1858banner

Author Topic: I reject using wads in a revolver for these reasons  (Read 24367 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Saranac Sam

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Posts: 1792
Re: I reject using wads in a revolver for these reasons
« Reply #90 on: September 17, 2013, 02:12:29 PM »


  As a new Remington shooter, I find no joy because I can't ram the ball all the way down on top of a 24 grain load.  I don't have that problem with the Colt.
  Experienced Rem shooters are telling me to use a wad to make up the air space, which we don't want.  I can also use a bench press rammer to get the ball down on top of the powder.
  Now here's the question:  Is it possible the Remington was intended to take a much heavier powder load, like 30-40 grains?  It certainly has the frame for a heavy load.  That could be compacted with the standard rammer.  Any thoughts?

I know, Johnnie Roper will say Yes!   (T^
Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading.

Offline KapundBall

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 468
Re: I reject using wads in a revolver for these reasons
« Reply #91 on: September 17, 2013, 02:38:23 PM »
Sam - I have shot several cylinders of my Uberti 1858 with 30 grs of T7 under ball and, while it is rather brisk, nothing suggested it was at risk of damaging parts. Nevertheless, I prefer the results with 25 grs.

In the event that you do not wish to use a lubed wad to make up chamber space in a lighter load, cornmeal does an excellent job as filler. It has a consistency like 1.5 - 2 FG powder and is completely neutral. I make paper cartridges and load powder charge, then cornmeal to desired level, then an overpowder milk carton card. I load with a lube wad over that, but no reason one would have to if one likes hard fouling residue for some reason. The paper cartridge just drops into the chamber, no fuss, no mess. There is some compression from twisting, so the cornmeal filler stays in place and doesn't mix in with the powder.
I recently mentioned to a friend that I was getting more interested in Black Powder. He said, "What, like Malcolm X and the Black Panthers?"

Offline kituwa

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 153
Re: I reject using wads in a revolver for these reasons
« Reply #92 on: September 17, 2013, 02:39:21 PM »
Sam, i think its because the conical was used back then more than a round ball. You can use cream of wheat on top of the powder instead of a wad and it works real good. Or a dip of Copenhagen ->i

Offline Saranac Sam

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Posts: 1792
Re: I reject using wads in a revolver for these reasons
« Reply #93 on: September 17, 2013, 03:11:48 PM »
Sam, i think its because the conical was used back then more than a round ball. You can use cream of wheat on top of the powder instead of a wad and it works real good. Or a dip of Copenhagen ->i

K, that brings up the next question:  Maybe anything could be used as a wad between powder and ball?  Paper, fabric, moose turd pie, anything that will take up the air space so we don't get unexpected explosions?
Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading.

Offline Pustic

  • Ultimate Forum Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 5906
  • Proud American Hillbilly Infidel & Facebook Felon
Re: I reject using wads in a revolver for these reasons
« Reply #94 on: September 17, 2013, 03:43:34 PM »
One square of toilet paper would fill four chambers on a cylinder, maybe all six.  :9)
{?( Be ye not afraid of the truth, for the "Truth Has No Agenda".  :9)
"If they come to take, they also come to die." Pustic 4:20


A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Concealed carry, where you HIDE the exercise of your right to carry arms.

Offline Saranac Sam

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Posts: 1792
Re: I reject using wads in a revolver for these reasons
« Reply #95 on: September 17, 2013, 06:15:22 PM »
One square of toilet paper would fill four chambers on a cylinder, maybe all six.  :9)

Ya know, that's sort of what I'm thinking.  If it takes up the space.  It will evaporate upon ignition.
Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading.

Offline DD4lifeusmc

  • Ultimate Forum Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 9226
Re: I reject using wads in a revolver for these reasons
« Reply #96 on: September 17, 2013, 07:43:24 PM »


  As a new Remington shooter, I find no joy because I can't ram the ball all the way down on top of a 24 grain load.  I don't have that problem with the Colt.
  Experienced Rem shooters are telling me to use a wad to make up the air space, which we don't want.  I can also use a bench press rammer to get the ball down on top of the powder.
  Now here's the question:  Is it possible the Remington was intended to take a much heavier powder load, like 30-40 grains?  It certainly has the frame for a heavy load.  That could be compacted with the standard rammer.  Any thoughts?

I know, Johnnie Roper will say Yes!   (T^
Yes the Remington with the added top strap is designed for heavier loads.
If you want to you can use a file or dremel to remove a minute amount of metal from the frame allowing the ramrod lever to travel a bit farther. Or a wad or a tad more powder.
The bended knee is not a tradition of our Corps.
General Alexander A. Vandergrift, USMC
to the Senate Naval Affairs Committee, 5 May 1946
------------
Marines Birthday  11/10/1775
USA birthday  7/4/1776

Offline Saranac Sam

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Posts: 1792
Re: I reject using wads in a revolver for these reasons
« Reply #97 on: September 17, 2013, 08:10:27 PM »


  As a new Remington shooter, I find no joy because I can't ram the ball all the way down on top of a 24 grain load.  I don't have that problem with the Colt.
  Experienced Rem shooters are telling me to use a wad to make up the air space, which we don't want.  I can also use a bench press rammer to get the ball down on top of the powder.
  Now here's the question:  Is it possible the Remington was intended to take a much heavier powder load, like 30-40 grains?  It certainly has the frame for a heavy load.  That could be compacted with the standard rammer.  Any thoughts?

I know, Johnnie Roper will say Yes!   (T^
Yes the Remington with the added top strap is designed for heavier loads.
If you want to you can use a file or dremel to remove a minute amount of metal from the frame allowing the ramrod lever to travel a bit farther. Or a wad or a tad more powder.

Thank you DD4, I have thought the same thing about modifying the loading lever to get a little more reach.

I'm not really interested in loading magnum rounds in the CBs, I have other things for that.  For economy, I like the 20-30 grains loads for plinking and apparently better accuracy. I like loading and ramming in the pistol whenever possible, but I also now have a table top cylinder loader so it's not a big issue.
  I was just curious why the loading lever on the Rem does not go all the way down when loading something like 24 grains.

Thanks, SS
Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading.

Offline Pustic

  • Ultimate Forum Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 5906
  • Proud American Hillbilly Infidel & Facebook Felon
Re: I reject using wads in a revolver for these reasons
« Reply #98 on: September 17, 2013, 08:41:18 PM »


  As a new Remington shooter, I find no joy because I can't ram the ball all the way down on top of a 24 grain load.  I don't have that problem with the Colt.
  Experienced Rem shooters are telling me to use a wad to make up the air space, which we don't want.  I can also use a bench press rammer to get the ball down on top of the powder.
  Now here's the question:  Is it possible the Remington was intended to take a much heavier powder load, like 30-40 grains?  It certainly has the frame for a heavy load.  That could be compacted with the standard rammer.  Any thoughts?

I know, Johnnie Roper will say Yes!   (T^

Ram the balls as far as they will go with the loading lever, then seat them with either a piece of a dowel or a sort starter.  :)
{?( Be ye not afraid of the truth, for the "Truth Has No Agenda".  :9)
"If they come to take, they also come to die." Pustic 4:20


A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Concealed carry, where you HIDE the exercise of your right to carry arms.

Offline Saranac Sam

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Posts: 1792
Re: I reject using wads in a revolver for these reasons
« Reply #99 on: September 17, 2013, 09:07:42 PM »


  As a new Remington shooter, I find no joy because I can't ram the ball all the way down on top of a 24 grain load.  I don't have that problem with the Colt.
  Experienced Rem shooters are telling me to use a wad to make up the air space, which we don't want.  I can also use a bench press rammer to get the ball down on top of the powder.
  Now here's the question:  Is it possible the Remington was intended to take a much heavier powder load, like 30-40 grains?  It certainly has the frame for a heavy load.  That could be compacted with the standard rammer.  Any thoughts?

I know, Johnnie Roper will say Yes!   (T^

Ram the balls as far as they will go with the loading lever, then seat them with either a piece of a dowel or a sort starter.  :)

Right, that's what I have been doing.  Now I have a table top loader.  But I still check them occasionally with a short starter.   ;)
Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading.

Offline Pustic

  • Ultimate Forum Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 5906
  • Proud American Hillbilly Infidel & Facebook Felon
Re: I reject using wads in a revolver for these reasons
« Reply #100 on: September 17, 2013, 09:50:22 PM »
Us old timers think alike.  ])M
{?( Be ye not afraid of the truth, for the "Truth Has No Agenda".  :9)
"If they come to take, they also come to die." Pustic 4:20


A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Concealed carry, where you HIDE the exercise of your right to carry arms.

Offline Dellbert

  • Ultimate Forum Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 4088
Re: I reject using wads in a revolver for these reasons
« Reply #101 on: September 17, 2013, 09:51:44 PM »
I never had any trouble with wads or loading 20 25 gr loads in my remmies. (^h I must be the odd bean on the pole round here. )L$ One thing I'm just about sure of is chain fires most likely comes from the nipple end. I never heard of wads over powder till I started reading about them on different gun forums. At the time I was just putting a little lube over the ball and it was a little messy but didn't really cause me no real trouble. The first was Crisco over balls sure made each shot smell good )L$ Then the boro butter over the balls ain't figured what that smells like yet, oh yay smells like a poot. )L$ Then I got around to the forums and people talking about the wads, and home made lubes. The wads seem to be a lot less messy, and work pretty good for me. Haven't got round to making my own lube pills yet, but I have everything I need to give it a try. As far as shooting go's nothing takes the place of range time, and getting to know your gun, Guess that holds true for any gun you want to shoot, and shoot well. You fellas don't need me to tell you that. For the time being I'm using the wads over the powder. It's true I don't really leave these guns loaded much longer than a week or so but when I go to fire them they do go boom. I'd like to give Johnnies way of loading a try with the 10% real bp and top it off with Pyrodex. If a person was going to use one of these pistols for defense more than likely you shouldn't be more than 7' away from the target. It would be hard to explain why I would be shooting at someone 25 yrds away don't you recon so? (^h I don't know it all. Live and learn. =K*
« Last Edit: September 17, 2013, 10:00:43 PM by Dellbert »
If it's not broke don't try fixin it.

Offline Classanr

  • Ultimate Forum Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 5218
  • BP, the original bug chaser!
Re: I reject using wads in a revolver for these reasons
« Reply #102 on: September 17, 2013, 10:24:39 PM »
OP loved dropping stones in the water.
12 days 'o postin' as much as he ought'r.
Then lightnin' struck, 'n the guy was gone,
But this here topic just ripples right on.

Lots of useful info and points to consider, all in one place.
Thanks, fellas, for posting.  I'll keep on readin', if you keep on post'n!

Classanr
Jim Beam me, Scotty!  Life here is more intelligent than I.

Offline SourMashII

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Posts: 1399
  • Smokin'......
Re: I reject using wads in a revolver for these reasons
« Reply #103 on: December 06, 2019, 09:43:55 PM »
Running low on wads, I brought Crisco  with me today.

Decided it's a slimey mess, AND if you forget to lube.. CHAINFIRES are a REAL threat. Experienced two "double barrel" shots today.

(different cylinders, forgot to lube twice, have only ever used wads)
Hah! I remember this day clearly, and where I was, and on what mountain, and which car..... Maybe I haven't lost my mind yet
Soaking this up like a Parched sponge.

Offline Hawk78

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 29
Re: I reject using wads in a revolver for these reasons
« Reply #104 on: January 01, 2020, 03:41:46 PM »
I dunno how many wads you can get out of an old lady hat but this is the best place to buy hard felt for wads. http://www.durofelt.com/image_26.html
Thank you for giving me a place to order felt shipping free! How and what do you use for lube sir? Hawk78