Old bullets
- Thread starter Amartin1955
- Start date
ligonierbill
New member
Without further information, it looks like a 56-56 Spencer.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
Those are cartridges, not "bullets." The bullet is the lead projectile at the end.
I did a bit of playing in Windows Paint, copying the ruler, rotating it 90 degrees, and overlaying it on the cartridge. The diameter is nowhere near .56 caliber -- it's just a shade over 3/8 of an inch, and pretty close to 10mm. So it's a rimfire cartridge with a caliber somewhere around .38" or 10mm (.39").
Possibly .41 Short Rimfire: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.41_Short
I did a bit of playing in Windows Paint, copying the ruler, rotating it 90 degrees, and overlaying it on the cartridge. The diameter is nowhere near .56 caliber -- it's just a shade over 3/8 of an inch, and pretty close to 10mm. So it's a rimfire cartridge with a caliber somewhere around .38" or 10mm (.39").
Possibly .41 Short Rimfire: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.41_Short
Amartin1955
New member
Thanks everyone
Its outside my experience but as I recall, that may have been the chambering for the Remington Over/Under Derringer. The kind Gamblers might pull in a TV Western.
JohnKSa Is probably right about collector value.
If they are still in business The Olde Western Scrounger may be able to help you.
Buffalo Arms is another possibility for an idea of value.
JohnKSa Is probably right about collector value.
If they are still in business The Olde Western Scrounger may be able to help you.
Buffalo Arms is another possibility for an idea of value.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
What my eyes tell me.
It looks like its a heeled bullet. 22's are like that, The OD of the cartridge case is nominally the same size as the OD of the bullet.
Its a metric/inch scale
Both bullet and cartridge case are slightly larger than 3/8 inch and slightly larger than 1 cm or 10mm (.3937 in)
The cartridge/scale are not exactly on the same plane . Tough to assume precision.
I would not argue against it being a .41 . Remember cartridge naming conventions vary sometimes from bore/ bullet dia. Like 38 Spl
It looks like its a heeled bullet. 22's are like that, The OD of the cartridge case is nominally the same size as the OD of the bullet.
Its a metric/inch scale
Both bullet and cartridge case are slightly larger than 3/8 inch and slightly larger than 1 cm or 10mm (.3937 in)
The cartridge/scale are not exactly on the same plane . Tough to assume precision.
I would not argue against it being a .41 . Remember cartridge naming conventions vary sometimes from bore/ bullet dia. Like 38 Spl
Last edited:
Aguila Blanca
Staff
I initially thought it was slightly more than 10mm at first glance, but notice that the cartridge isn't oriented exactly vertical. The lower side of the scale is the metric side, and I aligned the zero end of the inch scale with the case. The zero end of the metric scale is slightly to the left of the case. If we subtract a matching amount from the reading at the right side of the case, it's actually slightly less than 10mm -- maybe 9.8? That equates to .386 inches -- which is what led me to suggest possibly .38 Rimfire Short.NiBC said:
The only good way to get good measurements of the case and bullet is to actually measure them. By that I mean Amartin1955 needs to measure them with a micrometer.
Last night I was trying to reconcile the case and bullet by using the visible tape measure in the image, and it is an exercise in futility. I feel the perspective of the rule and the bullet make it difficult to get a good measurement.
I'm fairly certain it isn't a .38 Short. There is a picture of that round in CotW - the case is roughly twice as long as the visible portion of the bullet. Whereas the case of the 41 Short is roughly the same length as the visible portion of the bullet. The image in the book looks almost identical to the image in the post here.
Last night I was trying to reconcile the case and bullet by using the visible tape measure in the image, and it is an exercise in futility. I feel the perspective of the rule and the bullet make it difficult to get a good measurement.
I'm fairly certain it isn't a .38 Short. There is a picture of that round in CotW - the case is roughly twice as long as the visible portion of the bullet. Whereas the case of the 41 Short is roughly the same length as the visible portion of the bullet. The image in the book looks almost identical to the image in the post here.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
I haven't seen a photo of a .38 Rimfire Short, but I do agree that the .41 Rimfire Short appears identical in shape and proportion, which was what initially led me to suggest that as the identity of the mystery ammunition.
While a micrometer is the most precise, even a cheap plastic caliper measuring the round will give information accurate enough for a reasonably good identification. The OP need to get one (or borrow one) and take photos of it measuring the width and length of the round.
ALL the old rimfire rounds used heeled bullets. So did some centerfires, in the early days. Only the .22 rimfires are still using heeled bullets these days (other than reproductions of the old rimfire round if any are being produced.)
The round pictured is probably a .41 rimfire, could possibly be a .38 rimfire, there's not a lot of dimensional difference between the two and a tape measure isn't quite good enough to tell which it is.
ALL the old rimfire rounds used heeled bullets. So did some centerfires, in the early days. Only the .22 rimfires are still using heeled bullets these days (other than reproductions of the old rimfire round if any are being produced.)
The round pictured is probably a .41 rimfire, could possibly be a .38 rimfire, there's not a lot of dimensional difference between the two and a tape measure isn't quite good enough to tell which it is.
Mike Irwin
Staff
Not .41 Short. The case length is way too long.
.41 Short case was just under a half inch long.
That case appears to be over 1 inch long.
EDIT IN:
Oh hell, ignore that, I was looking at the CM scale... just saw the inch scale.
OK, that said, the bullet profile is more indicative of the .41 Short Rimfire than any of the other rimfire cartridges.
The .41 traditionally had a much sharper ogive than any of the other rimfire pistol cartridges that were in production at that time.
It seems to have been almost a trademark for the cartridge, in much the same way that the flat point was almost a trademark for the .44 Henry cartridge.
Finally, and I'm away from my reference books at the time, but I believe that the .38 Short Rimfire cartridge case was slightly longer than the .41 Short's case.
.41 Short case was just under a half inch long.
That case appears to be over 1 inch long.
EDIT IN:
Oh hell, ignore that, I was looking at the CM scale... just saw the inch scale.
OK, that said, the bullet profile is more indicative of the .41 Short Rimfire than any of the other rimfire cartridges.
The .41 traditionally had a much sharper ogive than any of the other rimfire pistol cartridges that were in production at that time.
It seems to have been almost a trademark for the cartridge, in much the same way that the flat point was almost a trademark for the .44 Henry cartridge.
Finally, and I'm away from my reference books at the time, but I believe that the .38 Short Rimfire cartridge case was slightly longer than the .41 Short's case.