.451 or .454 pistol balls???

P

Patrice

Moderator
Hello, I received a Pietta replica 1858 Remington New Army for a birthday present. [<Sigh>That's what I get for eye-balling them in the Cabela's Display Case.] Beautiful gun, but cap & ball revolvers are totally foreign to me, at this point. Can you gentlemen tell me what is the appropriate-size pistol ball to use. I believe I saw reference to .451 & .454 size .44 caliber balls in the information that came with the gun. Looking at the product reviews doesn't help that much; I see some guys saying that they use the .454 size, & others saying they use the .451. Help me out here, guys?--Patrice:confused:
 
Gotta go with the Hawg. I was just shooting .451s in a Cabela's M-58 and got very little "halo" while loading. Also, the Pietta manual (downloadable .pdf) recommends .454 balls for their .44 cal revolvers.
 
Last edited:
I also use .454's in my '58. It gives a decent little shaved ring when pressing the ball into the chamber. I've heard people sometimes use .457's, which will give even more shaved lead for a bigger surface for the rifling to grip. But it also seems that those could be enough harder to load that it won't matter. Just go with. 454's and you'll be fine.
 
Without knowing the actual chamber diameters of YOUR gun, it's just a guess. It is more LIKELY that .454 is the better choice, but some guns can use .451's. The only advantage, however, is a bit more velocity and they're a bit easier to load. Just a little bit, often not enough to notice.

If you have access to a vernier caliper, measure the chambers and you'll know for sure. Otherwise, the .454 is not a bad answer.
 
Shaving a lot of lead or a little lead is a totally subjective thing. As long as you are shaving SOME off with each seating, it means that (using a dead soft ball, of course) the ball is slightly over bore diameter--which is a good thing.

Of course, if you want to really go to the races, contact Buffalo Arms Company, and order a mold, made in the exact diameter you want for the bullet you want.
 
I guess that the Pietta .44 Remington pattern guns differ from their .44 Colt 1860 pattern, because my M1860 uses .457" commercial RB's (Speer), just shaving off a hair ring of lead during seating - exactly the same as my Ruger Old Army.

.
 
I shoot .457 in my Ruger Old Army, too. As suggested by mykeal, I put the calipers to the holes, and the Pietta dials in at .443 to .444 and the Ruger's more uniform at about .4505.
 
About 12 years ago I first entered the internet, and began discovering gun and reloading message boards.
Shortly after, I began posting replies suggesting that cap and ball sixguns be fed balls slightly larger than what was currently suggested.
I've been shooting cap and ball sixguns since about 1970. Through the years I've learned to use .454 or .457 balls in the .44s (the Ruger requires .457 balls, by the way) and .380 inch balls in the .36.
The larger balls tend to be more accurate, and they certainly hold in place better in the cylinder. In my Colt 2nd generation 1851 Navy, the chambers are so large that I've sometimes pulled the bull back out with the rammer after seating it. In fairness, Colt suggests a ball of .378 in the manual that came with it.
Try finding a .378 inch ball ...
But I found a .380 double cavity bullet mould years ago and started using that.
The difference in seating was obvious, and it appeared on the target as well.
This led me to postulate that the larger ball, when rammed into the chamber, naturally created a wider bearing band for the rifling to grip. So, I reasoned, accuracy was enhanced by the wider bearing band.
I believe I was the first to notice this. Prior to about 2000, I've never seen anyone suggesting that the larger ball not only sealed better, but gave a wider area for the rifling to grip.
My first cap and ball was a cheap .44 on the 1851 Navy platform. I started with .451 balls, then started purchasing .454 balls that were locally cast. Later, Hornady and Speer introduced .454 balls.
I've written Hornady and Speer, suggesting that they offer .380 balls, but never got a response.
 
What fascinates me about black powder shooting is that IMHO so much technology was lost with the development of modern smokeless powder cartridges. I suspect, Gatofeo, that you were very observant and have re-discovered what was common knowledge to shooting enthusiasts a century and a half ago. Thanks for sharing and please, keep on exploring and sharing. I think there are many more things that our forefathers knew about BP and lead that we still haven't figured out.
 
Me and the blokes in our BP club over here in Norway use nothing but .457 balls. Some use .462 aswell. Makes a larger area for the grooves to grip the ball.
 
With a new C&B revolver I measure the rifling groove diameter and the chamber dia. Ideally, they should be about the same. If that is the case the ball ought to be ca. .003 bigger than the measurements, i. e. if the dias are .451 I select a .454 dia ball.
If the chamber dia is much bigger than the rifling groove dia I return the gun because to correct that will be expensive. If the chambers are smaller, however, I will have that altered to rifling groove dia by a knowledgable gunsmith.
Just my 2 €-cent.
Bootsie
 
I have also used both but now use 454 almost exclusively. I found that even if the 451 shave some lead, there was a good chance that they would actually move under recoil a bit. This was especially the case when the gun was getting very hot. Measure both, the cylinder and the barrel. Then try it out.
 
The guy who sold me my Pietta 1858 through in almost 500 451 balls with the deal, so I will shoot them all, but I'm going to go with 454 after that. I should go ahead and order some 454 because they don't shave any lead going into my 1851.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top