What's the best "starter" blackpowder gun?

[WVGunman]

I'm not sure what I'd do with it yet, beyond target shooting and plinking, but that's mostly what I do with my cartridge guns, so it stands to reason. I'm looking at two categories, rifle and pistol (because I know I'll want one of each). I definitely am interested only in percussion, not flintlocks.

For a rifle, should it be a traditional design, or a modern inline model? What caliber is best for casual target shhoting/plinking? I don't want to spend a fortune on bullets; is any particular caliber the cheapest to shoot? I haven't seen any rifles below .45, are smaller calibers easy to find? Do they cost more?

For pistols, single shot or revolver? If revolver, what caliber is simplest to learn on, or does it not really matter? Colt style or Remington style? Steel frame or brass? (Do brass frames actually stretch?) Do pistols require a finer powder that is harder to find?

I appreciate any and all responses.

 

[Armored farmer]

What is your points of interest.?
Revolutionary war.?
Fur trade?
Mountain man?
Civil war?
Hunting?
Do you enjoy handguns or rifles more?

 

[WVGunman]

I'd say Civil War, thereabouts. I want to get one of each, but would probably shoot the handgun more. Easier to find a range for that.

 

[Armored farmer]

That's great because that would be my suggestion for a fun starter gun.
Now, choose between a Colt 1860 and a Remington 1858. Which do you like the looks of best.? They both have their advantages.
+ get a full size gun to start with.
+ spend a few more $$ and get a steel frame.
+ I like Uberti Colts, and Pietta Remington.

 

[rodwha]

I believe a revolver would be more fun, but that’s me.

Smaller calibers tend to cost a little less as they use less lead in their projectiles and have smaller chambers for the powder. But this may not amount to much unless looked at over a period of time, and some people use a filler (powder, filler, projectile).

I almost always get people over to see what it is I’m shooting (.44/.45 cal revolvers) as they have a nice loud boom with the smoke too. Not sure a .36 cal would be quite the draw and maybe that’s what you’d prefer (I like talking about them and allowing people to try them).

As to revolvers I’d suggest the cheaper Pietta if you want a Colt style or an Uberti if you want a Remington, which tends to be the easier to deal with from what I’ve read, though I have the Pietta model.

I was not happy with my Pietta ($199 plus a free starter kit) out of the box. The loading window isn’t designed to allow the loading of bullets/conicals as they should be. I had to file the nose of the hammer to securely use the safety notches which may not be a big deal for just a range toy. The hand and bolt stop needing the edges smoothed. The chambers are grossly under sized (something like .446” with a .452” groove diameter) so it’s been reamed to .449” and chamfered (considering getting to .451-.453”). The sight and lever latch are pressed fit and a couple of people have claimed theirs fell out. My pistol shoots left and I cannot fix that unless I dovetail a new sight in, which I plan to do. The grips didn’t fit nicely (gaps) and they were rather large for me so I sanded them. I also don’t like the reddish stain so I fixed that too.

All of that said it shoots rather well and I like it, though I still have more work to have done on it.

The Uberti Colts (all?) have short arbors but otherwise seem to be a bit better of a pistol. The arbor is easily fixed. Their chambers seem to run about .450” with a .452” groove. The lead will obturate but it seems the closer to groove the more accurate it will be.

If a muzzleloading pistol is something you’re interested in I’d suggest the Lyman Plains Pistol. I want one.

I don’t care much for the inlines as they just don’t have the character. Might as well just have a modern rifle. I have a Lyman Deerstalker in .50 cal and really like it. You can get one for about $500 which is about twice the cost of a base inline. It’s not really traditional (recoil pad and fiber optic sights) but that doesn’t mean much to me. If it does you I’d suggest the Trade Rifle or Great Plains.

Lead balls aren’t that costly but the bullets/conicals tend to be. Bullets for hunting are why I decided to get into casting them myself, along with making custom designs as I need a wide meplat. The Kaido bullets (modified Lee .45 Colt bullet) had cost $40/50 + shipping and then was raised to $50. A pound of lead cost me $1 at a recycle yard and I can get 35 of my 195 grn bullets out of just 1 pound. Eventually it will pay the expense of my inexpensive Lee pot and gear and my expensive custom bullet mold (~$250), and it gave me the opportunity to create exactly what I wanted.

Brass frames don’t last long if you use a more standard powder charge. For the .44 cal a full load is somewhere between 35-40 grns of powder, but shooting much more than 20 grns will eventually damage a brass frame. With that said a lot of target shooters state 18-25 grns tends to be the most accurate (along with filler). As I hunt and use the pistols as a backup this would be far too anemic. My Remington does best with 30 grns and this easily puts me in standard .45 ACP/Schofield performance levels when I use 1 of the 3 well known energetic powders (I use 3F Triple 7 and Olde Eynsford).

2 or 3F powder will work just fine in a rifle or handgun. 3F is more powerful and needs less to do the same thing. I use 3F in my guns as it keeps it simple. I may try 2F just to compare accuracy as I believe it would still produce the performance I need.

 

[.38 Special]

With regard to rifles, I personally have seen more failures with inlines than with traditional caplocks. I am not working from a huge sample size, and I also am biased, but there you go.

For handguns, I enjoy both revolvers and single shots. Single shots obviously are simpler and easier to manage. I suppose you could even find a caliber to match your rifle, which would save a bit of money on balls and such. I prefer revolvers but they are a bit more complex and most of them require some gunsmithing to really bring out their best. If you don't mind the cost buying a gun that already has the gunsmithing done that will result in a trouble-free experience, but you have to expect to spend six or seven hundred dollars for a new gun, or search the classifieds for used guns. If that is out of the question, then I honestly would suggest an 1858 rather than a Colt pattern. The 1858s have their own quibbles but, out of the box, are generally much easier to manage.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy

Yes, brass frames can stretch. I have an Uberti 44 I bought back around 1968, and the frame stretched because nobody was warning us back then to keep the loads below 30 grains of powder.

Here is my old 44 Uberti 'Navy' which is now a wall hanger because the frame stretched.






Remington or Colt, go with whichever you like best. This is my old EuroArms Remington that I bought way back in 1975. It is wearing a cartridge conversion cylinder in this photo, other wise with the original C&B cylinder it would look almost the same. The advantage of the Remington design is the solid frame with a top strap.






The cylinder is easy to remove for cleaning. Again, this is the cartridge conversion cylinder, but it pops out the same way the C&B cylinder would.





This is a Pietta replica of the 1860 Army.






To remove the cylinder from any Colt style C&B revolver you drive out the wedge and pull the barrel off.






In my experience, the Remington design binds up more quickly than the Colt design. The wider arbor of the Colt design and the helical clearance cut around the arbor make it less susceptible to binding from BP fouling than the Remington design because the Remington cylinder pin is much narrower and binds up with fouling quicker.






And do yourself a favor, spend the extra money on a steel frame.

Caliber, I prefer 44 over 36, but that is pretty much personal choice.

 

[Crunchy Frog]

If you own a revolver and handload your own ammo, you can start with black powder cartridges. Some of the black powder substitutes are compatible with coated lead bullets or commercially cast bullets with “standard” lube.

I saved you a couple hundred dollars! Merry Christmas.

 

[MEHavey]

Without any doubt (in my fixed opinion) the Lyman GREAT PLAINS patched-ball/sidelock rifle.
Before anything else, including before settling on a revolver.
It will bring you in, settle you down, teach you the basics.

You will never look back....

 

[J-Bar]

I am going to make a recommendation that no one else will agree with, but I am sincere.

Buy a Ruger Old Army. They are expensive, but you can get your money back and maybe more when you sell it. You will not get back your investment on a Uberti or Pietta. The Italian guns are a great value for their price, but they should be considered kits that need additional smithing to be reliable. While learning to enjoy shooting blackpowder with an ROA you will not have to endure cap jams or worry about bolt-to-cylinder notch fitting or arbor length adjustment. The adjustable sight ROA is a bit less expensive and is ideal for the fledgling Soot Lord because you avoid the frustration of the fixed sight models.

I started with Ruger Old Armies. I have owned and competed with Piettas, Ubertis, 1851s and 1860s from both companies. I learned a lot about percussion revolvers in the process. The Ubertis and Piettas are gone. I now have one pair of 5 1/2” ROAs and one pair of 7 1/2” ROAs.

I sleep peacefully every night.

 

[david58]

My preference for rifles is traditional. The best deal in a new factory gun is the Lyman Great Plains - quite authentic styling, reliable, accurate. Shooting roundball is fun, surprisingly accurate, and you have a good, solid hunting rifle as well. .50 is great for deer, but .54 will let you hunt elk and doesn't take that much more lead to shoot.

As to pistols, I cannot speak fluently, but there's a lot of good advice here.

 

[Jimster]

Good lord Amighty! If you have even a sprinkling of historic interest in Civil War era revolvers, don’t get a Ruger Old Army. They are fugly and have no remote resemblance to any historic revolver. Get a Uberti 1860 Army or 1858 Navy. You’ll thank me later.
If you have absolutely no passion for wanting to feel the experience of shooting historic Civil War replicas then by all means get a Ruger Old Army. They are solid revolvers with a loyal following.

 

[damoc]

Doesn't matter what you start with.

They breed.

 

[Malachi Leviticus Blue]

Doesn't matter what you start with.

They breed.

Ain't that the truth!

and I'm also going to agree with J-Bar you can't go wrong with a Ruger Old Army, and as stated it will hold it's value.

Unless you get someone who actually knows what they're dong to tune your Pietta, Uberti or whichever replica, it's not even going to be in the same ball ballpark as far as performance and functionality as a Ruger Old Army. It will only take one cock of the hammer to prove it.

Don't worry, you'll likely end up with at least one of every possible option before you're done anyway.

 

[45 Dragoon]

Set up correctly, Italian copies can go toe to toe with ROAs. In fact, ROAs get "upgraded" on a normal basis as well. In the end, the money will be about the same.
This stainless Remington has a coil sprung action, a bolt block and an action stop. With all the other parts "enhancements", it will go head to head (or toe to toe !!) with the ROA.

Mike

 

[expat_alaska]

Just my $.02 worth.

If you have small hands, the 1851 Navy .36 7.5" barrel is a natural fit and points/balances well.

If you have somewhat larger hands, the 1860 Army .44 8" barrel has a longer grip and will do you well.

If you have big hands, the 1848 Whitneyville Hartford Dragoon .44 7.5" barrel will suit, but don't expect it to be a "belt" revolver (and it speaks with authority!).

Some folks have a problem with the squareback trigger guard. Not I.

Regards,

Jim

For comparison:

Armi San Marco 1860 Army .44 Full-fluted cylinder
Uberti 1848 Whitneyville Hartford Dragoon .44
Pietta 1851 Navy Second Model .36 "Belt Dragoon"

 

[rodwha]

No matter what you get make sure you get a proper set (hollow ground) of screwdrivers. Don’t use the common types as they’ll bugger up the face of the screws.

 

[rodwha]

Oh, one brass framed pistol that does well is the Spiller & Burr as it only holds maybe a hair over 20 grns of powder.

If you think you might like a more compact pistol the 1862 Colt Pocket Police or Navy is an option (I want a 4.5” Police but do like the Navy barrel and assembly). However these might need the most work of all as they seem to suffer from cap jams more often. With that said it may be a rather simple fix, that being to file the safety notch in the nose of the hammer as it’s sharp edges are claimed (Colt models in general) to snatch the spent caps and pull them off of the nipple. With an energetic powder and bullet these have been chronographed at low end .380 performance.

The .31 caliber version of the Colts may be to your liking, especially as they use less powder and lead. But I’m not sure if the anemic power is as entertaining. To each their own though.

 

[Starter52]

I like the Thompson Center percussion rifles, Hawkens style. These beautiful rifles ruled the woods in the days before inlines. Top quality American made guns.

Plenty available in .50 caliber on the used gun market. Ridiculously cheap for the quality of gun you are getting.

 

[J-Bar]

Percussion firearms follow the same rule of economics as any other merchandise; you pretty much get what you pay for.

I maintain that a new shooter will have fewer mechanical problems with an ROA than with a new in the box Italian revolver of any stripe. Most of the SASS World Champions over the years have used ROAs. I can only think of one competitor who won the World Championship with slicked up Piettas in the past 20 years. Please correct me if I’m wrong. While the OP may not be interested in competition, this makes my point about reliability. I know that the two most recent World Records in Frontiersman category were set with a pair of ROAs that had only Treso nipples instead of factory nipples as the only mechanical change from new revolvers.

The OP must decide how much historical appearance matters, and how much he is willing to invest after his initial purchase.

 

[arcticap]

I would recommend starting off with an inexpensive 1 in 48" twist sidelock rifle to learn how much you like to shoot and clean muzzle loaders.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with an inexpensive Traditions Deerhunter .50 carbine which can also shoot sabots and conical lead bullets like an inline.
But it's also fine for patched round balls.
And it's carbine length with adjustable metal sights made with either a plastic or wood stock.
Traditions also makes other models like their mountain rifle with a longer barrel.
If you don't mind a heavier or more expensive gun, then the Lyman Investarms are also very good, perhaps better than Traditions but with a different ignition set up.
I prefer a drum ignition instead of the snail type of breech.

I think it's best to research revolvers and gain some familiarity with black powder shooting.
They all have their advantages and disadvantages, little nuances of design that affect function.
The Ruger Old Army is discontinued and not all parts are easily available.
The Remington 1858 target model gives you adjustable sights which shoot more to point of aim than the Ruger adjustable sights too without doing extra work

But don't buy one unless you are a revolver fan because the rifle is more like shooting a little cannon.
Rifles are not as tedious to load and one can plink away at moderate and longer distances.
Rifles are even fun at pistol distances if the target dot is small enough, and the 50 yard targets are also used at 25 yards.
And it's still hard to hit the bullseye at 25 yards.
But you can also try to plink at 100 yards at objects and larger targets.
Revolvers are really more for close range shooting unless you're a real competitive type of revolver shooter.

At least with the Remington, you can easily swap cylinders and use a loading press for quicker reloading.
Otherwise loading is more of a pain unless you spend a lot of time making handmade paper cartridges in advance.

 

[arcticap]

It's not that the brass Colt frames stretch, it's that the cylinder batters the recoil shield which opens up or enlarges the barrel cylinder gap.

A Remingron brass frame isn't too bad, but the steel frame should last a lifetime.
The Remington brass frame doesn't really stretch either, but the rear hole for the cylinder pin can enlarge over time and become oval, causing the cylinder to be slightly loose and off center.
But with moderate loads, it should last for a good while.
Read and research as many THR threads as possible to learn about revolvers.

 

[45 Dragoon]

I agree with J-Bar's last post.
The ROA is tough nut and I am a ROA (any 3-screw) fan. I appreciate very much what Ruger brought to the gun world. That said, I developed my version of the coil spring action for Colt open top pattern revolvers and Model P's over the last 4 years. The Remington's posed a bigger problem with a narrow frame and a single screw action. Success came right at 2 years ago and as far as I know, I'm the first to ever coil spring a Remington action!! Though my guns have won some State championships, making it to World Champ has a lot of elements. The sheer number of ROAs in seasoned shooters hands vs my New conversions in customers hands. It would be awesome for that to happen but that's not my main goal. My main goal is to make the Colt /Remington pattern revolvers as tough and reliable as the 3 screw Ruger (not to mention make the Ruger even better!). I believe I have achieved that goal. Now, just maintaining with refinements here and there is a blessing (it takes a lot of time developing this stuff)!!
If it wasn't for Ruger, the coils might not have happened . . . if not for Jim Martin, I wouldn't know the "intricacies" of tuning . . . if not for Walt Kirst, I would definitely be doing something else!!
Thanks to all !!!

Mike

 

[.455_Hunter]

I am not even sure why modern in-line guns even count as muzzleloaders, and definitely shouldn't be allowed in the special hunting seasons.

I like military guns, so my muzzleloading elk rifle is a .58 cal Zouave clone. My first cap and ball revolver was a Pietta 1858 from Cabela's, followed by one of the .31 Remingtons soon after for discrete carry.

I owned an Old Army for a bit, but my early example had way too much cylinder gap, so I sold it without replacement yet.

 

[skeeterfogger]

The 1858 Rem would be simplest to deal with IMO. As far as binding, I've never had any issue with mine. Recently I've started using Permatex antisieze to lube internals and pin. Works really well. Handles up to 1600* temp and is very resilient against hot gas blow out. Can shoot a bunch before reapply.

Unless you chose a single shot pistol getting one to match the rifle going to be difficult. 36 rifle shoots .350 ball with 010 patch. 36 revolver shoots 375/.380, 45, .440/010 patch, revolver, 451-454 and some 457 ball. As pointed out, steel frame however the pressure of a 36 not as hard on brass as 44. Cylinder bore undersize doesn't always happen. 36 should be around 361/363. 44, 449/451. Ive only had one to be undersize. Reamer, drill press and vice fixed that.

Look at info on barrel twist for rifles as to what would fit your expectations. Twist on inlines usually 1:28. Too fast for ball with decent charge. Plus my understanding those that use 209 primer now FFL required.
A half stock 28" barrel like a Hawken in 45 good plinker. Typical 1:48 twist decent all round shooter. Slower twist 1:60 or 1:66 Kentucky a good choice.