|
|
Post by johncantiusgarand on Mar 27, 2012 3:04:17 GMT -5
I like to reload .45 Colt with black powder for my Colt SAA, because of the excellent performance I get with it. Cleanup may be messier, but it is much easier; I never get any leading with BP, and Ballistol "moose milk" cuts the fouling quicker than solvents do smokeless residue. And because I can get higher velocities at lower pressure than with smokeless, I always assumed that BP was a win-win for me--easier on my revolver due to its lower pressure while giving me higher velocities than I could safely get using smokeless. But I've recently begun to doubt that assumption due to the heavier recoil BP produces. Which is a greater contributor to the development of endshake--recoil or pressure?
|
|
|
|
Post by 2 Dogs on Mar 27, 2012 3:37:45 GMT -5
End shake is about wear. Keeping lube or grease fore and aft on your cylinder creates a "gasket" which will make your sixgun last far longer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Markbo on Mar 28, 2012 10:34:22 GMT -5
Fermin, do you mean around the base pin or the entire face of the cylinder???
|
|
|
|
Post by steveb on Mar 28, 2012 11:16:58 GMT -5
Congrats to you for playing with BP ! On the issue of recoil, IMHO, X fps+ X gr of bullet= recoil/wear-n-tear. If anything, I was under the impression that BP accelerates the bullet more gradually. Always good to ask, I'll be watching to see what I can learn too. steve b
|
|
|
|
Post by johncantiusgarand on Mar 30, 2012 23:23:03 GMT -5
Well, with BP, the recoil is increased by the weight of the ejecta--about half of the product remains a solid. And for some reason, this recoil increase is greater than one would expect given the relative weight of these solids. If a 40 grain charge of blackpowder ejects 20 grains of solid material, one wouldn't expect that mere 20 grains to increase the recoil as much as it does. But the recoil of a 40 grain compressed load of FFF Goex behind a 255 grain bullet feels much closer to touching off a 44 magnum than to a similar smokeless .45 Colt load. What I don't know is how recoil is related to the actual forces being applied against the frame, cylinder ratchet, and base pin pushing. Perhaps the greater pressures of smokeless powder stress these areas more but for a shorter period of time than black powder. And if a load is applied for a short enough period of time, it might not be perceived as recoil but might still be enough to batter or stretch the steel over hundreds of rounds leading to a quicker development of endshake with smokeless than with BP. I'm just guessing though (wishing really), and I can't afford to buy two identical Colts and enough ammunition to do practical testing.
|
|
|
|
Post by 2 Dogs on Mar 31, 2012 7:02:57 GMT -5
Fermin, do you mean around the base pin or the entire face of the cylinder???
Mark, that part of the cylinder that contacts the frame itself needs lube. The gas ring or recoil bushing in the front and the ratchet area in the back.
John, remember Bruce Lee and the 1" punch? Just because the cylinder is only traveling a short distance doesnt mean it isnt enough to cause wear.
|
|
|
|
Post by johncantiusgarand on Mar 31, 2012 20:59:35 GMT -5
You're confusing me 2 Dogs. Or I'm confusing you. My question wasn't about what causes endshake. Sure, inadequate lubrication can lead to material rubbing from the frame, the bushing, and the ratchet as the cylinder rotates. Adequate lube can minimize that. I'm talking about the battering that these surfaces receive as the cylinder slams fore and aft during firing which is the major cause of endshake development. My question is more about felt recoil vs. pressure and how those relate to the amount of fore and aft force. If I limit my loads to low pressure blackpowder cartridges yet experience greater recoil than with the higher pressure smokeless, is the cylinder actually slamming back and forth with greater force using BP than with smokeless?
|
|
|
|
Post by webber on Apr 1, 2012 8:13:42 GMT -5
This is where just putting on the thinking cap comes into play. I have chronoed a load of Goex 2f black with a 255 gr bullet with a charge weight equal to the original (considering case volumn) with a Fed 150 and velocity with a 45/8" barrel Ruger and the velocity ran 810 fps. I am sure chamber pressure is low.
|
|
|
|
Post by jayhawker on Apr 1, 2012 8:26:44 GMT -5
Are you worried about your grandkids shooting it in 30 years? It will take many 1000nds of rounds, BP or smokeless to create a problem. You can always go the Bob Munden way and have the cylinder modified for a Colt like cylinder bushing.
|
|
|
|
Post by johncantiusgarand on Apr 1, 2012 15:40:03 GMT -5
"I have chronoed a load of Goex 2f black with a 255 gr bullet with a charge weight equal to the original (considering case volumn) with a Fed 150 and velocity with a 45/8" barrel Ruger and the velocity ran 810 fps. I am sure chamber pressure is low."
Yes, I'm sure that chamber pressure is low. I"ve gotten slightly over 1,000 f.p.s. using a compressed 40 grain load of 3f Goex under a 255 Keith. Chamber pressure was probably lower with that max BP load than my other load of 9 grains of Unique under the same bullet (and the 9 grain Unique load didn't chrono nearly as fast). But recoil of the BP load was much, much heavier. Linebaugh and others mention heavy smokeless .45 Colt loads that are "safe" in S&W M25's (they won't burst the cylinder) but advised to be used sparingly to avoid premature wearing out of the revolver due to the increased battering. My heavy BP rounds recoil harder out of my 7.5 inch Colt SAA than "Ruger Only" loads do out of an old Vaquero. Which brings me back to my original question--are my heavy BP loads harder on my revolver than standard pressure smokeless loads even though they probably don't produce as much pressure?
|
|
|
|
Post by webber on Apr 1, 2012 17:01:44 GMT -5
"Which brings me back to my original question--are my heavy BP loads harder on my revolver than standard pressure smokeless loads even though they probably don't produce as much pressure?"
Okay here is the main questions: Didn't the original Colt SAA use black powder loads?
Would you say the metallurgy is better in todays guns than the originals?
Wasn't the "Old Vaqueros" a heavier gun?
How many rounds do you expect to shoot of the foul filthy black to begin with?
I for one would just keep the touching surfaces well greased and have at it. If I were that concerned with wearing out a Colt SAA i would get something like a "New Vaquero" that cost far less and will probably shoot right along side the Colt and leave it at home just to admire. My same sentiments for the USFA guns too.
Personally if I had a Colt or a USFA I would shoot it and not worry about it.
|
|
