Conicals in cap-n-ball revolvers: why so inaccurate?

[ExMachina]

With almost no exception, folks report that conicals in Colt reproduction revolvers are not as accurate as round balls. Is there any wisdom here as to WHY that's the case?

Is it simply because conicals are difficult to load squarely? Or is it more because the rifling in repros is not compatible with the longer bullets (I believe original Colts has gain-twist)

Trying to decide on a mold for a '51 Navy repro...

Thank for any help

 

[MCgunner]

They're not that great in the Remington, either. So, I have a .454" RB mold for the Colt and Remmy. I still have an old Lee Conical mold, 220 grain in .454, I bought back in the mid 70s, but don't use it. I have a .457" conical AND hollowpoint mold, 220 grains. Seem to have misplaced the HP mold, but it's around here somewhere. I'll stumble on it when I ain't lookin' for it. But, they shoot great in my ROA and are about all I shoot in it. I have some store bought RB for the gun, though.

I don't know why my Piettas don't like conicals, they just don't, so I roll with it and shoot RB. I see really no advantage in shooting conicals unless it's for hunting or something and you want more momentum/penetration. But, I've never shot anything, but paper with my cap and ball stuff. With the conical an 777, though, the ROA is certainly capable. I wouldn't do it with any other cap and ball except maybe a Walker if I had one accurate enough. But, I can shoot a tick off a deer's butt at 40 yards with that ROA.

 

[Panzerschwein]

I think it's because it's so easy to load then cateywompus, hard to put a round ball in crooked.

 

[ExMachina]

I see really no advantage in shooting conicals unless it's for hunting or something and you want more momentum/penetration

Biggest attraction for me is that the conicals have lube grooves and that they're easier to roll into paper cartridges.

 

[rodwha]

My Pietta Remington shoots mine (they are short for their weight), as does my Ruger, about as well as a ball. Pitta changed the rifling twist to 1:16" as the Ruger's are. They used to be 1:30" or so before and people had problems with them not shooting conicals well at all.

 

[ExMachina]

Any specs on the current twist rate of Uberti 1851 Navys? Read on a forum that they might be 1:18 (unlike the 1:32 of their 44 cal revolvers) but cannot confirm.

 

[Patocazador]

My ROAs shoot conicals (255 gr.) fairly accurately but not as accurate as the round balls. Lower powder charges seem to equal more accurate loads ... just the opposite of what I need for hunting.

 

[45 Dragoon]

The .44's have a 16-18 twist as well. They shoot .45 Colt rather well.

Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com

 

[ExMachina]

Thanks Mike! Sounds like conicals are at least worth a try.

 

[EljaySL]

My Pietta 1858 shoots conicals (from the Lee cap and ball mold) somewhat more accurately than round balls *if* I use the right load. The load is much more stout than my cap and ball load for that revolver. As I remember 35 versus 25 grains. I wonder if on some guns the "sweet spot" with a conical is some amount of powder it isn't physically possible to load into the gun, or it's so light there's no point. I think it's just something you have to play with.

 

[RPRNY]

Lead alloy. Ball is almost always BHN 7-9. It obturates and loads easily. Unless casting your own or buying very soft lead conicals that you know are in that range, it is likely commercial conicals are much harder. Given the differences between groove size and chamber size in most Italian repros, inaccuracy is inevitable. Length vs twist. Already mentioned above, a long bullet with a sharp ogive is destined for failure in most cap and ball revolvers.

Short, squat, and soft. Not ideal in a woman! But perfect for your cap and ball revolver!

 

[Jim K]

The main problem is that there is so little bearing surface. Those who have tried bullets with more bearing surface report better results. FWIW, the folks in olden days had the same problem with conicals.

Jim

 

[Rattus58]

My Pietta Remington shoots mine (they are short for their weight), as does my Ruger, about as well as a ball. Pitta changed the rifling twist to 1:16" as the Ruger's are. They used to be 1:30" or so before and people had problems with them not shooting conicals well at all.

the dualist1954 shot some and had an excellent group on video.

 

[Hellgate]

My ASM 1860 Army is very accurate with the LEE 200gr conical. I doubt there is enough room under the rammer on a Pietta Colt Army to ram in a conical. No problems with the Remingtons and conicals but I have not done any accuracy testing.

 

[AJumbo]

The Buffalo Bullet conicals shoot well in my ROA, but they print WAY high..... like 10 or 12 inches at 25 yards. I am, however, fond of full charges, and found that if I downloaded enough to get the POA and POI somewhat close, there just wasn't enough "oomph" downrange to make me happy.

 

[rodwha]

"Short, squat, and soft. Not ideal in a woman! But perfect for your cap and ball revolver!"

"The main problem is that there is so little bearing surface. Those who have tried bullets with more bearing surface report better results."

I wonder if this is what makes mine seem to do well as I cast my own from soft lead, and I incorporated slightly more bearing surface than I typically noticed.

One thing is that mine both have the same powder charge sweet spot regardless of ball or bullet.

These are them:

http://accuratemolds.com/bullet_detail.php?bullet=45-170C-D.png

http://accuratemolds.com/bullet_detail.php?bullet=45-195C-D.png

My Pietta Remington 1858 does best with 30 grns of either 3F Olde Eynsford or Triple 7, and my Ruger does best with 35 grns, and this is with both bullets.

I had to modify the Remington's frame to get them to load.

 

[Rattus58]

"Short, squat, and soft. Not ideal in a woman! But perfect for your cap and ball revolver!"

"The main problem is that there is so little bearing surface. Those who have tried bullets with more bearing surface report better results."

I wonder if this is what makes mine seem to do well as I cast my own from soft lead, and I incorporated slightly more bearing surface than I typically noticed.

One thing is that mine both have the same powder charge sweet spot regardless of ball or bullet.

These are them:

http://accuratemolds.com/bullet_detail.php?bullet=45-170C-D.png

http://accuratemolds.com/bullet_detail.php?bullet=45-195C-D.png

My Pietta Remington 1858 does best with 30 grns of either 3F Olde Eynsford or Triple 7, and my Ruger does best with 35 grns, and this is with both bullets.

I had to modify the Remington's frame to get them to load.

I'm still waiting to pick up my Pietta "Buffalo"... 3 more days till my "permit" is available. I have a LEE double cavity 220 grain conical that measures also at .456. How is loading this?

[/URL][/IMG]
Aloha...

 

[Rattus58]

Good God.... what happened??//

 

[Hellgate]

Rattus58,
The LEE conical 220gr .456 mold is the one made for the ROA. I use the 200gr .454 one for all my Remingtons and the ASM 1860 Army. The .456 might not drop into the chambers if they are typically .446-.448 chambers.

 

[rodwha]

There also may not be enough clearance under the ram, though I'm not certain about that. To gain 20 grns I suspect it's longer than the 200 grn Lee conical meant for the repros.

 

[Rattus58]

Rattus58,
The LEE conical 220gr .456 mold is the one made for the ROA. I use the 200gr .454 one for all my Remingtons and the ASM 1860 Army. The .456 might not drop into the chambers if they are typically .446-.448 chambers.

I just mic'd my cylinders.... and you're right, they are .445.... so does anyone want a mold from track... double cavity...

Aloha...

 

[rodwha]

You cab buy a reamer from Brownells that's done by hand that makes it .450 or so. Mine has been reamed to .449" and I keep thinking I'd like to purchase that reamer for if/when I get anything else with small chambers. My bullets drop at .456" and with a .449" chamber (chamfered) it loads easy enough.

 

[swathdiver]

Trying to decide on a mold for a '51 Navy repro...

Forgive me if this has been revealed already but who made your sixgun and what year was it manufactured?

 

[ExMachina]

Forgive me if this has been revealed already but who made your sixgun and what year was it manufactured?

It's a current production Uberti. Supposedly these have a 1:18 twist so I've got a Lee mold on order.

 

[Surculus]

I just mic'd my cylinders.... and you're right, they are .445.... so does anyone want a mold from track... double cavity...

You could get a Lee sizer kit that fit on their cheapy single-stage press. Not much more expensive than buying another mold, and then you've always got the ability to size boolits down to fit your C&B if you want to try experimenting w/ a different mold...