Lead used in 'Old West' cartridges?

[chris in va]

A dangerous thing, but I got to thinking...

What sort of lead was used in old 1800's pistols and rifles such as the 45 Colt and 45-70?

Reason I ask, the 45 ACP replaced the 45 Colt with similar pressures. If they just used pure lead back then, would it be reasonable to do so with mild ACP's?

[totalloser]

I can't speak to .45colt, but I think .45-70 used a paper patch, so significanlty different process. Based on currently available information, I would be hesitant to use pure lead in .45colt, and I would NOT use pure lead in .45acp. I have heard folks often use a 20:1 lead/tin mix for about 12bhn. I aimed for 16+ for my .45 loads though. But I was water dropping and mostly concerned about a missed softer drop- IE wiggle room.

[Mike / Tx]

For some of my target only loads which are in the 3.5-4grs of Bullseye range I have no issues with alloy in the 8-9 BHN range which would put it somewhere in the 40-1 range. These are with 200'ish grain SWC's from the HG #130 or the Lyman or clone #452630.

The fit will be the most important thing along with the lube and then the pressure.

I have blended up small batches of alloy starting off with some pretty soft stuff when I was working on something that would work well with my HP's. These were initially shot in my 41 magnum. I can honestly say I ended up scrubbing out the barrel a time or two. None the less the alloy I am now running up to the 1300'ish FPS range with AA7 or 9, is still only in the 10-11 BHN range.

All you can do is try it and see where you end up. It's easier to add a little straight WW alloy to go harder, than to start with harder alloy and go the other way it seems.

[reloader28]

It seems like I heard or read that they used different lead/tin ratios. Like 20/1, 16/1, 10/1, 30/1.

I think 20/1 would probly be the most popular. Their metals werent as refined as ours are today so theres no telling what all was in a bullet or how hard it actually was.

[salvadore]

I have a 45/70 round from 1884 and I thought it was a pure lead bullet, but could be a high lead low tin alloy,,,,1 in 40?...My 44 Russian round looks cast because it has a wrinkle on the outside. I guess you would have to do a hardness test to get some idea.

[FrankenMauser]

Commercial bullets were generally (relatively) pure lead sweetened, and slightly hardened, with a little tin.

Bullets cast by a gunsmith or redneck/cowboy/ranch hand/hunter/farmer out in the boonies.... there's no way of knowing. They used what they could get their hands on (generally including any bullets/balls/shot they could recover from targets and game).

[res45]

Elmer Keith favorite alloy in his 44 Mag. loads was 16:1 Lead Tin. I believe Tin was really the only Lead hardening additive available for quiet some time. I need to do some digging into my old Lyman cast bullet manual to find out.

[reloader28]

A point of interest, I also heard somewhere that Lewis and Clark had gun powder in lead canisters.
When it was empty, they melted it and made some boolits.
Whether thats true or not, I dont know.

[FrankenMauser]

A point of interest, I also heard somewhere that Lewis and Clark had gun powder in lead canisters.
When it was empty, they melted it and made some boolits.
Whether thats true or not, I dont know.

'Tis true, indeed. It was the idea of Captain Lewis, to save weight and space, and simultaneously provide the appropriate proportions of lead to gunpowder (allowing for some powder loss, waste, and spoilage).

4 lbs of powder was packed in 8 lb lead canisters. It is mentioned very briefly a few times, but most specifically in his Feb 1, 1806 journal entry:

...today we opened and examined all our ammunition, which had been secured in leaden canesters. we found twenty seven of the best rifle powder, 4 of common rifle, three of glaized and one of the musqut powder in good order, [9] perfectly as dry as when first put in the canesters, altho' the whole of it from various accedents has been for hours under the water. these cannesters contain four lbds. of powder each and 8 of lead. had it not have been for that happy expedient which I devised of securing the powder by means of the lead, we should not have had a single charge of powder at this time. three of the canesters which had been accedentally bruized and cracked, one which was carelessly stoped, and a fifth that had been penetrated with a nail, were a little dammaged; these we gave to the men stock to last us back; and we always take care to put a proportion of it in each canoe, to the end that should one canoe or more be lost we should still not be entirely bereft of ammunition...

[chris in va]

Fascinating.

So here's another question. Casting bullets using a mold is a fairly simple process. But if those pioneers wanted to reload those cases, would they have had the means to do so...primers, dies etc? Or did everyone back then simply rely on a manufacturer for their ammo? Perhaps a local reloader?

I suspect some people were a bit frustrated with this as previous firearms (muzzleloaders) could be charged with individual components and bullets made over the campfire.

I love a good history lesson.

[bedbugbilly]

Just do a search on eBay for "antique bullet molds" "antique loading tools", etc. and you'll find various loading tools made by such companies as Ideal and Winchester for a wide variety of cartridges from the late 1800's.

I have shot BP for over 50 years and have cast a lot of round ball - usually I tried to use as pure of lead that i could, but soetimes, like our ancestors, you have to use what you have.

I love 38 spl. I recently picked up a fairly decent Winchester mold for the "38 S & W Spl" (38 spl.) I have cast a number of rounds out of it - they are falling at about 160 to 162 gr. - it is the standard round nose slug - a tad longer than the round nose that falls from a Lee mold that I have that is classed aas a 150 gr. I love vintage handguns - I got the Winchester mold just to try it out and see what it would do. The rounds I cast are out of "range lead" but I have some nice soft lead that i'm going to use as well. I'm going to shoot them out of my Ruger New Vaquero.

In the 1800s, molds, loading tools, components were available and I'm sure wierre widely utilized by many. Today, we get too caught up with the technology, ballistics, FPS, etc. You have to remember that for most back then, the primary use of their handguns and rifles were limited SD but more widely, putting meat on the table and shooting critters that would harm the livestock. If it would go in the cartridge and ultimately out the barrel and do the job, I doubt very much if they were too concerned with the things we are today. Today, we hunt because we want to, they hunted because they had to (for the average person). Today, our guns are really part of a hobby, back then, they were everyday utility tools needed to hunt and protect.

I don't think that things have really changd a whole lot though - back then, factory made cartrtidges were available for those that could afford them - the same as they are today. And then, there were those who could save miney by "rolling their own" either as a way to save money or as a result of being in isolated areas where it was a long way to travel to get to a source of ready made cartridges. Today, we reload - sometimes for the same reasons - save money, lack of ready made cartridges, expense of factory made cartrtidges, etc. I think that such companies as Winchester and Ideal, as well as others recognized that there was a market for reloading tools and there was a niche for them in thier product lines. For the average "Joe", if the metal would melt in a small ladle over a wood fire (and I have cast many bullets this way) - and cast a bullet that would fit the case, he wasn't too concerned on the hardness it was - he was more concerned about if it would "do the job".

Interesting thread - glad you posted it!

[chris in va]

So they had dies, primers and presses available? Interesting.

[salvadore]

nevermind

[Beagle333]

I don't think the pioneers in question reloaded any cases. Lewis and Clark wandered around somewhere between 1804-1806. There were also many different tools available for reloading cartridges in the late 1800s. But brass cartridges as we know and use them (boxer primed), I believe began somewhere around 1865. It may not be the exact date, but it's close enough to know that L&C didn't use any.

[chris in va]

L&C didn't use any because they had an air gun.

[FrankenMauser]

L&C didn't use any because they had an air gun.

True. Reports vary, but they were reported to have between 1 and 3 of the air rifles. (Three were requisitioned.) One suspected L&C Girandoni air rifle is known to have survived (NRA museum). The rest, if they even went on the trip, vanished.

However, they also had plenty of traditional armaments. Again, sources don't agree. But, the lowest inventory numbers listed for the expedition show 15 Kentucky rifles (experimental prototypes, at the time ) and one of the Girandoni air rifles. At the opposite end, some reports have them hauling more than 60 traditional rifles and muskets, and 3 of the Girandoni air rifles.

I can't provide citations right now, but there are also a couple journal entries that discuss the presence of personally-owned handguns (muzzleloaders, of course).