMC boxes.

Buck

[Dick Dastardly]

For  SASS shooting, how would those loads compete?  We shoot comparatively high intensity action.  We require ammo that will continue to perform both for accuracy and function.  Our winner's circle will not accommodate historical fal-de-rah.  The belt buckle goes to the winner, not the period correct ammo.

When the period correct ammo wins the belt buckle, it has proven the test of time.

DD-MDA

[Cholla Hill Tirador]

For  SASS shooting, how would those loads compete?  We shoot comparatively high intensity action.  We require ammo that will continue to perform both for accuracy and function.  Our winner's circle will not accommodate historical fal-de-rah.  The belt buckle goes to the winner, not the period correct ammo.

When the period correct ammo wins the belt buckle, it has proven the test of time.

DD-MDA

The subject of this particular sub-forum is black powder, and w44wcf's post(s) are relevant to the subject.

 I shot CAS for awhile, but became a little disillusioned with it because I realized so many competitors are more interested in tweaking their firearms to the point they'll only function with Brand X primers, and shooting loads so light they're often in danger of not even exiting the barrel; in other words they're more concerned with shooting fast times than with the history of the firearms, cartridges, etc. which I thought was the whole point of CAS. However, the interest I developed in the firearms, cartridges, and western history remains. As such, I welcome posts such as this one.

Please, keep it up, w44wcf.

CHT

[w44wcf]

Guys,
Thank you for your interest and kind words.

Buck,
Actually I don't have that box. I got the pic from a cartridge collector who has it.  The other box pic I would like to find is also a U.M.C.,  their 44-40  28 gr. cartridge.  It was only in production from 1906 to about 1916 so it would be pretty scarce.  

DD,
The ammo would be up to the task, but I wouldn't be. I haven't shot a main SASS event for quite some time.  I do believe though, if i crafted the ammo using the proper components that follow the  line of what was available back in the 1800's, a good b.p. shooter would not be handicapped.

These days, for me anyway, being more into the way things really were, I do enjoy the longer range side matches and similar contests which require good down range accuracy. "In those arenas, ammo crafted after the historic vintage b.p. factory rounds have proven to be  superior ......

CHT,
Thank you!  Me to!

One thing I neglected to mention is that 28 grs. of standard Goex FFG produced inferior ballistics as compared to the powder that U.M.C. used which was pretty much equivalent to Swiss FFG and Olde Enysford FFG.

Here's the comparison.
....................Goex  FFG  /  Olde E ; U.MC
7 1/2 " barrel - 714 f.p.s.  /  811 f.p.s.
.....24" barrel - 910 f.p.s.  / 1,027 f.p.s.

I am not knocking Goex FFG! Just showing the differences in ballistic strength between the powders. Also the original powder used by U.M.C. Like today's Olde Enysford & Swiss burned cleaner.

I have used a lot of Goex FFG and it works just fine with the "Big Lube" type bullets.



w44wcf



 

[Jake C]

Interesting post, thanks very much for sharing!  I love it when folks are able to recreate these historical loadings.

I'll need to try this in revolver, see how recoil is. I've been using 36 grains under a 200 grain bullet and the recoil is manageable but a little stouter than I'd want for just plinking at the range.

[Cholla Hill Tirador]

I dont want to take the thread off on a rabbit trail,  ut have to ask...I'm still wet behind the ears when it comes to BP, so I have questions. I just bought 6 lbs. of Goex 2Fg and got a heck of a deal. I promptly loaded some in my 38 WCF and chronographed it. The load (trickled in enough for light compression) close to 200 fps slower (685 fps vs. 850 fps) than the same loading technique with Pyrodex P. What the heck?
 On a positive note however, the Goex left my bass infinite cleaner with only the first 1/8" or so of the neck being black.

[Navy Six]

I've shot a similar 45 Colt load(28 gr Goex FF, 250gr bullet, grease cookie) in the past at SASS matches. Last time I put it on paper I was getting approx. 4" groups at 15 yards, but I wasn't then using a second card wad between the grease cookie and bullet. This degree of accuracy was pretty consistent in a variety of guns from Colt and Uberti. I was satisified with this and knock downs were never a problem. Recoil was manageable and no one was going to accuse you of being a gamer.

[Noz]

RE: CAS loads

It is true that the modern CAS shooter is shooting guns that have been tuned to shoot the best that is possible.
The claim of the super light loads is no longer valid. Even the fastest of the shooters have learned that some feedback from the gun is necessary for best performance.  If you see someone shooting super light loads be confidant he is a rookie and has not yet learned what works best.
My 44-40s carry all the case will hold which is in the vicinity of 38 grs of FFg. Same consideration for my 38 specials with around 20 grs of FFFg. My 1860s carry 25-28 grs of FFFg, my 1861s carry 22 grs of FFFg. My ROAs are a work in progress but it looks like 28-30 grs is going to be right for them.
The only thing that is loaded lightly is the 12 ga and that is simply a matter of economics.

If I plan on serious social work or hunting I carry a 41 mag made by Ruger or Smith and Wesson with a whole lot of W296 under a 260 gr LBT bullet.

[Coffinmaker]

CHT,
Pyrodex, Pyrodex P, Pyrodex - et all ........ is nasty stuff. (Somebody is going to argue with me).  the first problem with the stuff, it is corrosive in and of itself.  Doesn't need moisture to make corrosion.  Does it all by itself.  BP, is not corrosive by it self.  It is hydroscopic and the residue will trop moisture next to the steel and that moisture will cause corrosion.  that didn't answer your question did it!!

The various gradings of Black Powder refer to the granulation.  The more "Fs" you have, the smaller the granules of powder.  The smaller
the granules are, the better the burn.  The better the burn .. more wallop.  Ergo, those of us who are more recoil shy, strive to reduce
felt recoil.  To do that, most gravitate to 2F which equates to softer recoil than 3f.  Also less velocity (physics, remember).  Pyrodex has
a pretty hot burn and produces lots of gun gas, hence more velocity than 2F.  So, with your good deal 6 pounds of Goex, your going to get a mite less velocity and noticeably softer recoil.  Your guns also won't rust as bad as quick either.  Pyrodex ....... SUCKS.

Coffinmaker

[Cholla Hill Tirador]

RE: CAS loads

It is true that the modern CAS shooter is shooting guns that have been tuned to shoot the best that is possible.
The claim of the super light loads is no longer valid. Even the fastest of the shooters have learned that some feedback from the gun is necessary for best performance.  If you see someone shooting super light loads be confidant he is a rookie and has not yet learned what works best.
My 44-40s carry all the case will hold which is in the vicinity of 38 grs of FFg. Same consideration for my 38 specials with around 20 grs of FFFg. My 1860s carry 25-28 grs of FFFg, my 1861s carry 22 grs of FFFg. My ROAs are a work in progress but it looks like 28-30 grs is going to be right for them.
The only thing that is loaded lightly is the 12 ga and that is simply a matter of economics.

If I plan on serious social work or hunting I carry a 41 mag made by Ruger or Smith and Wesson with a whole lot of W296 under a 260 gr LBT bullet.

  In my limited exposure CAS firearms are tuned to shoot as fast as possible which is only "best" for fast shooting. I once had my '73's tuned and tweaked as such but realized the dreadfully slow lock time might be good for shooting fast, but not for shooting FAR. So I put the original springs back in and now have several Wolff main springs in my junk drawer! (No reflection on the springs or the company, though)

  CHT

[Cholla Hill Tirador]

CHT,
Pyrodex, Pyrodex P, Pyrodex - et all ........ is nasty stuff. (Somebody is going to argue with me).  the first problem with the stuff, it is corrosive in and of itself.  Doesn't need moisture to make corrosion.  Does it all by itself.  BP, is not corrosive by it self.  It is hydroscopic and the residue will trop moisture next to the steel and that moisture will cause corrosion.  that didn't answer your question did it!!

The various gradings of Black Powder refer to the granulation.  The more "Fs" you have, the smaller the granules of powder.  The smaller
the granules are, the better the burn.  The better the burn .. more wallop.  Ergo, those of us who are more recoil shy, strive to reduce
felt recoil.  To do that, most gravitate to 2F which equates to softer recoil than 3f.  Also less velocity (physics, remember).  Pyrodex has
a pretty hot burn and produces lots of gun gas, hence more velocity than 2F.  So, with your good deal 6 pounds of Goex, your going to get a mite less velocity and noticeably softer recoil.  Your guns also won't rust as bad as quick either.  Pyrodex ....... SUCKS.

Coffinmaker

  I don't have a dog in the hunt so at this point don't prefer one over another. As far as one being dirtier than the other they're both filthy to someone who's only used smokeless. I realize BP is hyGROscopic and had read that Pyrodex in and of itself is corrosive, but at this point in my non-smokeless loading and shooting I treat them both as though they were hydrochloric acid. So far I've only shot at the house, but when I'm finished I immediately and thoroughly clean the guns and the brass goes into a top less beer can filled with 50/50 vinegar and H2O2.

    I understand the differences in the grades of BP and expected some velocity loss when switching from 2f to Pyrodex P, but certainly 250 or so fps!

  CHT

[w44wcf]

CHT,
250 f.p.s. does seem like a bit too much between the same volume of Goex FFG and Pyrodex P but the differences between lots and densities of the powder could account for that.

Typically Pyrodex P and Goex FFFG velocities would be pretty similar with the same volume but again differences between lots and densities of the powder will make a difference.

I just checked the actual weights of the Goex FFG and Pyrodex P I have on hand. Using the 2.2 CC Lee Scoop and dipping it in to the point of overflowing and then tapping the side with my finger until it leveled off even with the top of the scoop.

These were the weights:
Goex FFG - 34 grs.  /  Pyrodex P  25 grs.  a difference of 9 grs.  Since the difference in weights is less with your lots,  and Pyrodex P being more energetic, it is understandable that the velocity difference is higher than my experience below.

The difference in velocity between my lots using the same volume in an original '73 .44 W.C.F. Short Rifle (21" barrel) was
108 f.p.s.  (Goex FFG 1,140 / Pyrodex P 1,248) at charge weights of 36 and 27 grs respectively.
By comparison, 36 grs Goex FFFG went 1,270 f.p.s.

PYRODEX & 777
I have not used either of those powders for awhile now. There was a time, though, when only those powders would produce consistent accuracy for 50 rounds in the afore mentioned '73 Winchester circa 1882.  The reason being is that the bore was a bit on the rough side and b.p. fouling would build up in the recesses in the barrel and after 10 rounds or so, (Goex FFG) bullets would start to tip and accuracy would go out the window.  Adding a "Big Lube" bullet did extend the accuracy to about 20 shots after which the accuracy went downhill.

After a session with Pyrodex & 777, I would clean the barrel the same day or if I was lazy, I would fire some smokeless rounds and that would clean out the fouling.   Cases were cleaned in a 50/50 White vinegar / water solution.

Eventually I tried Swiss powder and that made a noticeable difference with it's less fouling capabilities. And still later, I found that Olde Enysford worked as well as Swiss. 

w44wcf   

[Buck Stinson]

w44wcf,
Can you send pic of the .44-40 28 gr. box?  If so, respond to this post and either post here or I can send you my email via private mail.  Up to you.  Greatly appreciate your help.

Buck

[w44wcf]

Buck,
Sorry to say I don't have a pic of the .44-40 28 gr. box.  I have been on the hunt for a couple of years or so now. I have contacted cartridge dealers I know (that's where I got the pic of the .45 Colt 28 gr box) and posted on the International Ammunition Association Forum, but so far, no luck.  

I do have a catalog cut from the 1910 UMC catalog which shows the 44-40 28 gr loading which I could email to you if you PM your email address.

w44wcf