You are confusing the heck out of me, and I'm not even the guy who asked the question.
"Kaido Ojaama makes a nice 220 gr mold for those late model Piettas ..." Why is this mold specific to the late model Piettas? Is a .44 caliber ball for a Pietta Remington replica any different than a .44 caliber ball for a Colt Army replica?
Is your 1851 Navy a .36 caliber, or one of the .44 caliber "clones"? If it's in .36 and that's what the 140-grain mold refers to -- why even mention it when the question is about an 1858 Remington, which is a .44?
I'm sure you mean to be helpful, but sometimes too much unrelated information is counter-productive.
"Kaido Ojaama makes a nice 220 gr mold for those late model Piettas ..." Why is this mold specific to the late model Piettas? Is a .44 caliber ball for a Pietta Remington replica any different than a .44 caliber ball for a Colt Army replica?
This mold is specific to the late model Piettas as the 220 grain VKV , a modified Keith style Slug, fits in the loading lever cut out without modificaiton so you don't have to load on flat surface with a hammer?
The 240 grain mold ( preferred by most hog hunters ) makes a slug too big for the standard cut out on most newer belt pistol replicas. The 220 is easier use without modifying the weapon?
The point of that dissertation is that by saving up, AS I HAD TO DO ALSO BEING A DIASABLED VET ON A FIXED INCOME, was that the steel frame is much more versatile? If you are going to get a round ball mold and a 12 ich barrel we might be interested in ballistics? If we are saving up it sounds like a the OP is looking at a steel frame?
Also I said Piettas, not Remington Piettas. Works on my 1860 Pietta replica as well. So that sounds like you're just being obtuse trying to nit pick, which is fine. Arms are nit picky subjects.
I"m not confused by a statement like that but I've read at a graduate level since age 13.
Since other folks mentioned the brass frames I piled on. Sorry.
Is your 1851 Navy a .36 caliber, or one of the .44 caliber "clones"? If it's in .36 and that's what the 140-grain mold refers to -- why even mention it when the question is about an 1858 Remington, which is a .44?
No, there is no 140 grain VKV/Keith style mold that I own in .44 caliber. As mentioned I do have the .36. Again, talking about MONEY AND FIXED INCOME.
The .36 steel frame with ball and conicals arguably handles more 'chores' than the Brass Buffallo 1858 and costs less initially? ALso it may prove more versatile than a steel buffalo with round ball only?
The point is that a steel frame in either .36 or .44 gives more options and on a fixed income for some of us it is worth the stretch to save up?
Didn't mean to confuse any experts. I'm fairly new to BP compared to shooting in general. Perhaps my buying motives are different than some others?
If we are saving up for a round ball mold maybe make a nice conical/keith style mold a goal too?
The O.P. and I both apparently are not persons of means.
I'm also trying to point out that there is nothing wrong with a brass frame if that's what a person favors, understanding the limitations.
I could totally see a round ball mold and a brass framed 12" bbl 1858 for paper punching and bunny busting. Nothing wrong with that life is there?
There is nothing wrong with shooting light loads. Some people hit more stuff like that?
I'm not an NRA instructor but rarely handed a g/f my model 29 stuffed with 240 grain Normas saying "Let her rip darling!" unless it was a lady who was into that kind of thing
Sorry if my verbose style is offputting. Used to be Aaron Zelman's webmaster at JPFO. Had to read lots of verbose stuff in that job.