• This community needs YOUR help today. We rely 100% on Supporting Memberships to fund our efforts. With the ever increasing fees of everything, we need help. We need more Supporting Members, today. Please invest back into this community. I will ship a few decals too in addition to all the account perks you get.



    Sign up here: https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/account/upgrades
  • Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

New Pistol

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Joined
Jul 2, 2013
Messages
27
Reaction score
5
I just recieved a percussion pistol that only has the barrel stamped, "spain". It is an identical match to and old CVA, made in Spain kit .45 pistol except the caliber is smaller.I rolled a .437 down the barrel and had to pull it out after it got stuck. Do you think it's a .44 and if so what size ball should I try?
 
IMG_2376.JPG
The top one
 
Back in the late 60's and thru the 1970's a lot of companies made .44 caliber muzzleloaders and it sounds like this pistol is one of them.
They weren't particularly concerned with tolerances so making a barrel a little smaller than .440 wouldn't be strange either.

Like the others suggested try loading a .433 or a .429 diameter ball with a thin cotton patch and have fun with your pistol. :)
 
I have found most of the 44's I have played with seem to do best with a .433 ball. I am presently playing with a Pedersoli that seems to like the .433 with a .015 patch.
 
I want to thank everybody for the help. I held it up to an Italian Flintlock rifle I have also in .44, didn't realize it was 44 till I started checking guns.The hole looks the same on both.I guess when I get to the club for the monthly shoot I'll buy some .429 and .433 and see what happens. And then I'll be buying another mold. It looks like I'm sitting on .47, .45, and .44's now with the lone .62 smooth bore.
 
The upper pistol looks like an early CVA by Jukar. The lower one looks like a CVA by Ardessa. The difference in the trigger and front sight are the main differences. Rest of the gun is pretty much interchangeable. The extremely early CVAs by Jukar had bolster breech systems instead of drum and nipple. In addition, a few other companies imported Jukar guns. My first CVA pistol, purchased about 1972, had extremely shallow rifling, almost just scratches. The Ardessa guns had good deep round ball rifling
 
The upper pistol looks like an early CVA by Jukar. The lower one looks like a CVA by Ardessa. The difference in the trigger and front sight are the main differences. Rest of the gun is pretty much interchangeable. The extremely early CVAs by Jukar had bolster breech systems instead of drum and nipple. In addition, a few other companies imported Jukar guns. My first CVA pistol, purchased about 1972, had extremely shallow rifling, almost just scratches. The Ardessa guns had good deep round ball rifling

I would agree it's a Jukar made gun. I have owned several of these including the bolster breech models and the later drum type that came before the CVA patent breech. I actually picked up one of this type at the last OGCA gun show for $5 (it was dirty, missing the nose cap and had tape holding the barrel in). It cleaned up nicely, I had a nose cap in my spare parts that fit so it is complete again. Most of the earlier guns I've had did best with .433 balls
 

Latest posts

Back
Top