|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
November 16, 2011, 11:51 PM | #26 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 20, 2009
Posts: 1,102
|
Yea they make a Boom!
Ok with the usual safety warnings present don't ya just love the sound of a BP revolver fired out in the open? Normal firing ranges are either covered or enclose in some manner, some indoors which amplifies the discharge note somewhat. The roof directs the sound back at you and walls bounce sounds and contain them to unbearsble levels! Outdoors is way different
The throaty roar of Black Powder discharge is far different than the sharp crack of Smokless and perhaps that is part of the allure of BP shooting. As mentioned I took advantage of a situation and did some shooting with my .36Piettia Police model sans hearing muffs. I was suprised at how bearable the shots sounded and were. I had no difficulty shooting under these conditions. I'd done some handgun hunting and the sound of full house .357 Mags outdoors is far, FAR louder! Smokeless dosent seem to get absourbed by foilage and grasses. Now just cause I did it don't you do it but due ti a slight hearing imparement from dear Uncle Sam I had no pain or discomfort with the .36. I tried a Remington. 44 but the 35 gr load was pretty loud for the bare ear. I could see me shooting my .36 out in the open! I wonder if conicals sound different than Ball loads? Higher pressures might change the note? Have any of you had outdoor experiences with your revolvers? ZVP |
November 17, 2011, 12:23 AM | #27 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 20, 2009
Posts: 1,102
|
delete message
Last edited by ZVP; November 17, 2011 at 12:24 AM. Reason: delete. |
November 17, 2011, 05:10 AM | #28 |
Junior member
Join Date: August 8, 2009
Posts: 374
|
Can you type LOUDER? I can't hear you!
|
November 17, 2011, 06:11 AM | #29 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 16,188
|
I didn't notice any difference between round balls and conicals.
|
November 17, 2011, 07:06 PM | #30 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 20, 2009
Posts: 1,102
|
Hawg,
I always wondered if the Conicals kick just a bit more than a Round ball? I have not yet had the chance to try them out. I understand they can be really accurate and since they weigh so much more, they must generate more ftLbs of energy! Ihave read of Buffalo bullets and something about them having a stepped heel to assist in loading. That sounds like a good idea to speed up loading. What's a typical .36 conical weigh? Do you loose much velocity with them? ZVP |
November 18, 2011, 01:12 AM | #31 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 16,188
|
They do have a little more kick but round balls are more accurate. Conicals hit harder. Mine are cast from a Lee mold. I got the .380 mold and should have gotten the .375. The Lee's are tapered but the .380 is still too big to start. You have to balance them on the chamber mouth while working the lever. They do load easy and straight once you get them started tho. I don't remember offhand what they weigh. They load very easy in my brass Remington but those chambers are a little larger. Dunno bout velocity, never chrono'd them.
|
November 18, 2011, 04:38 AM | #32 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 21, 2000
Posts: 1,353
|
From what I have always got is the conicals totaly defeat the idea of a fast soft lead bullet deal so they have more effect on the shooter than the target. The main down is from what I see is they are a pain to get in the guns too. Walkers or dragoon types they have room to get them in the cylinder but all the rest they are a pain.
|
November 18, 2011, 07:49 AM | #33 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 16,188
|
There's room, for the Lee's anyway. The .380's are a tad big is the only thing. They drop right in with the brass Remington like they're supposed to.
|
November 18, 2011, 08:25 AM | #34 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 28, 2004
Location: Silicon Valley, Ca
Posts: 7,117
|
A question I should ask is why so many people favor the 1851 Navy.
I have always preferred the look of the 1862 Police and Sheriff's models in .36 caliber to the Navy models. I've found the 1862 Police, whether with the 5.5 or 8" barrel balances superbly in my hand and the weight is just right for a "carry" pistol. The 1861 Navy is a fine small gun too, though it doesn't have the same balance. During the civil war, paper cartridges were used, but the bullet weights ranged from 139 to 155 grains, depending upon who made them. A .36 caliber (.375") lead round ball weighed about 70 grains. If pushed to 1000 fps, that only produces 155 ft-lbs, though I suspect the lightweight ball was moving considerably faster. If the 139 grain moved at 1000 fps that gives 309 ft-lbs while a 155gr at 850 fps would give 249 ft-lbs. In contrast, the .38 Special 158gr @800 fps produces 225 ft-lbs. Has anyone chronographed their round ball loads?
__________________
BillCA in CA (Unfortunately) Last edited by BillCA; November 18, 2011 at 08:31 AM. |
November 18, 2011, 09:52 AM | #35 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 15, 2005
Location: Central Connecticut
Posts: 3,166
|
From
Cap and Ball Ballistics By Ed Sanow Handguns February 1998 Cap and Ball Wound Ballistics Calibre Firearm Bullet FFFg Velocity Energy 1 Shot Stop .36 Navy Colt 1851 Navy 70gr RB 22gr 1038 fps 189 ft lb 59% http://www.thehighroad.org/showthrea...ighlight=sanow |
November 18, 2011, 10:02 AM | #36 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Naples, Fl
Posts: 5,440
|
Why do people prefer the the 1851 pattern?...
It is my opinion (and that is all it is.) that people subconsciously like the octagon barrel. It appears (again, only a matter of my opinion) to be more businesslike than the elegant 1860 with its graceful lines and round barrel.
It is also my opinion that the 1860 is a better looking revolver.
__________________
Seek truth. Relax. Take a breath. |
November 18, 2011, 11:18 AM | #37 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 27, 2009
Location: on a hill in West Virginia
Posts: 789
|
Quote:
|
|
November 18, 2011, 04:34 PM | #38 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 20, 2009
Posts: 1,102
|
The Lee bullets look like they'd load very straight inside the cylinder. I have read posts that some Conicals don't load straight in the chambers but those Lee;s sure look good!
I have both a '51 London model .36 and a '62 Piettia Police Frankilly the 51 feels lighter in the hand than the short barreled Police does. I think the barrel assy on the '62 is a litle heavier. At leadt it feels that way to me. I really can't choose between the two as I really like shooting both! ZVP |
November 18, 2011, 05:34 PM | #39 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 9, 1998
Location: Ohio USA
Posts: 8,563
|
Quote:
I have to believe also that James Butler Hickock and Orin Porter Rockwell had a hand in boosting the popularity of the 1851 Navy. It was a favorite of both & both men were legendary for their prowess with it. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|