BP Cartridge Power Equivalent

Status
Not open for further replies.

Skofnung

Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2003
Messages
1,135
Location
Atlanta Area
I have a question that has been rolling around in my head for awhile now. It is in regards to black powder cartridges and the ammount of power they provided.

I am to understand that BP works at much lower pressures than smokeless. The many BP guns (muzzleloaders, not cartridge guns) had much less felt recoil than expected, even with "heavy" loads. Therefore, I assume that smokeless powder is more "powerful" than BP.

I have had folks equate the .44 Russian round to the .45 ACP in terms of "power." How can this be if the rounds are close (I think)to the same size and one is BP and the other is not?

Can anyone explain this to me?

As an asside, when cleaning BP cartridge guns, would the same "hot soapy water" cleaning apply to it as to muzzleloading firearms? How did they clean their guns "back in the day?"

Thanks.
 
For a lot of reasons, a carrtridge cannot always be used to its full potential. A cartridge like the .45 Colt is loaded at the factories with smokeless powder, but increasing velocity and pressure would blow up the old guns, so pressures are kept to BP levels. The .45 ACP could also be loaded hotter (and has been), but only at the risk of damage to the guns since auto pistols are made to operate in a fairly narrow pressure/velocity range.

Increased velocity was only one of the reasons to go to smokeless powder, and the change would have been made even if no velocity increase had been achieved. The change to smokeless powder made possible the small bore rifle, not only because of increased velocity, but because it eliminated the fouling that would have rendered a black powder .30 caliber useless in short order. (The .303 British was first loaded with black powder, and the "Tommies" were not happy campers.)

The main difference in the pressure curve of black and smokeless powders is not only in the actual peak pressure, but also in the fact that smokeless powder burns slower and keeps the pressure on further down the barrel. (This is a good point to remember when dealing with old Damascus barrel shotguns. When fired with smokeless, they often let go where the barrel becomes thin, since the barrels were not made to hold much pressure that far out. That that point is where the shooter has his fingers is the reason most folks advise against shooting those old guns.)

As to cleaning, yes. Black powder cartridge guns have to be cleaned pretty much the same way as muzzle loaders, but they are usually more complex and harder to clean properly. A good reason not to load modern guns with black powder is that they are not made to be cleaned the way black powder guns should be. As an experiment, I once loaded some .38 Special with black powder and fired it in an S&W Model 28. What a mess! With the S&W I couldn't just hose it down, so cleaning was a real lesson to not do that again.

"Back in the day", they used a lot of cleaning solutions, most of which were really water based. They didn't slop water around for the reasons mentioned above, but there was much scrubbing with brushes and patches, then oiling. Corrosive primers were the only kind, but were not as much of a problem with black powder because there was a lot of fouling and most cleaners that took out the fouling also took out the corrosive salt (water based, remember, and water dissolves the salt).

When smokeless powder came along, people didn't clean as well and barrels started to rust, leading most folks to believe that the new smokeless powder was causing the rust. A lot of old timers wouldn't use ammunition with that "new fangled" powder because it rusted the barrel. It wasn't until the 1920's that it was realized that the corrosion came from the primer compound, not the powder.

FWIW, I consider loading fixed cartridges with BP to be ridiculous. There are no cartridges for which safe smokeless loads have not been developed. In fact, I don't use much BP anymore at all unless I just want authenticity. There are much cleaner substitutes for shooting. (I do use BP in a rifle musket - it just wouldn't be right without that cloud of smoke.)

Jim
 
Thank you Mr. Keenan.

So, have any of you has any experience with the .44 Russian round with standard loads?

Thanks again.
 
The .44 Russian was the immediate ancestor of the .44 Special, which in factory loadings was a fairly mild round. I believe they used the same 246 grain RNL bullet and the Special was only slightly faster. I used to load very mild .44 Specials with 6.5 grains Unique which only gave about 630 fps. The .45 ACP is a noticeably stouter load getting the 230 grain FMJ out at 850-870 fps.

The .44 Russian was most renowned as the target cartridge of choice by name shooters (Walter Winans, et al) of the 1890-1910 period, in the #3 S&W target models. It was supplanted by the .44 Special and the newer DA Smith Hand Ejector and Colt New Service revolvers.
 
The .44 Russian was originally loaded lighter than the .44 Special, but in more recent times, they have been about identical. Some current tables even give the Russian a slight edge. This is a bit odd, since the .44 Russian was always chambered in break top revolvers (albeit strong ones) while the .44 Special was always chambered in solid frame guns.

Just as a matter of policy, I never give out loading data on line; there is just too much chance of an error. Anyone doing any reloading should buy one of the excellent reloading manuals for sale at most gun shops.

Jim
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top