Are there any Pre-1899 revolvers that were developed for smokeless powder?

Not "developed FOR smokless", at least in the sense of an entirely new smokeless design. Early Colt SAAs are considered 'black powder only' but by mid 1890s are considered smokeless capable, probably due to improvement in the steel used. Smith & Wesson in 1909 first stated that their revolvers were approved for factory loaded smokeless ammo. That covered their DAs back into the 1880s. Just how far back into history that was intended is not known.

As above, if you own one and are going to shoot it, then, unless you are 100% sure I would stick to the BP loadings. Caution beats a blown gun.

Yes, Blackpowder ONLY if you want that your gun will survive till the next century and beyond.

I wish that the powder coumpanies would some research on how to load smokeless powder cartridges that match the pressure curves of BP.

I have Model 1 1/2s, and 2s that have all been shot with Navy Arms 32rf and all function very well with that ammo. As I understand it, these smokeless loads were developed to safely shoot in BP pistols.

I have an article in the Double Gun Journal, Summer, 2002, titled "Finding Out for Myself Part VI", by Sherman Bell. Bell extensively tested BP shotguns with smokeless loads. His test gun had strain gauges attached all along the length of the barrel. Long story short - he found that Hodgdon's Clays powder could be loaded that exhibited the identical pressure surve as BP. This leads me to believe there are smokeless loads that could be developed.

I would love that someday a more knowledgeable person than myself would conduct these same experiments with pistols.

Question: Why would anyone want to shoot an antique gun?
Answer?: To duplicate feeling of what shooters of the period experienced.
Kind of like hunting with a muzzle loader. To see what our forefathers went through. (We won't consider the fact that muzzle-loading season is also special...)

Anyway, if shooting antiques is for the ambiance, wouldn't black powder be more authentic? It's easy to load and safer to shoot, plus you get the full experience of cleaning up after.

__________________
Dean
SWCA #680 SWHF #446

I have shot may pounds of black powder, but the clean-up is a mess. BP residue gets into the mechanism, all internal parts, and residue is very corrosive, if not totally cleaned, dried and lubricated after every outing to the range. You can only effectively clean BP using soap and water, which can cause more corrosion problems.

Pyrodex and Triple Seven are advertised as non-corrosive alternatives, but leave large amounts of residue that is quite hydroscopic, collecting moisture and corrosion if not cleaned the same way as BP.

So many of the antique Smiths I've seen have been damaged by years of BP and I thought that it would actually be better for the gun to shoot a non-corrosive powder.

Unfortunately, there are no tried and proven non-BP solutions in most of the antique calibers available today.

Agreed, BP can be corrosive if not properly cleaned. However smokeless can stress parts not designed for it.

BP corrosion can be controlled by prompt cleaning. I don't know of any way to control smokeless stress other than not using it.

Besides, the cleaning of BP residue is part of the experience.... (Or are you just lazy??)

__________________
Dean
SWCA #680 SWHF #446

This is pretty interesting. So they stated that their previous revolvers were approved for factory loads even though they weren't developed for them?

Since it's not known how far back into the 1880's this goes, would it be safe to assume anything from 1890-1898 would be inclusive in their statement?

Just playing Devil's Advocate here.......

I could imagine what they may have meant is "Go ahead and shoot your old top-break with smokeless. It's not going to blow up in your face, but we will be able to sell you a new gun sooner rather than later."

__________________
Dean
SWCA #680 SWHF #446

Using smokless stretschess the notches of the frame and wided them.
My English isnt that good that I can explain it better. But even with a so called nitro load that compares the blackpowder pressure it can harm your revolver. I do have several old blackpowder revolvers. I dont use anything else in them but black powder. For cleaning I use also Borebutter. This works great.

In the latter 1890s and early 1900s, various Powder Companys offered 'Smokeless' Powders for use in erstwhile Black Powder Arms.

Many people did this, using various proprietary kinds of Smokeless Powder, in their old Cap & Ball Rifles and Revolvers as well as in re-Loading for Metallic Cartridge.


There is no reason why one could not use 'Bullseye' or 'Unique' Powder in a period Colt Navy or other Cap & Ball Revolver, which many people did do with perfect impunity, to duplicate Black Powder Velocities, so long as one manages an appropriate Loading Density - which is the ratio of how much net Volume there is under the Bullet, to the amount of Powder used...which is then also to be considered with respect to the weight and type of Bullet.

Same with any Muzzle Loader, Shotgun or whatever, same as any Metallic Cartridge situation.

Since there are no Tables for these decisions to be guided for Muzzle Loading Arms, one would have to extrapolate or work out one's own Tables...and decide proportions of what Powder to how much 'Air' which is to be beneath the Bullet...for acheiving an approximate peak pressure and or acceleration for the Bullet, which the Arm in question will be comfortable with.


Obviously this would be important to manage correctly, and would require a very deliberate technique, both in prior calculating, and in very precise practice when Loading a Muzzle Loading Arm with Bullseye or Unique or other.



Consider the average mid range .38 Special Wadcutter, using Bullseye -

These are considered 'safe' to use in the S&W Model of 1899 'M&P', or any other .38 Special or .38 Colt Revolver of the Black Power era.

A few grains of Powder, and a large amount of Air under the Bullet, and, a mild, easy low to midling Velocity Round capable of supurb accuracy up to about 50 yards or so.

Pressure generated by a Propellent is a function of burn rate, time it has to burn, and, the volume it's gasses occupy - or have to occupy - as it is burning.

Soon as the Bullet starts to move, that volume starts to increase.

Loading Density is one way for these factors to be harmonized for acheiving an optimum balance for the Arm and the purpose.


Far as all that goes.

In summary - Smokeless Loads for erstwhile Black Powder Arms, would have to be calculated to have a correct Loading Density for the Arm in question, which means amount of Powder, amount of Air beneath the Bullet, and, appropriate Bullet kind and weight.

Just as Smokeless Loads do when for Modern Arms.


But, is there any reason really to make the effort and exercise worth the troubles?

Not for me, but for someone else, maybe there are reasons which would justify the effort for them.

Personally, I like Black Powder Metallic Cartridge very much for any Revolvers, old or modern.

So for me, other than studying the matter academically, I have no motive or interest to use Smokeless in what are otherwise Black Powder Era Guns.

Particularly in the Black Powder era Top Breaks, Black Powder Cartridges will give a much better performance than the off the shelf 'SAAMI' compliant Smokeless ones of today.

So in my opnion, really, for all practical purposes and satisfactions, in any Black Powder era Arm, one really is best in many ways to just use Black Powder.

The Velocities will be better, the report and recoil will be more satisfying, and no worries!

Smokeless powder can be used even in C&B revolvers, of course only with very light loads. The best reason for not doing that is because of the significant possibility of using an undetected overly heavy charge or a double load. With black powder or Pyrodex, etc. a normal load will pretty well fill the chamber. A light smokeless load won't come anywhere close to filling the chamber, so you have no visual indication of an overload. Unless you take extreme precautions, you could have a bomb in your hand.

I have fired Bullseye in a .36 Colt Navy replica, but only using 2 to 3 grains, and with extreme caution to avoid loading of a double charge. Not a practice I would recommend however. To demonstrate, I have been known on occasion to load lead balls into uncharged chambers because of inattention to loading procedures. If I can do that, I can also inadvertently load a double charge of smokeless powder.

I have often wondered how the old-time soldiers and gunfighters kept their cool under fire to avoid an uncharged chamber when they reloaded? Believe me, it's not easy to pull out a ball from an empty chamber even at the range. About the only way is to drill a hole in the ball and screw in a wood or sheet metal screw and then pull on the screw head with a pair of pliers. Try doing that on the battlefield under hostile fire.

Elite Armory - Your:
This is pretty interesting. So they stated that their previous revolvers were approved for factory loads even though they weren't developed for them?

Since it's not known how far back into the 1880's this goes, would it be safe to assume anything from 1890-1898 would be inclusive in their statement?

I will post S&Ws reply info below. You can judge for yourself its scope & meaning. I had asked about use of smokeless in .44 DA top breaks. I had reamed one of my .44 Russians and shoot .44 Specials. Every time I mentioned it I got a chorus of warnings I was about to blow up my gun, etc. This is the reply package from S&W.


[/IMG]

Would shooting your old BP gun with smokeless be comparable to running your old car on unleaded gas?

Sure, it will work.........for a while..

__________________
Dean
SWCA #680 SWHF #446

deadin -- Since you offer advice, what can I expect to happen to my old S&W DA? Advice-wise, lead free is better for an engine than leaded gas - but that is a debate for some automotive forum.

The question resolves in practice on the actual Loading Density one acheives, with the particular Powder and Bullet one is using.

This seems to be what is always overlooked in occasions of the question of using Smokeless Powders on erstwhile Back Powder Arms comes up.

Assignment of powder quantity and the ratio of a particular Powder quantity to Air space in the Cartridge, beneath the Bullet, is not an arbitrary matter in any Loadings with 'Smokeless'.

Hence, the necessity for critical understanding, and correct assignment of the actual ingredients - amount of Powder, amout of Air, weight and kind of Bullet.


With Black Powder, one fills the Case, compresses the Charge well, and, may use a wide range of Bullet weights ( even if not using a wide range of Bullet types, such as FMJ etc ).

With Smokleless, the particular characteristics of the individual Powder itself, and a correct Loading Density for that Powder and Bullet combination, have to be taken into consideration when designing the Charge for the Arm in question.

Since people generally will merely glaze over with all this, or not understand what is meant, or not have the technical acumen to arrive at correct calculations in theory or practice, and since there are no Loading Table Data sheets for determining Smokeless Charges for Muzzle Loading or older erstwhile Metallic Cartridge Black Powder Arms, it is and has been wisest to simply admonish NOT to do it ( not to use 'Smokeless' in any erstwhile Black Powder Arm ) at all.

No...this is not a good comparison.


Lead used to supply Lubrication for the Valve Stems and for insulaating the Valve Seats from erosion.

Unleaded Gasolene in an old-enough Stock engine will cause Valve Seat erosion/regression and possibly other problems.


One can use old Leaded 100 Octaine Aviation Gasolene in an 'Old' Engine and the Engine WILL run MUCH peppier! I used to do that with my 1946 Chevrolet One Ton Truck, and it was fun and interesting.

Possibly it would make more heat than the 80 Octaine, I don't know.

Does it hurt anything?

I think this would depend on how one drives, what one is asking of the Engine - Stump Pulling? Fast accelerating? Towing heavy Trailers up long grades uphill? Or just out for a Sunday Drive? and how one stays within a safe RPM range and reasonable usual rate of vehicle acceleration, for the Engine in question.

But regardless, it is not a good comparison to the question of 'Snokeless' Powders to 'Black Powder'.


I am not sure if I am remembering this coreclty, but...I t-h-i-n-k the 'SAMMI" PSI for .45 Colt is about 12,000 PSI for off the shelf Smokeless Cartridges.

Full House BP using a good grade of Black Powder, can get up to 16 or 17,000 PSI...maybe more.

Possibly someone could look this up...I have to be out on some errands for the rest of the day now.

OK. Bad comparison......
I was thinking that unleaded in old engine will burn out the valves. Smokeless in a BP gun will loosen it up sooner than with BP.

BTW, be careful with really minimum powder in a large case. Or at least do some research before trying it. I was taught years ago there is something called "detonation" (somewhat controversial) that may happen with super light loads of some powders. It supposedly can take a gun apart. (I'm not saying it will, just that there are stories reporting it happening.)

__________________
Dean
SWCA #680 SWHF #446

Okay, all this sounds like no smokeless in black powder guns to my ears.

Are there any Pre-1899 revolvers made by S&W OR any other manufactures that were made for smokeless?

Howdy

Colt first factory warrantied the Single Action Army for Smokeless powder in 1900, not the mid 1890s. This is a common misconception brought about by the term 'Black Powder Frame', referring to the early style frame that used an angled screw to hold the cylinder pin in place. Since the current spring loaded latch for the pin first appeared about 1892, and became a standard feature some time in mid 1896, many assume that the more modern latch means the gun is OK to shoot with Black Powder. That is incorrect. Starting in 1873, Colt SAA frames and cylinders were made of malleable iron, not steel. Malleable iron was used for frames and cylinders up until about SN 96,000, sometime in 1883. From about SN 96,000 to SN 180,000 (1883 - 1898) frames and cylinders were made from materials resembling modern low - medium carbon steels. After SN 180,000 Colt went to medium carbon steel. However it was not until 1900 (around SN 192,000) that Colt developed methods to better and more uniformly heat treat the steel and it was this combination that gave them the confidence to factory warranty the SAA for Smokeless powder. In 1901 Colt began placing a VP in an inverted triangle on the left front of the trigger guard. This stands for Verified Proof for Smokeless powder.

In short, the Black Powder Frame does not dictate when the Black Powder era ended with Colt. The SN and the alloy and heat treatment of the steel dictates when the Smokeless era started at Colt.

This information is from Kuhnhausen's Colt Single Action Revolvers Shop Manual, pages 69, 70, and 71.

I have tried in vain to find similar information on steel content for S&W, and have found nothing. I do have copies of the catalogs quoted, and am very glad to see that Mr Jinks has put the 1909 date in writing for S&W.

I too have shot many pounds of Black Powder. I go through about 20 pounds every year in Cowboy Action Shooting with 45 Colt, 45 Schofield, 44-40, 44 Russian, 45-70, and my 1860 C&B Army replicas. I shoot Black Powder in modern Rugers, 2nd Gen Colts, and Uberti replicas as well as 100+ year old S&Ws, Winchesters, and Stevens SXS shotguns. I don't mean to brag, I just want to establish my credentials.

First of all, Black Powder is no where near as corrosive as most shooters think. Part of the problem in the old days was corrosive primers. Corrosive primers coupled with Black Powder spelled corrosion and yes, I have several 100+ year old guns with pitted bores. But we no longer use corrosive primers, and when Black Powder is coupled with modern primers, the fouling is simply not as corrosive as most shooters believe. I seldom clean my guns the same day I shoot them with Black Powder. Just too darn tired and the end of a match and a long drive. I do try to clean them within a week of shooting them. I do not want to admit here how long I have gone without cleaning, suffice to say it is a heck of a lot longer than a week. When I do get around to cleaning, there is never any corrosion.

Yes, the old standard for cleaning Black Powder was hot water, and hot water remains a terrific BP solvent. Yes you do have to get all the water out again or there will be problems. But some better things have been developed. The key is, if you can infuse BP fouling with oil, it looses its ability to suck moisture out of the air. It is this Hygroscopic property of BP fouling that causes part of the problem. Think of BP fouling as a dry sponge. If allowed to sit, it draws water out of the air. But if the fouling is soaked with oil, it is like a sponge that is already saturated. It cannot draw any more water out of the air because it is already soaked with water. The key to not having to get all the water out is to make sure the fouling gets coated with an emulsion of water and oil. The water evaporates, the oil remains behind. There are several home made concoctions that take advantage of this. With most of them, it is best to actually infuse some of the concoction down inside the lockwork of the gun. The trick is, to coat the parts down inside the gun with oil. I have been doing this for years now. Every time I clean my guns I squirt some of my favorite solvent down inside the gun, followed by some straight Ballistol. I only take my guns apart about once a year to completely clean them out. There is always plenty of oily, black guck down inside. There is never any rust.

Regarding shooting old pitted bores, the only gun I with an old pitted bore I ever encountered that I could not get to shoot well with anything was an old Lee/Enfield made in 1918. It keyholed with everything I put down it. On the other hand, the old pitted bores of my 1894 built Winchester Model 1892, my 1895 built Marlin Model 1894, and my 1881 built S&W DA 44 all shoot beautifully. The bores may be pitted but the rifling is still strong, and that is the key.

Regarding cleaning BP being messy, yes it is. No two ways about it, you don't want to clean a BP gun on the wife's new white carpet. But I have found that even though it is messier than cleaning Smokeless, cleaning BP is easier than cleaning Smokeless. I use far less elbow grease when cleaning BP than when cleaning Smokeless. BP fouling melts away with very little scrubbing with any water based solvent. And since they are water based, you are not dealing with potentially poisonous cleaning fluids like most Smokeless solvents.

Lastly, for some reason that I still have not been able to completely understand, there is never any leading with Black Powder. None. Nada. Perhaps it is because of the higher temperature when BP burns, but there simply is never any leading. In fact, after shooting BP in guns that had leading, the leading mysteriously disappeared and the bores and chambers are spotless.

These postings about smokeless vs. BP are absolutely pointless. If someone has some sound engineering data that says that only BP cartridges can be used in older revolvers, and smokeless cartridges are dangerous, I sure would like to see it. All I have seen is based on guesswork and opinions and stories that may or may not have any basis in fact. Plus I have NEVER seen a box of smokeless powder cartridges in any of the original BP calibers that has a warning on it saying "DO NOT USE IN OLD PISTOLS DESIGNED FOR BLACK POWDER"

Until someone comes up with actual laboratory data showing pressure curves of BP vs. smokeless powder cartridges of the same calibers and stress calculations demonstrating that there ARE actual risks to metal integrity, there is no point in making these kinds of postings. I don't put any stock whatsoever in various unproven ideas from anyone who is not qualified to provide an engineering opinion backed up with calculations and analyses, and that includes all of the various so-called "expert" gunsmiths. Those guys are NOT engineers.

OK, how about this?

Attached is a comparison of two pressure curves. This is a comparison of pressure in two 3 dram shotgun loads. Both loads accelerated a 1 1/8 ounce load of shot to 1200 fps. The Black Powder load consisted of 82 grains, which is how many grains there are in 3 drams. Sorry, the ballistic technician who gave me this did not specify what the Smokeless powder was. Probably a fast burning shotgun powder. But both loads accelerated the same shot charge to the same velocity.

Pressure units are PSI, time units are milli seconds. The thing to notice here is not just the fact that the pressure was higher with the Smokeless load in order to achieve the same velocity. The Smokeless pressure spike was much sharper and of much shorter duration than the BP pressure curve. The BP curve is gentler. It is not as high, and it is spread out more over time. That is the real story of why the older steel should not be subjected to modern Smokeless powder pressures. The short duration pressure spike can shock the weaker steel, leading to failure.

Kind of like towing a car with a rope. If you start slowly and accelerate slowly, everything will be fine. On the other hand if you pop the clutch and jerk the rope, the rope may break.

They may not be degreed engineers, but some of these guys, like Dave Chicoine in particular, have years and years of experience working on all kinds of old guns. Buy a few of his books and read them. You will get a new opinion of his skill level. When Dave says that he has seen plenty of old Top Break revolvers with frames stretched because they were shot with Smokeless powder, I believe him. You don't always need a sheet of paper to demonstrate practical knowledge.

Attached Images

pressure_curve.jpg (23.9 KB, 211 views)

As far as I know -

The first Hand Gun manufactured in the United States, which was intended and designed to use 'Smokeless' Cartridges..was the Colt Model 1900 .38 Automatic.


The Colt .38 Automatic Cartridge ( designed 1898 I think ), was also the first Hand Gun Cartridge designed to be a 'Smokless' Cartridge from the onset, and was thus the first Smokeless Hand Gun Cartridge to be made or offered in the United States.


.38 Special was originally designed ( 1898 I think ) to be a Black Powder Cartridge, and was originally offered as a Black Powder Cartridge, and, was to some degree converted in various Factory Offerings, to 'Smokeless', around late 1899 or 1900 or so.

Really good info there Driftwood Johnson!

Indeed, by the mid to latter 1890s, various Ammunition Manufacturers were offering 'Smokeless' Loadings for the various popular Cartridges and or Arms or Revolvers of the day.

No doubt people were using off the shelf Smokeless Loadings at that time, in SAAs made in the early 1870s, and, we do not have much of anything passed down from them to edify us on how that went.

I assume it went 'Okay', for the most part! - even as did those Cartridges people were re-Loading themselves with the new 'Smokless' offerings slated for such application, with some of the then ( mid to late 1890s ) 'Smokeless', when following the Manufacturer's Loading Tables for their Cartridge and or Arm.


Many of those early 'Smokeless' Powders are long gone now, or have become unknown as for just what they were, other than their Trade Names, and the information published at the time for use as Loading Tables.

I assume they duplicated the Black Powder Velocities...


I remember reviewing some Smokeless Powder Manufacturer's Literatures from the mid 1890s and early 1900s, in which they had explainations and information about the use of their 'Smokeless' in Cap & Ball as well as in Metallic Cartridge Arms of all sorts, Shotguns, Rifles, Revolvers, Single Shot Percussion Pistols...

One of those Powders I am pretty sure was 'Unique', but, the others have become vague or not-successive or continuous through time, for us to obtain them now, unless maybe we happen to find an old, unopened Can of some, and or of the right kind of some.


But, all in all, generally, the Graph you posted agrees with what everyone has said for a Century or more now - that generally, when loaded for standard Loadings, Smokeless will have a sooner higher pressure, than Black Powder, when giving the same result for Velocity to the Bullet.

There may be and likely are exceptions to this, considering there are or have been a great many 'Smokeless' Powders over the years, and, some of them may well have enjoyed giving a curve and duration more similar to Black Powder.

Driftwood -- In your "The short duration pressure spike can shock the weaker steel, leading to failure" -- are we to understand this as a memory in the steel, something like metal fatique? How about "infant mortality" in failure of mechanisms? -- in which if it survives the first few cycles it's likely to have a long life.

Maybe it was dumb luck but as a kid (1930s) we shot whatever we could get, 100s rounds of smokeless in my Grandfather's damascus shotgun he bought used in 1886 - still in good shape. I shot .38WCF ammo in my old SAA, so noisy it made my ears ring & learned is was ammo intended for rifles. I don't recall anyone shooting black powder ammo or seeing it for sale. It was something far obsolete even then, almost a curiousity. I remember an old cop, still on the job, saying he shot black in his SAA and it saved his life in a shoot out because the other guy couldn't see him for the smoke screen.

Wrong kind of powder can blow up a gun. Couldn't find black powder so I made my own. Couldn't get potassium nitrate so I used potassium chlorate from the hischool chem lab. Loaded up a real nice 1860 Army and the first shot got a chain fire that blew out the top of the chamber in battery and fired four others. The rammer went out and stuck in the groud about 15' away. Dumb luck again, chem teacher said I had made blasting powder that could explode by impact or concussion.

Howdy Again

Many of the early Smokeless loads for older guns used the so called 'bulk powders'. They were called bulk powders because they were formulated to fill up most of the capacity in the large old Black Powder cases without causing over pressure. I cannot attest to the actual pressure curves formed when these powders were used. I have read that Accurate 5744 is a good choice for some of the old large capacity Black Powder rifle cartridges such as 45-70, 45-90/-110,-120 and .50-90. Again, I have no information as to the actual pressure curve created. I have used 5744 in 303 British in some Lee/Enfield rifles with good results, but these rifles were produced well in the Smokeless era with modern steel barrels.

Now you are asking questions way over my pay grade. I do not profess to be an expert in metallurgy. I do know that when firearms are proofed, there is only one proof load put through them. At least with a single chamber gun. I dunno about revolvers, maybe they proof all the chambers, I do not know. I did watch some rifles being proofed at the Remington plant in Ilion NY a bunch of years ago. Each rifle was proofed with one proof round. After the round was fired the rifle was stamped with some proof marks. There is no requirement for firearms to be proofed in this country. In Europe it is done in government run proof houses. Here it is up to each manufacturer whether or not to proof their products. Proof rounds will run somewhere between 25% -50% above standard SAAMI Max pressure, depending on the specific cartridge. So, in theory at least, if the gun does not blow up or sustain damage after one proof round, it is considered to be In Proof. At least that's the way they say it in Britain. I strongly suspect that if you ran a bunch of proof rounds through any gun, damage would occur. That leads me to believe that the damage is incremental, just like repeatedly bending a paper clip back and forth. Do it once and nothing breaks. Do it ten times and you have work hardened the metal enough that it breaks. But again, this is just supposition on my part.

I have a video of the Gunsmith at Colonial Williamsburg building a flintlock rifle from scratch. He forms the barrel completely by hand, forming and welding the iron (not steel) into a tube. Then he rifles it and then he files the octagonal flats onto it. Before he does any more work on the rifle he proofs the barrel by firing a charge of 3X the normal Black Powder load in it. If it does not blow up, and does not sustain any damage, he builds the rest of the rifle. But his 3x proof load is with BP, not Smokeless.

In a nutshell, these questions get asked so often on this and other forums that I have just about given up replying to exactly why Black Powder should not be used in pre-1900 guns. Chicoine and Kuhnhuasen have already said it much better than I can. But I do believe that part of the reason these questions continue to come up is because shooters are convinced that Black Powder is so difficult to load and clean up after. I have already given some alternatives to that problem, shooting and cleaning up after Black Powder is much simpler than many shooters believe. Personally, I would much rather go through the exercise of loading up some BP rounds for my old revolvers than risk blowing them up. A couple of them are really, really nice, and I simply do not want to risk it. Then again, loading and shooting Black Powder in cartridges is old hat for me. Probably simpler than visiting a bunch of gunshops trying to find some ammo in some obscure cartridge.

As for me, I really like Black Powder Metallic Cartridge for Revolvers of any era...they are wonderful in present Day revolvers as well as in the old ones.

Recoil and report are much more satisfying than Smokeless, and, all in all Velocities are overall about the same as Standard Loadings of ( non Magnum ) Smokeless anyway.


I use Home-Made thin 'Lube Wafers' which go between Powder and Ball-Bullet-Boolit, and I can shoot all day with never any binding or fouling issues.


As Driftwood Johnson relays, clean-up is easy, once you know how, and it is a shame so many people feel intimidated or put off by the prospect of clean up for Black Powder shooting.

What I do - Hot Soapy Water, run a Nylon or Bronze Bore Brush through a time or to, run a couple dry wads of Paper Towel through, blot dry all else, and warm with a Hair Drier or set in the Sun till the whole is warm enough for a smeared drop of Water to be seen to evaporate before your eyes...Oil it up, put away till next time.


Since Black Powder Metallic Cartridge for Revolvers is so much more fun and satisfying than Smokeless, it is just one more good reason to stay with it for any Revolver, old or new, but especially 'Old' ones, which one may have.

I plan on working up some 'Trail Boss' loads for .32 S&W, .32 S&W Long, and .38 S&W. Has anyone tried this powder on early Smiths yet? An if so, what works. I find 'Trail Boss' to be very forgiving on everything from .32 H&R to 45/70. It's almost "load it up, and leave enough room for the head(bullet)". Humboldt

Don't know where you are getting your loads for Trail Boss.
I have never used it, but from looking at some of the loading data from IMR it looks to be just a little slower than Bullseye. A case full, "with just enough room left for the bullet", might resemble a hand grenade. (Unless TB is very fluffy and light so a case full in a 45 Colt is only around 4 or 5 grains.......)

__________________
Dean
SWCA #680 SWHF #446

Howdy

Trail Boss was developed specifically for light loads in large capacity cartridges like 45 Colt. It was developed with Cowboy Action Shooting in mind, hence the name. In CAS, many shooters load extremely light loads for minimum recoil for fast repeat shots. Many CAS shooters load large cases like 45 Colt down so low that they recoil like a light 38 Special load. Large capacity cases like 45 Colt usually perform poorly when loaded way down because most powders will leave so much empty space in the case. Trailboss was developed specifically to take up more space than conventional powders. The grains look like tiny, puffy little donuts. So a light load of Trail Boss will take up much more space in the case than a light load of say, Bullseye or Unique.

Many shooters are under the mistaken belief that Trailboss is a Black Powder substitute. It is not. Black Powder substitutes such as Pyrodex, Triple 7, or APP develop very low pressure, similar to Black Powder. Trail Boss does not. It is a Smokeless powder, it is just bulky. But it develops a sharp pressure spike just like most other Smokleless powders.

I suggest rather than Trail Boss, if you want to shoot old guns and you don't want the muss and fuss of Real Black Powder you try APP (American Pioneer Powder). It does not develop much pressure, it does not require special bullet lube, regular Smokeless lubed bullets are fine. It makes smoke, it does not stink of sulfur, and it can be cleaned up with water. Loading cartridges with APP is very simple. Do not leave any air space in the cartridge. Put in enough powder so that it either barely touches the bottom of the bullet when the bullet is seated, or compress it no more than 1/16". That's all there is to it. Do clean the gun right away with water or you will get some corrosion.

DJ,
APP sounds like the way to go as it is loaded just like BP. (a case full with a slight crunch.) I was informed that 777 should not be compressed (as in a case full) and you should use a filler for partial case fulls. I end up just using regular BP. It's not that much of a hassle....

(I guess I just an old coot and tend to stick to what I'm comfortable with..)

__________________
Dean
SWCA #680 SWHF #446

deadin

777 is about 15% more powerful than real Black Powder. For that reason alone I stay away from it with old guns. Hodgdon specifically says that compression should not exceed .100. Their testing has shown that best performance will be realized when the bullet just touches the powder. They also say that a card or polyethylene wad up to .030 thick can be used to protect the base of the bullet, but they specifically say that no fillers should be used with it.

Personally, I usually just go with real Black Powder too, but real Black Powder requires a bullet lube that is compatible with Black Powder, standard bullet lubes usually cause problems with fouling when used with real Black Powder. I cast my own bullets and lube them with SPG for Black Powder for a variety of cartridges, but sometimes I load up a cartridge that I do not have special bullets for, such as 38 S&W. In that case I use APP and standard Smokeless bullets.

I've been using Track of the Wolf lubricated fiber wads with my 44/40 and they seem to work just fine. If I'm planning on not using the loads for awhile I include a over-powder card to slow down any lube fouling that might occur.

__________________
Dean
SWCA #680 SWHF #446

I'll chime in with my support for black powder. As mentioned upthread it is not that big a hassle to clean up and in many ways faster than cleaning up after smokeless.

The only real obstacle I see to using black is in many places no local retailer stocks it. Since 9-11 the regulations have become so onerous lots of gun shops just quit stocking it. And it has not been just small ones, on a recent trip to North Dakota I found that neither Cabela's nor Gander Mountain stocked anything but the plethora of substitutes.

While I don't shoot 20 pounds a year, the solution has been to split a 25 pound case with a buddy, the most we can get on one HAZMAT fee. The substitutes are not without their flaws, but I suppose suitable for the occasional shooter.

However, if you compete in matches, like BPCR or a few others, where 100% real black is required by the rules you quickly realize loading and cleanup are a lot less hassle and many of those old cartridges are a lot more accurate with a good load of black than they are with smokeless.