44 S&W Ctg questions

Went to the Conway Gun Show Sunday afternoon. Like the last Conway show, I did not get a chance to see all the tables; more like old home week with several dealers I knew, showing me what they'd picked up on Saturday, and wanting me to research a thing or two (frail reed for them to rely on, but fun). There for three hours and did not get a chance to buy a thing. One buddy who had a couple of tables had what appeared to be a long barreled Smith & Wesson number 3 in what he thought was 448 caliber due to the stamping on the barrel. I got my little eyepiece out and showed him it was not an 8 but a heavily stamped S. And that I assume it was 44 S&W (American?) It said: 44 S&W Ctg. It had the hard rubber grips not walnut, so I assume it was a S&W New Model No. 3, The serial number was @34,000, and had the right patent dates. He had bought a box of new factory 44 Russian ammo, and said he was going to shoot them in it. I did not think you could chamber them in a 44 S&W American, but lo and hold they'd chamber just fine. I advised him to get someone else to shoot it for him. Per Hatcher's Textbook, the diameter of the cartridge body of the 44 Russian was .453", and the diameter of the 44 American was .437 so I was kind of surprised that a 44 Russian would even chamber as it was almost .020" inches wider. Go figure. Finally he said he'd get a buddy to work up some milder loads, and I said if you are determined to shoot it, get him to either use black powder or Trail Boss for the load. BTW it did not have the spur on the trigger guard, and was about 89% blued. Is it possible that someone way back when had hogged the chambers on the cylinder out, or maybe swapped cylinders?

44 S&W American is an outside lubricated cartridge that uses a "heel" type bullet like modern 22 Long Rifle. So the bullet is actually .434, slightly larger than the 44 Russian .429 bullet. The chambers had to be large enough for the .434 bullet to go through them so they are plenty big enough for 44 Russian cartridges to fit. The 44 Russian bullets are .429 so they are not going to be real tack drivers out of a 44 American.

Excellent answer. I did not even think about the fact that the bullet which was .434. But I still wonder about the case diameter which in the 44 American was .437 and the Russian at .453. In other words almost 2/100ths of an inch larger. Have any of y'all tried dropping a 44 Russian in a cylinder bored for 44 American?

If the revolver IS a NM #3 then there is a big chance it is .44 Russian.

I have been thinking about it. Did S&W barrel stamp the No 3's just plain old 44 S&W Ctg for the 44 Russian?

YES. As I recall, my .44 Russian NM #3 and .44 DA barrels that are marked simply say '.44 S&W Ctg.'. There weren't any .44 top breaks factory chambered for .44 S&W Special, even though that is a possible rechamber option.

cgt4570 said:

YES. As I recall, my .44 Russian NM #3 and .44 DA barrels that are marked simply say '.44 S&W Ctg.'. There weren't any .44 top breaks factory chambered for .44 S&W Special, even though that is a possible rechamber option.

Click to expand...

That's true; since the 44 Special did not come out until 1908, and from my research, other than the 38-40 with a small number made from 1900-1907, the number 3's stopped being produced in about 1898.

"WHICH .44 IS IT"????????

Seems like a very common subject on this forum. Which .44 chambers in my Smith? With good reason. The old West was totally oblivious to safety and "clearly" marking firearms as to proper cartridge chambering until the turn of the century with the introduction of smokeless powder.(Especially topbreaks and tip-ups)
Oh, I know, we can find "some" clearly marked barrels and frames, but NOT near anywhere close to all of them were clearly marked.
See photo below of my private collection: Lets see....from left to right...44 American, 44 Russian, 44 Webley, 44 Bulldog, 44 Eley, 44 Colt, and finally the 44 WCF. And I didn’t even include rimfires!(Photo 1)

Add to the fact that the heads were not stamped with the caliber until post 1883 (photo 2) and you really have a mess of confusion.

But there is one thing that is absolute : The .44 Russian cartridge will NOT chamber in an original cylinder designed for the .44 American. The case is much too wide. (Photo 3&4).

So the gun in question is a .44 Russian. Whether original or not? Who knows? but it sure ain't a .44 American!

Now if you want to talk about "Altered" chambers?
Wow, that's a huge subject because I'm sure someone will present an American that will chamber a 44 Russian cartridge. That simply means it's been modified(NOT original chambering). I've personally seen a lot of cylinders modified to chamber an improved cartridge. 44 Americans re-chambered to .44 Russian. 44 Russian re-chambered to 44 WCF.... Very common! That doesn't mean it's original. That means it's been modified. Most that I've seen are poorly drilled out with circular scarring inside the chamber, but some are professionally worked and you can't tell with the naked eye.

The most common modified chambers:

44 Rimfire modified to .44 Russian or .44 WCF (HUGE loss in gun value)
44 American modified to . 44 Russian or .44WCF
38 WCF modified to .44 WCF
44 Colt modified to 45 Colt

Then there is an endless list of "Sleeved" chambers and barrels. The most common is "Any" caliber modified to .22 rimfire. Talk about a complete waste of time and money loss.

BMur said:

Seems like a very common subject on this forum. Which .44 chambers in my Smith? With good reason. The old West was totally oblivious to safety and "clearly" marking firearms as to proper cartridge chambering until the turn of the century with the introduction of smokeless powder.(Especially topbreaks and tip-ups)
Oh, I know, we can find "some" clearly marked barrels and frames, but NOT near anywhere close to all of them were clearly marked.
See photo below of my private collection: Lets see....from left to right...44 American, 44 Russian, 44 Webley, 44 Bulldog, 44 Eley, 44 Colt, and finally the 44 WCF. And I didn’t even include rimfires!(Photo 1)

Add to the fact that the heads were not stamped with the caliber until post 1883 (photo 2) and you really have a mess of confusion.

But there is one thing that is absolute : The .44 Russian cartridge will NOT chamber in an original cylinder designed for the .44 American. The case is much too wide. (Photo 3&4).

So the gun in question is a .44 Russian. Whether original or not? Who knows? but it sure ain't a .44 American!

Click to expand...

Thank you sir. That answers my question. I had already come to that conclusion, well, pretty much anyway, and left word with the feller, that in my opinion it was 44 Russian. But this brads it down.

I said if you are determined to shoot it, get him to either use black powder or Trail Boss for the load.

Click to expand...

Howdy

Trail Boss is not a Black Powder substitute. It is a modern Smokeless powder with a sharp pressure curve just like most modern pistol and shotgun powders. Personally, I never shoot any of my antique revolvers with anything but real Black Powder, I do not believe the old steel will stand up to the sharp pressure spike of modern powders. There are those who disagree. But Trail Boss is not a good choice for an antique revolver. There are some Smokeless powders that can be made to duplicate the gentler pressure curve of Black Powder, unfortunately I do not know what they are.

I suggest if someone does not want to mess with the fouling and cleanup of real Black Powder he tries American Pioneer Powder (APP). APP is a Black Powder substitute and it creates a pressure curve similar to real Black Powder. In addition, APP can be used with modern smokeless bullets, it does not need the soft BP compatible bullet lube that Black Powder requires. Being a Black Powder substitute, APP is messy, just like Black Powder, but at least you don't have to hunt for bullets with soft, BP compatible bullet lube.

Hodgdon has Trail Boss reloading data for 44 Russian with starting loads as low as 7,600 CUP. That’s much lower than the pressures you’ll get with black powder. With black powder you’re stuck pretty much with one load - fill the powder up to the base of the bullet. That’ll result in a load around 12,000 CUP. Even the max loads around 10,000 to 11,000 CUP are less pressure than a regular black powder load.

Driftwood Johnson said:

. . . Trail Boss is not a Black Powder substitute. It is a modern Smokeless powder with a sharp pressure curve just like most modern pistol and shotgun powders. Personally, I never shoot any of my antique revolvers with anything but real Black Powder, I do not believe the old steel will stand up to the sharp pressure spike of modern powders . . .

Click to expand...

I have been looking for that "sharp pressure curve" data for years and it does not exist as far as I can tell??? I can find, however, many comparisons both early smokeless charts as well as modern test comparisons that show black powder and smokeless can be loaded to the same pressure curves in everything from revolvers, to rifles, to shotguns.

I had a 44 American that was rechambered in 44 Russian, a very simple process. The only issue was that the bullet had to jump to the barrel throat in a cylinder bore larger than the bullet. That resulted in shaved lead flying around. It also was not accurate. I could shove a 44 Russian lead bullet through the barrel with a wood dowel by hand, so lots of key-holing. It was not easy to tell by looking, since boring out a 44 American chamber barely leaves a visible reduction in the chamber bore. The gun shot perfectly and would also shoot 44 American in the gun as well. The 44A case, however, had some major resizing issues after shoooting.

Gunsmith David Chicoine said smokeless was hard on the old guns because he had been getting a lot more in for repair since Cowboy shooting got popular. I wonder, was it because the old guns were being shot with smokeless or because they were being SHOT?

Most of the old guns I saw being shot in CAS were in the pocket pistol division, lightweight topbreaks not all of S&W make or quality, and many in already well worn condition. I think any regular use was going to beat them up (more) no matter what the powder.

I have been looking for that "sharp pressure curve" data for years and it does not exist as far as I can tell??? I can find, however, many comparisons both early smokeless charts as well as modern test comparisons that show black powder and smokeless can be loaded to the same pressure curves in everything from revolvers, to rifles, to shotguns.

Click to expand...

You and I have had this discussion before. I know you have worked up loads that would duplicate the pressure curves of Black Powder. However, you were using powders that are not normally associated with revolvers. Certainly not Trail Boss. I believe you also have pressure testing equipment to determine the pressure of the loads you are shooting, is that not correct?

I do not have pressure testing equipment, so I will continue to shoot nothing but Black Powder in my antique revolvers.

My initial comment was because many shooters are under the misunderstanding that Trail Boss is a Black Powder substitute, much like Pyrodex of Triple 7. Perhaps the name causes this misunderstanding. Trailboss was developed specifically for the CAS crowd, hence the 'cowboy' name. Many shooters in CAS load their cartridges way down, so the recoil will be next to nothing. This permits them to shoot their revolvers incredibly fast, without recoil disturbing their aim. The problem comes when some of the old, very large capacity cases, such as 45 Colt are loaded way down a large volume of air is left in the case. Not much powder and a large volume of air is a recipe for spotty performance in large capacity cases. So Trailboss was developed, with its large donut shaped grains, to take up lots of space with light loads in large capacity cases. Performance is improved without so much air space.

But I would never recommend using Trailboss in any antique revolver made before 1890.

Regarding pocket pistols and CAS, yes, pocket pistols are used in side matches. Side matches only. And because there are no modern reproductions of pocket pistols being made today, many of the pocket pistols used are antiques. I seldom take part in the pocket pistol matches, when I do I load my ammo with Black Power, because my S&W Top Break pocket pistols are antiques, made before 1900.

I march to a different drummer than most in CAS, I only shoot Black Powder, because it is so much more fun than Smokeless. When I bring my pair of New Model Number Threes to a match,




Or my Merwin Hulbert Pocket Army,






They only get stoked with Black Powder. Just as they were when they were new. I do not choose to experiment with Smokeless loads with these antiques.

I'm "NOT" trying to insult people on this forum, NOR am I trying to stand on a soap box. OK??? So take a deep breath before you get excited or take anything personal and "TRY" your best to have an Open mind.

I agree with Jim and driftwood and Mr.Chicoine. I have his book also and he seems to be a very knowledgeable(Also a "Qualified Gunsmith") regarding "Smokeless" use in the Antique Smith Model 3.

The problem with Smokeless "is" the spike in pressure. Time/Pressure curves are not designed to register a "Catastrophic Event". They are designed to measure a working formula or a comparative to various "Safe and Working formulas".

Understanding what causes a "SPIKE" in pressure is the key to understanding why Smokeless powder use in Antiques is not a good idea.

If your formula of Bullet design, weight, diameter, metal mixture, seating depth, type of seat, and degree of crimp, powder charge load: As applied to rifling type, depth, barrel length,(Is the rifling clean or pitted: As applied to a comparative in barrel Groove and land diameter? So, it's a complicated problem. It's not as easy as "Hey, lets try smokeless".

So, directly to the point. If "ANY" problem or miss calculation occurs in those items mentioned above when using smokeless powder you will get a spike in pressure...

Here is a list:

Heavy powder residue develops in the bore
, Leading from an oversized bullet, Pitting in the bore can be a trap for lead build up. A "ring" in the bore can also be a trap for lead build up. I've seen where bullets will separate in the bore and leave a "ring" of lead at the forcing cone.
All of these from a short list can cause a pressure spike with Smokeless that you won't see on any chart. Black powder will not spike with any of these conditions. It will continue to burn at the same rate.
It's as simple as that. The spike occurs from and unexpected problem with your loading recipe.

The Time/Pressure Curve showing lower pressure from a Smokeless load as compared to a Black powder load must also be accompanied with an "EXACT" and specific loading data chart.

Example: I use a .358/ 105 Semi-Wad Cutter with 10% Tin and 90% Lead in a Winchester Semi-Ballooned case with Remington 1 1/2 primer and 9 Grains of FFFG Gotex Black Powder with a heavy taper crimp with the bullet seating at the upper crimping groove. It's shot in my 3rd Model Top Break Smith & Wesson with 3 1/4" barrel having a .360 Groove diameter and rifling of .352 land diameter. The resulting pressure achieved is 7500psi or CUP.
That's the information that must come with your Time/PSI curve chart.

Same goes with your Smokeless load. "EXACT" loading data for each and every result.

Did you guys miss this?---

nbedford said:

It had the hard rubber grips not walnut, so I assume it was a S&W New Model No. 3, The serial number was @34,000,

Click to expand...

This one sentence pretty well eliminates the American on TWO points:
1-Americans never had hard rubber grips, and there were never any SQUARE butt hard rubber grips made for the large frame top breaks, so how could an American have them?
2-American serial numbers did not go as high as 34,000.

Driftwood Johnson said:

. . . My initial comment was because many shooters are under the misunderstanding that Trail Boss is a Black Powder substitute, much like Pyrodex of Triple 7. Perhaps the name causes this misunderstanding. Trailboss was developed specifically for the CAS crowd, hence the 'cowboy' name. Many shooters in CAS load their cartridges way down, so the recoil will be next to nothing . . .

Click to expand...

I agree that Trail Boss is absolutely not a black powder substitute, but it can be loaded in large capacity cases that have 600 fps +/- and no felt recoil. I have loaded 30 grains of BP in a 45 Colt and it can take your arm off! No one can tell me that it is low pressure compared with mild Trail Boss loads.

Having shot well over 100 antique S&Ws from Model 1 on with smokeless loads, I am confident that it can be done with less pressure and definately less felt recoil. My guess is that many people load their ammunition just too hot and shoot them in guns where their best days were well behind them. Most do not have the funds or the ability to buy pristine almost unused S&W hoglegs and would not shoot them as their primary CASS gun even if they owned one. I recall from my days of cowboy action shooting that as many BP loaded guns broke as smokeless antiques at matches, which BTW was few and far between.

I have shot hundreds of pounds of black powder and have tried most BP substitutes. My observation is that black powder always comes out on top for ignition and accuracy. It is well known that flintlocks and the BP substitiutes just don't give reliable ignition.

Driftwood.
Your revolvers are outstanding

Being new to the antique Smith and Wesson game I was hesitant to use smokeless in such an old revolver. I did a fairly good study and asked a number of questions and found that I would try smokeless for the sake of giving it a try. I ended up with a 200gr. RNFP bullet, 3.7 gr. of Tight-Group for my .44 Russian Double Action. I fired the first shot and thought it was pretty stiff for the little revolver. I then fired a black powder load using the same 200gr. RNFP bullet, 18grs. of Old Eynesford 3F using a .060 wad. It was about the same degree if stiffness as the smokeless. I alternated bullets in the chambers to see if I felt anything very different and truly couldn't. I use Old Eynesford 3F in all my black powder pistols and revolvers, it produces less fouling and is a little hotter or snappier.
After my trial and error I did decide to only shoot black powder in this fine old revolver just because that is what it was meant to shoot. I shoot black powder three days a week or more so cleaning is as much a part of shooting as shooting is, its all good time. The one thing I did notice while shooting black powder is that after about a dozen shots or more the fouling did begin to influence the ease of operation, it got more difficult to cock the hammer for single action use as the fouling was dragging across the forcing cone or barrel inlet. A simple cleaning of the cylinder face solved that problem. This particular revolver is very tight as it was sent back to the factory for a complete rebuild and refinish back in the 50's and probably never fired afterward. Thinking about it design and purpose for basic self defense it was not designed to be shot more than a full cylinder full and although I was careful and not wanting to damage it by firing was fully capable of continuing to shoot after a dozen shots, it worked very well double action you could just feel the build-up beginning to slightly hinder its operation. Probably why the black powder cut-out was installed on later models that were still in the black powder era.