Hey let's get something straight guys - Page 2

CaptainCrossman · May 9, 2009, 09:29 AM

B.L.E.
Senior Member

Join Date: 2008-12-20
Posts: 217

I'm not sure if that test proved how strong the ROA is or if it simply proved how erratic nitro powders are when simply lit on fire with a percussion cap. It's quite possible that the powder simply burned and the pressure needed to unseat the balls and push them out of the barrel was below the powder's fast burning threshold.

I believe the test pistol was modified to accept a shotgun primer so it would ignite in a normal fashion- it's been a while since I researched that information, can't exactly remember where it was, but I'll try to find it

here is 5 different ROA's that were converted in various ways, to smokeless powder- it is notable that a few of these guns have the loading info stamped into the cylinder, so there's no doubt what is safe/proofed in the gun- also they use shotgun primers

http://www.muzzleloading.co.uk/nitro...geroldarmy.htm

thanks for info BLE, I've been perusing your older posts, and apparently you have already experimented with the ROA and smokeless powder, by using blackpowder to prime the smokeless in the ROA- with a degree of success. One of your older posts also addresses the empty space in the chamber issue, which may actually be worse than a full cylinder of powder.

i.e. the full cylinder of Bullseye in the ROA test, may be less dangerous than half a cylinder. If an air space developed in the middle, and powder was in the front and back of cylinder, 2 flame fronts/pressure waves would develop, which smash together as detonation, and could then blow the gun open

I'd agree a slow powder drastically underloaded, may be worse than a faster powder filled to the top- I never like air spaces in cartridges or in c/b guns, but sometimes have to live with it

just like detonation of fuels in an automobile or racing engine, creates spark knock/ping and engine damage, from uncontrolled combustion of the gas- not exactly the same principal, because higher octane is actually slower burning fuel, to prevent detonation- but it makes sense the same can happen in a gun.

B.L.E. · May 9, 2009, 09:50 AM

D. Delozier.

I just got a can of Trail Boss also and tried in in my .357 reloads. Four grains of TB and 158 grain flat point round nose Lasercast bullets chronographs at about 780 fps out of the 5.5 inch Ruger Vaquero and about 900 fps out of the Marlin Cowboy II rifle.
What I really like about this powder is that a double charge runs the case over so you won't accidentally double charge a case. Also, it seems to be pretty accurate in the rifle.

CaptainCrossman · May 9, 2009, 10:19 AM

looking through the archives here, there are posts by shooters who loaded ROA's with smokeless on a regular basis, one loaded a rifle with it too- here's the link and posts- the posts and verbage are as found in the thread, not my wording:

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/...d.php?t=163281

Old 2005-02-26, 11:06 PM #10
care-less
Senior Member

Join Date: 2004-06-06
Posts: 136

I believe that the slower burning rifle powders have been sucessfully used as a black powder substitute, but only in large bore black powder rifles. I can't offhand recall the formula; but I have read the info and found it interesting. I tried it in a black powder rifle ( a very heavily built 1" across the flats 54 cal). It seemed to work rather well. I do not know of any literature on slow burning powders being substituted in cap and ball revolvers. I have however used unique for many years in an Old Army. I basically use moderate loads for the 44 special and have had no problems. Wouldn't even know where to start with slow burning magnum powders; and could not recommend that you try it either.
care-less is offline Report Post
care-less
View Public Profile
Send a private message to care-less
Find More Posts by care-less
Add care-less to Your Contacts
Old 2009-01-26, 04:07 PM #11
gunsmithing
Member

Join Date: 2007-05-22
Posts: 25

I have loaded and fired the Ruger Old Army with smokless loads. The method is not for beginners. First see how many grains of water your cylinder holds nwith room for the bullet.(per chamber) Then look at the charts for what smokeless powder cartridge holds that much water. Mine equaled the 45 colt auto magnum. Then load for a light load in that cartridge. Remember to always seat your bullet so the nose is even with the face of the cylinder. If you get it even 1/10 of an inch below, pull the bullet, empty the chamber of powder, and start over. The pressures will sky rocket with a smaller burning chamber. DO NOT USE BULLSEYE. It is way too hot, and way too easy to double charge.
If you blow yourself up, it is on you. It worked for me, but not maybe for someone else.
Ruger told me that the cylinders of the Old Army are the same metal as the Blackhawk, and tempered the same. They will withstand 60,000 units for a proof load.
I did find out that the recoil caused the bullets to come out of the chambers and tie up the gun. This is because you cannot crimp them into place like the cartridge is able to do.
I fired 45 auto loads, and light 45 magnum loads with no problems other than the jumping of the bullet.
If it will not go off, put 1 grain,(I mean 1 small kernal) of blackpowder in the base. This causes the ignition to light up the smokeless better.
I was using 2400.
Remember this is a stunt for the VERY ADVANCED RELOADER. So all you kids, when you blow yourself up, do not come crying to me. I have been doing this reloading business for 30 years, for myself and the government. I still mess up on occasion, like when I mixed up on powders and used Herco instead of 2400. I ruined a good single action 44 special on that one. SO if you think you can follow the directions perfectly, understand what I am saying, and have BIG BALLS and a gun you are willing to destroy, go ahead. BUT ONE MESS UP AND THAT MAY BE ALL. TOTALLY ALL."

CaptainCrossman · May 9, 2009, 10:45 AM

I just PM'd the member named "care-less" and he replied, perhaps he may chime in on this thread- here's his reply- I expected this, because common sense tells me, any stainless gun tested to 60,000 CUP, isn't going to blow up with a measley 4-5 grains of powder ! The ROA cylinder is in the same league as a model 1903 military Springfield, and M-98 Mauser bolt actions- and we all know how strong those are. There are many commercial pump and lever rifles on the market new today, that won't proof to 60,000 CUP. This is why I'd bet Vegas odds the ROA would NOT blow up with small loads of smokeless, and why in an emergency pinch I'd do it, if my life depended on it- but otherwise I would not. I like the big boom/smoke of BP, it's part of the payoff.

care-less
Senior Member

Join Date: 2004-06-06
Posts: 136

Re: smokeless powder in the ROA ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrossman
I read your post about using smokeless powder in the Ruger Old Army, following 44 special loads-did you actually use loose powder, a percussion cap, and a round ball ? or was this a cartridge conversion cylinder ?

ANSWER:
I used loose power just as if it was black powder. compressed the ball down onto it and fired away. Worked fine! Just wanted to try it, and I kept the loads light. The revolver is plenty strong.

B.L.E. · May 9, 2009, 11:01 AM

Quote:

thanks for info BLE, I've been perusing your older posts, and apparently you have already experimented with the ROA and smokeless powder, by using blackpowder to prime the smokeless in the ROA- with a degree of success. One of your older posts also addresses the empty space in the chamber issue, which may actually be worse than a full cylinder of powder.

Yes I did experiment with this and it was this experiment that got me to thinking that nitro powder really needs a sealed primer to ignite it.

I'm not saying what the loads were, if anyone wants to try this, they are on their own.

olyinaz · May 9, 2009, 12:51 PM

>>>I just got a can of Trail Boss also and tried in in my .357 reloads. Four grains of TB and 158 grain flat point round nose Lasercast bullets chronographs at about 780 fps out of the 5.5 inch Ruger Vaquero and about 900 fps out of the Marlin Cowboy II rifle.

What I really like about this powder is that a double charge runs the case over so you won't accidentally double charge a case. Also, it seems to be pretty accurate in the rifle.<<<

Indeed I think that's exactly what they were trying to accomplish with that powder no? A friend shooting next to me blew up his S&W Mod. 66 .357 shooting S&W factory .38 specials one day! Thankfully neither one of us was hurt (amazingly so since I was standing three feet away next to the revolver when it blew) and near as we could determine the .38 round must have been double charged in the factory. The fact that it was a new S&W revolver shooting S&W branded ammo made it pretty easy for S&W - they sent him a new gun with a trite letter of apology...which he immediately sold and bought a Ruger Redhawk! He was traumatized by the event.

When I start loading .45 Colts I'm going to very seriously consider Trail Boss.

Were it not for the variables of positive ignition and several other vexing issues that we have in cap & ball guns I don't doubt for a second that a safe load of Trail Boss could be worked up for the ROA, but as I've read and thought about this I just don't see how it ever works well with caps. (Obligatory forum safety addition: Not a suggestion, just thinking out loud.)

Those 209 primed conversion cylinders sure are interesting however!

Regards,
Oly

olyinaz · May 9, 2009, 01:42 PM

>>>Yes I did experiment with this and it was this experiment that got me to thinking that nitro powder really needs a sealed primer to ignite it.

I'm not saying what the loads were, if anyone wants to try this, they are on their own.<<<

Well there you have it. As I suspected it certainly is possible, it's just that the variables and the somewhat weak ignition of a cap just don't make it practical (or remotely wise for 99.9% of people).

What a long journey! This was pretty much what I was wondering in the first place a few days ago.

Thanks,
Oly

May 9, 2009, 09:29 AM	#26
CaptainCrossman Junior member Join Date: April 2, 2009 Posts: 381	B.L.E. Senior Member Join Date: 2008-12-20 Posts: 217 I'm not sure if that test proved how strong the ROA is or if it simply proved how erratic nitro powders are when simply lit on fire with a percussion cap. It's quite possible that the powder simply burned and the pressure needed to unseat the balls and push them out of the barrel was below the powder's fast burning threshold. I believe the test pistol was modified to accept a shotgun primer so it would ignite in a normal fashion- it's been a while since I researched that information, can't exactly remember where it was, but I'll try to find it here is 5 different ROA's that were converted in various ways, to smokeless powder- it is notable that a few of these guns have the loading info stamped into the cylinder, so there's no doubt what is safe/proofed in the gun- also they use shotgun primers http://www.muzzleloading.co.uk/nitro...geroldarmy.htm thanks for info BLE, I've been perusing your older posts, and apparently you have already experimented with the ROA and smokeless powder, by using blackpowder to prime the smokeless in the ROA- with a degree of success. One of your older posts also addresses the empty space in the chamber issue, which may actually be worse than a full cylinder of powder. i.e. the full cylinder of Bullseye in the ROA test, may be less dangerous than half a cylinder. If an air space developed in the middle, and powder was in the front and back of cylinder, 2 flame fronts/pressure waves would develop, which smash together as detonation, and could then blow the gun open I'd agree a slow powder drastically underloaded, may be worse than a faster powder filled to the top- I never like air spaces in cartridges or in c/b guns, but sometimes have to live with it just like detonation of fuels in an automobile or racing engine, creates spark knock/ping and engine damage, from uncontrolled combustion of the gas- not exactly the same principal, because higher octane is actually slower burning fuel, to prevent detonation- but it makes sense the same can happen in a gun. Last edited by CaptainCrossman; May 9, 2009 at 09:49 AM.

May 9, 2009, 10:19 AM	#28
CaptainCrossman Junior member Join Date: April 2, 2009 Posts: 381	smokeless in an ROA- it's been done here looking through the archives here, there are posts by shooters who loaded ROA's with smokeless on a regular basis, one loaded a rifle with it too- here's the link and posts- the posts and verbage are as found in the thread, not my wording: http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/...d.php?t=163281 Old 2005-02-26, 11:06 PM #10 care-less Senior Member Join Date: 2004-06-06 Posts: 136 I believe that the slower burning rifle powders have been sucessfully used as a black powder substitute, but only in large bore black powder rifles. I can't offhand recall the formula; but I have read the info and found it interesting. I tried it in a black powder rifle ( a very heavily built 1" across the flats 54 cal). It seemed to work rather well. I do not know of any literature on slow burning powders being substituted in cap and ball revolvers. I have however used unique for many years in an Old Army. I basically use moderate loads for the 44 special and have had no problems. Wouldn't even know where to start with slow burning magnum powders; and could not recommend that you try it either. care-less is offline Report Post care-less View Public Profile Send a private message to care-less Find More Posts by care-less Add care-less to Your Contacts Old 2009-01-26, 04:07 PM #11 gunsmithing Member Join Date: 2007-05-22 Posts: 25 I have loaded and fired the Ruger Old Army with smokless loads. The method is not for beginners. First see how many grains of water your cylinder holds nwith room for the bullet.(per chamber) Then look at the charts for what smokeless powder cartridge holds that much water. Mine equaled the 45 colt auto magnum. Then load for a light load in that cartridge. Remember to always seat your bullet so the nose is even with the face of the cylinder. If you get it even 1/10 of an inch below, pull the bullet, empty the chamber of powder, and start over. The pressures will sky rocket with a smaller burning chamber. DO NOT USE BULLSEYE. It is way too hot, and way too easy to double charge. If you blow yourself up, it is on you. It worked for me, but not maybe for someone else. Ruger told me that the cylinders of the Old Army are the same metal as the Blackhawk, and tempered the same. They will withstand 60,000 units for a proof load. I did find out that the recoil caused the bullets to come out of the chambers and tie up the gun. This is because you cannot crimp them into place like the cartridge is able to do. I fired 45 auto loads, and light 45 magnum loads with no problems other than the jumping of the bullet. If it will not go off, put 1 grain,(I mean 1 small kernal) of blackpowder in the base. This causes the ignition to light up the smokeless better. I was using 2400. Remember this is a stunt for the VERY ADVANCED RELOADER. So all you kids, when you blow yourself up, do not come crying to me. I have been doing this reloading business for 30 years, for myself and the government. I still mess up on occasion, like when I mixed up on powders and used Herco instead of 2400. I ruined a good single action 44 special on that one. SO if you think you can follow the directions perfectly, understand what I am saying, and have BIG BALLS and a gun you are willing to destroy, go ahead. BUT ONE MESS UP AND THAT MAY BE ALL. TOTALLY ALL."

May 9, 2009, 09:50 AM	#27
B.L.E. Senior Member Join Date: December 20, 2008 Location: Somewhere on the Southern shore of Lake Travis, TX Posts: 2,603	D. Delozier. I just got a can of Trail Boss also and tried in in my .357 reloads. Four grains of TB and 158 grain flat point round nose Lasercast bullets chronographs at about 780 fps out of the 5.5 inch Ruger Vaquero and about 900 fps out of the Marlin Cowboy II rifle. What I really like about this powder is that a double charge runs the case over so you won't accidentally double charge a case. Also, it seems to be pretty accurate in the rifle.

May 9, 2009, 10:45 AM	#29
CaptainCrossman Junior member Join Date: April 2, 2009 Posts: 381	I just PM'd the member named "care-less" and he replied, perhaps he may chime in on this thread- here's his reply- I expected this, because common sense tells me, any stainless gun tested to 60,000 CUP, isn't going to blow up with a measley 4-5 grains of powder ! The ROA cylinder is in the same league as a model 1903 military Springfield, and M-98 Mauser bolt actions- and we all know how strong those are. There are many commercial pump and lever rifles on the market new today, that won't proof to 60,000 CUP. This is why I'd bet Vegas odds the ROA would NOT blow up with small loads of smokeless, and why in an emergency pinch I'd do it, if my life depended on it- but otherwise I would not. I like the big boom/smoke of BP, it's part of the payoff. care-less Senior Member Join Date: 2004-06-06 Posts: 136 Re: smokeless powder in the ROA ? Quote: Originally Posted by CaptainCrossman I read your post about using smokeless powder in the Ruger Old Army, following 44 special loads-did you actually use loose powder, a percussion cap, and a round ball ? or was this a cartridge conversion cylinder ? ANSWER: I used loose power just as if it was black powder. compressed the ball down onto it and fired away. Worked fine! Just wanted to try it, and I kept the loads light. The revolver is plenty strong.

May 9, 2009, 12:51 PM	#31
olyinaz Senior Member Join Date: February 24, 2009 Location: Arizona Posts: 877	>>>I just got a can of Trail Boss also and tried in in my .357 reloads. Four grains of TB and 158 grain flat point round nose Lasercast bullets chronographs at about 780 fps out of the 5.5 inch Ruger Vaquero and about 900 fps out of the Marlin Cowboy II rifle. What I really like about this powder is that a double charge runs the case over so you won't accidentally double charge a case. Also, it seems to be pretty accurate in the rifle.<<< Indeed I think that's exactly what they were trying to accomplish with that powder no? A friend shooting next to me blew up his S&W Mod. 66 .357 shooting S&W factory .38 specials one day! Thankfully neither one of us was hurt (amazingly so since I was standing three feet away next to the revolver when it blew) and near as we could determine the .38 round must have been double charged in the factory. The fact that it was a new S&W revolver shooting S&W branded ammo made it pretty easy for S&W - they sent him a new gun with a trite letter of apology...which he immediately sold and bought a Ruger Redhawk! He was traumatized by the event. When I start loading .45 Colts I'm going to very seriously consider Trail Boss. Were it not for the variables of positive ignition and several other vexing issues that we have in cap & ball guns I don't doubt for a second that a safe load of Trail Boss could be worked up for the ROA, but as I've read and thought about this I just don't see how it ever works well with caps. (Obligatory forum safety addition: Not a suggestion, just thinking out loud.) Those 209 primed conversion cylinders sure are interesting however! Regards, Oly

May 9, 2009, 01:42 PM	#32
olyinaz Senior Member Join Date: February 24, 2009 Location: Arizona Posts: 877	>>>Yes I did experiment with this and it was this experiment that got me to thinking that nitro powder really needs a sealed primer to ignite it. I'm not saying what the loads were, if anyone wants to try this, they are on their own.<<< Well there you have it. As I suspected it certainly is possible, it's just that the variables and the somewhat weak ignition of a cap just don't make it practical (or remotely wise for 99.9% of people). What a long journey! This was pretty much what I was wondering in the first place a few days ago. Thanks, Oly