The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The North Corral > Black Powder and Cowboy Action Shooting

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old June 12, 2011, 11:47 PM   #1
Andy Griffith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 14, 2009
Location: Macon Co. NC
Posts: 591
Bottleneck or straight calibers for black powder repeating rifles?

Just want to hear the experiences of others that have run real blackpowder through their rifles of various calibers.

I know those old blackpowder rounds such as .32-20, .38-40, .44-40 and .45-70 and larger bottlenecked or tapered calibers had to have been designed that way for a reason.

I know that most modern people go with modern straight walled cases for ease of reloading, but are they more problematic when shooting a full magazine of cartridges loaded with holy black?

I'm thinking I want a nice new rifle in .44-40, likely a Uberti 1860 rifle.
Any reason I should not get one in .45 Colt for blackpowder?
__________________
Barney Fife: "Nip it, nip it, nip it!"
Andy Griffith:"Oh now Barn'...."
Andy Griffith is offline  
Old June 13, 2011, 05:23 AM   #2
Hawg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 16,177
44-40 is better for cleaning afterward, you don't get any fouling in the action from it. The case mouth is thin and expands to seal off the action from blowby. The 44-40 is a little trickier to reload but once you understand why and get the hang of it it's just as easy as anything else. The original 44-40 used a .427 bullet. Most modern 44-40's use a .429. The problem with reloading is most modern dies still size to .427. Trying to stuff a .429 bullet into a .427 case usually results in a crushed case. Cowboy dies size to .429 but I usually just take a wad punch and bell my cases a little bit. To clean after shooting a rifle just leave a fired case in the chamber when cleaning the bore and you keep the fouling out of the action.
Hawg is offline  
Old June 13, 2011, 06:16 AM   #3
Mike Irwin
Staff
 
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 41,374
Many of the early bottlenecked rounds were designed that way so that they would fit in the gun's action.

The Winchester 1873 and 1876 models simply couldn't handle long cases. The togglelink mechanism was just too flexibile, so to make the action as stiff as possible, but to get decent performance out of the cartridges with blackpowder, the rounds had to be bottlenecked.

In the 1876, in order to get cartridges that were on par powerwise with the .45-70 and the .50-70 government rounds Winchester came out with the .45-75 and the .50-95.

It wasn't until John Browning joined Winchester and redesigned the rifles, starting with the 1886, that the actions could handle the .45-70 and longer cartridges.


With single shot rifles of the time, for which there were no case length issues, companies often offered two versions of each cartridge, one in a straight case version and the other bottlenecked, simply to pander to those shooters (and there were apparently many of them) who preferred one over the other.
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza

Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.
Mike Irwin is offline  
Old June 13, 2011, 07:00 AM   #4
Hawg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 16,177
Mike, I don't mean to rain on your parade but the 1876 Winchester was originally chambered for 45-75. Later it was chambered for 40-60, 45-60 and 50-95 Express. Perhaps you meant the 1866 and 1873.
Hawg is offline  
Old June 13, 2011, 07:07 AM   #5
Mike Irwin
Staff
 
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 41,374
"the 1876 Winchester was originally chambered for 45-75."

Uh, yes, I know that.

The .50-95 followed a couple of years later, in response to requests for a heavier cartridge, and a number of years before the 1886 was designed.

I'm not seeing a problem here.
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza

Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.
Mike Irwin is offline  
Old June 13, 2011, 07:58 AM   #6
MJN77
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 27, 2009
Location: on a hill in West Virginia
Posts: 789
FWIW, I have a Uberti 1873 winchester, 1860 Henry, and 1876 rifles. The 1860 and 1873 are both in .44-40. I love them. Have taken several deer with both. With "real" black powder they will shoot all day with no hang ups, and clean up is pretty much just the barrel. The 1876 is a .45-60 (no bottleneck). I've had no problems with this gun either, although it gets slightly dirtier. I prefer the .44-40 in a Henry or 1873, but there are people that love their .45 cal. versions too.
MJN77 is offline  
Old June 13, 2011, 08:14 AM   #7
Hawg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 16,177
Sorry Mike I got confused. Haven't been up long enough I guess.
Hawg is offline  
Old June 13, 2011, 08:43 AM   #8
enyaw
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 28, 2008
Posts: 134
The 44-40's today with the sizing die for smaller bullets ,.427 ,and the barrels rifled for larger ones,.429, can be solved easily by getting an expander to change out in the expander die to expand it more for the .429 instead of for the .427. The C&H Tools in Mt. Vernon Ohio makes any size expander you can ask for...within reason. Others make them also I guess.
I have an expander in one of my 45/70 die sets that carries an .458 expander since I haven't gotten a Meacham Tools bullet alignment seater yet.
The .458 expander lets the bullets goin the case straighter. You ever look at factory ammo like Winchesters 45/70's? There is a bump on one side of the cases where the base of the bullet is because the bullets going n crooked because of shoving them into a case too small for them.
I'm under the understanding the bottlenecked cartridges Sharps made rifles for were problematic. They aren't (bottlenecks) preferred today.
enyaw is offline  
Old June 13, 2011, 09:05 AM   #9
Mike Irwin
Staff
 
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 41,374
"I'm under the understanding the bottlenecked cartridges Sharps made rifles for were problematic."

In what way were they problematic? I've never heard that before, but it does seem that, in America at least, straight walled cases were somewhat more popular in the larger cartridges.
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza

Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.
Mike Irwin is offline  
Old June 13, 2011, 11:33 AM   #10
enyaw
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 28, 2008
Posts: 134
In one book an expert states that in comparable rifles the bottle necks can't be made to shoot as consistantly accurate as a straight wall. ......Sharps thought so too since by the mid 1870's was dropping the bottle necks for the straight walls.
That said I know there were International Long Range shoots won by bottlenecks. The bottle necked 44/77 was a popular round for the buffler hunters out west. The 45/90 straight wall eclisped it once it was out.
I thunk one problem was the shoulder of a bottle neck made the round not chamber after a coupla shots due to blackpowder fouling in rifles without the camming affect to the action.
Repeaters....with black.....that could be a problem with their levering affect to the action if fouling shortened the chamber where the shoulder is. The 45/75 isn't known for great long range accuracy I don't think. 300gr. bullet and 75gr. powder. Like an express round not known for great accuracy but good enough for hunting at distances shorter.
I think there's more but I'd need time to leaf thru a bunch of books and older Black Powder cartridge News magaznes.
I just,in my simple mind, cataloged bottle necks as potential problems because of what I've read.
That said.....I'd like the challenge of getting an 1876 Winchester to fire 45/75's well or the same challenge in the 44/77 or 43 Spainish in a Sharps.
I don't believe there's a problem really in 1873 Winchesters firing 44/40 or the 38/40.
enyaw is offline  
Old June 13, 2011, 11:55 AM   #11
Geezerbiker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 20, 2011
Location: Willamina, OR
Posts: 1,908
I would have to look through a bunch of old articles, but I too remember something about bottle necked cartridges having a fouling problem with black powder. Even the popular bottle neck rounds from the black power days didn't have as much bottle neck as say, the .30-06 did.

Tony
Geezerbiker is offline  
Old June 13, 2011, 12:17 PM   #12
MJN77
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 27, 2009
Location: on a hill in West Virginia
Posts: 789
Quote:
Even the popular bottle neck rounds from the black power days didn't have as much bottle neck as say, the .30-06 did.
.30-06 was never a black powder round. It was developed on 1906 to replace the.30-03 round, that was the first chambering of the 1903 Springfield rifle, that replaced the .30-40 Krag round that the U.S. adopted in 1896 as it's first smokeless cartridge, and used in the panish-American war. All were smokeless rounds.
MJN77 is offline  
Old June 13, 2011, 02:00 PM   #13
Geezerbiker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 20, 2011
Location: Willamina, OR
Posts: 1,908
I never said the '06 was a BP round. I didn't say but implied it was developed after the BP era ended.

As I recall the .32 Winchester special was developed for people that insisted on loading BP long after it was no longer practical. The .32 has less neck down than the .30-30 and is supposed to work better with BP.

But it proves my point that bottle neck rounds became more popular after smokeless powders were phased in...

Tony
Geezerbiker is offline  
Old June 13, 2011, 02:26 PM   #14
Hardcase
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 14, 2009
Location: Sunny Southern Idaho
Posts: 1,909
Quote:
As I recall the .32 Winchester special was developed for people that insisted on loading BP long after it was no longer practical. The .32 has less neck down than the .30-30 and is supposed to work better with BP.
Winchester's story is that the cartridge was developed to fit between the .30-30 and .30-40. Supposedly it would be more powerful than the former without the recoil of the latter. I don't think that Winchester would be inclined to produce a cartridge just to facilitate reloading - they sold ammo, after all.

Certainly, though, it could be loaded with black powder and Winchester even advertised that, but I just don't think that the company would create a cartridge just for that reason. I think that it's more likely a fortunate byproduct of the slower twist rate that allowed for less fouling.

Of course, as it turned out, the .30-30 ended up being a whole lot more popular.
__________________
Well we don't rent pigs and I figure it's better to say it right out front because a man that does like to rent pigs is... he's hard to stop - Gus McCrae
Hardcase is offline  
Old June 13, 2011, 05:32 PM   #15
Geezerbiker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 20, 2011
Location: Willamina, OR
Posts: 1,908
What I posted about the .32 Win Special came out of an old Speer reloading manual. So if they got it wrong, so did I...

Tony
Geezerbiker is offline  
Old June 13, 2011, 05:57 PM   #16
Mike Irwin
Staff
 
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 41,374
"I don't think that Winchester would be inclined to produce a cartridge just to facilitate reloading - they sold ammo, after all."

Actually, Winchester did sell components.

As today, they recognized that there were going to be people who rolled their own no matter what, so they might as well grab that part of the market instead of relinquishing it to Ideal or Lyman.

"Certainly, though, it could be loaded with black powder and Winchester even advertised that, but I just don't think that the company would create a cartridge just for that reason."

Actually, yeah, they would. It's called hedging your bets.

When the .32 Winchester came out, smokeless powder was still far from being a sure thing and there were a LOT of people who didn't want anything to do with it, or they wanted to be able to make sure that no matter what happened with smokeless, they weren't going to have a rifle that was going to be obsolete.

The .32 Winchester Special was that cartridge.
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza

Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.
Mike Irwin is offline  
Old June 13, 2011, 10:24 PM   #17
Ideal Tool
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 6, 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,080
Hello, Andy Griffith. I really should be able to give you a definate answer on this one, as I have two rollingblocks, one chambered in .40-70 str. (2 1/2"), and another in .40-70 bn. (2/1/4"), but I have not got around to trying black in the b.n. case...yet! That said, when I had the b.n. made up by Lone Star, Mr. Higgenbotham thought the fouling problems on the b.n. cases were overated..at least he didn't find mine to be so in test firing. I have heard there are problems in compressing the charge...But with the Swiss powders, compression is not recommended..This is what I hope to find out. One other thing to think about...Every military cartridge of a major European power at that time was bottlenecked. And most were paper-patched..which makes fouling control even more critical.
Ideal Tool is offline  
Old June 14, 2011, 06:29 AM   #18
Mike Irwin
Staff
 
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 41,374
"Every military cartridge of a major European power at that time was bottlenecked."

The British started out with the .577 Snider, which was a straight case, for about 10 years.

There were also a few other straight-case European military rounds, but you're correct, almost all were bottlenecked to one degree or another.
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza

Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.
Mike Irwin is offline  
Old June 14, 2011, 07:36 AM   #19
Andy Griffith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 14, 2009
Location: Macon Co. NC
Posts: 591
I just wanted to figure out if the non-traditional .45 Colt loaded with BP would be much more troublesome than the .44-40 in a lever rifle, and should spend a bit more time looking for one in that caliber.

The correct answer is...I should get both.
However, I don't think money will allow that...so I'll just have to settle for one or the other.
__________________
Barney Fife: "Nip it, nip it, nip it!"
Andy Griffith:"Oh now Barn'...."
Andy Griffith is offline  
Old June 14, 2011, 07:50 AM   #20
Hawg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 16,177
Other than a little fouling in the action it should be fine. I hear of more feeding issues with magnums feeding specials.
Hawg is offline  
Old June 14, 2011, 09:23 AM   #21
Jbar4Ranch
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 19, 1999
Location: Near Helena, Montana
Posts: 1,719
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Griffith
I'm thinking I want a nice new rifle in .44-40, likely a Uberti 1860 rifle.
Any reason I should not get one in .45 Colt for blackpowder?
Ummm, because you want one in .44-40?
__________________
Sometimes the squeaky wheel gets replaced...

SASS 47015
Jbar4Ranch is offline  
Old June 14, 2011, 09:53 AM   #22
enyaw
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 28, 2008
Posts: 134
There are problems with the 45 Colt using black in the lever guns. The 44-40 is considered a better choice due to less blow back then a 45 Colt . people have tried annealing 45 case necks. They have tried fire formed cases. They have tried thinning the walls where the bullet seats.
I think the answer to the fouling blow back problem with the 45 Colt in the lever gun was to use a FIRM CRIMP on the heavier bullet and a full charge of blackpowder. Fouling would get back into the action since there would be black on one side of the case showing blowback was happening.
Anywhoooo......after all the cockamamee things tried the logical ones just used a simple remedy with a firm crimp and a full charge of powder in the 45 Colt. The use of FFFg over FFg may be part of it as well as annealing the top of the case that gets work hardened from resizing.
That said... using fire formed cases and seating the heavier bullet with a full load of black powder and bullet firmly crimped worked to stop the blow back as far as I remember.
It's not that the 45 Colt didn't shoot well enough but that fouling got dragged back into the action and the use of lots of lube made the action drag or be sticky.
I'm sure if this same post was initiated at the CASS CITY forum the results would be worth reading since they deal with this and I've read a lot over there about people having first hand experience with blackpowder and the 45 Colt and the lever gun.
The loadinng proceedure for the 45 Colt gave one good solution and the other was just get the 44-40 with the thinner case walls.
Loading the 44-40 came upand a knowledgeable reloader gave a good solution to reloading with the 44-40and it's thin case walls. The answer was a good logical one as any reloader of the 44-40 would know. Use an expander to expand the case more for the bullet so the cases wouldn't collaspe.
Modern guns want to use .429 bullets and the loading dies want .427 bullets so......use a bullet that fits the gun and get an expander in the expander die that accomodates that bullet instead of trying to push a .429 into a case sized and expanded to use a .427 bullet. A bevel on the inside of the case throat is a help too but that gets done on a lot opf cartridges anyway. Using case lube helps too.
I've fired blackpowder 45 Colts from a fine,seemingly, a "One in One Thousand" type rifle. Very accurate even way way out there.
I did get some barrel fouling and went to using a thin lube pill on the powder and the Lyman 454190 mould for bullets sized to .452. I did get dirty into the action and would disassemble the action and clean it but....that's no biggie. A lever gun Winchester 1873 Model is easy to take apart. Part of the experience and the enjoyment.
I'd bring this "45 Colt in the lever gun" up at CASS CITY. Then decide whst to get between 44-40 and 45 Colt in the lever gun.
I don't remember getting much "sticky" from fouling and lube in my rifle using black. Some but not too much but......I wasn't firing the lever gun as fast as a full auto machine gun either. I was just getting rid of ground hogs that dug holes in the farm fields. ha ha ha More ground hogs met their maker from my 1873 Winchester(Uberti) than any other rifle or hand gun I have. Beautiful rifle and wonderfully accurate with the 45 Colt cartridge. The recoilis pleasant and I didn't even have the need for ear protection. Of course I'm half deaf anyway from firing guns. ha ha ha
People wouldn't believe I could drill those ground hogs way way out there in the plowed fields or grass pastures until they would go for a walk with me and my rifle. I had drilled them hole diggin critters out at the 500 yard mark on more than one occaision. ha ha ha I missed them a few times too. Well.... maybe more than a few times. ha ha ha I usually at least threw dirt on them with that 45 bullet.
One strange thing.....the 45 from the lever gun ,going slower probably, killed them critters one the spot where as the Sharps rifle with a round nose bullet could drill them and they still run a good distance and get back in the holes.......denying the buzzards their super.
enyaw is offline  
Old June 14, 2011, 10:54 AM   #23
Mike Irwin
Staff
 
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 41,374
DUDE!

Paragraphs!

My eyes are bleeding!
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza

Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.
Mike Irwin is offline  
Old June 14, 2011, 11:21 AM   #24
Scorch
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2006
Location: Washington state
Posts: 15,248
Quote:
In one book an expert states that in comparable rifles the bottle necks can't be made to shoot as consistantly accurate as a straight wall.
There were many, many bottlenecked target rifle rounds. Take a look at Cartridges Of The World if you have any doubts. There were a lot of 40-caliber target cartridges, and many target rifles of the 1880-1900 era were 40-caliber. Bottlenecked cartridges provide very consistent velocities, (good for target shooters), but typically shoot lighter weight smaller diameter bullets (good for target shooters but not for hunters). Hunters wanted the most power available, meaning they gravitated towards larger, heavy bullets since velocity was going to be about the same.

One reason so many straight-wall cartridges stuck around has to do with the case size limitations of the available actions, and the limited velocity of BP rounds (typically around 1,500 fps max). One reason there were so many .45-70 rifles around had little to do with the cartridge being "better", it had to do with availability of ammo. The Army used to support the civilian marksmanship programs by providing ammunition, which meant you shot .45-70 ammunition unless you wanted to provide your own. The .45-75 and .45-90 cartridges were widely acknowledged to be "better" than the .45-70, but ammo was harder to get and expensive, so people shot .45-70.
__________________
Never try to educate someone who resists knowledge at all costs.
But what do I know?
Summit Arms Services
Scorch is offline  
Old June 15, 2011, 09:28 PM   #25
Mike Irwin
Staff
 
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 41,374
One point about many of the European "bottlenecked" cartridges...

I was going through Jean Huon's Military Rifle and Machine Gun Cartridges for another reason tonight, and decided to skim through some of the old blackpowder European rounds that were mentioned as being bottleneck rounds.

If you take a close look at them, many of these cartridges, like the 11 mm Mauser and 11mm French Gras, really weren't bottlenecked in the sense that we understand it today.

Many had the bottlenecks near the mid portion of the case.

Looking at many of the old American black powder cartridges, the same is true.

The effect is, then, to give the cartridge an extremely long "neck" in which the bullet is fully supported by this neck, unlike today's cartridges where the neck well may be shorter than the bullet.

If my thinking is correct, what has been discussed here, that fouling was an issue with bottlenecked cartridges, might not have been as much of an issue with these rounds with the bottleneck in the midportion of the case.
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza

Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.
Mike Irwin is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.06744 seconds with 10 queries