45lc OAL for R&D or Howell Pietta conversion

[Dakota Widowmaker]

What is the OAL for the Pietta conversion kits from R&D/Howell that fit the 1860s?

I thought it was 1.55" or 1.56" ... or is it shorter than that?

What bullet mold do folks usually use for getting rounds that fit? (and still crimp on the grove)

I thought the Lee 255gr (452-255-RF) had a short enough nose to work.

I am going to be loading these over the min charge of trailboss with either winchester or wolf primers.

[WaddWatsonEllis]

Dakotah,

I think this might start your search ...

Check the left hand of this page ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.45_Colt

TTFN


 

[Dakota Widowmaker]

I appreciate the link, but, that really doesn't tell me what the suitable OAL is for the Pietta frame conversions.

I guess I will go ask Howell and hope he responds.

[Advertising]

[Steel Horse Bailey]

11 Dec.'11 - Dakota, I'm NOT trying to start a pi..ing contest - Question:  If the SAAMI  45 Colt OAL listed in Wiki and every OTHER loading manual I've ever seen is 1.600" why do you think that R&D decided to create their own new OAL for that conversion?  I went on several sites that sell these.  Only the Brownells site gives a length figure for the cylinder, and it is for the Ruger Old Army @ 1.625".  However, ALL specify that the conversions are suited for all modern Cowboy ammo in both 45 Volt & 45 S&W Schofield. They undoubtedly go by the same 1.600" specification that the ammo-makers use.  This post has been modified on Dec.17th to reflect new information I didn't have when I wrote this originally.  It seems that R&D DOES specify - tho not AT ALL in their advertising & website - a "custom" OAL that is NOT standard to the SAAMI specs.  http://www.howelloldwestconversions.com/

I take it that you have tried rounds and measured them and the 1.6" is off.  You might consider checking the accuracy of your measuring tool.  Also, have you tried a factory round in your chambers?  It might help.  Equipment CAN get out-of-specs (and does).  Wilson makes a max length cartridge gage;  Midway sells them as well as their own proprietary set of gages.  Dillon sells stainless steel versions.  I'd HIGHLY advise you to purchase ones for the calibers you load.  I have both of the Midway sets - Revolver and Semi-auto.  Just drop one of your loaded rounds into the hole of the gage and you'll instantly know if your ammo is to specs.  I realize this is all useless information if the cylinder has been cut too short.  I believe the rim thickness on a 45 Colt case is .055"-.060."  That would mean that the cylinder itself SHOULD be at least 1.555"-1.560" long to chamber a max OAL with a touch extra to allow for bullet seating variation.

(Rifle gages work a little differently 'tho similarly, but they're handy, too.)

Hope something helps.

I had a similar experience when I first started loading for my 1875 Remington in 45 Colt.  The Remington revolvers have a very shot cylinder that is only a small amount over the 1.600" OAL for 45 Colt.  I forget the actual figure, but it is in the neighborhood of only ten to fifteen thousandths of an inch past the end of the loaded round.  (1.610" or thereabouts)  If I'm not careful when seating my BigLube (tm) boolits, they can rub the end of the barrel when the cylinder is rotated!

[Junkman]

I have the same condition with my Howell conversion cylinder in my Pietta 1860 Army. The longest OAL I can load them to and have them not protrude from the front of the cylinder is 1.550". I think 1860 Colt Cylinders are really too short for .45 Colt and better suited to .45 Schofield or the new Cowboy .45 Special.

[Steel Horse Bailey]

It sure sounds like Howell should specify that their cylinders are shorter than specs and/or since the cylinder will handle the larger rims, they could say it's chambered for 45 S&W Schofield ONLY - or plainly state that 45 Colt CAN be used with a shorter-than-standard O.A.L.  Of course, AdJack's Cowboy 45 Special would be an excellent, if not authentic cartridge "of the era" for use in their cylinders.  Of course, handloaders can seat the 250 pill lower or simply pick a "shorter" bullet, but this SHOULD be made plain from the git-go.

Junkman, the short cylinder may be the key.

Dakota, seriously - I did NOT mean to question you and I apologize if I came off too strong with my answer.  I simply couldn't imagine that a major manufacturer, VERY experienced in the CAS gun scene, would make their cylinders too short or at least not TELL prospective buyers of the short cylinder.  Hell, when S&W re-introduced their Model 3s  about 10-12 years ago, they elected to not stretch the frame enough to use 45 Colt ammo, and kept it as the original.  Except for the firing pin and other details.  And not being able to use the MUCH more common ammo is why the gun wasn't very well received, IMHO.  (Yes, I know - compared to 38 Spl. or 45 ACP, 45 Colt ISN'T overly popular, but in CAS use, the 45 Colt is MUCH more popular than 45 S&W.  The 45 Cowboy Spl. may be nearly as popular as the 45 S&W, but I don't have production and use figures so that is simply my opinion.)

But that's a topic for ANOTHER post, not this one.

[Mad_Dog]

It sure sounds like Pietta should specify that their cylinders are shorter than specs and/or IF the cylinder will handle the larger rims, they could say it's chambered for 45 S&W Schofield.

If I'm not mistaken, the cylinders in a Pietta 1860 are spec'd for 15 grains of FFF black powder and a .454 round ball.  (which surprises me, since I'm pretty sure the friend who let me shoot his Colt Army was loading 20grains of FFF).

Sounds like the R&D/Howell cartridge converter ought to come with a warning about OAL though!

-Mad Dog

[Junkman]

Mad Dog,

You MUST be mistaken. My Pietta 1860's easily hold 25 grains of powder, a 1/8th inch greased felt wad and a .451 RB with no trouble!

[Mad_Dog]

Mad Dog,

You MUST be mistaken. My Pietta 1860's easily hold 25 grains of powder, a 1/8th inch greased felt wad and a .451 RB with no trouble!

Thanks, junkman.  That jives better with what I've seen/heard.  I was just reading out of their manual though, which is probably on the exceedingly conservative side.  I was a bit worried, in fact, since a Pietta "1858" New Model Army is at the top of my "want" list, and 12-15 grains sounded a bit anemic.

-Mad Dog

[Steel Horse Bailey]

If I'm not mistaken, the cylinders in a Pietta 1860 are spec'd for 15 grains of FFF black powder and a .454 round ball.  (which surprises me, since I'm pretty sure the friend who let me shoot his Colt Army was loading 20grains of FFF).

Sounds like the R&D/Howell cartridge converter ought to come with a warning about OAL though!

-Mad Dog

My Uberti 1860 will hold around 30-32 grs. of 3F and a .125" wad under the ball, and I use .454."  (Depending on make and lot of powder, naturally.)  I believe 30 grs. was the target weight as asked for by the Army under a round ball and 25-27 grs. under a conical.  Many 1860 cylinders won't properly seat the ball and correctly compress the powder is only 15 grs.!  Now remember, back "then" they mostly used what we would call 2F powder, but their powder was also more "energetic."  Swiss Powder may be the closest to the older powders or even Triple 7 (777) powder.  I believe Trip 7 is about 10% more powerful than Goex, but don't quote my number - I don't remember the exact figure.  I just mentioned it "for example."

Also, remember this: all weights are subject to the "by volume" specification.  Pyrodex has more power by weight than BP, but it is fluffier (a scientific term meaning less dense  ) and so, by VOLUME Pyro performs about the same as BP by Goex and the others.

Designated weight of powder by some of the Colt revolvers:
Walker = 60 grs.
Dragoon = 50 grs.
1851 = I think 25-30 grs.
1860 Army = 30 grs.
1861 Navy = Again, I think the same 25-30 as the 1851

(I don't own any 36 cal. Colt-type revolvers, so I'm not near as familiar with their specs, only the design.)
 

[Dakota Widowmaker]

Dakota, I'm NOT trying to start a pi..ing contest -

You and others provided a response to a question I didn't ask. I know what the SAAMI specs are, but, that answers a question I didn't ask.

Since I am dealing with a cylinder conversion, "all bets are off" and SAAMI specs do not directly apply (in terms of OAL).

The frame is a black powder 1860 Army from Pietta.
The cylinder is chambered for 45LC/45schofield from R&D/Howell.

I did find out the answer after emailing Howell and here is what he responded with:

The OAL for the .45 LC cartridge and still seats the bullet below the cylinder throat is 1.545". Any of the 230 gr ACP molds work well sized to .452".

I got my cylinder conversion from MidwayUSA last week and using both a dial caliper as well as micrometer, I can fit up to 1.570" and still turn the cylinder w/o shaving lead. That means I need a round that seats the bullet nose deeper than the MAX OAL for SAAMI spec.

The reason I asked about the Pietta frame in my question is that there is a difference between Pietta and Uberti when it comes to the chamber length that Howell and Kirst must machine them for. Pietta are actually a bit longer than Uberti, is what I have found out through research.

I consider the matter settled.

[Dakota Widowmaker]

I have the same condition with my Howell conversion cylinder in my Pietta 1860 Army. The longest OAL I can load them to and have them not protrude from the front of the cylinder is 1.550". I think 1860 Colt Cylinders are really too short for .45 Colt and better suited to .45 Schofield or the new Cowboy .45 Special.

This is very similar to my findings.

With a case length of 1.285" (the trim-to-length for the 45LC) and a max length of 1.570" (or 1.565" just to be safe), I need to find a suitable bullet mold that has a nose length of .280" and weighs between 230-255gr.

Per Kenny Howell, I will test out some 230gr LRN 45acp bullets and see how they fit. I think they run a little bit longer than that... I last measured some Lee dumble lubed bullets at 0.310", but, I might try the truncated cone and see if those are possible.

TC bullets don't have a shoulder, but, they do have a generous lube grove.

[Pettifogger]

It sure sounds like Pietta should specify that their cylinders are shorter than specs and/or IF the cylinder will handle the larger rims, they could say it's chambered for 45 S&W Schofield.  Of course, AdJack's Cowboy 45 Special would be an excellent, if not authentic cartridge "of the era" for use in their cylinders.  Of course, handloaders can seat the 250 pill lower or simply pick a "shorter" bullet, but this SHOULD be made plain from the git-go.

Junkman, the short cylinder may be the key.

Dakota, seriously - I did NOT mean to question you and I apologize if I came off too strong with my answer.  I simply couldn't imagine that a major manufacturer, VERY experienced in the CAS gun scene, would make their cylinders too short or at least not TELL prospective buyers of the short cylinder.  Hell, when S&W re-introduced their Model 3s  about 10-12 years ago, they elected to not stretch the frame enough to use 45 Colt ammo, and kept it as the original.  Except for the firing pin and other details.  And not being able to use the MUCH more common ammo is why the gun wasn't very well received, IMHO.  (Yes, I know - compared to 38 Spl. or 45 ACP, 45 Colt ISN'T overly popular, but in CAS use, the 45 Colt is MUCH more popular than 45 S&W.  The 45 Cowboy Spl. may be nearly as popular as the 45 S&W, but I don't have production figure so that is simply my opinion.)

But that's a topic for ANOTHER post, not this one.

As far as I know, Pietta does not make conversion revolvers so I'm not sure what you are talking about.

[Steel Horse Bailey]

As far as I know, Pietta does not make conversion revolvers so I'm not sure what you are talking about.

I mis-typed.  I meant the Howell cylinder (and have corrected my post to so read.)



Dakota, my bringing up the SAAMI specs - which, as you stated you did NOT mention - is because of this.  Let's pretend I put out a product and advertise it as being chambered for 45 S&W Schofield AND 45 Colt (or 45 Long Colt.)  To MY logic, the chamber should be cut to the 1.6" specifications.  If, as seems to be the case, it can't chamber the factory-length rounds, I'd make darn sure that little bit of info about the recommended custom O.A.L. is very well explained in ALL the ads.  By re-printing the e-mail you received from that VERY fine establishment, and which DOES specify a "custom" non-standard length is what I'm talking about.  That's all - and I certainly respect your wish to "close the matter."  

Merry Christmas to you and have tons of fun with your new cylinder conversion ... I have been seriously considering one myself and my Uberti 1860 Army!  I like the fact that we are having this discussion so that ALL the pertinent information needed is out for anyone to read.

[WaddWatsonEllis]

Pietta Loads ..

I think that the lawyers at Pietta got their hands on the brochure ... I used to have their brocure on my desk ... it might still be there but I can't find it ...

I remember what I thought was rather puny was their maximum dosage for .36 and .44 calibers ... if I remember right, it was in the line of 15 grains ...

The only thing I could think was that they were cutting the margins ... 'cause if one shot a normal load of powder, one was legally exceeding the acceptable limits for the weapon ... case closed ...

[Steel Horse Bailey]

Agreed, Wadd-y!  Lawyer crap.

VERY underpowered.  Now, it may be fine for SASS targets at 15 feet, and any more could be considered a waste, but the guns were designed for and WILL safely shoot a full load.

Heck, a BP weapon of MOST types wastes powder.  A lot of it flies out the barrel still burning and NOT contributing to the shot.  An old test to see how much powder was wasted in ANY load was to shoot over snow.  (Uh, I guess they had to test during winter, but a white sheet of cloth works, too.)  All those black specks on the snow are either unburned powder, and the tiny holes will be powder that ignited, but not IN the barrel.  It can be an eye-opener!


And the fool lawyers who propagate these powder safe load myths aren't considering that even the cheapest Italian or Spanish steel (or Brazilian, or ... ) is undoubtedly better than the IRON that was used in many of the original guns.

[Beauregard Hooligan]

I have 5 1/2" barreled '58 Remingtons with Taylor's/R&D conversion cylinders and load .45 Colt to 1.580 with a 225 gn Bear Creek moly coated bullet over 5.8 gns of 700-X, the starting load for that powder and a 230 gn flat point bullet in the #49 Lyman manual, and they work very well for length and accuracy. I am considering going to a powder that has more bulk, but do not know much about the powders that have been developed in the last few years, as I was too crippled up to shoot CAS for a while. If the good Lord's willing and the creek dont rise, I'll shoot next saturday with The Outlaws at the Sac Valley Shooting Center; a club I have never had the pleasure of shooting with, and will be shooting gunfighter with my '58 conversions. If any of yu have a chance to come to that shoot, look me up and say Howdy! ;')

[Steel Horse Bailey]

I can't attend your shoot, but here's a friendly "Howdy" to ya, any-hoo!  Glad to have you back shooting!  More fun.

Nowww, all ya gotta do is switch to the One True Powder, Black Powder!   You won't have to worry about small charges filling large cases!   Just fill the case up to near the top so when you seat the bullet it'll compress that 3f BP around 1/8" to 3/16"!

(Remember to use a bullet that hauls a bunch of lube or load using a lube cookie!  Not to mention the lesser felt recoil from the Gunpowder vs. the heathen smokeyless powders that probably are only a passing fad ...)