Remington 1851 Max loads

[rodwha]

I can do 30 without a wad if I use grease over the balls. With a greased wad, 25 puts the end of the ball pretty close to the end of the cylinder. I believe I once loaded 30gr with a wad and was shaving a little lead as I rotated the cylinder through. It's most accurate with around 22gr of 3F or Pyrodex P.

I found that both my NMA and ROA have their more accurate loads about that percentage under max like yours. I have a new adjustable measure that allows me to work in 2.5 grn increments so I’ll be reworking both guns to find their best loads so I can reconfigure their universal bullet design that looks close to 230 grns so far.

 

[gtrgy888]

Managing to squeeze 30gr into a .36 can be a feat of engineering, especially if you are using a wad between powder and ball.

It sure is. I can cram 30 grains in each chamber under a .380 ball if I exert enough force to bend components and bruise my palms. But the marginal ballistic increase is hardly worth it. Now I load 25 grains with 2-3 grains cornmeal filler to prevent chainfires and lube the tops immediately before shooting so it doesn’t contaminate my powder in between range trips.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

"But the marginal ballistic increase is hardly worth it". Now that hits the nail on the head. You can't turn a .36" into a .357 Magnum. But you can nip on the heels of the .38 special. For me, the best compromise is shooting a slug over 23-25 grains of 4fg. I think the increase in projectile mass (120 grains or more compared to the ball's 80 grain weight) outweighs (pun intended) any slight increase in velocity as far as producing more energy. Using a lubed bullet eliminates any need to put lube over the bullet or wad underneath. Much faster loading process. Win-win!

 

[rodwha]

"But the marginal ballistic increase is hardly worth it". Now that hits the nail on the head. You can't turn a .36" into a .357 Magnum. But you can nip on the heels of the .38 special. For me, the best compromise is shooting a slug over 23-25 grains of 4fg. I think the increase in projectile mass (120 grains or more compared to the ball's 80 grain weight) outweighs (pun intended) any slight increase in velocity as far as producing more energy. Using a lubed bullet eliminates any need to put lube over the bullet or wad underneath. Much faster loading process. Win-win!

Well, according to another fellow’s testing, 20 grns of 3F Swiss or Olde Eynsford moved a 110 grn bullet to .380 ACP levels. And from what little .36 info I’ve seen, using an energetic powder one can achieve .38 Spl +P levels. Of course using other powders will provide dismal numbers.

 

[paul harm]

Just buy a 44.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

I have a .44, but I like the Remington New Model Army in Navy caliber better. But you can't turn a .44 into a .357 either.

 

[gtrgy888]

Just buy a 44.

I have a .44 waiting in storage for the holidays. I set out last September to make the .36 a reliable, accurate, adequately powerful sidearm to understand how these were historically used.

Remember that from 1837 to 1860, the .36 was the ONLY caliber available for a belt sized revolver. For a lot of old timers, it served adequately enough for personal protection that they were still purchased after the 1860 came out, but it takes a ton of work to make good performance happen reliably, every trigger pull, without hiccups. I’m confident I have the right formula after nearly a year to get 5/5 reliable ignition with acceptable performance after a month loaded. I’ve estimated ballistics are between .380 acp and .38 special depending on the projectile and grains/type of powder used. It’ll still do the job.

 

[gtrgy888]

"But the marginal ballistic increase is hardly worth it". Now that hits the nail on the head. You can't turn a .36" into a .357 Magnum. But you can nip on the heels of the .38 special. For me, the best compromise is shooting a slug over 23-25 grains of 4fg. I think the increase in projectile mass (120 grains or more compared to the ball's 80 grain weight) outweighs (pun intended) any slight increase in velocity as far as producing more energy. Using a lubed bullet eliminates any need to put lube over the bullet or wad underneath. Much faster loading process. Win-win!

I find conicals and round ball have identical effects on water jugs… with the exception that the round ball throws the jug straight up 3 feet in the air! Try it and see. For penetration, the conical is best, but that round ball will sure hurt more since it seems to dump a lot more energy as it goes through.

 

[rodwha]

A WFN bullet trumps both…

 

[gtrgy888]

A WFN bullet trumps both…

The Kaido 140 grain is essentially a semiwadcutter. It just sailed through peacefully. For body shots, ideal for penetration. But if I HAD to take a .36 to the head, I’d hope it wasn’t roundball.

 

[rodwha]

The Kaido 140 grain is essentially a semiwadcutter. It just sailed through peacefully. For body shots, ideal for penetration. But if I HAD to take a .36 to the head, I’d hope it wasn’t roundball.

Right, that’s why I stated a WFN. It makes a bigger hole than a RB. It’s why most lead hunting lead bullets wear a wide meplat.

 

[gtrgy888]

Right, that’s why I stated a WFN. It makes a bigger hole than a RB. It’s why most lead hunting lead bullets wear a wide meplat.

As true as that is,the meplat of an oversized, shaved off roundball is still fairly wide, especially when pressed down tight. I’ve seated one down, popped it out and slugged it down the barrel to see its final profile after being swaged down from .380 to .375. It had a flat angled ogive to the rear, a flat driving band 2-3 mm long, and a slightly rounded flattened down front profile. The press also engraves a nasty sharp ring as it flattens the front. It reminded me of a distorted .30-30 rifle round, squished down and stretched out wide. It’s not an efficient shape, which means a lot more turbulent flight through air or tissue. If nothing else, it has width. And at 1,000+ fps, it’ll flatten into a disc, deflect, and tear. I like WFN, but there’s something unique about that seated roundball moving faster than 1,000 fps that just inspires dread every time I see its handiwork on small game, wood, water jug, or compressed snow. I can see how it was trusted for so long, provided the right powder and charge are used.

 

[Lyle]

As true as that is,the meplat of an oversized, shaved off roundball is still fairly wide, especially when pressed down tight. I’ve seated one down, popped it out and slugged it down the barrel to see its final profile after being swaged down from .380 to .375. It had a flat angled ogive to the rear, a flat driving band 2-3 mm long, and a slightly rounded flattened down front profile. The press also engraves a nasty sharp ring as it flattens the front. It reminded me of a distorted .30-30 rifle round, squished down and stretched out wide. It’s not an efficient shape, which means a lot more turbulent flight through air or tissue. If nothing else, it has width. And at 1,000+ fps, it’ll flatten into a disc, deflect, and tear. I like WFN, but there’s something unique about that seated roundball moving faster than 1,000 fps that just inspires dread every time I see its handiwork on small game, wood, water jug, or compressed snow. I can see how it was trusted for so long, provided the right powder and charge are used.

What is the powder you use and how much to get 1000fps from your 36?

 

[Ugly Sauce]

I think the ball and slug are both good. But they both have their "specialties". The slug, penetration, the ball, smack-down! Depends on the situation, or the target. One is not more better than the other.

 

[rodwha]

As true as that is,the meplat of an oversized, shaved off roundball is still fairly wide, especially when pressed down tight. I’ve seated one down, popped it out and slugged it down the barrel to see its final profile after being swaged down from .380 to .375. It had a flat angled ogive to the rear, a flat driving band 2-3 mm long, and a slightly rounded flattened down front profile. The press also engraves a nasty sharp ring as it flattens the front. It reminded me of a distorted .30-30 rifle round, squished down and stretched out wide. It’s not an efficient shape, which means a lot more turbulent flight through air or tissue. If nothing else, it has width. And at 1,000+ fps, it’ll flatten into a disc, deflect, and tear. I like WFN, but there’s something unique about that seated roundball moving faster than 1,000 fps that just inspires dread every time I see its handiwork on small game, wood, water jug, or compressed snow. I can see how it was trusted for so long, provided the right powder and charge are used.

Well, meplat is a term used to describe tip. My meplat is .375” or about 83% of its size. A ball is a sphere at its tip. Look at what you see in the various videos shooting a ball in to get, it’s caliber sized. A wide meplat creates larger than caliber permanent wound tracks. They aren’t on the same playing field.

Depending on which expert pure soft lead readily expands at 1100 or 1200 FPS, which seems about the threshold many rifle shooters see that instead of a flattened ball found under the hide it’s a complete pass through right around the 75 yd mark. Of course it could expand upon striking bone, but so can a bullet all the same. Maybe it’s possible to break 1100 FPS with a Navy ball but for how long will it stay supersonic? A WFN cute a larger than caliber hole right down to powder puff loads according to Beartooth Bullets. Put a .280” meplat on a .375” bullet and at just 600 FPS it is cutting a .420” permanent hole.

An oddity found by one fellow I’ve chatted a lot with when designing my bullets was that he tested the 180 grn ball-ET or somesuch and with the same powder charge got the same velocity despite it being a heavier projectile. His ponderings on it were that the long driving bands created more friction making the detonation stronger. There’s further evidence to support this with testing the various .45 caliber balls and the same powder load.

 

[rodwha]

I think the ball and slug are both good. But they both have their "specialties". The slug, penetration, the ball, smack-down! Depends on the situation, or the target. One is not more better than the other.

Ummm, the WFN does both…

 

[Captain*kirk]

Wait...are we talking revolvers or rifles here?

 

[rodwha]

Wait...are we talking revolvers or rifles here?

Revolvers. A RB from a rifle can be relied upon to expand quite a bit, a pistol, not so much.

 

[gtrgy888]

What is the powder you use and how much to get 1000fps from your 36?

777 or Old Eynsford. Goex 3f will never give those kinds of velocities. 23 grains is the starting charge for lead deformation in the target. I tend to keep it between 21-23 grains for plinking and 25-28 grains if I need power.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

I think it holds true for rifles. For deer, you might prefer a ball for more smack-down. For elk or bear, you might want more penetration for a good blood trail. However, either one would work fine for either one. And the bigger the ball, the less need for a slug. In my .50" rifle I shoot slug. In my .62" rifle I shoot ball.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

Ummm, the WFN does both…

Well...I prefer the WFN slug to a ball, but other's results may vary. !!! What I like best about a slug, in a revolver, is that I can reload more quickly in the field. No wads or grease. And I do believe a WFN slug delivers more energy on target, even though a light projectile like a ball, or modern lightweight hollow point will look like more energy when shooting water jugs, compared to heavy slugs.

 

[rodwha]

As to maximum shock, there’s another fellow who has tested and created all sorts of stuff, including loading custom hollow points. They require a modified ram that he uses epoxy to create.

I’ll be buying an additional ram or loading lever assembly once I’ve worked up my final bullet design. And the idea of a HP is quite interesting. For myself it’s looking like the WFN will end up weighing 225-240 grns, give that a HP and it’s still over 200 grns. What comes to mind is the old Speer Flying Ashtray. Do that with a .36 and you have a 110-125 grn HP +P. Not bad.