Remington 1858 New Army Muzzle Energy

H

huey1945

Inactive
Hi Guys
Im new to this forum, i live in Northeast England
and want to get back into fullbore blackpowder pistol

Could anybody explain what kind of muzzle energy
i could expect from given powder charge using a
.454" round ball, my friend seems to think these
pistols are lame compared to likes of a Colt .45ACP

I used to shoot in my younger years a Navy Arms
Colt 1860 Army, and seem to remember it had decent
kick/recoil to it and was not bad on accuracy..


Thanks in advance
huey1945
 
Not too good a comparison really.

The 45 acp throws a much heavier bullet of modern design at comparable velocities.

The 44 cal black powder 1858 and 1860 style revolvers are probably more equitably compared to a modern 38 Special?
 
Hawg Haggen said:
Around 900 fps with a 30 grain charge.
__________________
Click to expand...

Since a .454 RB weighs 140 grains, that works out to 253 ft-lb of kinetic energy.

A Ruger Old Army will shoot a .457 RB about 1036 fps with a 41 grain load of Goex FFFFg according to Lyman's Black Powder Handbook. That's about 340 ft-lb of kinetic energy.

.44 cap and ball revolver pretty much equals a .38 special.
 
Hi Guys

Thanks for all your feedback, looks like
my friend was right on relative powers
of old and new pistols

Regards huey45
 
Hawg, That was a great link. Maybe I will just fill up the chambers with Pyro-P and ram the ball home. I never realized you could get 40-45grs by volume into a Remington. I'm gonna have to try it. Thanks for the idea. My only reservation to using Pyro is it is a bit harder to light off but it helps to pack it snugly. 45grs in a Remington is SNUG!!
 
I don't have a problem setting off Pyro with standard caps. I've used 40 grains before and it do kick a mite. With Pyro you can fill the chamber full then compress it and load the ball.
 
Kenetic energy is, IMO, a virtually useless number when it comes to effectiveness. The soft lead .44 (really .45) caliber ball at 900 fps does quite a bit of damage and I would consider it more effective by and large than a typical .38 special. JMHO.

mike
 
You must understand that in comparing the Remington .44 and the .38 Special , these are "paper" comparisons and not Real-World comparisons. The round ball preforms muchdifferent on fleah than the round nosed .38 bullet will. I have read atatements that say the round ball penetrates much farther and is more destructive than round nosed bullets. Tests preformed on Pig Carcases. The ball outpenetrated the conical bullet.
A high velocity .44 ball could and likely would penetrate deeper causing more tissue disruption than the conical load even though the conical is heavier.
Let us hope that we need never be placed in a situation where we needed to demonstrate the actual wound preformance of either!
Back in the Civil War days the .36 was a known mankiller.
The US military opted for the larger .44 caliber ball load for the Army's use and the Navy chose the high velocity .36.
ZVP
 
ZVP,
I agree that the 44 ball would be a better "stopper" than the 38SPL due to the larger frontal diameter delivering more tissue destruction but I really can't see it (the 44 ball) being a better penetrator. I'd expect it to upset more readily and be even a flatter, bigger diameter which would tear things up more and thus not go as deep as the more pointed and elongated 38SPL round nose bullet which to me would be more like an arrow poking a long, deeper hole but not disrupting tissue like the soft, fatter ball. Somewhere there is a link to photos of various projectiles going through ballistic gelatin and I think one was a .44 ball but I can't remember if there was a dramatic difference.
 
In discussions of the power of a round ball, people shy away from asking or saying the "real" objective of the question, that being the preformance on a Man? When they talk Hunting, they say animal, but they won't say on a man.
I shoot round balls and have always gotten respectable accuracy with them and if the tales I have herd and the stories from the Civil War are true, they make a pretty effective manstopper! I would hope a well placed round ball would preform if need be.
What I have trouble with is the accounts from the Civil War of one shot .36 caliber stops. I would hate to be shot with a .36 ball!
Maybe the deep penetration (or thru shot) of the high velocity .36 hit vitals and killed instantlly (re: Hickockvs Tutt).
So the question of a ball working on a person, I would say yes, they probablly work very well and the bigger, the better for a one shot stop!
A heavy 200gr Conical .44 might act just like a smokless cartrige. I know that they really Kick a lot more than a standard Ball! That translates to more ft/lbs of energy.
The oldtimers seemed to know what worked and it's odd but by sales figures they chose the .36 caliber for self defense! Maybe the .36 was the best to use against Human advesarys? No question that the .44 makes more ft/lbs of power but maybe the high velocity penetration of the .36 beat the raw power of the .44?
All we have is stories from the War and the Old West and some attempts to evaluate the balls in Gelaton. I guess the "real truth" is lost in history since noone involved in todays shoot-outs chooses to use a Cap and Ball revolver.
Maybe some Hunters who shoot Blackpowder could chime in with some current facts? Finish-off shots with a revolver would tell a lot!
ZVP
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top