Author Topic: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle  (Read 8371 times)

Offline Black River Smith

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 1054
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
« Reply #120 on: March 02, 2021, 03:42:55 PM »
I will try to do this again to help you with your BP Loading.  I am only responsible for what I can say and offer,  not for what you understand of that information.

Just to clarify my fatal error was not in what I present to you about my approach to loading but in how you were approaching to get consistancy.

So, now I am attaching a complete BP Cartridge Rifle Reloading Guide from Black Powder Cartridge Rifle forum/website.  Please see attached link.  https://www.bpcr.net/site_docs-results_schedules/documents/bp_cartridge_reloading_dick_trenk.htm

Now for some noticeable statement to take note of:

1.  "Load the same amount of Pyrodex powder height into your case as you would for black powder. DO NOT load Pyrodex using equal scale weight of black powder. Use ONLY the RS or Ctg. grade not the P grade of Pyrodex in BP rifle cases."   THIS corresponds to my comments about different brands not have the same specific gravity and therefore equal weights of different powders will occupy different volumes.
(YES - you can use a scale when your 'final' volume load has been determine but not until.')

(Using only 'volume measurements of different powders", will be the only way to maintain consistent case and bullet loading.)


2. "WHAT POWDER GRAIN SIZE TO USE

Powder grain size     Caliber of rifle cartridge
       Fg                             45 and 50 cal.(best with case lengths 2. 6" and longer)
       FFg                           38 to 45 cal. (all case lengths)
       FFFg                         Under 38 cal. (all case lengths)
       FFFFg                       Flintlock primer"


Recommendation is to use only FFg in your 40 caliber.

3. "With a few exceptions, the original black powder era cartridge cases were designed to be fully filled with the appropriate black powder and partial filling was rarely permitted! If BP is fired in a partially filled case having a large amount of air space there may be a danger of producing a dangerous pressure spike which can "ring" the chamber or bulge the barrel. A small amount of air space not exceeding about 1/16 inch seems to be harmless but there is no good reason to have any air space at all and in fact a slight amount of powder compression is always recommended to hold the powder column in a rigid manner and promote consistent ignition pressures."

This is my concern over your indication of a 40grain and 50grain loading.  That I do not understand how you achieved in a 55 to 57grain casing.  I did go back and checked my 45/60 casing will hold 57 grains by volume of tapped FFg Geox.  That 57gr volume measurement weighs and average of 51.5grains.

4.  "There are at least three methods of load development which can bring you to a point where you have the most accurate loading for your rifle with a particular bullet.

The first method (along with general assembly steps and suggestions) will be described next.

Many black powder shooters weigh every charge but what appears to be more important is to have the same powder "height" or "volume" of SETTLED POWDER in the case prior powder compression and bullet seating. This is more critical with Fg grain size than with FFg and FFFg grain sizes.


Because your bullet may have many seating positions possible, the actual powder height cannot be specified but the following will explain what is required and for these reasons it is usually a waste of time asking other shooters for their "pet" loads. Their bullet, seating depth, powder lot, compression, wad type, lubricants and many other factors will NOT be the same which your gun will be using. Therefore trying to obtain the good results someone else obtained with a certain powder charge and bullet generally does not work too well."

What I was trying to relate to you 'before' was 'talking about weighed charges' before you even have every correct component (bullet).  In my experience a true 'rifle bullet' will have a larger base to crimp length compared to a pistol bullet.  No load you produce with the incorrect bullet will be the usable when you get the correct rifle bullet.

5.  "NOTE: once you have determined the best powder "volume" you can then use a powder measure such as the Lyman #55 or other hopper type dispenser to duplicate that charge volume and speed up your reloading operations. Remember that even with a drop tube attached to this type of powder dispenser, your charge in the case is considered to be not compressed."
Yes then and only then will using a scale be acceptable for you.  But the relating of the measurement to people like us - is as I said before is USELESS.

My biggest problem with trying to help you - with what you have presented - is how you can get a 1/4" compression on both a 50 grain and 40 grain load in the same casing, because the volume filled are totally different.  That was where I was trying to get you to provide more info to fully understand your overall approach.  Did you use a filler? a wad? something to get the space filled between powder and bullet base?

Anyway enjoy the full read and maybe this will help you understand loading blackpowder.  And why I emphasize the - Volume Volume Volume to correct bullet measurements.

PS:  I do cartridge pistol; cartridge lever rifle; cartridge single shot - Grease and Paper Patch; shotgun casing; and percussion pistol and rifle.  I seen and done enough to understand right from wrong and what is the normal acceptable approach by others.  'Fatal error' was not a content mistake.....
Black River Smith

Offline KenH

  • Very Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 94
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 87
Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
« Reply #121 on: March 02, 2021, 05:30:49 PM »
Thank you for your detailed response.  As said before I KNOW ya'll have MUCH more experience than I do with BP shooting. 
This is my concern over your indication of a 40grain and 50grain loading.  That I do not understand how you achieved in a 55 to 57grain casing.  I did go back and checked my 45/60 casing will hold 57 grains by volume of tapped FFg Geox.  That 57gr volume measurement weighs and average of 51.5grains.
If you remember on last page I made a post
showing I did some checking and I get the following from a level full Jamison 40-60 brass:
GOEX Fg = 54.5 grains
GOEX FFg = 49.6 grains
GOEX FFFg = 53.3 grains

Those are weighted on a digital scale.  Tapping case on bench lowers the powder to the point a bullet is easy seated, but still will give about 1/4" compression

Please do note I did write "about", not exactly 1/4".  I weighted each at least 3 times in the same brass checking to be sure the weight of each powder was in the range given.  Perhaps I should have written "average" for each weight since that's more what it is.

Remember, your 45-60 brass is a straight wall case while my 40-60 is a bottleneck which reduces the volume of the case.  Did you use a drop tube for filling the case?  I poured thru a funnel so there was almost no drop which also would decrease the case.  The 40-60 brass I have is Jamison with 53.1 grains water, while the Starline 45-70 brass I converted to 40-60 holds 56.3 grains of water.  This would indicate the volume of the two brands were different.

Yes, I'm very aware that changing anything in a load, even seating depth of bullet changes the load.  No place shows seating depth more critical than 9mm loads, or other small case loads.

That is a very good link you gave and I've read all the way thru it, and will read it again.  Lots of good info there.

Thanks again for taking the time to write good responses, and please do believe me when I say I'm learning from you, and the rest of folks here like DT.

Ken H>



Offline greyhawk

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 953
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
« Reply #122 on: March 02, 2021, 08:08:45 PM »
Thank you for your detailed response.  As said before I KNOW ya'll have MUCH more experience than I do with BP shooting.  If you remember on last page I made a post
Please do note I did write "about", not exactly 1/4".  I weighted each at least 3 times in the same brass checking to be sure the weight of each powder was in the range given.  Perhaps I should have written "average" for each weight since that's more what it is.

Remember, your 45-60 brass is a straight wall case while my 40-60 is a bottleneck which reduces the volume of the case.  Did you use a drop tube for filling the case?  I poured thru a funnel so there was almost no drop which also would decrease the case.  The 40-60 brass I have is Jamison with 53.1 grains water, while the Starline 45-70 brass I converted to 40-60 holds 56.3 grains of water.  This would indicate the volume of the two brands were different.

Yes, I'm very aware that changing anything in a load, even seating depth of bullet changes the load.  No place shows seating depth more critical than 9mm loads, or other small case loads.

Ken
 that number on the Goex FFg has me scratching my head a bit - I reckon I would double check that (maybe you already did but it looks a bit skewed)

Also I reckon we double up on part of DT's post ---- first you figure out the powder required in the case to give you good fill, and appropriate compression (whats appropriate ? simple what works best) some powders "take" more compression, some perform better with more - or less - so thats a volume measurement --ideally would be expressed in cc's like the LEE people do on their scoop measures - but the blackpowder community has fallen into this foolish idea of marking the volume measure and then telling us how many grains weight that is - (thats fine until we encounter a change in density) - dunno why they do this but seems like most everybody does .....anyway ..... once you have established the ideal volume -- then -- if you want ultra consistency weigh it, because everytime you fill that volume measure its likely there is a bit of variation - not much - but some - its all relative

I load 44/40 shells with homemade powder (its a bit less dense) by eyeball measure  - fill em to point of overflowing with my flintlock powder horn, make a row of them along my loading bench - compression die to correct level - insert boolit - its done - good enough for the kind of shooting I do with it and consistent within about one grain   

my 45/75 that I am trying to make teensy little groups with, same powder, I weigh every powder charge to within a tenth of a grain and use a drop tube to fill the case. Carefully assembled loads for that rifle have given me Extreme Spread velocities in the single digit range (just but we made it) That amount of work is unwarranted for  most of my 44/40 shooting under 100 yards. 


Offline KenH

  • Very Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 94
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 87
Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
« Reply #123 on: March 02, 2021, 08:21:00 PM »
that number on the Goex FFg has me scratching my head a bit - I reckon I would double check that (maybe you already did but it looks a bit skewed)
********************************************

the blackpowder community has fallen into this foolish idea of marking the volume measure and then telling us how many grains weight that is - (thats fine until we encounter a change in density) - dunno why they do this but seems like most everybody does .....anyway ..... once you have established the ideal volume -- then -- if you want ultra consistency weigh it, because everytime you fill that volume measure its likely there is a bit of variation - not much - but some - its all relative
It seems you and I are on the same page there.  I agree 100% with your comments.

I will double check the weight of the FFg in the Jamison cases.  I would well have mixed something up.  I am prone to doing that sometimes.  Seems worse in my "older" years {g}

Yes, I've read your posts in the "homemade black powder" thread on another forum - all 170 or so pages of the thread.  I'm actually planning to fool around a bit with making a bit - just because I like to learn new things.  That's what's so nice about retirement - having time to play around with all the different things that are interesting.

Ken H>

Offline Black River Smith

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 1054
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
« Reply #124 on: March 03, 2021, 03:04:54 PM »
...Remember, your 45-60 brass is a straight wall case while my 40-60 is a bottleneck which reduces the volume of the case.
...

Sir, I am sorry but you are wrong about that.  All the 1876 cartridges are bottlenecked.  I have a photo from theChaparral manufacturer of all 4 cartridges.  I just cannot get to where I am at now.  Also, my Lee & RCBS dies both put a nice shoulder in the modified/cut 45/70 brass.  Unless you are calling the manufactures of dies wrong, I think you need to more research.

In the old days a designation of 40/60 and a 45/60 meant a 40 caliber and a 45 caliber respectively, but both casings still held 60 grains of powder by volume.  That was for balloon head cases but not modern solid base brass.
Black River Smith

Advertisers

  • Guest
Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
« Reply #125 on: Today at 01:27:02 PM »

Offline Black River Smith

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 1054
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
« Reply #125 on: March 03, 2021, 03:13:15 PM »
Attached picture.  Shoulder is there but smaller than the 40/60.
Black River Smith

Offline KenH

  • Very Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 94
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 87
Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
« Reply #126 on: March 03, 2021, 03:24:01 PM »
Thanks for that drawing showing the two cases.  I was looking for info and found conflicting info on the case.  Wikipedia says "Case type   Rimmed, tapered" and the photo "looks" like a straight tapered case.  I even checked the 8th edition of "Cartridges of the World" on page 136 and it shows a straight case, with the 45-75 right below it as clearly a bottleneck and text says bottleneck.  Also on page 353 of "The Handloader's Manual of Cartridge Conversions" it clearly shows the 45-60 Winchester as a straight case.

BUT - with that said, You have the actual cartridges and are the final authority.  The drawing you posted clearly shows a bottleneck.  I will acknowledge the 45-60 Winchester is a bottleneck.  I think you can see where I was confused with the sources I had showing straight case.

Thank you for your input.

edit to add:  https://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php?topic=65001.0
That's the link to your post with the photo of all 4 cartridges.  The left most cartridge is the 40-60 and the bottleneck barely shows, but we know it's there.  The next cartridge is the 45-60 and I just didn't see the bottleneck.  From your drawing it's there, but I sure did miss it in the photo.

Offline Black River Smith

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 1054
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
« Reply #127 on: March 03, 2021, 04:20:15 PM »
...but the blackpowder community has fallen into this foolish idea of marking the volume measure and then telling us how many grains weight that is - (thats fine until we encounter a change in density) - dunno why they do this but seems like most everybody does .....anyway ..... once you have established the ideal volume -- then -- if you want ultra consistency weigh it, because everytime you fill that volume measure its likely there is a bit of variation - not much - but some - its all relative...

First off comment No One I know has never converted a Blackpowder Measurement to a Weight relation until You have in these postings.

Ok guys, lets put all the discussion about volume grain and weight into real historical perspective.  Won't argue that the term grain by definition is a weight base.

But now you are back in the 1770, 1830, 1860, 1870.  Just how many people living their life style could own; afford and protect a very sensitive scale/balance that could weigh to the grain weight?

NO ONE.

So to make it simple, for the common man, the gun manufactures/and people, used dedicated measuring tubes, hollowed out dear antlers; copper powder flask with pre-sized tubes attached; copper scoops in reloading tool kits.   That way people got what they needed to simply do what we do today to reload and shoot.

I started my smokeless reloading with the LEE Powder scoops.  LEE put scoops in all their LOAD-ALL kits.  All the modern Drop dispensers work off of VOLUME dispensing.  We just accept this without issues(I do check my drops against a balance).

I now own several digital scale for small medium and large smokeless charges, because I can.  That way, I do not need to record what scoops are needed to get to a desired charge.  It makes it simpler.  But back then simplicity was one charge; one bullet; a repeatable loading technique.   That was/is the only why Winchester, Marlin, and Ideal reloading tong tools worked.  But then bullet variety came into play and different smokeless powders became available - requiring changes.

I have read books on Schuetzen rifles; Creedmore shooting; and general target shooting.  Do you really think all these groups and people weighed their loads?  Truly, I do not.

Give this argument about 'grain blackpowder volume' and 'grain smokeless loading' a REST and just follow the normal convention, like the rest if us.  Once 'you' are comfortable with blackpowder cartridge loading and have developed your load, you can do whatever/however you feel like doing it in your environment.  Just understand that most all of us look at cartridge designation like 44/40; 45/70; 45/75; 38/40; 32/20; 44/77; 50/70.. etc and say OH! that last number is the amount of powder measured by a tube dispenser filling a casing(old not modern).  Period End, because that is what the original manufacturers have told us in their brochures and reloading kit accessories/instructions.

Besides you're loading these cases for a Levergun not a Creedmore, Sharps or Remington Target Rifle.
Black River Smith

Offline KenH

  • Very Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 94
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 87
Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
« Reply #128 on: March 03, 2021, 04:48:08 PM »
@Black River Smith:  The quote you show above is NOT from me, but Greyhawk.  His post looks like it's me quoting, but when he quoted my post, he started typing before the [/Quote] that would indicate the end of my quote.

A question for you, we all know the 45-70 and the 70 indicates the grains of BP using in the original case.  I was thinking (scary thought) the manufacturer actually weighted the BP it took to completely fill the case, not just a volume measurement.  Remember, the old original 45-70 (and others I suspect) were a balloon head type case giving the case more volume than our modern cases have.  This allowed them to actually get 70 weighted grains of BP in the case.

There was a question if I had made a mistake in weighting GOEX FFg in the 40-60 case.
 It was felt the brass case should have held more power.  So, just for the record, just now I weighted again and got 49.7 grains of GOEX FFg in a Jamison 40-60 case (no reason to think it was the same case, but was Jamison).  In a Starline 45-70 case that has been trimmed, sized, and fired in the 40-60 rifle it held 53.0 grains of GOEX FFg powder.  I used the same Jamison brass case when I weighted the Fg, FFg, and FFFg powders.  I didn't wish to take a chance that different cases might hold different amount of powder.

Offline Black River Smith

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 1054
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
« Reply #129 on: March 03, 2021, 05:45:51 PM »
KenH,

I know the quote was not yours but that is the error of the quoting button on the forum.  Sorry about that.

"I was thinking (scary thought) the manufacturer actually weighted the BP it took to completely fill the case, not just a volume measurement."  Reread my posting that is what I am saying also, only a manufacture could afford a grain sensitive scale/balance back then.  I am certain that they did weight a charge to first develop the cartridge being offered.  But then they had to change that measurement into something useable by the common man.  Plus a lot of manufactures tried to just sell their preloaded cartridges, more profits.  Then there was the whole flint and percussion period individual gun builds gave a dispenser that through a charge the gun would handle.  Sight were adjust to that and only that.  Also, powder was just quickly measured and thrown down the barrel/cylinder on some occasions.  No real time to weigh or measure. except for (preloaded paper loads think Civil War).  In the 70's - 90's there where the loading tools, there still where 'no real accurate weighing' devises for anyone.  So manufactures made scoops to replicate the correct charge.

The main thing during all of this time is that there were only a few Powder Manufacturer in America.  They were not high quality producers.  That is why during the Mountain man times they relished getting their hands on English powders.


"It was felt the brass case should have held more power."  Short answer - NOT all manufactured cases for a particular caliber have the same internal Volumes.  Winchester -Remington- Starline - Federal will all have different volumes mainly because of wall thickness.  This is another reason for talking just about volume filled to get to final completed load.  One 44/40 case will take 2 more grains volume over another.

Here read this posting from this site in the  The Winchester Model '73 section.  https://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php?topic=54292.0
Black River Smith

Advertisers

  • Guest
Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
« Reply #130 on: Today at 01:27:02 PM »

Online King Medallion

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 847
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
« Reply #130 on: March 03, 2021, 10:08:12 PM »
Certainly have gotten off topic here  :-\

Offline KenH

  • Very Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 94
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 87
Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
« Reply #131 on: March 03, 2021, 10:14:01 PM »
Yes, you're right, it did get off topic of "project rifle" a good bit, but it sorta "snuck up on us" - you know that dreaded "slippery slope"? :)  Still a good conversation and nobody got upset.  All in all, a good exchange of information.  I learned a good bit from it.  Actually I should have started a totally new thread on "how to load" ammo for my old rifle.

Ken H>

Offline Black River Smith

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 1054
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
« Reply #132 on: March 04, 2021, 11:48:53 AM »
King Medallion,

This was the Original Poster KenH comment in Reply 102,

"I wasn't sure if this should be posted in the 40-60 loading data thread, or here with the project rifle.  Since it's more what "this" rifle is doing and certainly not loads to use I decided to post here.  It's pretty long, and I would like any comments to my questions at the end."

It has become a terminology; reloading; & BP history dump.  Just helping a new BP shooter who has brought back to life a nice old rifle by has own skills.  I would now hate to see him put a ring the chamber by his initial loading techniques.
Black River Smith

Online King Medallion

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 847
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
« Reply #133 on: March 04, 2021, 02:04:31 PM »
 :) My comment only was in observation about the thread being about a man bringing a cool rifle back to life and how he did it, to pretty much 2-3 men taking, what, 2 page on how to reload for it. Nothing more. Not arguing, just observing. All good here. I'm learning too, someday hope to have a 40/60 76 too.  ;D

Offline greyhawk

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 953
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
« Reply #134 on: March 04, 2021, 03:43:14 PM »
Mr Smith

in my reply to Ken
I said.....
Even loading smokeless most of us end up doing it by volume (powder throwers) - BUT - anytime I quote a load it is scale weight - grains is weight - marks on a volume measure is just that, a mark on a container - might or might not equal the weight that the number represents . There is some wiggle room Swiss is denser than Wano, Wano is denser than Goex, Goex is denser than homemade corned is denser than screened .........................50 grains is 50 grains is 50 grains - on a scale !!


Seems like you missed this next bit

 ---none of which matters so long as we are clear what we are talking about - you were.

 I would suggest you calibrate your measure using a scale if you can, including how many taps on the bench you use or whatever else you do to to settle the charge evenly. Not nit picking here  - waaaal dont mean to be...........
This has been a fun project for a lot of us - it wont be long and you will be blowin bean cans off a post at 100yards with that old girl!


So If you tell me grains weight along with the brand and grade of powder  I can weigh out a charge and go cut a volume measure from anything thats handy

OR the number from a LEE volume measure

OR even something as simple as "fill a new starline 45/70 case and tap it three time on the bench"

you have given me good information that I can easily duplicate from ten thousand miles away.

 OTOH if you tell me 55 grains volume - to me that is a rough guide at best  - I have no clue how your measure is calibrated, what brand it is, what the actual measured VOLUME of it is 

I was not intending to be obstreperous at the time - if thats the way you took it - my bad I guess - I always thought of this forum as the friendly place .

Online King Medallion

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 847
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
« Reply #135 on: April 14, 2021, 01:54:13 PM »
So is this project complete? Sending to Turnbull for CCH and reblue? Or stuffed in a scabbord for calf branding season?

Offline greyhawk

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 953
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
« Reply #136 on: April 14, 2021, 05:27:13 PM »
So is this project complete? Sending to Turnbull for CCH and reblue? Or stuffed in a scabbord for calf branding season?

I vote for stuffed in a scabbard for calf branding season  :)

Offline KenH

  • Very Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 94
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 87
Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
« Reply #137 on: April 17, 2021, 07:41:39 PM »
From my post on page 5, Feb 15th I mentioned the result is pretty well complete.  I've even traded for the borrowed Uberti finger lever.  I thank all ya'll for the help.  Here's the post:
Folks, I've had LOTS of fun, and I've learned more than I ever expected to learn about these toggle link type lever action rifles.  Ya'll have really been a BIG help - both with encouragement and shared knowledge. The lever is a borrowed Uberti finger lever a fine Cowboy on this site loaned me until my Uberti finger lever that's on backorder is delivered.  Anyway, here's the result.



 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk

© 1995 - 2020 CAScity.com