Christmas Tree Bullet Theory

[Hal]

We just bought a Starr Carbine and I would like to know more about the theory of how a Christmas Tree Bullet is supposed to fit the chamber/leade of a breechloader. I would assume the first band should be some minor amount smaller than bore diameter and the last band should be somewhat larger than groove diameter. Am I on the right track? What about the middle band?

To complicate things, it is a 5 groove rifling and I have no accurate means of measuring a slug. I've tried wrapping a slug with thin metal, measuring and subtracting two metal thickness, but I can't seem to get the same thing twice. I've also tried knocking in a bullet sized .556" and get some very light engraving on what the groove diameter would be, so I'm thinking the groove diameter is probably close to .556" but I'm not sure. I don't have pin gauges, but by turning a soft bullet in the muzzle and shaving off lead, I believe the bore to be .540".

I'm thinking about ordering a Moose Moulds .557 Christmas Tree mould, but I would like to know more about the theory of bullet fit, and also get some better measurements before doing so.

Thanks,

Hal

[RaiderANV]

The smaller band is in the front and rearward bands get larger. Sharps had a problem with quality control I reckon as the bores varied so much. They came up with this bullet as a fit all round. Smaller bores jus shaved the front band backwards.

take your gun to about any machine shop and they can measure it accurately for you. I've never had one charge me for 15 seconds of time even though I offered to pay. Guess paying with the gun surficed?

[EPPS1919]

The larger band is in the front and rearward bands are smaller. Sharps had a problem with quality control I reckon as the bores varied so much. They came up with this bullet as a fit all round. Smaller bores jus shaved the front band backwards.

take your gun to about any machine shop and they can measure it accurately for you. I've never had one charge me for 15 seconds of time even though I offered to pay. Guess paying with the gun surficed?

On my sharps bullet the front ban is smallest they get bigger as they go to the bottom. Hence the Christmas tree. This way they start in the bore straight


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hal]

Front band is definitely smallest. I have a Christmas Tree mound for my wife's sharps, but it's too small for the Starr. The Sharps mould is a Moose too. Going form memory, so I might be off a few .001", but as I recall the front band is say .523, the middle is .532 and the rear is .544. The next largest mould from Moose Moulds is .557 on the rear band. It may work as is, but if I determine I would like it to be 1 or 2 thousandths bigger, I bet they could cut it bigger.

[John Holland]

RaiderANV is correct as to why Sharps designed the "Christmas Tree" bullet with three different diameters. They had horrendous quality control issues with bore diameter, so they made one bullet that fit all of their problems.

[Charlie Hahn]

Hi Hal,

The chamber design is also key. The forcing cone needs to align on the tapered bullet, or there needs to be a throat and chamfer lead angle to help all of this start straight into the bore. I am not so sure about the internal configuration of the Starr. If you can cast the breech to see what you are dealing with you may find there is a better solution to getting these to shoot well. What ever you do, you want the bullet to be no larger than .005 over groove diameter. I would be glad to give your carbine a look see and help with a bullet design, or a bullet we can size for your application so you have a reasonable chance. A Starr is in my future as I do think there are a few simple changes that would make these a good shooter.

Charlie

[John Holland]

At one of the recent past Nationals I noted there was a "Father & Son" pair on another position, each shooting a Starr Carbine during the Carbine Team Match. I wanted to speak with them, but the hectic activities of being Team Captain otherwise wise took up my time! When we were done.....they were gone. Perhaps someone reading this may know who they are!

[Dave Fox]

I'd be surprised surprised but not shocked, if any Sharps bullet works well in a Starr. They didn't during the war and shouldn't now, for the same reason: too small a diameter. I've had success with an unsized Rapine Burnside bullet in my Starr.

[RaiderANV]

To really make a tack driver outta ah start you need to hammer the tack with the butt plate and not the barrel!!

Only other way is to change the to fast(IMHO) rifling from one in 41, I've measured several(though they claim 42) to something like 1in 48-54. Get a tight one with good gas seal and do NOT use the Sharps X-mas tree bullet in it.....you need more bearing surface!

Or.........find GOD an acquire one of his Beloved MAYNARD's 😇

[Lou Lou Lou]

Pat
years ago we had a fella with a Starr it shot very well. Don't have any info on the bullet or load

[RaiderANV]

I understand some do......theoretically they should preform better then Sharps as their block falls back and away from the chamber and will not seize up like the Sharps is well known for.

Maybe if they had copied Maynard's rifling. 🤔

[Hal]

I have some Cerrosafe, but have never used it. Maybe it's time to learn how. I have knocked several soft slugs into it to try to measure different things, but they all had lube grooves that make them hard to measure and then with the 5 groove rifling..... I need to spend some time with it and get some better measurements. Doing a 'pound cast' has crossed my mind, but it's not like there's a cartridge to fill with lead to take up the chamber space. I'll have to get creative.

[ms3635v]

A member of my team shoots a Starr. He is using a bullet that Rapine made years ago. It resembles the Sharps Christmas tree but the bottom band is slightly larger than a Sharps bullet. He uses Charlie Hahn's cardboard tubes and I believe 38 grains of powder, not sure if it's 2F or 3F. The carbine shoots very well. Check with Moose Moulds, a friend recently bought a mould that Moose designed to be used in a Starr, not sure of the measurements.

[jonk]

Don't discount the Lee REAL bullet in a sharps or starr or any other .54. It's kind of like a reverse Christmas Tree, with the front band being the largest.

Personally I size my Rapine christmas tree bullet down to a uniform-ish .540 diameter. It takes some lead off the bottom band, a little off the next one up, and doesn't touch the top one; but then i slugged my bore.

I guess that's my go-to answer. Match bullet to bore diameter (grooves that is) and go 1-2/1000" over for breechloader. If you want to use an unsized bullet, just use softish lead and go from there.

Personally I hung the sharps on the wall (metaphorically) after I started shooting my smith. I love the sharps, yes, but just shoot the smith better.

[Hal]

For what a Lee mould costs, it may be worth a try. I called myself looking at them once before but thought the slug diameter was .540" and chalked it up to being too small. If it is made to fill the groove of a rifle with a .540" BORE, then it may work very well. However, something with a ringtail would lend itself better to cartridge making, whether using paper of cardboard tubes.

[jonk]

If you'd like a small sample pack of Lee bullets let me know, I'm happy to send some. PM if interested. I'd send some cast from soft lead, and some from hard, as I find that given the small driving bands, sometimes the harder lead works better.

I can't speak for your sharps, but in mine, the chamber is generous enough to permit a fatter paper cartridge. Granted you can't use Hahn tubes, but if you roll your own, making one that encompasses the fatter non-ringtail Lee bullet up to the top driving band isn't an issue.

[Hal]

Jonk,

Thanks for your generous offer. I sent you a PM.

[gemmer]

If you'd like a small sample pack of Lee bullets let me know, I'm happy to send some. PM if interested. I'd send some cast from soft lead, and some from hard, as I find that given the small driving bands, sometimes the harder lead works better.

I can't speak for your sharps, but in mine, the chamber is generous enough to permit a fatter paper cartridge. Granted you can't use Hahn tubes, but if you roll your own, making one that encompasses the fatter non-ringtail Lee bullet up to the top driving band isn't an issue.

I shoot the Moose flat base .544 in my Sharps. Since I started using Charlie's tubes, I super glue the bullets to them. Works fine.

[hobbler]

We just bought a Starr Carbine and I would like to know more about the theory of how a Christmas Tree Bullet is supposed to fit the chamber/leade of a breechloader. I would assume the first band should be some minor amount smaller than bore diameter and the last band should be somewhat larger than groove diameter. Am I on the right track? What about the middle band?

To complicate things, it is a 5 groove rifling and I have no accurate means of measuring a slug. I've tried wrapping a slug with thin metal, measuring and subtracting two metal thickness, but I can't seem to get the same thing twice. I've also tried knocking in a bullet sized .556" and get some very light engraving on what the groove diameter would be, so I'm thinking the groove diameter is probably close to .556" but I'm not sure. I don't have pin gauges, but by turning a soft bullet in the muzzle and shaving off lead, I believe the bore to be .540".

I'm thinking about ordering a Moose Moulds .557 Christmas Tree mould, but I would like to know more about the theory of bullet fit, and also get some better measurements before doing so.

Thanks,

Hal


Not being familiar with the Starr was looking on line for examples of dug bullets.
What I found was a rather blunt nose (eh, blunter than usual) cylindrical slug without lube grooves and a small dimple in the base. My first reaction was that it should be very easy to replicate.
Is that the correct bullet for your piece? Was it paper patched in service? Would a version to meet the skirmish rules about patches be the same but lubed?

OK, asked all that to ask this...
Would a .54 minie mold with the plug altered to give it a plain base (or that little dimple) be about as close as anyone can get to an original and still meet skirmish rules?
This here is the Lyman #533476. As an example, if it was enlarged a tad and had a flat plug would that do it? Or would it need to have a smaller front portion diameter to keep from jamming on powder fouling ahead of the chamber, with a larger rear end?
http://i791.photobucket.com/albums/yy192/SNARGLEFLERK/533_zpsr7dnpgyu.jpg (http://s791.photobucket.com/user/SNARGLEFLERK/media/533_zpsr7dnpgyu.jpg.html)

[Dave Fox]

The percussion New Model 1859, 1863 and 1865 Sharps rifles and carbines are nominally .52 calibre. That's why some which were factory bored tight subsequently worked, more-or-less, chambered for the .50-70 round. The Starr's groove diameter is often larger than .56 calibre. When issued Sharps ammunition during the war, the linen cartridges simply slid way forward deeply into the oversize Starr chamber, resulting in misfires and the undersize bullets in erratic accuracy. To shoot a Starr successfully, to paraphrase Chief Brody in "Jaws": "You're gonna need a bigger bullet". My old Rapine Burnside mould throws a .556 diameter bullet, too big for Sharps, quite usable in my Starr. Experimenting with bullets designed for the Sharps in a Starr is likely a dead end. Using the old Rapine Sharps ringtail bullet with a Hahn tube is quite effective in my original MN 1863 rifle, accurate and the cardboard tubes exit the muzzle as advertised. Hahn tubes are too small in diameter to work in the Starr, so I roll combustible paper tubes of the proper size. Accuracy is also good, though I'm usually faced with cartridge remnants in the chamber which have to be cleared. with black powder anything, to quote Roseanna Danna: "It's always sumpin'."

[Hal]

I still haven't gotten around to getting any better measurements, but I'm positive that the groove diameter is at least .556", so I'm thinking any .54 cal minnies are gonna be way too small, especially if you do away with the expanding skirt. I'd really like to avoid paper patching (Not to be confused with paper cartridges) if at all possible.

I experimented a little yesterday with some .556" flat bottom round nosed bullets that I had tried in my Burnside. The experiment geared toward ignition rather than accuracy. We rolled some cartridges (Hair curler paper) around a dowel and the bullet (With glue stick applied around the sides) at the same time and pulled the dowel out to fill with powder. I tried a couple of different folding techniques as well as twisting the tails. Believe it or not, the twisted tails left the least amount of charred paper in the chamber. The twisted tail being the only remnant I ever saw and then only on a couple of them. The tails were either consumed or evacuated on the others. None of the various cartridges, folded or twisted, gave any ignition problems.

[hobbler]

Looking at photos of recovered (artifact) bullets. There's a couple at the bottom of the page...
http://www.thomaspublications.com/CW-bullet-carbine.html

I'm getting what you were saying there. It's .54 bore. I was thinking in terms of needing a slight reduction in diameter due to fouling. Looking at the photos it's like the very rear of the bullet was groove diameter and the forward 70-80% undersized.

Though being a cast bullet and muzzleloader hobbyist for the last forty years I'm plumb ignorant when it comes to the breech loading carbines, so it's of interest to me on what they did and how it worked. For the Starr ammo (as opposed to the Sharps) did the undersized forward potion of the bullet get covered by the cartridge material? From what I've found so far it appears maybe not.

[hobbler]

Would a second hand .54 mold with the rear band taken out 0.01" all around (making it .56") produce a reasonable facsimile of the ammo that Starr produced?

[Hal]

Hobbler, I must admit I am not familiar with the original bullet.

Last night, I finally made time to try to get a better measurement of the throat (or is it "leade"?). I did a 'pound cast' and got a slug that I can measure. The diameter at the point the grooves run out into the taper is .562". So now I guess I need to find (Read that "Have made") a .564" mould, as I'm thinking I'm not gonna find such a thing off the shelf. I do have a .562 round ball mold, but I doubt that will ever give the accuracy I would like to see with it.

[hobbler]

Just a passing though, would taking .575 minies (with the grooves lubed) down to .564 be feasible in a sizer with plenty of taper?
Or would the configuration be useful if you did?

Just thinking out loud, there's lots of .58 minie designs to try out.

[Kenneth L. Walters]

I used this bullets and it worked just fine.
There is an article about the Star in the Winter 2016 Guns of the Old West.
That is two issues back.
Incidentally that magazine is being published again.

[Hal]

Hobbler,

I wouldn't want a Minnie in a paper cartridge breech loader. If the skirt were to expand before getting down into the bore, there would be quite a pressure build-up. It would probably work OK in a metallic cartridge breech loader like a Snider, but with a .620 chamber and a .562 groove dia, I'd hate to see that .577 Minnie expand to .680 then try to go down a .562 groove barrel.

Kenneth,

I have a .544" ringtail that my wife uses in her Sharps. I have to admit, I've not shot one through the Starr, but I did knock one through the bore. It didn't take much effort and the lands barely engraved the bullet. It will take an awful lot of obturation for it to fill the grooves in this Starr.

[hobbler]

I wouldn't want a Minnie in a paper cartridge breech loader. If the skirt were to expand before getting down into the bore, there would be quite a pressure build-up. It would probably work OK in a metallic cartridge breech loader like a Snider, but with a .620 chamber and a .562 groove dia, I'd hate to see that .577 Minnie expand to .680 then try to go down a .562 groove barrel.

Now Hal, that's a sobering thought indeed. So, the paper cartridge area of the chamber is .620" diameter?
And there's a .680" part in there? Wow. I'm picturing that the bullet is supposed to rest pretty well up into the bore? The recovered relic slugs identified by the dealers as Starr ammo are basically cylindrical with round noses. I'm gonna see if I can search engine a drawing of what the chambers look like. The early breech loading arms are becoming of interest to me and in long arms I'm just basically ignorant unless it's a muzzleloader or uses a brass case.

[Hal]

Sorry. No, it's only .620. The .680 was a goof.

[hobbler]

Went and found a photo of Starr carbine ammo. This is all pretty interesting to me. The bullets must have bumped up some to groove diameter. The linen cartridge and chamber dimensions must have worked together to reliably position the bullet.

This is as close as I've come to shooting a civil war carbine... Lyman #445599 in a .45 Colt.
http://i791.photobucket.com/albums/yy192/SNARGLEFLERK/11111_zps3c173945.jpg (http://s791.photobucket.com/user/SNARGLEFLERK/media/11111_zps3c173945.jpg.html)
.45 Colt Experiment / BP and Lyman Minie

The picture on the left shows the distance to the rifling. On the right, the minie is has a full case of black behind it. It's held tightly in the case by having a cloth skirt around the rear ring. The minie slips into the bore and bumps up to fill the rifling down the full length of the bullet.
Thinking about the Starr and looking at the recovered battlefield relic bullets, I've been trying to wrap my head around how they worked and thinking it is about the same (eh, close but not really) as what I've done with the 445599 minie. But as noted, the Starr has a very different chamber and no brass to take up the differences in diameter.
Thanks for the info. I'm still looking for a chamber drawing.