Remington 1858 New Army

[StonewallSharpeson]

Skirmishers,
I am looking to purchase an Uberti 1858 Remington soon, so I've started looking for ammo molds. My question is: What types of balls did this weapon use? I know that this .44 pistol was often loaded with .451 round balls, but I am also looking for an appropriate "elongated ball" (as they called them) mold. My interest is historically accurate loads.
Can you please give me some specs on appropriate elongated balls, and where I can find molds for such a round.
These are the molds/rounds I've been looking at so far:
Lee .445, .451, and .454 RBs: http://leeprecision.com/bullet-casting/black-powder-molds/round-ball-mold/
Lee .450 EB: http://leeprecision.com/bullet-casting/black-powder-molds/black-powder-conical-cap-and-ball
Lyman .445, .451, and .454 RBs: http://www.lymanproducts.com/lyman/bullet-casting/round-ball-moulds.php
Blockade Runner "Colt Style" (supposedly original-based) EB mold: http://www.blockaderunner.com/Catalog/catpg6.htm
scroll down about 10% or search (control + F for windows or command + F for mac users) for "colt style"
I appreciate the help,
StonewallSharpeson

[Curt]

Hallo!

I have a new and unused one still in factory oil I am selling and can likely save you some Yankee Greenbacks.

But to answer your question, while they vary a bit due to Italian QC issues in terms of the individual cylinder chambers, force cone, and barrel... Uberti Remington M1863 New Model Army's
(incorrect Hobbyism "M1858") tend to run .450 chambers (some may vary a wee tad up or down.. :( ) and a .451 or .452 barrel.

Civil War Period cartridges varied a bit by arsenal, factory, contractor, and the size and weight of the "heeled' type conical bullet.
Oh say... 199, 204, 220, 236, 238, or 257 grain in .446, .455, .458, or .460 in diameter.
And it gets complicated as the Government sometimes supplied arsenal-made bullets to make into cartridges.

Ideally, the "theory" was that the "standard" was .44 and up to a point any .44 could conceivable use whatever .44 cartridge the Ordnance folks issued. However, obvious some .44 revolvers although ".44's were slightly larger or smaller than other makers. The US and its CS clone Ordnance Manual called for a 30 grain charge, 216 grain bullet of 0.46.

Perhaps oddly, Remington did not make their own ammunition, but largely relied on Johnston & Dow.

Finding a true .44 conical heeled bullet these daze is hard.

For many years I struggled with Rapine making order calls they did not answer their phone for, or never returned multiple messages. Nor did they fill orders done by mail. Anyways, Rapine offered, used to offer a ".44 Colt Conversion' bullet in .451 210 grain that was okay. Albeit a tad smallish it was a conical and it was heeled. Metallic conversions of CW C & B revolvers simply had their bullets getting a copper cartridge built around them.
Rapine also had a conical ".45 Auto" in .452 215 grain.

Rapine aside, the best and easiest .44 conical heeled bullet is the old Dixie "hair straighter" crude 'pliers' type mold they call a .454 Remington.

I just picked up one of the Pedersoli Colt presentation or caser type molds in .44 that throws a .44 conical and .44 ball. It is more for decoration, and now new pricey, but it will do mildly okay as a mold for a rare bullet. I have not cast any yet to measure, but I am assuming it is sized for the modern Italian .44 sizes and not the CW original size bullet.

And last...

Fudging a bit on Period Correctness.... ;) :)

There are two modern versions, a compromise. And that is Lee's double cavity .450 200 grain bullet. There are two versions, a more blunt round ose, and a slightly more pointed round nose conical.

I have not tried them yet, and will not be getting to a range until next week some time. I am a bit suspicious on accuracy though- their being .450's in a .450 chamber with a .452 bore.
I am curious as to whether a 30 grain charge on a pure lead bullet will obdurate it enough to shoot well.

I would have to some research as it has been years since I read about it, but before the Italians came out with Metallic Conversion versions of the CW C & B revolvers, some lads were shooting originals and had gone to hollow based conicals using the Minie or Pritchett concept to deal with the larger original bore sizes and the lack of Period sized molds.

Curt

[Maillemaker]

Most people shoot these with round ball these days. .454 is the most common, but my Uberti Walker shoots .457. The key is that a small lead ring should be shaved off when you drive the ball home. I use Lee round ball molds and find them to work very well.

Curt gave some good info about period-style heeled bullets.

I have heard, but cannot confirm, that rifling twist rates in modern reproductions are optimized for round ball and may not work well with period-style conicals if you choose one that is too long.

Steve

[Chris Sweeney]

One common problem is that the cylinder bores tend to be smaller than the barrels. If you cram a .454 ball into a .450 cylinder, you now have an out-of round ball that may be undersize for your barrel. Unless you get lucky and get a matched set (or buy one of them big-buck Germans), most of the really competitive shooters ( and a lot of us not-so-competitive shooters) will get the cylinders honed out to the barrel size or a tad larger. Then there's timing, and they often need trigger polishing, and a taller front sight and . . .

[Curt]

Hallo!

For the longest time, everyone I knew in the N-SSA (myself included) was of a modern competitive bent, and fiddled with ball size and weight, configuration, diameter, lube mixes, powder charges, and rifling types, twists, and depths to achieve optimum target performance from their long arms.

But, I know a few who strive to shoot a Period cartridge in a Period bore (as far as possible) for the "more historic' rather than the "modern competitive" side.

As shared, it can get really complicated fast when it comes to Italian reproductions, and especially Italian reproduction revolvers beyond just bore size. As MM above shared, there is
rifling twist.

Historically, the Italians started out the repro business in the face of a determined opposition or resistance from Civil War arms collectors, historians, and writers that reproducing again CW revolvers would lead to wide spread fakery and counterfeiting. So, one of the "compromises" was to changed the number of grooves and/or change the direction of the rifling twist to be a dead giveaway.

Another was a matter of production costs and economics.... so even or straight button cut rifling replaced the gain twist brooch cut rifling of original Colt and Remington revolvers.

AND, in the knowledge base and climate of the 1950's and 1960's, it seemed that folks did not realize that martial arms were fed with arsenal or contract made cartridge packs or packets made with conical bullets and not everybody "running round ball" home-making their own (kind of a "civilian' thing for folks too cheap or too far from stores to buy commercial ammunition).

Say what?

Original Colt and Remington revolvers were made with well-finished, brooch cut rifling that was deeper at the muzzle than it was at the breech. For example, original Remington M1863 New Model Army revolvers had a cylinder end rifling twist of 1:60 and 1:18 at the muzzle.
So, they shot conicals fairly well or well enough for the 25 yard concept with 30 grains per Ordnance or sometimes in the mid to upper 20's...and setting aside Colt's flimsy rear sight notch on the hammer nose that disappears and eliminates one's sight picture when the trigger is pulled. Or, the slightly better 'groove' in the Remington's upper frame."

BUT, with their uniform depth rifling, Pietta uses a 1:30 twist and Uberti a 1:32. Both shoot a round ball best, for the longer a conical is, the less stable it is in a faster twist (in general the opposite of a round ball in a fast twist).

Lads I know will compromise on the conicals, by trying to cut the velocity by reducing the powder charge down from the Ordnance spec of 30, down to 25, 21, 18, or 15 for example.

Yeah, somewhat of a "historical mess." Meaning, for the lads who want to shoot a historical cartridge with the Period charge, bullet, and cartridge form are largely defeated by Italian revolvers not being historical copies. Which leaves the modern shooters looking to be "competitive" and so they shoot a round ball that CW soldiers were not issued.

And last.. I have not followed it as I do not shoot sight modified 'target' versions of CW revolvers. Anyways, sights aside, for the extra cost, one can buy "target revolvers" with gain twist rifling. I would have to look it up, but believe a similar concept is what Pedersoli now calls their "Pedersoli Premium Match Grade" (PPMG) and/or 'Premium Match Grade" (PMG). barrel line.

Curt

[Blair]

Davide Pedersoli just had a new, Highly accurate NM-1863 Remington revolver approved by the N-SSA.
Hopefully with the new formation of IFG-NA these will become available here in the USA.
I wish I could provide more information at this time.
However, one of these two links may offer you help on finding out for yourself.

info@davidepedersoli.com
www.davide-pedersoli.com

My best,
Blair

[Curt]

Hallo!

Thanks, Herr Blair!

I was in Italy in November and have my "Speak Italian" books hand, so I thought I would have to translate DP's web site page. But then I found the "English" button. :)

Here is the listing from the Pedersoli site:

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y104/Michael1787/Civil%20War/PEDREmingtonPMG_zps9564480f.jpg (http://s4.photobucket.com/user/Michael1787/media/Civil%20War/PEDREmingtonPMG_zps9564480f.jpg.html)

"Remington PatternAfter the success obtained in the target shooting with Rogers & Spencer “Pedersoli” Target model and under specific requirements from shooters, we introduced this new target revolver, produced on the Remington model. The materials used are of the best quality, enhancing the ballistic characteristics of the barrel, of the cylinder and of the trigger set mechanism. The gun has been expressly “customized” by our crafts-workers and shooters, with the purpose to give the gun a good functionality with the very first use. The non-reflecting barrel, the anti-wear cylinder and the rifling twist have been designed to give the shooter the best chance."

Curt

[jonk]

One consideration as others have hinted at is to make sure to check cylinder diameter. Thing is, with an oversized round ball, it starts easily and the cylinder just shaves a bit off. Brush that away and you're good to go. But with a conical, a square base needs to be slightly undersized as compared to the cylinder to start easily; otherwise you end up mashing a bullet in at a slight angle, shaving some off one side or the other. Accordingly, I have only found the Lee .450 mold to work in my revolvers. Granted, you could have the cylinders reamed as mentioned to permit seating a larger bullet, or perhaps just the ends of the cylinder reamed to allow it to start straight; however, it is a known trade off that may or may not work for you. I've seen some guys do really well with the conicals; my revolver does ok with them (also a REmington copy), but really prefers round balls. So the question is, what do you want to acheive? Historical accuracy or just plain accuracy? I would likely want to work up a load for both.

[Curt]

Hallo!

Agreed.

IMHO...

One can get a more "historical" experience in using a CW Period cartridge even in an Italian repro rifle-musket or rifle (there are differences, such as Enfields have uniform depth rifling instead of progressive, etc.).
Some lads just want to get the historical "feel" of a Period cartridge and make up a batch just to shoot or plink. Kind of simulation if not an emulation of what a CW soldier had the capability of doing (setting aside Period issues like lack of marksmanship training or paper target experience, etc.). Or just the feel of a full CW cartridge's ball and charge.
Some few lads forego tweaking the most accurate load possible by changing rifling, changing bullets, or changing powder chargers and like to enter N-SSA competition with a more "Period" cartridge.

Revolvers are so much more complicated due to the differences between modern Italian repro's and originals. Meaning, a CW era revolver cartridge in a repro (NUG) will not perform the same as it did in an original revolver (even a minty and not worn out one).

And on a tangent.. sometimes it is neat to see what a weapon can do actually do.
Once Upon a Time I was listening to a presentation from two Berdan Sharpshooter reenactors at Antietam instructing the crowd. One said that the Sharps NM1859 Rifle fired a six inch bullet. And with their Sharps NM1859 Rifles, could hit targets out to one (1) mile. It seemed to me that the reenactor had never live fired his repro Sharps to see what they actually could do...

:)

Curt

[Maillemaker]

And on a tangent.. sometimes it is neat to see what a weapon can do actually do.

I can tell ya this: A couple of skirmishes ago I hit a man-sized steel target at 120 yards with my 6th shot off hand (throwaway - the other 5 went on the paper target).

:)

Steve

[StonewallSharpeson]

So I got a Lee 6-cav .451" mold. I made a few hundred balls, but could not get the mold hot enough to prevent balls from coming out with casting voids, and only got a handful of true spheres. Turns out Curt was right; using callipers, my chambers measured not quite .45"... When loading the balls, no lead rings were produced, only a little lead was scrunched around the edges of the ball. Between this and loading with a wide-mouthed powder measure, I experienced one chain-fire, which fortunately only set off the chamber next to the one in the barrel, causing no harm to me or the weapon. Accuracy was good, at 25 feet.
So the question now is, do I load the gun with patches, which I don't want to do, or do I switch to a larger ball? .454" or .457"? I hope Track of the Wolf will take the mold back... if not, anyone want to buy a slightly-used Lee .451" round-ball mold?

[Eggman]

Forget the six cavity mould. Aluminum moulds cool too fast to get consistent results from all six. I think two cavity moulds are one cavity too many. Use single cavity moulds only - steel moulds like Lyman by far the best. Yes you need a larger ball.

[Mike McDaniel]

Agree with all. I've never seen an aluminium mould that could be kept hot enough to cast good bullets.

[Curt]

Hallo!

First, I am curious about the "chain fire?" A .451 ball in a .450 chamber let alone one under .450 should have 'sealed' off the powder beneath it.

Just a passing thought, measure some of your cast balls. I would be curious as to whether a too cold mold might just be casting slightly undersized balls.

IMHO...

If you plan on doing a higher volume of shooting, or competing for that matter, go with a single cavity steel block mold in .454.
I hate to say this, cliché and pun warning....but... just "bite the bullet." :) :)

While I personally do recommend a cheap alumimum mold for the lad who is going to the range, just one time, to shoot a few dozen rounds from a low-end brass frame revolver... but still wants the experience of casting his own rounds... good enough.

If you are in the "middle" here, you may want to think about skipping casting and just buying some commercial swaged round balls. Hornady makes a .454 that comes in a box of hundred (100) for something like $15 or $16. (While I do not recommend them, there is also the sprued, sometimes wrinkled, mass produced 'poly bag' balls for the buckskinner community. Of course one can cut and file off the sprues and reject the few that come flawed, but....)

[jonk]

Agree with all. I've never seen an aluminum mould that could be kept hot enough to cast good bullets.

Well, a lot of guys are winning a lot of medals shooting Moose, Rapine, and yes, even Lees.

Not only can I keep my Lee molds hot enough, but when casting anything but dead soft pure, they get SO hot that I have to let them cool, or hardening takes 20-30 seconds, and the bullets are badly frosted and sprues tear rather than cut.

This using a Lee 10 pound pot set on 8, lead temp around 800ish.

I have no preference as to the material a mould is made out of; they a ll require a little different approach, that's all.

As to durability, I have heard stories of people wearing out molds... never had it happen to me. Probably the ones I have that have seen the most use are some Lee molds I started with 20 years ago, that probably have a good 100,000 bullets cast out of them, and work just as well as when I got them.

This isn't a slam; it's just intended to point out that, as with so many things in this sport, your mileage may vary and what works for me might or might not work for you.

[Eggman]

I kinda had the same thought as Curt on too cool of ball being also undersized viz a multiple discharge. As said above you got to shave off some lead to verify a proper seal. One other paricular fly stuck in my craw (mixed metaphor), I had a Patterson repro chain fire one time using good oversized balls and lots of Crisco on top. The only explantion is I was shooting one cylinder at a time - the other nipples uncapped. I think it was a reacharound.

[Maillemaker]

I agree with Jonk - I use Lee molds for round ball, both .454 and .457, they are 2-cavity, and they got so hot that I usually switch off between two molds, letting one solidify on the bench while I'm pouring the other.

I find the Lee molds make very, very nice round balls with hardly any sprue. Wrinkles go away when the mold is up to temp and I have no problem keeping it at temp.

I'm no great shot but I shot a 45 with Lee .457 balls out of my Uberti Walker at 25 yards at the last skirmish.

It was good enough for second place. Of course, only two of us were shootin'. :)

Steve

[Curt]

Hallo!

Our personal experiences can set our preferences and likes and dislikes.

I have a mix of aluminum and steel. Aluminum (Rapine and Lee) for lower production, less used guns.

In my experience, when I started out Skirmishing... I was going through an aluminum mold every second or third year , based on say a hundred rounds of musket and carbine per Skirmish, typically 12-14-16 Skirmishes a year in and across a region or two. Not exactly high volume. Lead was heated on a Coleman stove in a smallish crucible.

What happened was, that the molds all got out of "alignment" meaning that the two halves of the blocks did not line up perfectly at first. then it worsened so that they got mechanically out of whack, and "loose" so that the automatic or fixed base plug was jamming and not closing properly.

I don't know. A Coleman should not have heated the aluminum blocks hot enough to warp. And I don't think whacking on a sprue cutter with a heavy dowel should have damaged things as I kept track of the screw tightness holding it down keeping it loose and freely swinging.

Anyways, I figured a steel mold that was good 'forever' was a more sound financial investment than buying a new aluminimum mold every 3-4 years since, at the time, I figured I would be Skirmishing for the next 60 years or so.

:)

It was a "False Economy" in the end. Having started out with a Navy Arms/Miroku mixed model M1863/64 and then four years later a Parker-Hale "'Naval Rifle" and then the Slippery Slope gave way to getting into custom building... the one steel mold mushroomed to over a two dozen or more in different bullet configs and diameters.

:) :) :)

Curt

[Muley Gil]

I read lately that instead of flash igniting the powder from the front of the cylinder, chainfires are caused by loose caps on the nipples.

I had a chainfire about 45 years ago, shooting a brass framed Navy Arms Model 60 .44. One of the balls hit a friend of mine on the leg. We were sitting together on the bank of an old quarry. Quite an exciting time! Just left a bruise, nothing serious.

[Maillemaker]

What happened was, that the molds all got out of "alignment" meaning that the two halves of the blocks did not line up perfectly at first. then it worsened so that they got mechanically out of whack, and "loose" so that the automatic or fixed base plug was jamming and not closing properly.

Oh, I agree - the Lee Aluminum minie-ball molds with core pins are not very good. The aluminum-on-aluminum rubbing as the mold opens and closes causes galling.

But for the simple two-half round ball molds, I have not had any problems yet. There is some galling from the sprue plate and the top of the mold, but this can be addressed with a diamond paddle file and by painting the wear surfaces with Moose Juice.


I read lately that instead of flash igniting the powder from the front of the cylinder, chainfires are caused by loose caps on the nipples.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ne4VgCdAy7Y

The above video shows intentional chain fires caused by under-sized balls.

I believe that a chain fire can happen from either end of the gun, and if you watch slow-motion videos of cap and ball revolvers firing you can see there is a significant venting on the rear of the cylinder.

But clearly the bulk of the blow-by happens at the front of the cylinder, and as the video shows, under-size balls will cause a chain fire.

It would be interesting to see the above test done with no caps on adjacent nipples to see what happens.

Steve

[Ron/The Old Reb]

Curt
"I don't think whacking on a sprue cutter with a heavy dowel should have damaged things"

This is he best way to destroy a mold. never hit the sprue cutter or the mold it self in any way. Whack the handle joint.


When my son joined the NSSA I gave him one of my molds to make bullets. I walked out to the shed to see how he was making out. He was whacking the Hell out of the mold to make the bullets drop out.

Needless to say I adjusted his butt to a new location on his back.

[Curt]

Hi!

"This is he best way to destroy a mold. never hit the sprue cutter or the mold it self in any way. Whack the handle joint."

I am not clear on what you are saying?

I have cast about 50,000 bullets and balls. I had always given the "handle joint" a light tap when the balls sometimes did not fall from the candle sooted mold cavity. But I am not clear on how one would slice the sprue off with the cutter without whacking its "tab?"

I had tried, and I forget who makes it "Uncle Mike's' maybe (?), but they offer an ball type attachment for the sprue cutter on molds that creates leverage enough when you push it to shear off the sprue.. but went back to a tap from the dowel.

Anyways, how does whacking the handle joint cut the sprues?

Thanks!

Curt

[Rob FreemanWBR]

Curt and others are right, striking the mould itself to drop/eject a freshly cast projectile is a huge "no no" - unless one likes to buy moulds on a regular basis...

Personally, I do don't even like to strike the sprue "flange" when casting the first few rounds out of a cold mould. If I have to, in those situations, I use a rubber mallet, and take care to only aim on the flange, NOT the mould itself.

Of note to share: When it comes to casting those "sold on TV"-type Oven Gloves have really sped up casting rates for me. They work GREAT in allowing me to directly manipulate/man handle the moulds while casting!! Once the mould is hot, the spur cutter on the mould can be swung/pivoted very quickly & easily by an Oven-Gloved-hand.

Yes projectiles do get stuck in the moulds, even when hot. In those instances a small "love tap" via the rubber mallet - applied only to the HANDLE'S joint is all that is needed, but never to the mould body itself.

If available, before getting the mould hot, a small dose of any mould prep application helps a great deal in getting cast rounds to literally fall out of the mould.

[Curt]

Hallo!

"Ov Gloves!"

I always use relatively heavy leather work gloves. Thanks for the tip, I will give them a try!
As well as a rubber mallet, just to see. Since switching over to steel block molds, they are perfectly fine even after 35 years (except for replacing the wooden base pin handles due to scorching every so many decades. :) :) .
But I do have some revolver conical molds that are aluminum, so I will give it a try.

Thanks!!

Curt

[Maillemaker]

You should never hit the mold to make the bullets drop out. Hit the pivot point.

But I do hit the sprue cutter with a leather-wrapped wooden dowel to cut the sprue.

Some people wear a glove and push the cutter with their hand.

Steve

[StonewallSharpeson]

Hello all, and thank you for your interest and comments. At this point, I am basically set on getting a Lyman mold. I use them to cast all of my other rounds, and have good experience with them. At this point, my question is should I go with a .454" or .457" ball?
I will also give the Lee mold another try, but will use a higher temperature. And be more cautious in my loading of the weapon.

[Maillemaker]

At this point, my question is should I go with a .454" or .457" ball?

It depends entirely on the firearm. When you drive the ball into the chamber, it should shave a tiny ring of lead all the way around the ball. This is how you know you have a press fit of the ball in the chamber.

Once you achieve this ring, any larger a size ball just makes it harder to load.

Steve

[Curt]

Hi!

Steve...

May I tap into your knowledge of mail please?

Wetzel1781@Gmail.com

Curt