Black powder or smokeless ?

[OldFotoMan]

I don't mean to seem dumb, but I have a question about ammo for old guns.

I have several old guns that I would like to shoot, but need to know what is safe to shoot in them. I certainly do understand that they should not be fired with normal, modern, higher power loads; but is it safe to shoot smokeless cartridges that were designed to replace or duplicate the original BP loads and pressures in some of these old guns.

As an example, I have an old WC Scott 10 gauge double with Damascus barrels (made 1890), a Colt SAA (made 1872), and a Colt 1877 Lightning (made 1891).

I shot these guns many times when I was young, and don't remember any heavy or excessive smoke being produced by them, but that was about 50 years ago. I fired the SAA about 20 years ago with some old ammo that was with it when I inherited it.

Again, I know not to use modern higher power loads, but from everything I've read in cartridge books, the original smokeless loads for 10 ga, 45 Colt, and 38 Long Colt (along with many other original BP loads) were designed to duplicate the pressures and ballistic performance of the original BP loads in order for them to be able to be used safely in these older guns. I know smokeless burns slower and BP is an almost instant detonation, but from my understanding of basic physics, as long as the total pressures are the same, that should be safer in theory, since the smokeless would build the pressure slower.

I would probably even reduce the loads slightly from what the original pressures were if I hand loaded or had them loaded, but smokeless is certainly less corrosive and easier to clean, so I would rather go that route if it would be safe.

All input will be appreciated.

I’m not sure whether this question should be in the C&R or the Black Powder and Cowboy Action section, but am posting it in both as it would seem to be of interest and fall into both. Administrators, please feel free to let me know or remove it from either if you feel it’s in the wrong place or if duplicating to reach different readers is not allowed.

Thanks.

[James K]

There were no SAA's made in 1872; production didn't start until 1873. That said, any Colt SAA in good condition can be safely fired with standard commercial ammo as well as "cowboy" loads and their handloaded equivalents. If you want to blow up a gun, buy a Ruger, they are less expensive.

You don't say what caliber the Colt rifle is, but it should be OK with standard commercial ammo and also with "cowboy" loads or equivalents. But those rifles are pretty delicate and I don't recommend firing them at all. If you must, use light loads; even full charge black powder loads can be iffy.

I strongly recommend not firing any Damascus barrel shotguns with anything. Many people will contend that those guns are as strong as, or even stronger than, modern steel, but I have known of several that let go, and don't buy that. If you must fire it, stick to black powder. The reason is that smokeless powder loads are not necessarily higher pressure, but smokeless powder is progressive burning and the pressure is higher out further than with black powder. That means the barrels let go at about the front of the foreend, or about where the shooter's fingers are. Since fingers are not in the normal human's spare parts kit, losing a couple is not a good idea.

Jim

[OldFotoMan]

Sorry Jim, my mistake. My SAA (# 74XXX) was made in 1882 not 72. And the 1877 was their first double action revolver. I know the rifle was officially named Lightning, but the common designation for the DA revolvers were: Thunderer for the 41 cal., Lightning for the 38 cal., and Rainmaker for the 32 cal.

My grandfather carried and used all of these on his hunting trips with dad up until the early 60's. He gave them to dad who gave them to me in the 90's.

My question was because several of my knowledgeable shooting buddies have stated flatly that it is not safe to shoot smokeless powder loads in any gun designed and made for black powder. Knowing that I and my family have fired these guns many times, and not recalling any excessive smoke; their warnings have made me think again and second guess myself even after reading several cartridge books which all state that the early and standard smokeless loads were designed to pretty much duplicate the original BP loads.

And you are certainly right on the SAA. The value is much too great to take a chance with it. So while the desire is there, I'm not sure I would fire it anyway. However, I'm not sure I can buy a replacement or copy of either of the others for much less than what their current market value is, so I was seriously considering firing them if it would be safe. I know I can purchase BP ammo from several different Cowboy Action Shooting manufacturers, but would rather not have to go through the extra cleaning if smokeless loaded to the same specs or pressures will not harm them.

Thanks.

[Jim Watson]

A solid frame revolver like your SAA is probably ok with standard smokeless ammo, even though Colt did not beef up their guns for it until 1900 and did not proof test and advertise suitability until 1904 or thereabouts.

Your Lightning will handle the PRESSURE of any .38 Long Colt ammo you can find, but it is not a strong action and mechanical wear adds up fast. A broken Lightning is of very low value. I would only shoot it, as a friend says, on ceremonial occasions.

I won't get into the Damascus debates. It has been done with no bad result but they have also blown up. What you used to do does not apply, the gun may have fired its last safe shot the last time out.

[bedbugbilly]

You state it has been 50 years since you've shot these? Personally, I wouldn't shoot any of them unless I had them checked out by a competent gunsmith. I'm not trying to be critical here - just safe. You say nothing about the condition of any of them - what the bores are like - how tight the action is on the shotgun - etc. You can get all kinds of good information on here and folks are very willing to help - but be safe and get them checked out in person by a real live gunsmith who knows his stuff.

I also have seen a number blown barrels - especially on damascus shotguns - by those who thought "it won't hurt to shoot it just once". They were made for black powder. It isn't worth loosing a hand or fingers - or worse - based on suggestions you got on the internet. Even with BP - you should have the bores inspected before firing it as well as the soldered webs attaching the barrels to each other - those joints may be weak - I've seen it many times on both original muzzleloading shot guns and later breech loading ones like yours. The guns have a lot of memories for you and a lot of nostalgia - please don't be penny wise and pound foolish - get them all checked first.

[James K]

My misunderstanding on the Colt 1877. I somehow missed the date and thought you meant the Colt Lightning RIFLE. Actually the rifle was the only gun Colt called the Lightning; the names "Lightning" and "Thunderer" were dreamed up by E.C. Meachum, a Colt distributor, for advertising purposes. I don't know who came up with "Rainmaker", but it seems to be modern, and the guns seem to be unknown outside the books.

Jim

[OldFotoMan]

Thanks a lot for all of the quick replies.

The Colt SAA was the gun my grandfather carried and used as a side arm on all of his hunting trips for deer, moose, or elk until the mid 1960's. The 10 gauge was what he used for goose and duck at that time. They were both guns that my father used to teach me to shoot pistol and shotgun back then. I think I recall grandfather firing the 1877 DA Lightning, but I'm not sure on that one. I do know they have been properly stored since then, but it has been 50 years now.

So as most of you point out, even though they are all excellent mechanically, time may have taken it's toll and it may not be worth the risk; especially with the values on the SAA. Sometimes, fond memories just give me a desire to fire them again.

[James K]

My main concern in firing that Model 1877 is that they are notorious for breaking parts, mainly springs. And spare parts are almost as scarce as gunsmiths who would know what to do with them. I strongly suggest considering it a collector's item, not a shooting gun.

Jim

[44 AMP]

Commercial ammo today, is basically safe in the old guns (provided the guns themselves are in good shape - with one exception).

Modern ammo factory loads (standard ammo) in the old calibers is loaded to be safe in the old guns. Pressures are kept to the blackpowder levels.

HOWEVER,

I would recommend not shooting they 10ga Damascus gun. I would not shoot it, even with blackpowder ammo. And this is because of both the age, and the particular method of manufacture of Damascas barrel guns.

First, while smokeless ammo, at black powder pressures is generally not an issue for old guns, guns made of solid steel, it can be trouble with Damascus barrels.

Damascus (and the lower cost "twist") barrels were made by winding steel straps around a mandrel, and hammer welding them into a "solid" barrel. But it is only "solid" to the eye. There are always gaps or voids inside the welds, where they cannot be seen by any visual inspection. Some guns have, while appearing visually excellent, developed rust or corrosion in these voids, weakening the already none too strong barrel even further.

The fact is, that while you may get many, many rounds of shooting (with appropriate ammo), you may also have the barrel(s) "unravel" the very next time you pull the trigger. There is no way I know of to be certain.

That's why I recommend Damascus guns be wall hangers. Even with guns in good condition, shooting reproduction original ammo, there is still a risk.

Your gun, your call. The risk that it will blow up the next time you shoot it is small. But it does exist. Personally, I'd rather see a family heirloom honorably retired while its still intact (and I still have all my fingers and both eyes). Sure, that's worst case, but it can and has happened.

My Grandfather had a twist barrel gun until 1909, when he "finally got talked out of it" by a neighbor. He replaced it with a "fluid steel" barrel gun. The twist barrel gun served his neighbor very well, until the left barrel came apart, in the 1940s. (this may have been due to shooting smokeless ammo, but it may not have been, no one today knows, and black powder ammo was still in use at that time, particularly in rural areas during the general ammo shortage in the WWII years).

TO me, its just not worth the risk to the gun, or the shooter.

[chiefr]

I love shooting the older guns. If the gun was designed to shoot black powder, that is what I use.