A different vintage cartridge for the 45 Schofield

I have a copy of an 1896 Winchester catalogue and was looking through the section on what kind of ammo they offered at that time. To my surprise, they offered a cartridge for the 45 S&W (which they say was 'adapted to the Smith & Wesson Revolver, Schofield Pattern'. It was a 250 grain bullet over 30 grains of powder. This was a heavier bullet than the standard 230 grain one. I'd love to know what the velocity of this cartridge was.

For comparison, they also offered a 44 Russian cartridge that used a 250 grain bullet over 23 grains of powder. Given this, the Schofied cartridge would seem to have been a more powerful cartridge than the 44 Russian, with 25% more powder for the same wieght bullet.

I have a copy of an 1896 Winchester catalogue and was looking through the section on what kind of ammo they offered at that time. To my surprise, they offered a cartridge for the 45 S&W (which they say was 'adapted to the Smith & Wesson Revolver, Schofield Pattern'. It was a 250 grain bullet over 30 grains of powder. This was a heavier bullet than the standard 230 grain one. I'd love to know what the velocity of this cartridge was.

For comparison, they also offered a 44 Russian cartridge that used a 250 grain bullet over 23 grains of powder. Given this, the Schofied cartridge would seem to have been a more powerful cartridge than the 44 Russian, with 25% more powder for the same wieght bullet.

Everything being equal, a 250 grain bullet would have a slightly slower velocity than a 230 grain bullet, of course. Velocity is more the result of barrel length than weight of the bullet. Many makers, Winchester, UMC-Remington, U.S.CartridgeCo., etc., offered the .45 Schofield ammo around the 1890-1910 due to the number of surplus Schofields in the gun market, and the round would also shoot well in the Colt .45 SAAs. UMC-Reminton even had Walter Winans shoot a record target at Bisley in 1897 using a NM#3 chamber in .45 Schofield in order to help sell a large stock of .45 Schofield ammo they had. Ed.

What was the original muzzle velocity of the 45 Schofield, out of the standard 7" barrel?

Howdy

The 45 Schofield had a greater case capacity than the 44 Russian so more powder could be stuffed in. Here is a photo that you might find interesting. Left to right, the cartridges are 45 Colt, 45 Schofield, 44 Russian, and 44 Special. The 44 Russian is a Black Hills cowboy load, with a 210 grain bullet. No velocity is listed. The other 3 are my handloads.



In his book Shooting Sixguns of the Old West, Mike Venturino lists data for both the 44 Russian and the 45 Schofield, both loaded with Black Powder. It should be noted that modern solid head cases will not hold as much powder as the old balloon head cases, but the comparisons are still interesting. For instance, he was only able to fit 19 grains of powder into the 44 Russians vs the traditional 23 grains.

44 Russian

Test gun S&W Model #3, 2nd Model Russian, 7" barrel.

252 grain Lyman #429383 sized to .430 cast from 20/1 alloy, Starline cases CCI Large Pistol Magnum primers.

Goex FFg 19.0 grains 690fps variation 27fps
Goex FFFg 19.0 grains 740fps variation 19fps
Goex Cartridge 19.0 grains 657 fps variation 21fps
Pyrodex P 15.0 grains 821fps variation 16fps


45 Schofield

Test gun S&W Model #3 Schofield 7" barrel (delivered to Springfield Armory October 1876)

239 grain NEI #323A sized .454 pure lead, Starline cases, CCI Large Pistol Magnum Primers

Goex FFg 27 grains 725fps variation 46fps
Goex FFFg 27 grains 805fps variation 35fps
Goex Cartridge 27 grains 705 fps, variation 18fps
Pyrodex P 20 grains 828fps variation 38 fps

219 grain NEI #323A sized .454 20/1 alloy

Goex FFg 27 grains 732fps variation 44fps


256 grain H&G #22 sized .454 20/1 alloy

Goex FFg 25 grains 644fps variation 46fps

I notice with FFFg and only 27 grains, he got 805 fps. I wonder what another 3 grains of black powder would do? All my life I've been plagued by questions like that and I've sometimes got into trouble trying to find out. (I wonder what this '59 Chev will do?)

Win38-55
When loading with black powder, you fit all you can into the case and compress it with the bullet. There is no "another 3 grains", you get what you can get. Which is why people often add the disclaimer about the old balloon head brass holding more powder than modern solid head cases since the old black powder loading data can't be used with modern brass.

There is another side to that.

Not all Black Powder weighs the same. Depending on the brand you use, and the granulation, you may be able to get more powder by weight with one brand and granulation into the exact same case than you can with another brand and granulation.

For instance in the photo I supplied, that 45 Colt on the left has 2.2CC of FFg powder in it. But depending if it was Elephant, Goex, or Schuetzen that I loaded it with that 2.2CC of powder will be approx 37.5 grains, 34.5 grains, or 33 grains, for each of the 3 powders I just listed.

I also noticed that Mike Venturino's velocities really vary depending upon the type of black powder being used, with pyrodex usually giving the fastest velocities. Maybe I'm a little too cautious, but sometimes I do wonder about the safety of the pyrodex loads. They seem to put the bullet out the barrel faster than original black powder velocities? But then again, maybe the ballon head cases held enough to put them out at modern pyrodex velocities. When I develop a load for my old pistols, I stay below the pyrodex velocities.

Another thing that can vary the velocity and black powder charge, for the same powder, is the amount of compression. I've been involved in discussions of how much a fellow should compress his black powder. I found that when loading the .45-60 cartridge (for the Winchester Model 1876), I could get the full 60 grains of FFg unto the case, with sufficient compression. First, I'd set the charged case on a little electric shaver. The vibrations settled the powder quite a bit. Then I'd set the wad and bullet in place and tap the bullet down the remaining 1/8" of compression until the cartridge was at the proper OAL. The 45-60, however, might lend itself to this, because I notice that Venturino also got the full 60 grains of FFg in his 45-60 loads too. One fellow I know strains all his FFFg through a fine strainer and uses the finest stuff (which he calls FFFFg) for his capacity loads. I've got no desire to do that, but I thought it was interesting. The velocities of the Russian and the Schofield loads with today's amounts of FFFg seem to be pretty good as they are.

Howdy Win38-55

I suspect you are thinking about the Winchester Model 1876, not the 1873. The 1873 was not large enough to accomodate the 40-65 cartridge, the 1876 was.

The vibration trick has been tried by a variety of shooters, it works well. However most shooters, particularly those trying to milk the utmost in precision when shooting long range cartridges like the 40-65 or the 45-70 and its bigger brothers use a drop tube instead. Trickling the powder down a 24" drop tube results in a tighter and more consistant packing of the powder in the case than just pouring it directly in and also results in packing in a few more grains. Using a drop tube results in more consistant packing and probably results in more consistant velocities than vibrating the powder. As far as conpression is concerned, each rifle will tell you how much comnpression it wants, there is no hard and fast rule. I usually compress the powder in my 45-70 rounds about .200. Although I regularly compress the powder with the bullet when I load pistol rounds like 45 Colt or 44-40, it is not recommended for long range shooting, particularly with a soft lead bullet. Compressing the powder with the bullet can deform the base of the bullet enough to affect accuracy. Most long range BP shooters compress the powder with a separate compression die, then seat the bullet onto the already compressed powder.

One place Mike Venturino and I diverge in our treatment of Black Powder cartridges is the use of a drop tube for pistol rounds for Cowboy shooting. Mike makes the point that using a drop tube will result in better accuracy, even in a pistol round, I compromise on that part and dump my powder in directly without the use of the drop tube. I am loading all my Cowboy BP rounds on a progressive press, and I do not want to remove the rounds from the press to pour in powder through a drop tube. I believe Mike loads all his BP rounds on a single stage press. But if you were to use a drop tube with your 44 Schofield rounds, you would probably wind up fitting in a couple of more grains.

For what it's worth, I compress all my BP pistol rounds by about 1/16"-1/8", that amount of compression works fine and if one works backwards from that amount of compression one will arrive at a nominal powder charge. I do not put a wad between my powder and bullet in my pistol loads, I have found it to be unnecessary, although I do put one in my 45-70 loads.

I do not know much about Pyrodex, I have never used it. However the one BP sub that you should be way of with your antique Schofield is Hodgden's 777. 777 packs about 15% more energy, volume to volume, than real Black Powder does.

Ooops. You are right about the 1876. I changed it. Thanks for that info on how you reload. Good stuff to mull over.

Hi I know a few things about Pyrodex from loading both 45 Schofield cases and 45 colt cases full!
The Loads were kick ass loads with real thump!
BUT the primers were Flattened so bad and Old guy watching me said to stop (i was just begining to have fun to LOL)
I got off maby 20 Rds of each but looking at the Primers them full Pyrodex loads were aufull hot.
Flattened right out with lots of flow.
I swear they were some lethal loads tho.
the cases extracted ok tho!
The bullets were .454 dia x 250 gr Keiths bullets
Guns were Antique Rigby Pryse that can shoot 45 colts has a 5 and 3/4 inch barrel and a Webley RIC that can shoot 45 Schofields with a 4.5 inch barrel.
The Rigby shot under 2 inchs at 25 yds and under 4 at 45 yds with that Pyrodex load!

Dinguss, welcome to the place. But PLEASE back off those loads, I have had a gun blown up in my hands from shooting a too hot load. Thankfully, I was not hurt, but it taught me to be a lot more careful.

Deacon, can you recall the details of that load (powder, weight, bullet weight, etc.)? I'm sure it is a painful experience but for those of us who do develop loads, blow-up data is extremely valuable. Since none of us actually experiment with blowing up our guns, blow-up data is pretty rare, but would be very good for fellows like me to know about.

Hiya Win, I should have stated it was an improper load for the gun involved, I was shooting a friend's reloads in a Glock 23. It was when they were just out and we didn't know not to shoot lead bullets in the polygonal rifling. It was a 180 grain lead truncated cone over Accurate #5. I do not know the specifics, but he is a safe reloader, not one who hotrods. When it blew it split the breech on both sides and blew the mag out of the gun. Thankfully, no one was hurt.

Thanks for that info, Deacon. The only modern gun I reload for is a Springfield Armory Loaded 45 1911. I use cast bullets in that. Good to know about the Glocks, however. I had no idea one should not use cast in them.

Cartridges of the World, 11th edition, lists factory loads for the .45 S&W. There were two loadings for the 250 gr. lead bullet, one with blackpowder and one with smokeless, that gave the same velocity and energy; 710 fps at 283 ft/lbs. The factory load for the 230 grain bullet lists 730 fps at 276 ft/lbs using smokeless powder.

Both those loads seem extremely mild. Mike Venturino got quite a bit more than that with a 239 grain bullet ... up to 828 fps with pyrodex and 805 fps with FFFg and that was with only 27 grains. The 1896 Winchester load used 30 grains under a 250 grain bullet. I wonder why there is such a large difference between COW and real-life black powder results. Even with FFg, Mike got 725 fps. Do you think the old black powder used in the 1800's was close to FFg rather than FFFg? Even the 44 Russian in the same Model 3 S&W's beat the pants off that, and with a lot less black powder too.

COW does list a 230gr handload using 28gr of FFFg and still only got 730 fps.

I've never read Mike Venturino's book, so I can't comment.

Originally posted by Jellybean:
COW does list a 230gr handload using 28gr of FFFg and still only got 730 fps.

I've never read Mike Venturino's book, so I can't comment.

Click to expand...

Mike Venturino's book Shooting Sixguns of the Old West is an excellent book to get for those who are interested in the subject and in black powder loads for all the major sixguns of the old west. Mike actually does a tremendous amount of work in this book, loading and shooting a variety of old sixgun cartridges. Usually for each one he tests FFg, FFFg, cartridge, and Pyrodex. It is a valuable resource for seeing actual results for all those old cartridges. I would highly recommend it. He has some good chapters on a few different old S&W old west sixguns such as the Schofield, the New Model #3, and the first model DA.