[Desert Scorpion]

I bought a Walker from Cabelas about half a year ago. And I have to say it is a wanderfull gun. Very big, I got use to the size and weight very quick. Packs a punch you would not believe, and I like to shoot 60 grains FFFG powder out of it. It is crazy and blows enough smoke out to make you blind for 30 seconds. I love it and recommend it to any one thinking of getting a black powder pistol. Any questions about it I will answer so ask away.

[Plastic Cowboy]

I've got a Uberti Walker from Cabela's too!!!
And yes- it is a monster of a gun. Light off all six chambers in quick succession and you will see smoke and fire like the seventh circle of hell!!!
Ohhh and that deep thunderous roar!!!!

The only thing better is my full size 500 S&W magnum!!! :evil:


Big Bore Handguns.....if you have to ask why, then you probably wouldn't understand!!!

[Franco2shoot]

Isn't it still gonna just take one Pyrodex pellet? I think the one I saw was a .44 bore and the chamber didn't look any bigger than my Colt, or Remington.

I did like the size and weight...

KKKKFL

[fineredmist]

I have read articles comparing the Walker to modern handguns and was suprised to find that it ranks with the .44 mag. It was the most powerful handgun until the developement of the .44 mag and that is saying something. The first time I heard one fire I thought is was a rifle, it is truely an impressive firearm and it is on my wish list.

[Tommygunn]

The Walker is powerful but I believe it was eclipsed by the .357 magnum not the .44 magnum.
I have a Uberti I got from Dixie Gun Works. Very Nice. I haven't shot it in quite awhile. A lot of the conoidal bullets I molded for it (it lives in a presentation case) have turned white.

[AirForceShooter]

no.
It's the 44 mag.
The Walker is a monster.

AFS

[.38 Special]

I love the Walker, but let's talk some sense:

140 gr. roundball @ 1300 fps or 220 gr. conical @ 1000 fps.

This is the fastest I've ever been able to drive anything out of a Colt Walker, with charge holes literally stuffed full of Swiss FFFg. The former ends up at 525 foot pounds and the latter at 488.

Compare this to the .357 125/1500 at 624 foot pounds, and the .44 Mag 240/1400 at 1044 foot pounds.

The classic line is that the Walker was the most powerful handgun up until the advent of the .357 Mag. The .44 is a whole 'nother world.

Not that any of it has anything to do with the fact that the Walker is one of the neatest handguns around.

[.38 Special]

BTW,

Isn't it still gonna just take one Pyrodex pellet?
Sir, you offend me. :scrutiny:

[Franco2shoot]

sorry to offend...

The Range I go to is cramped, and load'n and shooting BP is difficult even on a low turn out day... Its the main reason the I use the pellet approach.. although prepared paper cartridges look like a viable alternative...

So, newbie that I am.. I spin the cylinder dropping a pellet at a time into each chamber.. I have never seen Pyrodex come in anything but one size..(that might be interesting- or do they make hotter charges?)

Enlighten me... cuz I like the big bang and cloud of smoke.. is there a way for me to get more?


Thanks

KKKKFL

[.38 Special]

Don't take me too seriously. I think using anything but basic black in a blackpowder gun is liable to offend the gods and lead to warts and crabgrass. Or something.

I can't imagine a range so crowded that I can't manage my powder flask, and for me, finding, fiddling, and orienting the rabbit pellets is more difficult than just pouring in the correct dose of black from the flask. (With apologies to Ross Seyfried for blatently stealing his line.)

My load chain: FFFg from a flask with an appropriate spout. (Usually 50 grains for my Walker.) Invert the flask, place the fingertip over the spout, operate the lever. Return flask to upright, remove finger from spout, pour charge into cylinder. Cover with Wonder Wad. Continue around the cylinder. Then place ball on charge hole, ram fully home, and -- if I'm in the mood -- cover with grease. Continue around the cylinder. Cap, fire, repeat.

HTH!

[mec]

I don't know anything about the pellets but here's what Ive gotten with a Uberti Walker:
140 Grain Ball Charge Velocity Extreme Spread {5}
55 Goex FFFg 1001 fps 54
60 Goex FFFg 1115 fps 46
60 Gr./Vol. Pyrodex P 1221 44
60 Gr./Vol. A Pioneer 974 80
60 Gr/Vol Swiss FFF 1278 53
55 FFg 956 46
60 Gr./Vol. PyrodexRS 1045 35
37 Gr./Vol. H 777 1201 72

200 Grain Lee Bullet
40 FFFg 927 40
45 Swiss FFFg 1074 33
45Gr/Vol Pyrodex P 1087 47

170Grain Original Pattern Picket Bullet
40 Grains Swiss FFFg 1031 36
Energy 402 ft/lbs
45 Grains Goex FFFg 1026 84
45 Grains Swiss FFFg 1158 35
506 ft/lbs
45 Gr/vol. Pyrodex P 1035 57
http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=37789&d=1143738571

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=47927&stc=1&d=1163612433

[.38 Special]

Intersting to see that our numbers are so close, mec.

[Franco2shoot]

Last week I was sitting at a table and 2 feet away the guy had some sort of cannon that rattled everything including my fillings so badly that I couldn't keep track of which chamber had a pellet. I had the earplugs+headmuffs on thankfully, but the concussion from each shot was like standing on the deck of a battleship with a 16 incher going off, i would flinch each time... I bet you would have been spilling powder all over the deck..

Unfortunately, that's not uncommon on the weekends.. Through the week its not too bad and I would like to give the real dust a shot..

KKKKFL

[mec]

"Intersting to see that our numbers are so close, mec."
Noticed that myself.

[.38 Special]

I had the earplugs+headmuffs on thankfully, but the concussion from each shot was like standing on the deck of a battleship with a 16 incher going off, i would flinch each time... I bet you would have been spilling powder all over the deck..
Nawp. I've played with my BP guns next to my buddy with his .50 BMG knocking things off the bench, and next to four and eight bore BP guns that actually vibrate yer eyeballs when they go off.

The only trouble I ever had was loosing count of which cchambers had powder and which didn't. That's why I took to stopping after each powder pour and placing the wad on the chamber. Now it's impossible to screw it up.

But hey, if you're happy with the way you do things, gooodonya. No, there is no advantage with a Walker over a '60 Army -- or whatever -- if you're using pellets. Calibers are the same, and the cylinder isn't twice as long, so you're stuck with the single pellet. One more argument against pellets, IMO: they really limit your versatility. Kind of like being stuck with factory ammo in a world full of handloaders. :)

[Franco2shoot]

Yea that is just what was happening to me... losing count of what was where, and you are exactly right in that changing to totally load each was the only reliable method...

I need to take some mid-week time and practice with the black stuff when it is less crowded and I can think the process through several times until it becomes a little more rote cuz I like the notion of building my own charge.

KKKKFL

[.38 Special]

The gods are pleased with me today! :D

[Desert Scorpion]

:scrutiny: When I got my uberti Walker from Cabelas I loved it to death and shot it a lot. However within only a week the gun was loosing it's bluing from me holding it by the barrel while I watched Clint Eastwood movies for a week. So I had a multi colored gun. So I decided to make it all gray. After all most in the old west most were not blued, so I took all the bluing of the gun. know it looks aged and a kick ass gun to put on a wall hanger and mount in my room.


O and about it being compared to a 44 Magnum that it not at all true:banghead: . I know on the history channel they said that but it is not true.The muzzle velocity is way lower in the walker. However it is comparable to a 357magnum. If you load it properly. You know what is interesting is that my friend bought one from cabelas to. His is diffrent from mine, his sight is shaped totally diffrent, and his grip slant's forward more and the wood of his grip is way shaped diffrent from mine. It may seem no two are alike.

[Desert Scorpion]

O Yeah and if any of you decide to get a Walker remember that the loading lever is way different and has no catch on the front to hold it in place. With the recoil of the gun it causes the lever to 60% of the time to fall after every shot:banghead: however this was adherent in the original models as well and was fixed with the scaled down dragoon models and later models.:) You can fix it to some degree I bent my loading lever catch forward just a tad and it will still fall, but only with pyrodex and nearly not as much as before. Just to give you an idea look at MEC post and look at the picture you will see the gun’s loading lever is falling away from the barrel.

[J.T. Gerrity]

Cut down on the powder charge and the loading lever won't drop. Original cartridges for the Walker were made up with the 200 gr elongated bullet (based on design specs of 32 to the pound) and 40 grs of rifle powder, even though the cylinder would hold 57 grs with the round ball. Colt was so concerned about burst cylinders (and dropped levers) that he specifically redesigned the cylinder to hold no more than 40 grs of powder (tho' there are some who will stuff 50 grs of FFF into a Dragoon, the second incarnation of the Walker. See attached photos for comparison of Walker and Dragoon cylinders).

I use 45 grs FFF with 15 grs of instant grits when making up cartridges for use with the round ball in the Walker, and after several hundred rounds thru the pistol have never had the lever jerk it's way loose. I have to grimace when I see levers flying in the photos of folks firing their Walkers. 60 grs will certainly make a loud BOOM, but cuts down on accuracy, wastes powder, and sure puts some major strain on the rest of the gun, not to mention that the subsequent ball velocities are out of the official SASS range. Don't get me wrong, I've got no quarrel with folks who want to try out a full load for the thrill of it; I just wonder if a constant diet of high capacity loads isn't detrimental to the health of the pistol? I guess the real question is: do you want to learn how to use that hogleg, or just make noise with it?

[pohill]

I use no more than 45 grs of black powder in my Walker and the lever drops just about every time (with 45 grs the gun is very accurate). I fired 35 grs in my Pietta 1860 .44 today and the lever never dropped. Yep, gotta say the Walker lever latch was a design flaw. Colt knew it, we know it, but it's like the wedge...gotta love it.

[J.T. Gerrity]

Nearly always drops with 45 grains?!? Sounds like it's about time you replaced that spring! :) As indicated above, it doesn't have to happen... or maybe I just lucked out and got a good one? :uhoh:

[pohill]

My Walker is not that old, and the lever has dropped right from the start. Given the history of the gun, and comments from current users, I'd say you lucked out. I'm sure that if I spent some time working on it, I could get it to stay where it belongs, but I don't want to alter the gun in any way, or make it worse (always a possibility when I start bending and shaping anything metal). A simple fix is a rawhide tie-up...

[Yankee John]

You can also slightly modify the latch spring so that the lever NEVER falls; Takes about 5 minutes with a file. Caution: Just file a little at a time!

Here is a pic below.

There is also close-up pic of the modified spring in this thread too:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=215047

John

[Desert Scorpion]

I have to say that some get lucky with there walkers and others dont. My loading lever drops a lot. My friend saw me buy one so he bought one,and his as never ever ever fallen once. Even when he loaded 60 Grains Pyrodex. His sight is curved diffrent to. Same company made it though. So it seems to me none are made alike.:scrutiny:

[Plink]

The rawhide tie up is also historically accurate. The originals had the dropping lever problem too and people use rawhide to keep them in place. I kinda like the look, actually.

[sjohns]

John,
Can you post a pic with an arrow on it to show exactly where to file on it?

[Yankee John]

sjohns- The forum won't let me attach the same pic to more than one post.

But if you go to the thread that I linked in my post above, I have a very good pic of the modification in post #15.

Hope this helps!
John

[Gewehr98]

What's the success rate of preventing the loading lever from dropping under recoil? I see Yankee John said it NEVER falls, is that with full loads or just something that would make SASS happy?

The reason I ask is that the extra chamber capacity and massive size of the Colt Walker probably wasn't a fluke, and if I wanted to download such a revolver to Dragoon or 1858 Remington standards then I'd go ahead and buy that type of gun. Nor do I want an automatically-deploying monopod on the gun, as seen in many of the pictures here when the Walkers are barking. My Arisaka came with one of those, 'nuff said.

If the latch spring mod keeps that loading lever properly situated with full-house Walker loads, then I know what I'm buying myself for Christmas this year!

[sjohns]

John!
I saw that there were two notches on it. I don't own one right now, so I can't look at my own. I was just wondering where on which of those two notches. But I imagine the purpose is to keep the ends sharp/flat so that they will grip better?

[J.T. Gerrity]

Gewehr - see my post above.

[pohill]

It's a sad, cruel fact of life that levers drop. If your lever doesn't drop, you are blessed. Some levers drop all the time, some occasionally, but usually it's at a bad time, when you really need it to stay up. And women are very quick to point out the failure of your dropped lever. "HIS lever isn't dropping...why is yours?" But women are lucky - as a whole, their equipment is different, usually lever-less. If you don't have a lever, it can't drop.
Sure, there are quick fixes and remedies, but, eventually, your lever stays dropped, no matter what you do, which leads to you not using your weapon that often, or...you shoot alone so no one can see your misery.

[Yankee John]

pohill- Too funny!!! If I didn't know better I'd swear you are talking about something other than a Walkers' loading lever :evil:

sjohn, The notch where the loading lever catches the spring clip is the bigger one you see in the pic- that first little "notch" you see is actually where the spring transitions into the knob-shaped end.

My next project on the walker is to solder the spring onto the barrel; The spring is Dixie replacement that fits loosely into the dovetail (I have a piece of brass stock wedged in between now to keep it tight).

Or, I might even try some JB Weld!

John

[Gewehr98]

1. If I wanted a downloaded-capacity Dragoon, that's what I would buy. The Walker has an allure all of it's own with the massive cylinder, and I get a neat square-back trigger guard.

2. I don't much care for SASS and their powder-puff loads. It's a miracle they don't have squib loads or stuck bullets these days.

3. Burst cylinders from overcharges in the Walker don't seem prevalent. We're not running 20gr of H110, either, it's a cylinder full of FFFg or FFg in Pedersoli/Uberti steel.

4. Dropped loading levers, however, are.

5. I cast my own bullets, and may want to try a 200gr conical - so the Walker looks even more attractive to me.

6. Yankee John has come up with a simple fix, so I can have my cake and eat it, too.

7. I've been loading both muzzleloader and BP cartridge for quite a few years, and handloading centerfire smokeless for nearly 30 years. I'm neither a pressure nor velocity freak, but I see no reason to hamstring a firearm designed to handle a given load - much like I disdain commercial 8mm Mauser loads running just a hair over .30-30 Winchester numbers these days.

That's where I'm coming from.

[mec]

I think yankee john is pretty smart and would vote for J&B weld to keep the spring in place. I suspect recoil puts extra strain on the spring when the lever doesn't drop down. I use the stuff to keep other Uberti studs and such from walking out of the dovetails.
The historic occurance of blown cylinders wasn't as prevalent as we read about. It appears from one good reference that The 300 alleged blown up Walkers actually referred to the ones that were rejected prior to issue, brought up to standards and then put into service. About 190 broken walkers including those with blown cylinders were returned after the Mexican War. Very few shootable ones came back from the texas rangers. They were prone to report them lost or broken and then take them back to Texas with them. Adj/ Doctor John Ford observed that a lot of soldiers, previously accustomed to round ball loading thought that the sharp pointed picket bullet was all pointy to make it easy to load. they loaded them backwards and created a nice shaped charge in the chambers. Ford said this almost invariably blew up the revolver. Multiple dischagres and resultant explosions were also possible as the picket bullet made a great repository for spilled over powder and and undersized bullet or one cocked sideways would provide a good avenue for the sloppily loaded powder to reach the main charge.
Walker also reported that the Walkers carried farther and hit harder than the Mississippi rifles. Not true but apparently the Walkers were quite impressive in battle. In one of the first encounters after issue, the Rangers routed a superior force of Mexican army at Matamores. They were certainly very effective to fifty yards.
http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=48113&stc=1&d=1163960539

The original order called for 1000 revolvers to be issue in pairs to the mounted troops along with 500 flasks and combination tools. The army decided to issue only one revolver to each troop and none to officers creating a shortage of the necessary accoutrements. For this reason, 500 revolvers stayed in the arsenal at Baton Rouge until the war was over and were then issued to the army and federalized Texas Rangers on the frontier. By this time, colt was already starting on the transtion walkers and early Dragoons with front latching levers and shortened chambers. An officer named johnson complained about the huge size f the revolvers compaired to the Paterson five shooters blaiming the picket bullets for the need for excessively long cylinders. He wanted to go back to the more portable patersons and round ball loading. It is probable that the use of round balls was much more common in post war texas than it had been in Mexico.

[Gewehr98]

There. I said it. Now I'll never get to join the organization, because it's on record. Even Mike Venturino has taken a swipe at the practice, see here:

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_184_30/ai_n16741476

They even use blanks to pop those balloons. No thank you.

I run a full 70gr of Goex Cartridge behind a 535gr Postell in my .45-70 Sharps. I'm not afraid that it's going to explode in my face anytime soon, nor do I need to download it to keep it from falling apart.

Pictures and loads like MEC listed above make me ask why should I be forced to download a big honkin' 4 pound Walker replica, when I know I can safely run 45gr of Holy Black behind a 200gr Lee conical, or 50-60gr of same behind a .457" ball? Are they that poorly assembled, or is the current 2006 Uberti/Pietta/Pedersoli metallurgy so bad that it mimics mid-19th century steel?

I just want to shoot a big 4-pound boomer, and put it in the safe with other loud, obnoxious boomers like my Desert Eagle and Wichita Silhouette. I don't want the Walker's loading lever to fall all the time, and it appears that there's a fairly easy fix without having to resort to downloading a big revolver.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy shooting .44 Specials in my 8 3/8" S&W Model 29, but I also know I can run full-house .44 Mags in it without it disassembling itself. ;)

[hildo]

http://www.twolefthands.nl/Zwart%20Kruit/page5/20060526ColtWalkerF.jpg
Percussion cap fires

http://www.twolefthands.nl/Zwart%20Kruit/page5/20060526ColtWalkerB.jpg
60 grain swiss fffg ignites

http://www.twolefthands.nl/Zwart%20Kruit/page5/20060526ColtWalkerD.jpg
A bit of recoil

http://www.twolefthands.nl/Zwart%20Kruit/page5/20060526ColtWalkerE.jpg
And with a bit of luck on 25 meters (25 yards?)... you become a happy man!
Full loads are the way to go in my book.

[pohill]

So, am I under-loading my Walker with a measley 45-50 grs of black powder, even though it's accurate out to about 100 yards?

Damn, I gotta take my Mercury out on the highway and see what it can do. Screw 65 MPH...I know it can do twice that.

[hildo]

Must let you into a well kept secret Pohill... I'm not much of a marksman.
These photo's show a lot of luck, the next one was way off. On a 100 yards I probably would not hit the card at all. If not enyoing good scores one can always enjoy big loads.
Bet 60 grains in a new Walker is safer than doing 130mph in a Mercury:).

[pohill]

Hildo, I don't believe in luck. You hit what you were aiming at. I also don't believe in fully loading a Walker, simply because it puts strain on the gun, and, more importantly, on me. I might get one good shot with 60 grs, maybe two, but the rest would be flyers. But I do enjoy the reaction a Walker gets from those around me, even with 45 grs (I don't like the reaction I get if I drive my Mercury too fast).

Actually, I'm more fascinated with where you live; gun laws, gun availability, gun mindset, etc. Would you care to enlighten me a bit? (No, we're not planning an invasion...not yet, anyways)
Thanks.

[hildo]

Pohill, when taking aim my bullets fly 'in the general direction'. Hitting the bullsye twice for me is, although I always aim at it, a true lucky shot.
Usually I am happy with a 'more in the black than in the white' result.

Offtopic.
Sure I will enlighten you a bit, you may even be surprised at the way people here in general look at firearms.
You must understand there is a giant difference in history when comparing Holland to the United States.
In the America there was no law in the beginning and a man had to be able to defend himself against whatever came along, go hunting for food etc, which is absolutely logical.
The Dutch have always had law enforcement and regulations, therefore gunownership was not an issue. If you had a problem you would not pull your gun but use your fist, knive or call the police. The people with firearms were, and still are, soldiers, police and such. Private gun ownership has always been prohibited as far as I know, logical as well since I doubt it would made the situation safer having everybody running around with firearms. The fist is without a doubt safer.
Just about every American has grown up with or in the neighborhood of guns and this continues upto this day. It is a part of life and that is the major difference between our countries. Guns are not a part of life in Holland and have never been.

The Dutch do not have the right to bear arms, we get the priviledge to own arms, which is completely different. I actually feel privileged that our government feels that it is safe for our citizens that I own firearms. They have given me quite a responsibility. It is different to the American way of thinking but I find it not too bad. Can you see my point of view?

Gun ownership is under strict regulations obviously.
You must not have a criminal record that is younger than eight years. This is checked prior to joining a shooting club of which it is mandatory to be a member.
You must shoot at least for one year before you can get your gunpermit.
You must shoot a mimimum of 18 times a year. This is recorded at the shooting club and in a little book that you own in which you get a stamp each time you visit the shooting range.
If you shoot less than 18 times a year you will loose your permit and your gun privilege. You will have to give up your guns. The probable idea behind that being: If you do not find shooting that interesting, why own guns?
When choosing a firearm you must have an okay from your shooting club and from your local police. Usually not a problem.
We may have a maximum of 5 of justabout any firearm, pistols, revolvers, rifles, even AK47's or AR15's as long as they are not full automatic.
.50 caliber or larger is prohibited.
If a certain gun is not in stock at the gunshop it can be ordered for you.
Firearms must be stored in a safe at all times. You have acces to the key, nobody else (including your wife!)
The police may visit to inspect your gun serial numbers and if you have your papers correct etc. If you are just on your way to work you can ask them to come by another time, and they will. Sometimes there may be years between visits.
You may have a maximum of 10.000 rounds at home.
You can only buy ammunition in the caliber for guns that you own.
Blackpowder, I believe a maximum of two kilo's at home but nobody checks.

True historical blackpowder weapons are seen as antique and are free to have for anybody, which is not a general known fact however. You can hang them on the wall if you like.
All guns made before 1873 are free. Centerfire cartridge revolvers after 1873 are prohibited. Rifles/muskets/shotguns are all free as long as they have no nitro proofed barrels. All guns made after 1945 are prohibited, including blackpowder arms.
Strange... blackpowder is free as are percussion caps en round lead balls.
This not commonly known.

The general idea about firearms in the Dutch population?
If you shoot firearms you may be some kind of criminal, or there is something wrong in your head. Normal people don't use guns, they're dangerous and nothing good will come from it.
The only well known shooting sport are the regular double barrel shotgun hunters 'that blow away innocent rabbits'.
I don't feel the need of killing anything myself so I keep to paper targets. Personal preferences.

That's how it's done in Holland, quite different from the United States I think.
I envy the space you have, shooting outdoors and such. That is quite limited here.
Overall may seeme like at lot of hassle and regulations but in fact it is not too bad for a small overregulated and overcrowded country (15 million or so and it's just something like 225 miles high and less than 150 miles wide probably). I don't think it needs to be changed. although I'd like to see the maximum of 5 permit guns changed to a bit more but you can't have it all.
Everybody that is interested in the shooting sport can start shooting in Holland and that's important, unless you're a criminal ofcoarse... But they have illegal guns anyway.

And Pohill, about your Mercury. I live 40 miles from the german autobahn (highway)... there is no speed limit. Fully legal and nobody will say anything apart from 'that's a fast car' when one flies by at 160mph or more. As fast as you car or bike will go all day long (or untill you blow the engine)! :cool:

If you're interested to see some more, check my website (in dutch but pictures say more than a thousand words)
http://www.twolefthands.nl
Use the knob 'hildo's zwartkruit' for the blackpowder section.

Tada,
Hildo

[pohill]

Good info, Hildo. Thanks for taking the time.
I have to say that most Americans have not grown up with guns - most people that I know have never fired, held or seen a gun, which is a problem when it comes to the concept of legal gun ownership. More people die in car accidents or by doctor's mistakes than by firearms, but non-gunowning Americans do not want to hear those statistics. Oh well...
Anyways, thanks for the postings. I always thought the Netherlands was where Peter Pan lived (just kidding).

[.38 Special]

I also don't believe in fully loading a Walker, simply because it puts strain on the gun...
Fair enough. To me, though, full loads in the Walker strain the gun just like full loads in a .357 Magnum strain the gun. Which is to say, not really. I use my guns like they were meant to be used. If I can afford to wear them out by shooting them, I can afford to replace them once in a while.

[pohill]

"Big" Walker loads are good, cool, loud, and put a much bigger hole in a piece of paper than, say, 50 grs. But when people say they use their guns as they were meant to be used, I assume that they ride their horse to the range, wear no synthetic clothing, no eye/ear protection, mould roundballs over an open campfire, use no gas/electricity/oil in any part of the shooting/cleaning process, make their own parts when the guns break (can't go running to VTI online to order new ones), etc...Remember, we're talking 1847 here.
And that's if you can, without a doubt, claim that all shooters in 1847 used full loads all the time. Which leads to the question, whoever said a full load in a Walker was 60 grs? Apparently, a fully loaded Walker chamber was NEVER a good thing, especially with the originals.

Also, the beauty of my Ruger .357 is that I can, with no shame, shoot .38 Specials out of it, as it was also meant to do.

added info: according to Haven & Belden in A HISTORY OF THE COLT REVOLVER, "the chamber capacity (of a Walker) is approximately fifty grains of black powder..."

[hildo]

Interesting to know if shooters always used full loads back then. Anybody know?
My thought: Big guns were designed to take a big load. f you did not intend to shoot a full load it would be more logical to get yourself a smaller gun with all it's advantages as lower purchase price, less bulk and weight to haul around all day.

The original Walkers were unsafe as history books have let us know. In the case of Uberti Walkers, made of modern steel, I do not believe you will be able to blow one up no matter how much black powder is stuffed in there. Reducing loads for better accuracy or more comfort, is a personal preference, just as full loads are.
I guess the chamber capacity of 50 grains was probably measured with a conical bullet.

[mec]

The walkers came with an adjustable flask and moulds for the picket bullets. Weight estimations of the these bullets are usually in the 200+ grain range but the pedersoli mould casts a 170 grain bullet that would not fit under the loading ram if it were any longer. the proof load was as much fffg as could be crammed into the chamber under this bullet. With my uberti, this works out to 45 grains.
http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=48294&stc=1&d=1164224098
Knowing shooters, I would guess that the circa 1848 walker users would cram in as much powder as they could and then run down to see what kind of mess it made of anything they shot with it.

The needle nosed bullet is almost too wide to get in under the lever anad as far as I can tell, the uberti window is the same size as the origninal:
http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=48295&stc=1&d=1164224919

[.38 Special]

But when people say they use their guns as they were meant to be used, I assume that they ride their horse to the range, wear no synthetic clothing, no eye/ear protection, mould roundballs over an open campfire, use no gas/electricity/oil in any part of the shooting/cleaning process, make their own parts when the guns break (can't go running to VTI online to order new ones), etc...Remember, we're talking 1847 here.
Huh? What on earth does all that have to do with loading a gun to full capacity?

Also, the beauty of my Ruger .357 is that I can, with no shame, shoot .38 Specials out of it, as it was also meant to do.
Excellent point. Imagine if someone told you, though, that it was unwise and possibly unsafe to fire magnums in your .357; that it was only prudent to stick to .38s? I imagine you'd dismiss it as the rantings of a goofball. :p

[BigG]

Hey MEC, how does that pointy picket bullet fly? Does it group as well as the round balls? TIA

[pohill]

"Huh? What on earth does all that have to do with loading a gun to full capacity?"

You said, "I use my guns like they were meant to be used."
Well, what does that have to do with a full load? If you're going to use a gun (Walker) as it was meant to be used, then ride horseback and chase down Mexicans and Indians. They weren't meant to be used to impress people at a local gun club and punch really big holes in paper.

Then again, what WAS a full load? According to what I read, it was a mere 50 grs.

By the way, this is all in fun, right?

[mec]

"....how does that pointy picket bullet fly? Does it group as well as the round balls? ...."

Amazingly, they shot very well for me out to 40 yards. No bench rest work but some very tight off hand stuff. I had used some dremel bits to cone the loading ram to fit the sharp pointed bullets without distorting them. I also had slightly beveled the base of the bullet so it would sit square on the chamber mouth. This turned out to be important as I went back and tried some as cast and they were all over the paper. On that earlier picture I posted, you can see the kind of odd signature they made on the target but none of them were yawing or tumbling.

[dragongoddess]

Ever consider a Walker for conceal carry

[J.T. Gerrity]

Walkers were designed to use a 200+ grain "elongated ball" with ~ 40 grains powder. Colt issued the pistols to the army with two types of bullet molds: one single cavity mold; one six cavity mold. Both were for the "elongated ball". He did not issue a mold for a round ball, and in fact both he and Walker were concerned that only the "elongated ball" be used in the pistol.
Read "Colt's own Records", a collection of letters regarding the design and manufacture of the Walker. Very interesting reading.
If you want to use one of these pistols "the way they were meant to be used", and the "way they were designed", then you would use a 200 grain bullet with 40-50 grains. Not a round ball. Not 60 grains. Using 45 grains of BP is not "downloading"; it's using the pistol the way it was meant to be used.

[Blindshooter]

Has anybody use the R & D drop in with the walker?

BlindShooter

[BigG]

That picket bullet as you call it they also referred to as a "sugar loaf" bullet in the older documents I've read.

[mec]

This was in The Whitneyville Walker Colt by Lt.Col. Robert D. Whiting III Regarding the first or close to the first shipment received at Vera Cruz:
214 Pistols- Colt Patent
218 Powder Flasks
230 Combination tools (cone wrench, spring vice, and screwdriver)
16 Rings for spring vices
22 Sets extra springs ***
8 Sets lock work
8 sets of 6 cones
8 sets screws
22 bullet moulds casting one ball*
4 bullet moulds casting 6 balls
50,000 percussion caps
1240 pounds bar lead
200 pounds rifle powder **
*“Ball” appears to be a generic term for the conical bullets used in the Walker
** The Army pistols proof tested the Walkers with a bullet over a full charge of fffg powder.
***Note that the quartermaster believed eight sets of lock work to be sufficient to keep this shipment of pistols in operation but ordered almost three times that number of spring sets.

I looked all over for pictures of the original bullet bullet but have not been able to find any. I have had to be satisfied with the one's dropped from the pedersoli mould

The Lee 200 grain is shaped differently. It has a small diameter heal and is easy to load in the walker and other replicas. We can never know the exact performance they got with the orignal powder /bullet combinations ( and lacking chronographs, neither could they.) but here are some fun figures I got with mine:
200 Grain Lee Bullet
40 goex FFFg 927 40
45 Swiss FFFg 1074 33
45Gr/Vol Pyrodex P 1087 47

[pohill]

From an old Colt pamphlet: "FFG black powder is best for the large and medium-size revolvers, and FFFG for the small pocket models, but any grade that is available will work reasonably well."
My questions(s): what did they use "back in the day" for Walkers?
Would a "full chamber" of FFG have the same potency as one of FFFG?

Also, in a "memorandum of an agreement made this 4th day of January 1847 between Samuel Colt, inventor of Colts Patent repeating pistols- and Samuel H. Walker Capt in the U.S. Navy..."
(drop down a paragraph)

"The barrels to be nine inches long and Rifled: made of the best hammered cast steel; and of a bore suited to carry fifty round balls to the pound; and with strength sufficient for firing an elongated ball, of 32 to the pound..."

[mec]

When they ordered "rifle powder", I assumed they were talking about ffg but Whiting says that it was fffg. fifty to the pound would be 140 grains and 32 would be 218. The first definately does correspond with a round ball. Here are some 19th century colt specifications:

".44 Dragoon 41 Grains Unspecified Powder and 146 Grain Ball or 219 Grain Bullet
.44 1860 27 Grains Unspecified Powder 212 Grain Conical Bullet or 146-Grain Ball.
.44 Walker 40 to 50 Grains Unspecified Powder 212 Grain Conical Bullet.
19th Century references often do not specify powder types but those that do recommend FFG for all except the small pocket models.
Granulation is achieved by grating the powder through screens of specified sizes. Manufacturer’s standards regarding proper granulation are highly variable.
Screen sizes:
Fg 12 –16 squares per inch. Ffg 30- 50 squares per inch. FFFg 50+ squares/inch
I I don't know that you could really get 50 grains under a 212 grain bullet into the walker chambers. The bullet weights and charges used in various loadings and paper charges are widely variable. I have a couple of civil war pick up dragoon bullets they weigh 240 and 246 grains.
Guns Magazine April 1956 Page 11- " Grandpa's Muzzle Loader Comes Back" William C.L ThompsonColt .44 Dragoon 220 Grain Conical and 145 Grain Ball
40 Grains FFg and FFFg
Colt .44 Army 1860 200 Grain Conical and 140 Grain Ball
28 Grains FFg and FFFg
Navy .36 1851 & 61 140 Grain Conical and 82 Grain Ball
18 & 20 Grains FFg and FFFg
Pocket .31 1849 77-Grain Conical and 50 Grain Ball
13-14 Grains FFg and FFFg ( This load is suspect. It will not fit in the chamber of either the Colt or Remington Pocket revolvers.-mec)

It appears that happiness lies in not being too obsessive about this subject.

[pohill]

"It appears that happiness lies in not being too obsessive about this subject."
(how do you highlight quotes on these pages?)

You are correct - that's why a few posts back I said, "This is all in fun, right?"
But it sure beats talking politics, sports, or health.

[mec]

But it sure beats talking politics, sports, or health

It does.

[BigG]

I can only imagine how unwieldy a Walker would be. I have a 3rd Model Dragoon which looks like the cylinder is cut down 1/2" from the Walker, yet it is a monster. And, you are right: it sure beats talking politics or sports! :)

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i115/BigG_photos/Picture19053.jpg
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i115/BigG_photos/Picture19050.jpg

[.38 Special]

You said, "I use my guns like they were meant to be used."
Well, what does that have to do with a full load? If you're going to use a gun (Walker) as it was meant to be used, then ride horseback and chase down Mexicans and Indians. They weren't meant to be used to impress people at a local gun club and punch really big holes in paper.
Dunno about you, but none of my Walkers were made in 1847. And according to the instructions that came with my Armi San Marco version (dunno what happened to the Uberti paperwork) I should load it with "approx. 55 gr. of size FFFg Black powder". IOW, "it was meant to be used" with full loads.

Then again, what WAS a full load? According to what I read, it was a mere 50 grs.
I'll fax you a copy of the instruction manual. :neener:

By the way, this is all in fun, right?
No, I'm incredibly outraged.:)

[.38 Special]

But here's the bottom line: Somebody come up with an example of a "name brand" Walker repro that has been damaged or worn out by firing with full loads.

I've had three, two of which have been fired several thousand times apiece with full loads and are still mechanically sound.

[BigG]

"The purpose of an apostrophe is not to notify the reader that the next letter to appear will be an S."

You wouldn't know it from reading some of the stuff around here. :neener:

[hildo]

Is there a difference in felt recoil between 45 grain / conical and 60 grain / roundball?
Have never shot conicals.

[mec]

bates has one or two of those colt reissue dragoons just like the one in the picture. He hasn't fired them.

I haven't been able to get a walker to kick much at all even with 60 grain charges. It does put out a fairly tremendous amount of smoke, fire and general loudness though.

[pohill]

I made the remark about this being all in fun simply because I got into a pissing contest with a moron a few months ago on this forum, in which I started out joking and he ended up threatening me and my family.
That is not the case here, I know. I doubt, even in your rage, that you'll threaten me. :)

My Walker was not made in 1847. I wish it was. But, it is 1847 technology, and they were made to fight Mexicans and Indians....period. No apostrophe. If you want to go by the instructions provided by the Italians as far as suggested loads, that's fine...I think they said in my 1860 .44 that I should use 12 - 15 grs of FFFG. If they're wrong once, they're wrong forever in my mind. I revert back to what Colt intended for the revolvers.:banghead:

[pohill]

Traditions pamphlet Recommended Revolver Loads:
.44 Colt Walker and Dragoons .454 round (Min) 25/3f
(Max) 40/ 3f
.454 conical (Min) 20/3f
(Max) 35/ 3f


Uberti pamphlet: Target 22 - 30 roundball diameter -.454
19 - 25 conical bullet - .454

Uberti: "The full maximum charge is seldom used except for hunting or "showing off."

I kid you not...

[jplb70]

Has anybody use the R & D drop in with the walker?

BlindShooter

I was wondering the same thing.

I'm thinking of getting one of these for myself for Chistmas. I used to have a kentucky pistol when I was a kid and I want to get back into shooting. (it's been a LOOONG time). This gun looks like a hoot to shoot.:D

so anyone try one of those R & D drop ins? Are they only safe/good for cowboy ammo?

[Desert Scorpion]

I have had the R&D conversion for the Walker. It is not that great I bought it from possible shop, good site:) $200.00 . However the conversion cylinder took 45LC and every shot from the recoil made the lever drop on my gun because of the force of the bullet. I got rid of it however I know people who love it. Me personally, why convert such a good BP gun to shoot a real bullet. Just get a Peacemaker if you want to shoot 45LC. It is annoying to load too, you have to pull the wedge then take the gun all apart then take the cylinder out take the cylinder apart load the cylinder put back on the firing pins cover then reverse process. YAAAAAA that is fun:banghead:

[jplb70]

Thanx that answers my questions. I'm going to get one and have fun w/it as is.

[glen walker]

If any of ya'll remember the 'Dirty Harry' movies with Clint Eastwood, (I'vd never seen any of them) the handgun he carried was the Smith and Wesson Model 29, .44 Mag...The Walker, with a full powder charge, is more powerful than the Model 29, and THAT, my good friends, is a well documented and well tested, and well proven (although evidently not so well known) FACT!...

[Old Dragoon]

But not so the 357 magnum.
Granted we're talking different calibers, but Elmer Kieth said that the Walker was the most powerful handgun until the 357 Magnum became avaiable. I don't think he mentioned the 44 Magnum.

Having shot all three, The 357 seems to me to have a lot more power than the Walker or the 44 Magnum. These were all at least 8 inch bbls or what was standard on the Walker. Recoil from the 357 was the worst of the three. the other two about the same due to the weight of the Walker.

[glen walker]

A .357 IS a very powerful round with good penetration, sir. However, it absolutely DOES NOT have the power of a well loaded .44 Hagnum. Shoot an animal with a .357 (which is also if I might add, a very inaccurate round. The .44 Special is one of the most accurate revolver rounds ever conjured up, with the .38 Special real close behind) and you have,..well,..just a hole. Shoot that same animal with a .44 Mag, and you'll be there all day picking pieces of copper out of him....Respectfully..

[hildo]

I have seen some topics saying the Colt Walker was the most powerfull revolver... untill the 357 Magnum was developed in 1935 or so, and the 44 Magnum is more powerfull than the 357.
Still the Walker was king of revolvers for 88 years, think that's a record on it's own. Or... isn't it?

[glen walker]

WALKER REVOLVER
LENGTH--15 1/2 INCHES
WEIGHT--4 1/2 POUNDS
CALIBER .44 (.451)
BULLET WEIGHT 138 GRAINS
POWDER CHARGE 55 TO 70 GRAINS
MUZZLE VELOCITY WITH 55 GRAINS--1200 FEET PER SECOND
MUZZLE ENERGY WITH 55 GRAINS--450

I am not trying to argue with anyone. But I know for a fact that many tests have been conducted over the last several years. Listen to me. Ya'll are not wrong; you're just not right. The .44 Walker with a full powder charge is right up there with the best of the modern .44 Magnums, and both of them are far more powerful than the .357 Magnum. The .357 has (by and large) a faster rate of travel than the.44 has. The .44 is slower moving, but it has far more foot pounds of energy than the .357 does. I think that many (some) of you are using a chronograph to check the speed of the round and are relying strictly upon that as opposed to figuring in bullet mass and...never mind. All I'm going to do here is piss off some people and I'm not trying to do that. Just take my word for it. Special operation teams, also the U.S. Army Special Forces, (Green Berets) U.S. Marine Corps Force Recon, the U.S. Navy Seals, and some other U.S. Governmental Agencies that would make the 'Soccer Moms' urinate all over themselves with fear just simply knowing that we have people like that, have each ran test after test. They have arrived at several indisputable facts...To wit::The .357 is a very inaccurate round. The modern .44 Magnum has much more stopping and knock down power than the .357 Magnum, including further down range. However, while retaining more foot pounds of energy further down range, the .44 Mag will experience a faster rate of drop after the first 100 yards, than the .357 Magnum. To wit:: The blackpowder Walker (which was brought into the equation while trying to arrive at a satisfactory answer concerning the accuracy of the .44 caliber round) proved to have much more knock down power and stopping power than the .357 Magnum....I myself have read several articles on this computer which state that the .44 Walker was the most powerful handgun UNTIL the .357 Magnum came along. I have read those articles the same as the rest of the people on this forum has, but those articles are inaccurate, (out of order) (out of line ) (incorrect)...Respectfully..

[Jorg]

I think that many (some) of you are using a chronograph to check the speed of the round and are relying strictly upon that as opposed to figuring in bullet mass and...never mind.

I figured in bullet mass and I'm afraid that with my limited experience, I simply don't see how those numbers line up. Your numbers above clearly state that the velocity and the ME of the Walker 1200 fps and 450 ft/lbs respectively. (Actually, it works out to 441 ft/lbs for a 138gr.) Even if you were able to keep the same velocity with a 200gr round, you would only be at 640 ft/lbs.

However, if we look at some reloading information (http://www.chuckhawks.com/handgun_cartridge_reloading_data.htm), we see that a .357 magnum with a 140gr bullet hits 1323 fps out of a 6" barrel. This results in 544 ft/lbs, 100 more than your example Walker load above.

When we look at .44 magnum loads, a 200gr at 1590 fps has a muzzle energy of 1123 ft/lbs.The 240gr load hitting 1350 has a massive 1451 ft/lbs. Even factory loadings are over 1000 ft/lbs for the .44 magnum.

I'm afraid I just don't understand how you can consider a Walker with 450 ft/lbs of energy to be "up there with the best of the modern .44 Magnums" which have easily over 1000 ft/lbs of energy or "more powerful than the .357 Magnum" which seems to outclass the Walker by 100 ft/lbs.

[ArfinGreebly]

Gads, I wish I had a copy of that bison photo.

Some time back (as I may have mentioned (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=2844857#post2844857)) it was my privilege to view a photo of a bison, a hunter, and his 4-inch S&W 686, after having knocked said bison down from 70 yards (well, 71, really).

With hardcast ball ammo.

No scope.

Offhand, standing.

You've never seen a grin any bigger than that guy had.

I think I'll stick with my wimpy, semi-accurate, almost-as-good S&W 586.

I know, I know, "the plural of anecdote is not data."

But, man, if a .357 can make a guy grin like that, it's okay by me.

[Gewehr98]

I'm afraid I just don't understand how you can consider a Walker with 450 ft/lbs of energy to be "up there with the best of the modern .44 Magnums" which have easily over 1000 ft/lbs of energy or "more powerful than the .357 Magnum" which seems to outclass the Walker by 100 ft/lbs.

Which .357 Magnum factory load would that be? One can cherry-pick load data all day long, I'm sure.

I count more than a few .357 Magnum loads that don't meet the Walker's 450ft/lb muzzle energy figure, just using a quick Google search. Imagine if I went to Remington's or Winchester's website.

It's been stated by many folks, including the late Jeff Cooper, that the big Colt Walker was the king of the hill until the .357 Magnum hit the scene. I for one, don't doubt it. :scrutiny:

[Joe Demko]

What do factory loads have to do with it? Jorg said in his post that it was reloading data. Since there aren't any factory loads, to the best of my knowledge, for the Walker (every cylinder being handloaded by the shooter) it seems fair to compare .357 reload data to figures on various possible loads for the Walker.

What does Jeff Cooper saying something have to do with it, either? That's called "appeal to authority" and it is a well known logical fallacy.
But let's assume he said that the Walker was most powerful until the .357 came along and that he was right. How has what Jorg said been in opposition to that?

[Jamie C.]

I myself have read several articles on this computer...

I think I see the problem... :scrutiny: :uhoh: :D

...proved to have much more knock down power and stopping power...

And there's the second. :rolleyes:



And here I was thinking the "9mm vs. .45acp" arguments were bad.... :o


J.C.

[Jorg]

Which .357 Magnum factory load would that be? One can cherry-pick load data all day long, I'm sure.

I count more than a few .357 Magnum loads that don't meet the Walker's 450ft/lb muzzle energy figure, just using a quick Google search. Imagine if I went to Remington's or Winchester's website.

Please, feel free to check those sites. I think you'll find that the numbers there are pretty much overwhelming in favor of most .357 factory loads exceeding 450 ft/lbs.


From Remington (http://www.remington.com/products/ammunition/ballistics/results/default.aspx?type=pistol&cal=5)'s site:


Energy (ft-lbs)
Cartridge Type Bullet Muzzle
R357M7 Remington® Express™ 110 410
R357M1 Remington® Express™ 125 583
GS357MA Golden Saber™ 125 413
LL357M1 UMC® Leadless™ 125 583
L357M12 UMC® 125 583
R357M2 Remington® Express™ 158 535
R357M3 Remington® Express™ 158 535
R357M5 Remington® Express™ 158 535
RH357MA Core-Lokt® Hunting 165 610
R357M10 Remington® Express™ 180 524
As you can see 8 of 10 of Remington's factory loads exceed 450 ft/lbs. Keep in mind that those numbers are also for a 4" barrel (except the last two, which are from an 8 3/8").

And from Winchester (not as link friendly, but you can find the data from here) (http://www.winchester.com/products/catalog/handgun.aspx):
Bullet - ft/lbs
110 gr. USA JHP - 410
180 gr. Supreme® Partition Gold® - 557
105 gr. Super Clean NT® (Tin) Super Clean - 397 (Tin target round)
125 gr. WinClean® Jacketed Soft Point - 521
158 gr. Super-X® JHP - 535
158 gr. Super-X® Jacketed Soft Point - 535
125 gr. Super-X® JHP - 583
145 gr. Super-X® Silvertip® Hollow Point -535

So, that's 6 of 8 of Winchester's offerings.

And, for the hell of it, Federal (http://www.federalpremium.com/ballistics/default.aspx)'s choices.

Round - Ft/lbs
P357HS1 357 MAGNUM HYDRA-SHOK JHP 158gr - 539
PD357HS2H 357 MAGNUM HYDRA-SHOK JHP 130gr - 574
P357XB1 357 MAGNUM BARNES EXPANDER 140gr -509
P357J 357 MAGNUM CASTCORE 180gr - 449
C357B 357 MAGNUM JHP 125gr - 575
C357E 357 MAGNUM JHP 158gr -539
C357G 357 MAGNUM JHP 180gr -466
AE357A 357 MAGNUM JACKETED SOFT POINT 158gr - 539

Federal's cartridges exceeding 450 ft/lbs: 7 of 8.

I wouldn't call using 31 out of 36 factory loadings cherry picking. If we call the actual energy as calulated for the Walker as 441 ft/lbs, you can see that the majority of factory loadings exceed it by at least 80 ft/lbs, if not more. I suppose if you wanted to nitpick, there are only 7 of those loadings were a full 100 ft/lbs more, with another 9 in the 90-100 ft/lb range.


A few other factory loadings that exceed 450 ft/lbs:
http://www.pmcammo.com/ballistics/handgun_ballistics_357mag.php
(4 of 5, with the exception being the non-toxic frangible.)
http://www.black-hills.com/factorynew.htm
(2 of 2 (I didn't count their cowboy loading, make it 2 of 3 if you want to include that.))
http://www.dakotaammo.net/
(8 of 8)
http://www.magtechammunition.com
(8 of 10)
http://www.fiocchiusa.com/cat_centerfire.php
(4 of 4)


Finally, my point was not to dismiss the power of the Walker. I just simply don't understand how glen walker figures it is more powerful than a .357 magnum and on par with a modern .44 magnum. Even Cooper's quote supports my position. If the .357 was a weaker caliber, why would he have said the Walker was the most powerful until the .357? Wouldn't he have then said the .44?

I will confess, all my data is from secondary sources at best. However, I am all about conducting primary research in the search for the truth. I will gladly evenly split the cost of a .357 magnum, a box of each kind of ammunition, a Walker pistol, and a chronograph with any members who would like to settle this once and for all, provided I get to keep the hardware for my efforts. Don't worry about blackpowder and balls for the Walker, those are on me. ;)

[Gewehr98]

So I don't know why he'd say it's more powerful than the .44 Magnum. I'm of the opinion he was quoting Phillip Schreier's now-famous History Channel blooper.

The factory .357 ammo I Googled showed MagTech 158gr loads at 413ft/lbs, and the lightweight Remington loads are in that range, too. There are many .357 factory loads that exceed the 450ft/lbs generated by the Colt Walker, I don't dispute that at all. But my numbers point to the Colt Walker and its 60-grain chambers still being the big kid on the block until the hot-rodded N-Frame .38-44 HVs in 1930 and its .357 Magnum offspring in 1935. That's pretty darned impressive considering the Walker was a muzzleloading revolver designed in the 1840s. Gawd only knows how the Walker would perform if we had the same formulation of black powder they did in the mid/late 1800s again. ;)

[Tommygunn]

Gawd only knows how the Walker would perform if we had the same formulation of black powder they did in the mid/late 1800s again.

Not to hijack the thread, but what has changed about BP formulations? It's charcoal, sulpher, and Potassium Nitrate, IIRC????

[Jorg]

Ok, now you've thoroughly confused me. I'll say it again, I'm not disputing that the Walker was a powerful handgun. I was disputing the glen walker's claim that it is "far more powerful than the .357 Magnum."

You may notice that my position does not and has not, in any way, contradict the claim that the Walker was the "big kid on the block until the hot-rodded N-Frame .38-44 HVs in 1930 and its .357 Magnum offspring "

Again, I do not understand why you seem to think that this is the case.

There are many .357 factory loads that exceed the 450ft/lbs generated by the Colt Walker, I don't dispute that at all.

Sure sounds like you wanted to dispute it based on this post:

Jorg, show me the numbers, please.
Which .357 Magnum factory load would that be? One can cherry-pick load data all day long, I'm sure.

I count more than a few .357 Magnum loads that don't meet the Walker's 450ft/lb muzzle energy figure, just using a quick Google search. Imagine if I went to Remington's or Winchester's website.

I suppose it is possible that I misunderstood your intent and you were merely clarifying that not all .357 mag factory loads acheive such energy rather than attempting to confound my assertions. If that was the case, perhaps that is the cause for confusion. It seemed to me that you disagreed with my position and were refuting it by claiming that factory rounds were not that powerful. Unfortunately, intent and tone can be rather hard to discern via text so I may have made an assumption about your that was simply not the case.

However, I believe thread has wandered far from the orginal topic. Please feel free to PM me if you would like to continue this confusion.

[mec]

the .357 as loaded in 1935 featured a 158 grain semi wadcutter bullet desinged by Phillip Sharp over a non-canister version of Hercules 2400 powder. The velocity claimed from an 8 3/8" ( actually the first was 8.5") was 1520 feet per second for an energy deliver of 811 ft/lbs. I have duplicated the performance of the original load in a Smith model 27 with the 8 3/8" barrel.
The load delivered somewhat less velocity from shorter barrels and was later reduced by the factories to abut 1450 fps. Current top fop factory and handloads with the 158 grain bullet range between 1250 and 1300+ feet per second depending upon barrel length and other factors. Energy for a 1300 fps load would be 593 ft/lbs. It is common to drive 125 grain .357 bullets from 5.5-6" revolver barrels to 1450-1500 fps rendering a near-identical 584 ft lbs of energy. The full loaded .357 is hard on revolvers- particularly the smaller framed ones now in general use and this accounts for the more sedate maximum loads now in use.

The 44 magnum came along in 1955-56 with original performance driving a 240 grain lead gaschecked semi wadcutter at 1450 fps. The energy can be found in numerous loading manuals or by use of the formula Velocity squared X bullet weight in grains / 450240- a conversion factor)= ft/lbs energy.
The speer number 12 loading manual lists a 240 grain jacketed hollow point over a heavy charge of H110 at 1451 fps. By the formula ( and the table in the back of the book) energy delivery is 1122 ft.lbs.

In the Walker, the round balls weigh from 138-141 grains depending upon diameter which ranges from .451-.457" . Under a round ball, the maximun charge that will allow the ball to seat below the chamber mouth is 60 grains of FFFG or the equivalent volume of substitute powder.
Dense Swiss FFFg black powder and Pyrodex P provide the highest velocities we have chronographed:
60 Goex FFFg 1115 fps 46fps extreme spread
60 Gr./Vol. Pyrodex P 1221 44
60 Gr./Vol. A Pioneer 974 80
60 Gr/Vol Swiss FFFg 1278 53= 508 ft./lbs energy

It is possible to seat a 200 grain Lee conical cast bullet over 45 grains or the volume equivalent. More powder than that and the bullet will stick out and lock up the cylinder velocity Extreme spread 6 rounds
45 Swiss FFFg 1074 33
45Gr/Vol Pyrodex P 1087 47=525 ft./lbs energy

The .357, .44 and the 44 walker can be quite accurate. The longer bullets and greater velocity of the two magnum loads will allow them to retain energy and shoot flatter to longer range than the Walker

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=58113&stc=1&d=1179200363

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=58115&stc=1&d=1179201642

[Jorg]

Interesting information, mec. I think yours far surpasses mine in value to this discussion. I suppose that pretty much wraps up the power discussion. :)

Well done, mec. Nice looking guns as well.

However, I'm not 100% sold on your results. I think I need to verify them first hand for the good of the board. The offer to split costs to do the testing stands. ;)

[mec]

" I think yours far surpasses mine in value to this discussion. I suppose ...."

not really. It's more like a footnote to yours with some information from handloading manuals

"I'm of the opinion he was quoting Phillip Schreier's now-famous History Channel blooper. "

I think I remember that one. The History Channel-Tales of the Gun, etc are very entertaining and informative. Frequently though, they lay down a huge blooper. I remember one scene where Bat Masterson is industriously filing away on the hammer spur of his Colt to "sweeten" the trigger. They seem to have gotten that from an order he placed to Colt for a revolver with an ejector length barrel, extra tall front sight and " sweeten" the trigger. If you have a little background knowlege, you can dismiss the occasional goof up and enjoy the programs. The producers do a good job but many of them are not gun peopl.

[Gewehr98]

And MEC's data reinforces my view a bit. A 500 ft/lb Colt Walker is no slouch, even in today's world.

BP manufacturing is indeed different than days gone by. I've got an original Harper's magazine article from 1895 illustrating DuPont's processes. The efforts into making the perfect grade of charcoal for BP are very interesting. It appears alder and willow wood produced the best-performing BP, but that's not economically viable for today's Goex brand of BP. ;)

[buzz_knox]

Special operation teams, also the U.S. Army Special Forces, (Green Berets) U.S. Marine Corps Force Recon, the U.S. Navy Seals, and some other U.S. Governmental Agencies that would make the 'Soccer Moms' urinate all over themselves with fear just simply knowing that we have people like that, have each ran test after test. They have arrived at several indisputable facts...To wit::The .357 is a very inaccurate round.

I wonder if someone could invite Pat Rogers over. He could probably give some insight into Recon's testing of the .357 Magnum. And we could probably get Frogman here to discuss why the SEALs historically deployed (and still have in the arsenal) the .357 Magnum.

[mec]

Without a time machine, we can't know much about 19th century black powder. There was a bewildering array of makers all of whom seemed to have their own notions about what screen sizes constituted ff,fff ffff G granulations. I've shot 2f from the 1924 dupont cans, 3f from the rectangular Dupont cans and some stuff I pulled from some 1913 <> .44 special black powder cartridges. The tendency is for them to have the same shot to shot and extreme spread consistency as new Goex but with 30 to 50 fps less velocity. In some loads, the older stuff actually goes a bit faster than goex.

Swiss powder has been around since the 1850s and has always been considered good stuff. Somebody was trying to come up with cartridge loads for his english black powder double rifle and found that swiss 1.5 fg would bring the barrels together with chargers that would fit in his cases but no other modern powder would do so. A wild guess would be that 150 year old black powder was at least as variable as the brands that have been available in the last 50 years or so. A lot would depend on the purity of available Nitre, sulpher and charcoal wood and upon the density produced by individual processes. there may also have been tendency among some suppliers to cut the powder to save money- much like modern dope dealers and food processor do.

[Correia]

Special operation teams, also the U.S. Army Special Forces, (Green Berets) U.S. Marine Corps Force Recon, the U.S. Navy Seals, and some other U.S. Governmental Agencies that would make the 'Soccer Moms' urinate all over themselves with fear just simply knowing that we have people like that, have each ran test after test. They have arrived at several indisputable facts...To wit::The .357 is a very inaccurate round.

Huh?

Okay, so top secret counter terrorist units spend their time testing modern revolvers against obsolecent blackpower handcannons, for what reason exactly?

Man, my tax dollars are being wasted.

Strange enough, I know the guy who was in charge of the largest .gov agency handgun procurement in US history. I don't recall them doing much with .44 mags.

And all of that scientifc testing to find out that .357 is inaccurate? They could have just bench rested it. :rolleyes: I'll have to tell THR member Ben Shepherd to quit busting clay pigeons at 100 meters with his Ruger .357, because Force Recon SEAL Commando Ninja Force Alpha tested them and said they were inaccurate.

As for .357 having more oomph than the Walker, well, that is just basic math. And I'm not even a member of a super dooper top secret unit.

I am friends with some guys on one of those units. Interestingly enough, they carry whatever they are issued.

Thanks for the info though. I read it off of my computer, and now I'm smarter. :)

[O.S.O.K.]

This is one of the silliest "argument" threads that I've read. :uhoh: :D

[glen walker]

THAT's what I was trying to say. Try loading that big assed Walker with 60 (or hell, 62 grains) grains of powder behind the .457 ball. THEN try loading the .451 in front of 62 grains of powder. Your speed (velocity) will change, as will your knock down power. Just like that other person said in this post (although I think they were trying to be sarcastic, which is alright. I don't mind) about the 9mm and the .45.. Hell yes, the .45 has a lot more knock down power than that little 9mm...And when ya'll try the .451 and the .457 in front of 62 grains of powder, make sure you run the test TWICE. One test with 2 f (FFG) and the second test with 3f (FFFG)..The famous M-16 that everyone loves to bring up all of the time. It's a small round with high velocity. Get shot in the leg with it. Depending on whether it hit's a bone and goes to flipping or not, it might knock you down and it might not. Get shot in the leg at half a mile or better with the M-14 (.308) or the M-1 Garand (30-06). It will blow your leg clean off, PLUS it will knock you piss winding...I am NOT saying that a fully charged Walker is every bit as powerful as a fully charged .44 Magnum, but it is right up there with it. I WILL stand by what I said about the Walker being stronger than the 'average' and 'normal' load for a .357 Magnum. (I'm sure one could 'hot load' the .357 and greatly enhance it's capabilities) AND I WILL DAMNED SURE STAND BY MY STATEMENT THAT THE .357 MAGNUM IS AN INHEIRANTLY INACCURATE ROUND. WHEW!! I thought I (little ol' me) was the one that didn't know anything about modern firearms, and I don't, so you know where that put's some of ya'll..Do ya'll think that the adjustable sight on a handgun are there just for windage and elevation? Well, DO YOU? Do you want to know one reason I continued to stick with black powder and round ball all of my life? Because they are extremely accurate, that's why. Pick up you 'regular' .45 Colt revolver. (It dosen't have to be made by Colt. It can be made by The Man in The Moon, for all I give a damn) Get a paper target, a big one. Aim at (benchrest is fine. hell, lock it into a vice if it make's you feel better) the very exact dead center of that target, firing from exactly 100 yards away. Go check your point of impact. (We are assuming that you are firing from 100 yards away, and that it is a still, calm day with no wind blowing) Look how far to the right that the .45 'walked'. Usually at least a foot to the right and in many cases well more than a foot. (and THAT is a heavy, slow assed moving round) I state to all of you for the last time that the U.S. Government tests have proven beyond a shadow of doubt that the .357 Magnum round is an inaccurate round....Yes, Correia, I said clean off. There may be a little meat and muscle and skin holding it on, but for all practical purposes, yes, clean off...Goodbye. I have never seen so many people in one spot in my whole life who spend so much time reading books and think they know so much, to actually know so little. I signed on to this site because I thought I was going to learn something and have some fun. Hell, that guy that posts on here named ALFY who dosen't even know which end of a Walker the ball come's out of, is worth more than the rest of ya'll put together. You don't have to worry about me signing back on to this pile of crap...

[Correia]

Get shot in the leg at half a mile or better with the M-14 (.308) or the M-1 Garand (30-06). It will blow your leg clean off, PLUS it will knock you piss winding...

Clean off, huh? At half a mile...

[buzz_knox]

glen walker, I'd appreciate the information requested in another thread about the Mini-14 being a competitor in the trials that led to adoption of the M-16.

Also, do you have any first hand knowledge of the effects of the M-14 at "half a mile" or at any distance, since most anecdotal evidence, an understanding of physics or human anatomy, (or a basic reading of a ballistics table) says this is a very suspect claim, not even worthy of an elite Counterstrike Commando (one of those who may soccer moms soil themselves).

[Jamie C.]

I swear, I dunno whether to laugh or cry, after reading some of the stuff here... :rolleyes: :D :eek:

Considering how many people I've heard of that took a burst of M.G. fire during various wars, and survived without losing a limb ( James Doohan - "Scotty" from the original Star Trek - lost a finger to such an incident, during WWII ), I have more than a little trouble with " Get shot in the leg at half a mile or better with the M-14 (.308) or the M-1 Garand (30-06). It will blow your leg clean off".


A Walker is a big, powerful, revolver. It's NOT a hand-held super-cannon, however.

Oh, and one more... I've had several .357 mags, over the years. Wouldn't call the first one of 'em "inaccurate", since even the ones with short ( 1-1/2" ) barrels would generally shoot better than I could hold. Under 2 inches at 25 yards was the norm, not the exception.



J.C.

[buzz_knox]

It's funny that an M-14 will blow apart a leg at half a mile, but a .308 will just punch a hole in a deer at 100 yards.

[Plink]

I WILL DAMNED SURE STAND BY MY STATEMENT THAT THE .357 MAGNUM IS AN INHEIRANTLY INACCURATE ROUND.

That's going to come as a surprise to the thousands who compete with this round and find it to be every bit as accurate as other cartridges.

Get shot in the leg at half a mile or better with the M-14 (.308) or the M-1 Garand (30-06). It will blow your leg clean off, PLUS it will knock you piss winding

And that's going to come as a surprise to all the medical personel who have treated many such wounds of that nature and found the leg still attached, just with a hole in it.

I am NOT saying that a fully charged Walker is every bit as powerful as a fully charged .44 Magnum, but it is right up there with it. I WILL stand by what I said about the Walker being stronger than the 'average' and 'normal' load for a .357 Magnum.

At max charge, the Walker is about half as powerful as the .44 magnum with average factory loads, and far less than half with hot factory loads or handloads. And the average factory load for a .357 magnum runs about 100 ft. lbs. more than the Walker. There are hot +P .38 special loads that edge into the Walker's power range, as well as some hot loaded 9mm's.

Upping the charge in the Walker doesn't result in a great velocity boost. The barrel can only effectively burn so much in it's given length. You get a little more at max charge, but nothing spectacular. It mostly just gives more recoil.

The Walker is a great gun for what it is, and an amazing piece of technology for it's era. It isn't a modern magnum by any standard though.

[buzz_knox]

AND I WILL DAMNED SURE STAND BY MY STATEMENT THAT THE .357 MAGNUM IS AN INHEIRANTLY INACCURATE ROUND. WHEW!!

Do you stand by your assertion that testing by Force Recon, the Special Forces, and the SEALs (who use this round) establish this fact?

[glen walker]

Well, this Is the last time ..Yes, you may contact Sturm and Ruger. I'm not certain, but I BELIEVE their address is, or was, at Lacey Place. (Probably located in Conn.) Anyway, if you will call them, you will certainly find that they were in the running hot and heavy for the contract offered by the U.S. Goverment. I am positive that they will tell you far more about it than I can. Anyway, when Ruger lost the contract, he continued producing the Mini-14's, and started selling and equipping police departments and various governmental agencies all around the world SO LONG as they were friendly with the U.S.....I did not say that I had seen anyone deliberately shot in the leg at 1/2 mile with the M-14. But, yes sir (or Ma'am) I have seen people who were hit (about 2 individuals, not all at the same time but on the same morning) with the M-14 at a good 1/2 mile. The NVA were carrying them and it was us (Iwas one of the 'us') they were shooting at. They were extremely lucky in hitting anyone, but I wasn't talking about deliberate shots; I was speaking of the round's power.
The reason we know they were carrying M-14's is because we always kept guns in the back, ready to fire for us. We called in Lima Company's guns, (Leaping Lima's Thundering Guns of Death) and gave our G.C.'s , got one spotter round, and then 6 rounds on fire for effect. (177's) Then we hiked our little recon asses over there and tried for a body count, and to see what else we might could find. One of the M-14 rounds had struck 'Billy Boy' in the chest. (regular ball ammo, I guess) We found out later that the round had broken his breast bone, completely blew away one lung, collasped the other lund, took out about a coffee cup full of his liver,(which is lower, which is why I'vd always wondered about the ball ammo part. It sure as hell wasn't armor piercing, or a tracer.) and WHEN IT PASSED COMPLETELY THROUGH HIM it took about three inches of his backbone with it. The other Marine was hit in the left leg, just a hair below his knee, and when the corpsman (we had one with us because we knew we were being inserted into a 'hot' area) got to him, there was just a bit of meat and some skin holding his leg on. (just in case you're interested, Moderator, both of them died) Goodbye to you, sir...One more thing I will tell you, sir. Being in recon, we could carry whatever weapon we chose, but we were still issued the M-16. (A1 at that time) Sometimes one of us (never me) would carry an M-60 on a shoulder strap, and another one of us (sometimes me) would carry an extra belt or to. Occasionally one of us would carry a shotgun. I tried it one time, and while recon is supposed to 'snoop and poop' and stay hidden, sometimes it didn't work out that way. That one time I carried the shotgun I almost got killed because I got excited and pulled the trigger 3 or 4 times after my first shot. I forgot I had to pump it. I always carried an M-14 that had been assigned to me, and a .38 special with a 6 inch barrel that my sister sent over there to me, and she always made sure I had a good supply of .38 Special hollow point. WHAT'S THAT YOU SAY? OH, my GODDDD! You mean I wasn't supposed to fire hollow point because of the Geneva Convention?... Oh, well. tough s***...Oh!, Moderator, here's something else for ya'll to try and pick apart. DID YOU KNOW, SIRRR, that the .38 special, firing hollow points through a 6 inch barrel will give you greater (as in better) accuracy and more stopping power than the M1911A1 firing the regular issue military ammo? Well, it damned sure will. As opposed to it's son, the much ballyhooed .357 Magnum, the .38 special is an extremely accurate round, bested only by the .44 Special...Anyway, the point of all of this, is that a buddy of mine (over there) carried a Mini-14. He had his magazines taped bottom to bottom, so he had 40 rounds at his instant command, using only a quick flip of his wrist so to speak. At 'fire in the hole' (checking weapons before a patrol) or in the bush, there was NEVER a problem with his mini. The M-16's were jamming constantly...goodbye...

[Jorg]

Anyway, the point of all of this, is that a buddy of mine (over there) carried a Mini-14. He had his magazines taped bottom to bottom, so he had 40 rounds at his instant command, using only a quick flip of his wrist so to speak. At 'fire in the hole' (checking weapons before a patrol) or in the bush, there was NEVER a problem with his mini. The M-16's were jamming constantly

Say again? The last US combat troops left Vietnam on March 29, 1973.

The first Mini-14s were out in 1974 (http://ruger.com/Firearms/PS-SNH-RI-Mini14.html).

Also, didn't you say you were 3rd Force Recon in another post? 3rd Force Recon was in Vietnam from 1967 through 1970. In fact, almost all USMC ground forces were gone by 1971. Unless you went back for the evacuation of Saigon in 1975, it seems odd you'd have a rifle from the future in your unit. I thought only Delta got weapons from the future.

I'm very confused again.

What's the color of the boathouse at Hereford?

[Correia]

Jorg, those were top secret prototype Mini-14s that were issued to Ninja Force Alpha SOG, deep in the bush, a year before they were released in America.

Glen, you can get all huffy and offended all you want. And you can accuse some of us "reading books" (thanks, but I write them too) but when you come along and start peddling information that smells funny, you should be fully prepared to substantiate.

If that offends you, sorry. I've never personally attacked you, but much of what you said doesn't stand up to scruitiny, and many of your stories don't seem to match the experiences of others on this board. (oh, and by the way, there is probably 10,000 years of collective military service, and a million years of collective shooting experience amongst the general membership of THR, so a few people here have done more than "read books")

So if the facts you present are reality, as you insist, instead of conjecture, or your imagination, then they should be pretty easy to validate. No problemo.

[Warren]

I think there is some confusion between the Walker Colt and the Norris Colt.

It's the Norris that is as powerful than the .44 mag and can kill an entire platoon of mimes from a mile away.


The recent TV show has confused matters.

[ArfinGreebly]

That's just cold.

:evil:

[O.S.O.K.]

:rolleyes: and I think this sums up the responses to Mr. Walker: :banghead: :D

[Brian Williams]

OBTW the Marines never called them or had 177s. They were 8 inchers or 155's..

[buzz_knox]

177, 178. Whatever it takes.

[Sistema1927]

I am beginning to think that my boots aren't tall enough to wade into this discussion.

[Jamie C.]

Aw hell, Sistema... forget the boots. Just grab a snorkel and dive right in. :D :evil:

J.C.

[Calibre44]

I've been undecided whether or not to buy a Dragoon :confused: (see my thread - Colt Dragoon or not Colt Dragoon) - well after seeing your two beautiful pictures I'm now 99% sure it's the next gun for me. I've already got a Navy .36 and a SS Remmi on the way and the Dragoon will make a nice trio of 'shooting irons'
John

[MISSEDSHOT]

Glenn Walker got plumb mad and left like he said he was going to. I enjoyed some of his black-powder posts even though you might have needed "boots", but some folks can't take it when you "call the on the carpet" about an incident the way they remember it. If his personal info is true he is an older fellow. I don't know anything about 155's or what year the Mini-14 came into production or whether it made it to Vietnam,I do know that war messed up some good men mentally and physically, and continues to do so.I do understand ballistics though and I must agree that the Walker in all its glory is not even close to the .44 Magnum.

[SAKOHUNTER]

I do understand ballistics though and I must agree that the Walker in all its glory is not even close to the .44 Magnum.

Well folks, there you have it....all in a nutshell.:cool: