Using fillers over the powder

[warbirdlover]

I have been just putting the powder in, dropping in a pre-lubed wad and then the ball. Pushes the ball down aways into the cylinder.

I've read where you should use cream of wheat or corn meal over the wad to 3/4 from the top of the cylinder before putting in the ball.

What is the purpose of doing this? Getting the ball closer to the cylinder end for more accuracy? Safety reasons?

Hope an old pro here can explain. Thanks in advance.

 

[warbirdlover]

I feel kind of guilty roaring into this forum and posting questions you experts have probably answered in here hundreds of times before. I just go nuts when I can be around people who can teach me on a subject I'm new to. Sorry for bothering you all and I'll try to slow down.

 

[Old Fuff]

Answering questions is one reason this forum is here, and why it's so good.

Sometime you will find that a lighter powder charge is more accurate. However you should NEVER seat a ball or bullet that isn't firmly pressed against the powder charge. In single-shot or other non-cylinder guns this isn't a problem, but in revolvers it can be. The answer is to first load the chamber with the lighter load. Then with a filler such as corn meal or Cream of Wheat. Then a lubricated wad under the ball or a dab of grease on top of it.

I did this while shooting in an indoor gallery (50 feet) and could interlock the holes in the target at that distance. I had two powder flasks, one with a drop-tube shortened to throw the correct powder charge, and the other to drop the correct filler charge. Other then the addition of the filler the chamber(s) were loaded in the conventional manner.

Some cylinders have tapered chambers, and deep seating the ball can swage it undersized. In an ideal situation the ball should be seated about 1/16" below the cylinder face, BUT IN ALL CASES IT MUST BE DOWN ON THE POWDER CHARGE (AND OR THE POWDER/FILLER CHARGE) WITH NO AIR SPACE BETWEEN THE BALL AND POWDER.

 

[Father Knows Best]

Some cylinders have tapered chambers, and deep seating the ball can swage it undersized.

Really? Can you give examples? Are they designed that way (if so, why) or is just poor quality control in manufacturing?

I don't know any guys who use fillers with cap and ball revolvers. There are a few in cowboy action shooting that have a problem with not being able to seat the ball all the way down on the powder because they are shooting revolvers with ram rods that aren't long enough (short barrel Ruger Old Armies or Remington 1858's, as I recall). Instead of using fillers, though, they either use a big wad between the powder and the ball, or they place an undersized ball on top of the ball they are loading, ram it down firmly, and then drop the undersized ball back out.

 

[warbirdlover]

I've read where you put the powder in, wad over the powder, then the filler and then the ball. Others have stated you put the filler over the powder, then the wad and ball. Does this matter?

 

[Father Knows Best]

A wad between the powder and filler will keep the filler from contaminating the powder. Whether that's a concern or not depends on what you are using for filler. Some fillers contain moisture, which can degrade the powder. That's more of a risk in cartridges, which may sit for a long time, than in cap-and-ball guns, which usually are discharged shortly after loading.

 

[unspellable]

filler

Eliminating any air space is a safety issue. But aside from that, I am of the opinion that the closer the ball is to the barrel, the better the accuracy will be.

 

[Old Fuff]

The purpose of the wad is to provide lubrication to help keep the powder fouling soft. If you use Creame of Wheat for a filler I find it doesn't shift down into the powder to any serious degree. Therefore I advocate having the wad behind the ball, although if you grease the top of the ball no wad is necessary. Rule of thumb: If shooting at at range use grease. If carrying the revolver in a holster in the field, use wads.

unspellable: You are right, but do you know why?

Father (maybe) knows best: Ya' Sam Colt made them that way to insure a tight seal between the ball and chamber wall, and to add metal where the cylinder bolt notches were cut. At the factory the chambers were measured, and a bullet mold of exactly the right size was included with the revolver. If you remove the cylinder from a better grade reproduction and check the chamber with a snug plug you'll find it doesn't go all of the way down. Also true with original cap & ball revolvers.

 

[warbirdlover]

I've noted that the point of aim changes as the gun fouls. When clean the first few shots (25 yds) go high (about a foot) and left (over 6 inches). By the third loading it's about half that from point of aim. I'm assuming this is normal?

 

[unspellable]

ball seating

The closer the ball (Or bullet, be it cap and ball or modern cartridge revolver.) is to the barrel breech the smaller the distance it has to travel to get there and the less speed it will have built up by the time it does get there. Hence less distortion before it takes the rifling. (The acceleration forces on a bullet are huge. Lead will flow like warm taffy under that kind of acceleration.) In addition, if it happens to be a cap and ball revolver, the ball will have been sized down less if it has not been seated so deeply. Also less distortion of the ball in seating it.

 

[Old Fuff]

Given black powder's relatively slow ignition the acceleration issue may not have a critical effect, and most of the distortion of a ball is caused by a rammer that has a cavity shaped to fit pointed bullets, and therefore only push on the outer edge of a ball.

But deep seating tends to strip away more lead around the circumference of the ball and reduces the "grip" between it and the cylinder wall. Thus you lose some of the crimp effect.

Another seldom known factor is that most reproductions have undersized chambers (the Ruger Old Army being a noteable exception). For example, a typical 1858 Remington often has a barrel groove diameter running out as far as .460" with a recommended ball size of .454" that is swaged down to about .450".

Umberti may be doing better with recent production ( .452" barrel/.450 chambers), but this is an often overlooked factor that may, depending on the individual gun, effect accuracy. It is interesting to note that the recommended ball size for original Colt 1851 Navy revolvers is .380" according to some authorities, while it is .376" for reproductions.

 

[unspellable]

ball seating

Can't cite the Ruger, it's not a repro. Wonder about the chamber barrel dimensions in the Rogers & Spencer, they have a reputation for accuracy both in the originals and the repros.

The acceleration in a BP arm will deform the ball. It's much higher than one would intuitively think in any arm. I'll run the numbers later, gotta run.

 

[warbirdlover]

I've got a Colt Navy .44. My brother has a Remington New Army and a Rogers and Spencer (all guns Piettis). The Rogers and Spencer is in a class by itself. Sites are almost dead on also. Remington is next in accuracy (but far behind the R & S) and Colt is last but not too much behind New Army. We bring all the guns out to the range and have a "blast" (pun intended).

With the same load the Rogers & Spencer has more recoil and feels much "tighter" then the other two.

 

[unspellable]

accelration and ball deformation

If you acclerate a lead ball from rest to a velocity of 1000 fps in a distance of 7.5 inches (More or less what you would expect from a Ruger Old Army) it will be subjected to a minimum acceleration of 24,865 standard gravities. To achieve the minimum you must maintain a constant acceleration from start to finish. In a firearm the acceleration is far from uniform and so the peak acceleration must be greater than 24,865 gravities.

Under 24,865 gravities that 143 grain ball weighs 508 pounds. Wanna bet it doesn't get deformed?

 

[Old Fuff]

I have my doubts because I have recovered balls from water tanks ...

Lyman's Black Powder Handgun manual has listed loads and velocities, but I don't have it at hand. Regardless, a 28-grain charge in an 1860 Army will push the ball out at around 850 to maybe 870 FPS. In my experience all of the powder doesn't burn in the bore because you can see this in the muzzle flash with little sparks flying out and away.

Black powder tends to accelerate the ball rather then boot it ... Which is part of the reason Colt's gain twist worked.

To test my theory get a 55 gallon drum and fill it 3/4 full of water. To keep from getting wet, place a peice of thin plastic over the top and tape it down. Then climb up a step-ladder and shoot straight down. Later pour out the water and recover the balls or bullets.

Edited to add: It's interesting that you mentioned the Ruger, because with one possible exception (that was a semi-custom Remington style revolver made for International shooting teams) the Old Army is the most accurate of the commonly found black powder revolvers. I don't see a revolver shooting pressure-distorted balls being able to shoot one-hole groups at 25 yards off a rest, which it has done.

 

[unspellable]

ball distortion

Read the afore mentioned numbers for acceleration again. The number was for the simplified absolute minimum which is impossible to achieve no matter what you propel the ball with. Any real world case, regardless of propellant used, will produce higher numbers than the simplified minimum.

It's also obvious that the ball/bullet must deform as we would regard a load that does not obturate as a poor load.

In the best of all possible worlds, the ball/bullet will distort in a uniform manner and allow accurate flight.

In the case of a solid for big game, the objective is to minimize any deformation in the bullet other than what is required for obturation and engraving the rifling. At terminal the bullet may be slowed from a lower velocity over a distance longer than the rifle barrel. It's very difficult to make a bullet that will show NO distortion. You pay a fancy price for ones that get close.

Measure your water retrieved balls with a micrometer. I'll gurantee they are distorted.

 

[Old Fuff]

Of course they are distorted - from impact and also from being seated. But I believe that distortion from these factors is much greater then anything caused by pressure in the bore. In any case I don't think that distortion relative to bore pressure has any noticeable negative effect on accuracy, which was the original point.

On the other hand if you have a revolver with undersized chambers that swage the bullet below bore diameter, but the ball emerges from the muzzle with rifling clearly engraved on the circumference, and "mikes" across the lands at bore diameter, it would seem that this "upset" rather then "distortion" had a positive effect. However a ball that is correctly sized in the chamber to match the bore will be more accurate. Ruger does this, and it shows.

 

[warbirdlover]

Got out to the range and tried cream of wheat over the powder and wad. 23 grains of fffg (brass frame) lubed wad and 10 grains of c.o.w. Didn't make a difference at all. Actually grouped better without it. Oh well.

 

[Old Fuff]

Sometimes it doesn't, and hand-held marksmanship plays a part too. But try cutting your charge back to about 15 grains and see if it makes any difference.

The only time I ever bothered to use light charges was when shooting in indoor gallery ranges at 50 feet, and under those circumstances it did help. Most of the time this was with a .36 rather then .44 revolver, and that could make a little difference too. Once, I was shooting a brass-framed 1851 Navy replica just to prove that they "could shoot." Using a .375 round ball, 15 grains of 3-F black powder, and a Cream of Wheat filler I was able to interlock shots into one ragged hole at 50 feet, and it shot to the point of aim, which is unusual. The light charges also extended the working life of the gun somewhat, as it didn't go through the pounding given by full charges. But eventually the base pin became loose and I had to give it up.

Part of the fun in shooting these vintage-style revolvers is experimenting to find the best combinations of ball size and powder charge.

 

[ArmedBear]

I had good luck with 15-grain charges in an 1858 Remington .44 at relatively short ranges with Cream of Wheat filler, but it's a time-consuming extra step that can be frustrating in the wind. And it makes a mess at an indoor range.

Something I learned about it recently, though. My dad gave me a bunch of his old BP stuff that had spent 20+ years in a closet. When you leave a powder flask filled with Cream of Wheat for that long, it will breed bugs.

Next quarter century, maybe I'll try grits.

 

[warbirdlover]

LOL!! That crossed my mind about the bugs in the cream of wheat. They'd get quite a ride I would think!!

 

[Beartracker]

The best load I have found for my 1858 Remington .44 is 30 gr. powder,wonder wad,.454 ball and grease on top. The grease I use is wonder lub melted with 1/3 beeswax added. I can carry this in hot weather all day and the grease will become soft but not drip out.This load is more accurate than I can shoot and I'm not a bad shot Some people don't like to mess with the grease but if you want a smooth working and easy to clean revolver then grease is the way to go.
If you chamfer the ends of your cylinders and polish it and the cylinder rod so that it's glass smooth and keep them greased you can shoot 6-8 cylinders without any binding.
A little work on the trigger and timing and the 1858 can be a pure pleasure to shoot. As Buffalo Bill would say "My Remington has never failed me", Mike