What 58 Minie Mold Casts this Minie?

[oscarlovel]

1092

Does anybody recognize this Minie and what mold it is cast from. Bought some off Gunbroker and they seem to shoot well, so would like to track down the mold. Thin skirt and .576 diameter, 430 grains

[Francis J. Miller Jr, 02601]

Clint,

It looks like it may be from an old lyman or Ideal mould. Check the link below, look at the last row of bullets, take a look at the 3rd one from the right, it looks almost exactly like picture you posted. It's from mould# 575-602, 400 Gr. Maybe there was one that was a .576 Hope this helps.

http://www.three-peaks.net/bullet_molds.htm

[oscarlovel]

You are right. It looks identical.

[R. McAuley 3014V]

These minies shoot great if you thicken up the skirt, and also mill 1/8-inch off the top of the blocks. Years ago, I calculated the centroid on the modified minie and found that the centroid occurred just below the apex of the hollow base, so did not occur in the metal, therefore allowing the minie's trajectory to remain unaffected by any minor defects in the molding (i.e pinholes, air bubbles, etc). But we had to thicken the skirt because any of these same minor casting flaws might cause the skirt to rip away when shot. That same thin skirt cost me my first musket, a Navy Arms M1841, because when the skirt blew, I was on the firing line at a National and we tried to clear the skirt from the bore between relays. In the process, a teammate used a wiper trying to grab the skirt, and forcing it caused one of the tynes to score the edge of the rifling raising a burr. Not only did this prevent us from removing the skirt without pulling the breech-plug, back then no one was re-lining guns, so I had to buy another musket. But this minie performed excellent in the Euroarms Enfields (with straight rifling), and at one time, that one little modified mould was supplying minies for two 8-man teams! It eventually wore out.

[Jim Leinicke 7368V]

I have a couple of those moulds, but haven't used them for years. Maybe I should play with them again, as I considered it a pretty good bullet back in the day. So when you advise removing 1/8" from the top of the blocks, you are saying to shorten up the nose of the bullet and not the skirt? I had not heard of anyone doing that before. What is the reason from shortening the nose?

I might add that on my moulds, the skirt already seems to be relatively thick.

Jim Leinicke
7368V

[ms3635v]

I have same mould but it was made by Ohaus - Ohaus part number 58400M - weight is 400 grains. Bought it new in 1978. I used it one of my Zouaves years back and it worked very well. The box still has the price tag on it...a wopping $22.00. I think RCBS bought out Ohaus.


1093

[R. McAuley 3014V]

I have a couple of those moulds, but haven't used them for years. Maybe I should play with them again, as I considered it a pretty good bullet back in the day. So when you advise removing 1/8" from the top of the blocks, you are saying to shorten up the nose of the bullet and not the skirt? I had not heard of anyone doing that before. What is the reason from shortening the nose?

I might add that on my moulds, the skirt already seems to be relatively thick.

Jim Leinicke
7368V

The mould had already been modified and was part of a package deal on the Navy Arms Mississippi. I bought (or rather traded) for the Mississippi with a dealer setup on Sutler's Row at the 1977 Spring National (my first time there), and got the rifle with sling and cleaning rod, the mould with handles, and the guy even threw in 75 rounds of ammunition so I could shoot it in the musket team matches on Sunday. He had modified the mould to make a better wadcutter, with almost a flat face that cut out the paper to make a nice clean hole. A couple of years later, while sighting in a new EOA Enfield carbine, I had shot three rounds downrange and was almost ready to pitch the gun because there was only one hole in the target, and I thought the other shots had missed the paper. Finally, when I calmed down and went down to examine my target, looking closer I found the other two shots had printed as cresents on the edges of the first hole. That's how accurate the modifed minie design was. But yeah, the original skirt was only about 2 millimeters in width, and I later thickened the skirt to about twice that. In 1986 when I started shooting a Parker-Hale 3-band, the minie just would not work with the P-H, and so I retired it. Besides, it was wore out from being shared with 15 other shooters.

[Jim Leinicke 7368V]

Thanks, Richard. Interesting information. I may modify one of my old sets of blocks and see how it does.

Jim Leinicke
7368V

[Rick R]

Hi Jim,

I have been using the 575602 for decades. Shot 1.5 in At 50 yd groups in my Parker Hale 2 band an now in my Hoyt lined Springfield. The round shown looks very close to the 575602 however the sprew cut flat on the nose looks larger. I have not modified the skirt. One of the good aspects of this round is that you don't need to ram the ball beyond that first ping that assures safe seating.

The down side to it and the reason I speculate it hasn't been more popular is the difficulty casting good rounds. It takes very hot lead and an aggressive pour from a large capacity ladle to get "flawlwess" rounds. I believe the thin skirt and the tendancy to cool rapidly is the reason the lead needs to be so hot. If the rounds don't have a blue tint after casting they probly aren't good enough and weren't cast hot enough. Feel free to have a look see around the next campfire.

Rick
1st USSS