36 caliber round balls

Status
Not open for further replies.
whughett

whughett

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2008
Messages
4,683
Location
Rhode Island
I have an 1858 Remington, in 36 caliber made by Uberti in 1964 and imported by Navy arms .

A .375 ball is too loose and will slip out under recoil, after 3 0r 4 shots and jam the cylinder.

A .380 ball is tighter, and stays in place but does not "shave a ring of lead" on loading.

I have forced both sizes throuh the bore from the muzzel and as far as I can tell both measure .375 or smaller.

Any solution to this problem?
 
Option 1: Track of the Wolf has .389. If that's too big you can get a .385 mold made.

Option 2: If you push a .380 ball back out of the cylinder, how squished in are the sides? If you think there's enough flat area to make good contact with the rifling it may not be a problem. Sometimes they don't shave a ring because somebody's chamfered the rim of the cylinder a bit.
 
What a great idea j-bar. I don't know how many balls are in an 8# jug but that has to be the best bargain available, for 36 calibre projectiles. Years ago I had a rotary breach small bore that used #4 buckshot. Got an enormous amount of shooting for very little money.
 
J-Bar, that's a brilliant solution! then there's this...The ''Quad'' drops 'em at .382 with my lead, once you get going you can really turn out some ammo as the ''quad'' refers to the buck shot size but the mold makes TEN at a time, for thirty bucks.

http://www.buckshotmold.com/
 
Last edited:
EljaySL said:
Option 1: Track of the Wolf has .389. If that's too big you can get a .385 mold made.

Option 2: If you push a .380 ball back out of the cylinder, how squished in are the sides? If you think there's enough flat area to make good contact with the rifling it may not be a problem. Sometimes they don't shave a ring because somebody's chamfered the rim of the cylinder a bit.
Click to expand...
I tried 3 chambers with your suggestion, the flat measured .378, from a .380 RB.The flat seems to be uniform and is a 1/16 or so band completely around.
When I purchased this piece, from Gunbrokers, I jumped the gun and aquired a .375 mould, when that proved wrong I aquired a .380 mould, I really hate to have to buy another mould.
 
Dframe said:
What a great idea j-bar. I don't know how many balls are in an 8# jug but that has to be the best bargain available, for 36 calibre projectiles. Years ago I had a rotary breach small bore that used #4 buckshot. Got an enormous amount of shooting for very little money.
Click to expand...
My math shows 768 pellets in a 8# jar.
 
I would like to see a bigger band than that, but I'm not sure how much of a difference the buckshot will make. Seems worth a shot though (no pun intended).
 
Have you fired your revolver with the .380 balls. If they stay in the chamber when the gun is fired and the gun groups OK you are fine.
 
Thanks for the math whughett(not my strong suit) If there are indeed 768 pellets in that #8 jar at about $30. That works out to a bit more than 25 shots a dollar. Sounds like a bargain to me! If the diameters work out for you I'd be ON that like a beagle on a rabbit.
 
Wow! I need one of those! With .360 round balls, I could shoot .38 Special with tiny charges for about as cheap as I can find .22LR!
 
Consulting my Dixie Firearms Catalog and depending which chart you're looking at there is a bit of confusion (and there shouldn't be) on the number of 0000 balls/lb. One chart says 85 another says 96. Which ever 8# of 0000 is a lot of shooting. If the balls are not 100% lead I'd be concerned about loading the rounds in the pocket pistols. A lot of stress on the loading lever.
 
The web description of that product shows 6.0 per oz. I just went from there.

RON in Pa:If they stay in the chamber when the gun is fired and the gun groups OK you are fine.

The 380's do stay put as near as I can tell. I have only shot this pistol a few dozen times, it has been a pain since I bought it from Gunbrokers in May. Turned out to need a new hand and spent from June to September in a gunsmith shop, could not find the parts he said untill I told him to return the gun, than, viola, found the hand and installed it along with a new main spring, which I know it did not need. $100.00 what a rip off. Between what I paid for the piece, + 3% for paypal, plus shipping, and the gun repairs, well as my buddy so succienty observed, "expensive wall hanger". So all in all I have got to make this work.
 
To beat this horse just a bit more on quantity of 0000 Buck. A .380 ball in PURE lead should weigh 83 grains for 84 per pound. I've seen dissected 0000 buck from .410 loads that went from 66 to 73 grain each, depending on hardening and if copper plated. And that makes the 6 per ounce or 96 per pound (73 grains each) work out.
 
whughett said:
Well I be dipped in puppy dog s....., they are champfered, what is up with that.
Click to expand...
Some manufacturers and some owners have chamfered the mouths of the chambers. This allows the oversize ball to swage down rather to fit than shave off any lead. Same result, a good seal, just a different way to accomplish it.
 
I agree with StrawHat. I chamfered my cylinder. Same results and no lead ring.
You can load the .380 ball without the powder then push it out through the nipple opening with a brass rod. You can then check to see how much it has been swagged.
 
fogg64 said:
I agree with StrawHat. I chamfered my cylinder. Same results and no lead ring.
You can load the .380 ball without the powder then push it out through the nipple opening with a brass rod. You can then check to see how much it has been swagged.
Click to expand...
I tried 3 chambers with your suggestion, the flat measured .378, from a .380 RB.The flat seems to be uniform and is a 1/16 or so band completely around.
 
Sounds to me like someone has reamed the chambers out. Either that or you have an older gun that has chambers that more closely match an original. That would be a good thing as long as you can find the right size balls.I bet your rifling twist is faster than newer guns to and may even have progressive twist. Even if your cylinder has been reamed and is not a match for your bore size, that wouldnt make it a parts gun, a new cylinder would fix that at the worst.I think it would shoot better with a larger ball that would give you more of a flat to engage the rifling than that 1/16th. Try some conicals in it too, that thing may really come alive with a conical.
 
swathdiver said:
So you chambers are .378, what's your groove diameter? This is starting to sound like a parts gun.
Click to expand...
Don't think it is a parts gun, frame, cylinder and barrel all have matching numbers, beyond the the standard proof marks and date stamp, in this case Uberti with the date stamp of XX (1964). The proof marks are even on the cylinder face between the bores. The number 259 is on the barrel under side, the cylinder face, and inside frame butt. It is a Navy Arms Import with a 6 3/8" octagonal barrel. If it is a parts gun it is one well made piece with a blue job far superior to my other repros. I think, from the way it locks up, the trigger pull, and the way it points it will be shooter once I get the bullet size worked out.
Maybe someone here that knows a little about Navy Arms Imports will ahve some thoughts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

K
  • Locked
Uberti 1851, .380 or .375 ball?
Replies
16
Views
4K
Fingers McGee
Fingers McGee
M
  • Locked
1851 colt .36 ball size
Replies
13
Views
12K
motor
M
Lyle
  • Locked
1858 Uberti in 36 caliber
2
Replies
44
Views
2K
gtrgy888
gtrgy888
S
  • Locked
36 caliber RLBs
Replies
10
Views
682
Shawnee
S
O
  • Locked
Pietta 1858; barrel and cylinder dimensions issue
Replies
14
Views
1K
paul harm
P
Back
Top