I too would exercise caution with modern loads and personally would only consider it if I was reloading my own ammunition after extensive research on pressures of various powders and could be 100% certain of the data. For example, the starting 44 Russian load using 3.5 grains of Titegroup produces a velocity of 738 fps @ 5,100 CUP while the max load using 4.8 grains only produces 936 fps but increases to 11,400 CUP. Unless you are skilled at reloading, there is an awful chance for error here which could produce catastrophic results. I personally would not go there but if you decide to, please do more research than you think you need and proceed with extreme caution.
New Model No.3 .44Rus smokeless or no?
- Thread starter Czvz24
- Start date
The maximum pressure for most revolver rounds is reached before the bullet leaves the cylinder. It does not occur in the bore unless your running a very slow powder.
According to Hodgdons powder co. and Western powder co. in separate papers:
Powder in a correctly matched powder cartridge combo., is completely burned within a couple of inches of the case mouth. Exact distance depends upon powder burn rate. Something like Unique would be burned before the bullet leaves the case. So chamber pressure would have nothing to do with barrel length and vice versa.
So if you are using a light load of a fast burning powder the maximum pressure has nothing to do with the bore. This would be especially true using relatively soft lead bullets
This has been a regular discussion among the group I shoot black powder cartridges with. The one guy of the group that is an excellent gunsmith is almost 90 years old and shoots Sharps, Martinis and original Colts has been using smokeless loads for over 40 years with no ill effects. He does fill his cases with filler and says he has tried several but now prefers dacron.
I have to believe that max pressure is max pressure no mater where it comes from or the speed at which it is achieved. Steel has a yield strength, it will yield at that point no matter how that point is achieved. Experience has also taught me that black powder fouls a bore far worse than any smokeless.
According to Hodgdons powder co. and Western powder co. in separate papers:
Powder in a correctly matched powder cartridge combo., is completely burned within a couple of inches of the case mouth. Exact distance depends upon powder burn rate. Something like Unique would be burned before the bullet leaves the case. So chamber pressure would have nothing to do with barrel length and vice versa.
So if you are using a light load of a fast burning powder the maximum pressure has nothing to do with the bore. This would be especially true using relatively soft lead bullets
This has been a regular discussion among the group I shoot black powder cartridges with. The one guy of the group that is an excellent gunsmith is almost 90 years old and shoots Sharps, Martinis and original Colts has been using smokeless loads for over 40 years with no ill effects. He does fill his cases with filler and says he has tried several but now prefers dacron.
I have to believe that max pressure is max pressure no mater where it comes from or the speed at which it is achieved. Steel has a yield strength, it will yield at that point no matter how that point is achieved. Experience has also taught me that black powder fouls a bore far worse than any smokeless.
Last edited:
On the hinge etc. Take a look at a colts dragoon which fired a .457 ball or a conical bullet at 1000-1300 fps using 50-60 gr of black powder. compared to a 44 Russian holding just 23 gr max. Some Dragoons actually suffered split cylinders, either through chain fires or bad metal, but although they had absolutely no back strap the frame held up
I am not telling anyone what to do. That is up to them. I am simply looking at the what I have found and can see for my self.
I have fired less than 100 light smokeless loads from my double action 44 Russian with no problems. Mostly just to have shot it
If I had a number 3 I would do it with that too, but I would not shoot either a lot. Black powder or smokeless. Stuff breaks, parts foe them are hard to come by. Why would you shoot one a lot in the first place???
I am not telling anyone what to do. That is up to them. I am simply looking at the what I have found and can see for my self.
I have fired less than 100 light smokeless loads from my double action 44 Russian with no problems. Mostly just to have shot it
If I had a number 3 I would do it with that too, but I would not shoot either a lot. Black powder or smokeless. Stuff breaks, parts foe them are hard to come by. Why would you shoot one a lot in the first place???
Last edited:
Smokeless foruma
A little deeper into the dynamics?
Bullseye powder was introduced in 1898 by Laflin and Rand. I love the stuff. It's extremely efficient, fast burning, clean burning and you get the most bang for your buck with 1lb of powder than any other. I've used it for target shooting and hunting because it goes off. Period. Last thing you want is your round/gun to fail in a pig hunt when the tusks are on their way in.
The problem with a fast burning, extremely efficient powder is that you must get everything right.
Maximum pressure listed is based on "all" parts of the formula being exactly as intended. Folks keep posting time/psi curves but to be accurate you must include "all" parts of the formula as intended by the published curve. You can't short cut it nor can you short cut your loading. NOR can you plug that curve into an antique firearm since the tested curve was NOT performed using an antique firearm.
That includes what make/model gun was tested, barrel length, bullet type and weight, overall case length, primer type, and type of crimp used on the specific case used and type of lubrication.
You can't eliminate any of these since any one of these impacts the time/pressure curve results. If I change any of those listed items the results change. If I change from a CCI primer to a Federal primer, the results change. Etc etc.
Fast burning powders achieve maximum pressure given that "ALL" COMPONENTS OF THE TIME PRESSURE CURVE ARE MET.
If I change anything, the maximum pressure achieved will change as well. If I introduce a obstruction at the forcing cone by say the most common factor? Leading? The maximum pressure increases dramatically. Especially from fast burning pistol powders.
If I slow the bullet down the maximum pressure increases dramatically. If I introduce a hardened bullet? The maximum pressure increases dramatically. You can't remove any of the the factors in play. All of them can change the maximum pressure achieved by your smokeless load. It's not just the powder that's in play. The assumption that the powder is all burnt before the bullet leaves the bore has to include all of the dynamics in play. If I change anything? Your powder burn changes! It's not acting alone.
Many years of reloading smokeless pistol powders I have seen significant pressure spikes from increases of only 2/10ths of grain of powder using exactly the same formula as described above. Using exactly the same sized bullet, primer, case, powder by weight, overall case length, etc, etc. By pressure spike I'm specifically talking about a dramatic increase in performance.
I somehow introduced an obstruction that spiked the load. Or I got close to detonation of that specific load. Simple as that. Powder burn and detonation are not the same results. Something that changed the published time/pressure curve in my specific pistol given that specific load. Optimum powder burn is detonation and that is something to avoid with smokeless powder.
It's not simple with smokeless powder. It's exact from all aspects or you're gonna get a surprise. The surprise is always a pressure spike.
Murph
A little deeper into the dynamics?
Bullseye powder was introduced in 1898 by Laflin and Rand. I love the stuff. It's extremely efficient, fast burning, clean burning and you get the most bang for your buck with 1lb of powder than any other. I've used it for target shooting and hunting because it goes off. Period. Last thing you want is your round/gun to fail in a pig hunt when the tusks are on their way in.
The problem with a fast burning, extremely efficient powder is that you must get everything right.
Maximum pressure listed is based on "all" parts of the formula being exactly as intended. Folks keep posting time/psi curves but to be accurate you must include "all" parts of the formula as intended by the published curve. You can't short cut it nor can you short cut your loading. NOR can you plug that curve into an antique firearm since the tested curve was NOT performed using an antique firearm.
That includes what make/model gun was tested, barrel length, bullet type and weight, overall case length, primer type, and type of crimp used on the specific case used and type of lubrication.
You can't eliminate any of these since any one of these impacts the time/pressure curve results. If I change any of those listed items the results change. If I change from a CCI primer to a Federal primer, the results change. Etc etc.
Fast burning powders achieve maximum pressure given that "ALL" COMPONENTS OF THE TIME PRESSURE CURVE ARE MET.
If I change anything, the maximum pressure achieved will change as well. If I introduce a obstruction at the forcing cone by say the most common factor? Leading? The maximum pressure increases dramatically. Especially from fast burning pistol powders.
If I slow the bullet down the maximum pressure increases dramatically. If I introduce a hardened bullet? The maximum pressure increases dramatically. You can't remove any of the the factors in play. All of them can change the maximum pressure achieved by your smokeless load. It's not just the powder that's in play. The assumption that the powder is all burnt before the bullet leaves the bore has to include all of the dynamics in play. If I change anything? Your powder burn changes! It's not acting alone.
Many years of reloading smokeless pistol powders I have seen significant pressure spikes from increases of only 2/10ths of grain of powder using exactly the same formula as described above. Using exactly the same sized bullet, primer, case, powder by weight, overall case length, etc, etc. By pressure spike I'm specifically talking about a dramatic increase in performance.
I somehow introduced an obstruction that spiked the load. Or I got close to detonation of that specific load. Simple as that. Powder burn and detonation are not the same results. Something that changed the published time/pressure curve in my specific pistol given that specific load. Optimum powder burn is detonation and that is something to avoid with smokeless powder.
It's not simple with smokeless powder. It's exact from all aspects or you're gonna get a surprise. The surprise is always a pressure spike.
Murph
Last edited:
I do believe careful loading is very important. But, that brings up another point. Bullseye, Red Dot and other similar powders. They are bad enough in 38 special cases, and even worse in 44 Russian cases. I know lots of rounds using both have been fired in 38s but, as pointed out small amounts of anything can have big effects. Plenty of modern guns have went Ka plooee with both those powders. They also are very easy to double charge and not notice. The fastest powder I use is Green Dot. which is a bit faster than Unique. a modern 44 Russian case holds 2.7 gr of water a 38 special 2.3.
But with Bullseye and Red Dot, the maximum pressure is achieved before the bullet ever leaves the cylinder. There may well be more pressure in the barrel with an partially obstructed barrel than there is with out an obstruction. BUT it is not higher than the original chamber pressure.
I don't care if your shooting a 120 year old gun or a brand new one. Barrel obstructions, playing mix master with components, loading near maximum with really fast powders, and carelessness are all recipes for a wreck.
Interestingly Black powder is not all the same either. FFFG of one brand will burn different than another. How much you do or don't compress it.
But with Bullseye and Red Dot, the maximum pressure is achieved before the bullet ever leaves the cylinder. There may well be more pressure in the barrel with an partially obstructed barrel than there is with out an obstruction. BUT it is not higher than the original chamber pressure.
I don't care if your shooting a 120 year old gun or a brand new one. Barrel obstructions, playing mix master with components, loading near maximum with really fast powders, and carelessness are all recipes for a wreck.
Interestingly Black powder is not all the same either. FFFG of one brand will burn different than another. How much you do or don't compress it.
I have a 44 Russian first Model Double Action that I have shot with modern smokeless factory loaded ammo, and have used Trail Boss to reload with I haven't had any issues. It is your gun your risk. Will factory loaded ammo blow your gun up? I doubt it unless your gun is out of time or has other issues. Will it cause more wear than black powder maybe, but I doubt you are planning on putting that many rounds through it.
All things being equal...there is no reason that a modern "cowboy action" type smokeless load can be run throug a vintage revolver that passes an exam by a guy that knows what he's looking for. I have shot them through my single action .44 Russian and D.A. Revolver. I find the recoil too sudden or abrupt with smokeless, much more satisfying and "natural" in black powder configuration. I have tried Swiss 3F and older Goex 3F, the only difference is that with just about anytime I compare them the Swiss will burn cleaner and produces a more satisfying ignition, call it "buck and roar", if you like. I can fire mulitiple cylinders of Swiss 3F with just a simply wipe of the revolver face, Goex will foul up enough mid cylinder shoot to make turning the cylinder bind up. Usually no issue for at least a dozen or so shots but beyond that she likes a cleaning. I never have lost sight over the fact that this is a personal defense weapon and therefore the need to fire more than a cylinder or two is a bit of a stretch. It will certainly get the job done for its intended purpose, my favorite S&W poster shows a "cowboy" and horse mid stream throwing lead over his shoulder backwards toward a group of hostiles...I am looking at that poster right now, I love it.
RISK MANAGEMENT 101- REMEDIAL: THE BEST AND ONLY WAY TO TRULY MANAGE A RISK IS TO AVOID IT ALTOGETHER.
ANY AND ALL OTHER APPROACHES ARE FRAUGHT WITH PERIL.
Ralph Tremaine
ANY AND ALL OTHER APPROACHES ARE FRAUGHT WITH PERIL.
Ralph Tremaine
Last edited:
Ralph, i assume you have never done the research yourself to prove or disprove David's position on smokeless? I have determined that there are two diverse sets of opinions on this subject and it is impossible to change minds, so why bother.
Well, there is plenty of research out there, plus all the charts, graphs, pressure data, studies, etc. to get one well down the road to consider the debate objectively. There, I have used the word objective!! You cannot comment with any authority one way or the other until you do the research, do the loading, and do the shooting.
I have spent decades trying, without success, to bring people the technical results of years of study out there on this subject and can absolutely, positively, without exception state that smokeless reloads can be lower pressure than BP, I can debunk every old-wives-tales with data. I can load and shoot smokeless all day with less felt recoil than BP, but it does no good for those who disagree. Reloading for BP revolvers is not only possible, but can be safer for those vintage guns than original BP loads. Easier to clean, no water involved.
If you have ever shot a 255 grain bullet in a full load of 40 grains of BP in a 45 Colt you know that the pressures go way beyond cowboy smokeless loads. Hold on tight. 44 Russian original factory loads were stated to be 246g lead bullet, 23g BP, 750 fps, 12,000 psi. Search loads for this caliber on powder sites, handloader mag, etc. and you will find loads like the following:
140g lead bullet, Trail Boss & Win WLP with pressures of 10,000psi. Other powders can be loaded to similar pressures, below original BP loads. You can also look at case fillers, light bullets, fast burning powders that will drop smokeless loads into the 4 digit psi levels.
I always state that you can break any antique revolver with standard BP loads and light smokeless loads, so depending on what you are shooting, you can blame that powder on the damage. Consider this - almost all 1800s revolvers were still in service well into the Twentieth Century and certainly shot their share of smokeless. By some people's accounts, they should all be blown up and gone, but they are still out there for sale, go figure!
SMOKELESS SQUAD
The ultimate accomplishment of the "SMOKELESS SQUAD"???
This is exactly what happened here in California a few years ago we actually had "open carry". It was legal here but some total boneheads decided they needed to parade around coffee shops with their Glocks open carry and frightened the ignorant people so much that they were able to raise such a fuss they actually got rid of that law in this state. "Great plan"!!!! I was one of of those who screamed "boneheads" so loud that they actually left the state after doing permanent damage to our gun rights here!
Be careful what you wish for!!!!
Now we have the "smokeless squad" who insist it's ok to use smokeless in antique firearms. It won't be long before they actually get a large enough following that the ATF will buy into the concept and "REQUIRE ALL ANTIQUES TO BE REGISTERED AS MODERN GUNS"!!!
SO JUST REMEMBER WHO TO THANK WHEN IT HAPPENS AND I HAVE TO CONVINCE IN COURT THAT THEY ARE WRONG!
LONG LIVE THE SMOKELESS SQUAD!!! Pretty soon we will have to register BB guns in California thanks' to them!
SOME ISSUES NEED TO BE LEFT ALONE.
MURPH
The ultimate accomplishment of the "SMOKELESS SQUAD"???
This is exactly what happened here in California a few years ago we actually had "open carry". It was legal here but some total boneheads decided they needed to parade around coffee shops with their Glocks open carry and frightened the ignorant people so much that they were able to raise such a fuss they actually got rid of that law in this state. "Great plan"!!!! I was one of of those who screamed "boneheads" so loud that they actually left the state after doing permanent damage to our gun rights here!
Be careful what you wish for!!!!
Now we have the "smokeless squad" who insist it's ok to use smokeless in antique firearms. It won't be long before they actually get a large enough following that the ATF will buy into the concept and "REQUIRE ALL ANTIQUES TO BE REGISTERED AS MODERN GUNS"!!!
SO JUST REMEMBER WHO TO THANK WHEN IT HAPPENS AND I HAVE TO CONVINCE IN COURT THAT THEY ARE WRONG!
LONG LIVE THE SMOKELESS SQUAD!!! Pretty soon we will have to register BB guns in California thanks' to them!
SOME ISSUES NEED TO BE LEFT ALONE.
MURPH
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2022
- Messages
- 881
- Reaction score
- 1,422
Hi There,
I am dismayed by the number of people who think that the "pressure
curve" is definite proof that smokeless is safe to shoot in old black
powder firearms. I would like to point out that it wasn't too long
ago (at least from my perspective) that we measured pressure using
lead and copper crushers disks to determine maximum pressure of
a load.
Then piezo transducers were developed to measure strain
exerted on the barrel and chamber (which is translated into psi
via the software used). Now some of the "pet" loads from the earlier
determined pressure measurements using the crusher system were
now determined to be unsafe (even though there was 50 years of
common usage with no apparent signs of harm to the firearms).
And reloading manuals were updated to reflect the new information
gained from the more accurate pressure readings.
So, I tend to think that there will come a time when a better, more
accurate system of determining pressures over the time of the
pressure curve and determining the function of barrel mass to
the delay in pressure reading due to inertia of the metal in the barrel.
And the information we currently deem as "accurate" will be
found to be in error.
Cheers!
Webb
I am dismayed by the number of people who think that the "pressure
curve" is definite proof that smokeless is safe to shoot in old black
powder firearms. I would like to point out that it wasn't too long
ago (at least from my perspective) that we measured pressure using
lead and copper crushers disks to determine maximum pressure of
a load.
Then piezo transducers were developed to measure strain
exerted on the barrel and chamber (which is translated into psi
via the software used). Now some of the "pet" loads from the earlier
determined pressure measurements using the crusher system were
now determined to be unsafe (even though there was 50 years of
common usage with no apparent signs of harm to the firearms).
And reloading manuals were updated to reflect the new information
gained from the more accurate pressure readings.
So, I tend to think that there will come a time when a better, more
accurate system of determining pressures over the time of the
pressure curve and determining the function of barrel mass to
the delay in pressure reading due to inertia of the metal in the barrel.
And the information we currently deem as "accurate" will be
found to be in error.
Cheers!
Webb
You are correct, Gary---I've never done the research. I at least suspect Dave hasn't either---that his position arises from seeing, trying to figure out how, and then attempting to repair the damage done by smokeless loads in guns that weren't built to take them. I say "weren't built to take them", it's more like they were built with material that couldn't take them without eventually incurring damage------key word there: "eventually".
On the one hand, I understand the desire to shoot these old guns---and to shoot them conveniently---which is to say go to the store and buy some ammo. That's what I did---once, and not for long. My caution arose from paying big bucks for essentially unrepairable/irreplaceable guns. Then, after getting educated on the matter, I decided my caution was well founded!
Ralph Tremaine
On the one hand, I understand the desire to shoot these old guns---and to shoot them conveniently---which is to say go to the store and buy some ammo. That's what I did---once, and not for long. My caution arose from paying big bucks for essentially unrepairable/irreplaceable guns. Then, after getting educated on the matter, I decided my caution was well founded!
Ralph Tremaine
Last edited:
Where to start. BMur - where are your research documents to prove otherwise?? Where are the documents that show lower pressures are more dangerous than higher pressures in gun barrels??? Pressure test results do not lie today and gun powder companies certainly go to great lengths to determine those pressures as they will be held liable if they do not. They also go to great lengths to offer safe smokeless loads that will obviously be used in old top break revolver calibers or they could be held liable for that issue as well. I object to the reference to the Smokeless Squad and that the BATF will make antique guns modern with the use of smokeless powder.
At pressure levels below 20,000 psi, CUP is almost an identical number. I have no fears that the numbers generated today by the use of strain gauges will ever be found inaccurate. First, steel can be tested for tensile strength using the same strain gauges as those used on barrels, so apples and apples. 50,000 psi tensile strength steel will yield in both a steel billet and a gun barrel at that pressure reading. Not true in the days of CUP. Cannot test steel tensile strength using the CUP methods for gun barrels. Apples and oranges.
No problem if people want to shoot BP or not shoot their guns at all, but it is time to recognize the fact that smokeless loads can be built that are safer than BP!!! That means lower pressures than BP, but still doesn't guarantee the gun you are using cannot break!!
At pressure levels below 20,000 psi, CUP is almost an identical number. I have no fears that the numbers generated today by the use of strain gauges will ever be found inaccurate. First, steel can be tested for tensile strength using the same strain gauges as those used on barrels, so apples and apples. 50,000 psi tensile strength steel will yield in both a steel billet and a gun barrel at that pressure reading. Not true in the days of CUP. Cannot test steel tensile strength using the CUP methods for gun barrels. Apples and oranges.
No problem if people want to shoot BP or not shoot their guns at all, but it is time to recognize the fact that smokeless loads can be built that are safer than BP!!! That means lower pressures than BP, but still doesn't guarantee the gun you are using cannot break!!
Research
There are no modern cartridge companies that will guarantee their ammunition is safe to be discharged in antique firearms. That is a clear invitation to liability.
My first book clearly defines the black powder era as a NON STANDARDIZED ERA. Lots of research backs that up.
The United States Government also clearly defines antiques as non firearms because they are from that non standardized era and can not be adapted to "safe" smokeless use in general. You have to include all antiques not a select few!
So By that I specifically mean "ALL" antiques. Not Smith & Wesson firearms only.
There are no smokeless pressure curves or smokeless Time/Pressure curves that exist that I am aware of that are specifically designed or tested for use in antique firearms. You are plugging modern smokeless curves into antique use which is not responsible. It's also not applicable unless that specific time/ pressure curve was in fact tested using an antique firearm. Which it was not.
No cartridge company in their right mind would guarantee the use of their modern smokeless ammunition in antique firearms. In fact disclaimers state very clearly (example) this ammunition is designed for use in MODERN FIREARMS in good condition and in good working order. Never any mention of antique firearms use. I have never seen or documented any smokeless ammunition with anything in writing that claims it's ok to use this ammo in an antique firearm. In fact the opposite is true. There is no liability if you follow the Government definition of "Non-Firearm". Clear and simple? Don't use this in an antique! No brainer.
Present one singular official statement from any modern cartridge manufacturer that clearly defines smokeless powder use in antique firearms. It doesn't exist. Only folks who support smokeless use fabricate such beliefs by irresponsibly plugging smokeless curves into antique use.
Murph
There are no modern cartridge companies that will guarantee their ammunition is safe to be discharged in antique firearms. That is a clear invitation to liability.
My first book clearly defines the black powder era as a NON STANDARDIZED ERA. Lots of research backs that up.
The United States Government also clearly defines antiques as non firearms because they are from that non standardized era and can not be adapted to "safe" smokeless use in general. You have to include all antiques not a select few!
So By that I specifically mean "ALL" antiques. Not Smith & Wesson firearms only.
There are no smokeless pressure curves or smokeless Time/Pressure curves that exist that I am aware of that are specifically designed or tested for use in antique firearms. You are plugging modern smokeless curves into antique use which is not responsible. It's also not applicable unless that specific time/ pressure curve was in fact tested using an antique firearm. Which it was not.
No cartridge company in their right mind would guarantee the use of their modern smokeless ammunition in antique firearms. In fact disclaimers state very clearly (example) this ammunition is designed for use in MODERN FIREARMS in good condition and in good working order. Never any mention of antique firearms use. I have never seen or documented any smokeless ammunition with anything in writing that claims it's ok to use this ammo in an antique firearm. In fact the opposite is true. There is no liability if you follow the Government definition of "Non-Firearm". Clear and simple? Don't use this in an antique! No brainer.
Present one singular official statement from any modern cartridge manufacturer that clearly defines smokeless powder use in antique firearms. It doesn't exist. Only folks who support smokeless use fabricate such beliefs by irresponsibly plugging smokeless curves into antique use.
Murph
Last edited:
I said nothing about what is printed on the box, of course they are going to print every type of disclaimer they can get away with. What I said they would not load old top-break calibers higher than BP pressures and almost certainly below that point. These companies are not dumb and know full well that antique revolvers will be shot with their ammunition. Look at what is made today, 32 S&W, 38 S&W, 44 Russian, 44 Winchester, 45 Colt, even 45 Schofield ammunition can be found. I will not hesitate to stand by my opinion that they are all loaded with vintage revolvers in the minds of the ammo makers. The old statement that printed warnings are not worth the paper they are printed on.
How many research articles and studies do you want to see as I have many, but I believe if I posted yet another set of data it would be of little interest to someone who has a closed mind.
Oh and sorry I missed your book on the "non-standardized era"??????????
How many research articles and studies do you want to see as I have many, but I believe if I posted yet another set of data it would be of little interest to someone who has a closed mind.
Oh and sorry I missed your book on the "non-standardized era"??????????
gwpercle
Member
I'm going to pass on what my Mom would have told me ...
..." Better Safe Than Sorry " ...
This is what my Dad would have said ...
... " Boy , Don't be acting the Fool ...Listen to your Momma ! " ...
I can also tell you I would want to shoot it also , guns you can't shoot are no fun ... I reload so I would maybe check out black powder substitutes for cartridge loading ... and low pressure loadings .
Gary
..." Better Safe Than Sorry " ...
This is what my Dad would have said ...
... " Boy , Don't be acting the Fool ...Listen to your Momma ! " ...
I can also tell you I would want to shoot it also , guns you can't shoot are no fun ... I reload so I would maybe check out black powder substitutes for cartridge loading ... and low pressure loadings .
Gary
Make sure you send us a range report! By the way, I have 14 blown up Smith & Wessons. I don't have a New Model Number 3 yet. Fingers crossed. Stay safe!
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2006
- Messages
- 7,781
- Reaction score
- 7,197
While antiques aren't my area of expertise, I'll answer the question posed by the quote above.
1. The powders available back in 1927 aren't available today.
2. Load data "assumed" to be safe in 1927 is very suspect.
3. Back in them thar days, firearm failure wasn't an uncommon experience. Firearms do, even today, wear out. It happened faster back then. No one was suing gun & ammo companies back then.
4. I've no clue when the Japanese bought S&Ws, but the production run (per Wiki) ran 1870-1915. There were design improvements and steel quality improved significantly over that time. SAAMI was formed in 1926. Who knows what the safety standards were back then or what firearms they used for testing.
OP, get some loading dies and a can of Pyrodex pistol if you want to shoot your oldie but goodie.
Model19man
Member
I guess you do not know what you are talking about. Many gunpowders including Bullseye and Unique for example were being made then and continue to be made now and the loadings have not changed.
Similar threads
