Do I need a filler for a 20 grain charge in a .44 cal. Cylinder?

and why IPSC had the major and minor power factor. they actually chronographed our rounds at the big matches. On a simeler note to my other long winded rant the guy with the 45/70 that gets a good hit is going to drop that Elk a whole lot faster than the person with the 45/120 or the 50/90 that gets a bad hit or a miss.

Strictly personal opinion, so take it for what you paid for it, but my thoughts on filler are that it helps give consistent pressure on the powder. The plungers don't go very deep in the chambers, a light load won't get much compression, if any, and black powder likes consistent pressure at loading. 20 grains with no filler would have very little pressure and basically be a squib load. A cylinder full of inconsistent squibs would shoot all over the place. My Uberti 60 army, with Olde Eynsford, shot all over the target and left me scratching my head...till I saw the second cloud of smoke halfway to the target. I believe it wasn't all burning at ignition and some varied amount was burning outside the barrel. Switched back to Goex, problem solved, accurate again. Those were 35 grains behind a conical, my hunting loads. Anyone else experience anything like this?

Sorry to disagree but heavy charges (not "hot" but at the top of the safe range) are more accurate in many situations. That's been my experience and also with others. No harm to try some. Obviously if flinching is an issue- that is an entirely different matter.

You really have to take each individual gun out and run it through many loads, with or without wads, etc.

I don't shoot in matches with percussion revolvers so I focus more on what gives me a good Boom, good smoke and can I put up acceptable groups on the target or hit a steel swinger. Keeping the guns running without having to constantly take them down to wipe them out is a factor too. I use a lot of Crisco because it just works.

You'll never know why or how some things happen, I have two Pietta Navy brassers that shoot better with the loading levers removed. 15 grain charges, a wad and .375 balls. No loading lever, from a sandbag and I recently fired a group at 50 yards that you could cover with an old Dollar coin, using red toy caps

Replace the levers and things open up. Who knows. Not enough to really matter for fun shooting but it's noticeable

I almost never load on the gun so compression is a non issue. I pre load all my cylinders on the bench.

nick_1 said:

I shoot 25g of 777 in my 1858s and my 50 cal trapper. it rings the steel with plenty of authority. I would have no problem hunting with that load as long as I stuck to my basics of good shot placement. 25 of 777 is likly hotter than 28 of period BP anyways.

Click to expand...

True on 777. That's all I use with homemade magnum caps. Kinda hard to ignite with reg caps. I found 777 15%-20% hotter. I use 20 grain for target and 40 grain for "everything else". 40 grain 777 easily equal to 45 grain reg BP, probably more like 50 grain BP. I only use 777 for more power, less corrosion. I get really good groups with 35 grain loads. The groups get a bit wide over 40 grain 777. I started 777 at 15 grain and it was about equal to 20 reg. Love the stuff. Not crazy smoke either when shooting semi fast. I heard rumor the ATF considers 777 smokeless.

Boomtown Bang said:

True on 777. That's all I use with homemade magnum caps. Kinda hard to ignite with reg caps. I found 777 15%-20% hotter. I use 20 grain for target and 40 grain for "everything else". 40 grain 777 easily equal to 45 grain reg BP, probably more like 50 grain BP. I only use 777 for more power, less corrosion. I get really good groups with 35 grain loads. The groups get a bit wide over 40 grain 777. I started 777 at 15 grain and it was about equal to 20 reg. Love the stuff. Not crazy smoke either when shooting semi fast. I heard rumor the ATF considers 777 smokeless.

Click to expand...

That's pietta 1860 army .44 using 20 grain 777 with .454 / 140 grain RB. Fun! Use left thumb for practicing point blank shootings of multiple targets.
Thanks trooper JR Funk!

Difficult to comment as I only use my revolver for target shooting, it's a Remington 1858 copy with accurately machined cylinder bores. For 25 metre offhand target shooting I use 18 grains of Swiss 2 powder, 9 grains of Cream of Wheat with a .454" ball. I use Castrol white grease very sparingly (with a hypodermic) around the seated ball. My PB is 92/100 and, so far, no issues.
I've owned more or less every repro Colt revolver but never personally owned a brass framed version.
I know people here in the UK that do so can't really comment on them but with Swiss powder costing around $80 a kilo AND being registered I much prefer lighter 'Target' loads. More bang for your buck as they say....
Not really connected but I watched a very interesting video some while ago on YouTube of a Hungarian shooter using a Pedersoli Remington with various loads, right down to a .22LR case full! Well worth a look.

My Colt Navy 36 I use about 20 gr and seat with a "crunch", jut so you don't think I'm a "big load only" type- I have a single shot 50 cal. that I backed off to 37 gr as seeming to be best.

Most people don't shoot percussion revolvers in matches, so I say do what meets your needs

You can get more shots per pound with light loads, and I'm sure target shooters back in the original period with their Bisley grip Colts or worked over Tranters etc , used light loads because the goal was small groups on a 25m or 50m target.

I 2nd this, it's been my observation as well. Being che...I mean frugal, I like to stretch my powder out too. For targets, I use enough that I can get consistency, you only need to poke a hole through the paper a5i can usuallygetby with25grs. When max accuracy matters I give em what they like, which is usually 30grs plus in my 44s.

I have a pair of Navies that use toy caps, and I stocked up on Midway $6 a box .375 balls.....so if I use 15gr charges I can basically shoot these for less than a .22 just to leisurely punch paper

Stantheman86 said:

Apparently Pietta made their brass frames stronger over the past 20 some odd years.

Some say they're almost as durable as the steel frames, given that most people won't even approach 25,000 rounds through any percussion revolver. I think a Brasser will last most people forever.

The steel used in these guns is very mild, especially in the frames so it's not much of a gap to fill as far as strength with blackpowder loads.

It was believed that loading was hard on the old brass frames , and that the cylinder would beat against the recoil shield causing increased end shake.
And the very old brassers had pinned arbors which pulled out. Apparently they were expected to be blank guns for reenactors.

I honestly shoot my brass frame Colts the same way I shoot my steel frame Colts. I don't think 20 or 30gr charges are going to unduly beat my .36 or .44 brassers. I don't top off and stuff any of my revolvers.

The YouTube guy claims 1000s of full power charges through a .44 Brasser with 0 changes in mic'd measurements

Click to expand...

I just acquired what appears to be a 1979-made brass Armi San Marco Navy in .44 caliber. I bought it due to the relative rarity (to me) of the San Marco’s, but to my disappointment when I got it home I realized that the cylinder is smaller than ”modern” Pietta .44 Navy’s— it looks like they just took a .36 cylinder length and hollowed it out further to accommodate the .44 balls. The modern Pietta .44 Navies have longer cylinders and smaller forcing cones. Anyway, I’m disappointed because it’s obvious I won’t be able to get as much powder into the chambers as my steel Pietta… am going to do some tests with a chronometer to see if I can get velocities of about 800 fps— if not, am going to sell it because it would not be as effective as my modern Pietta. Am thinking that it would take loads of at least 32 grains of BP and maybe 23 grains of 777 to achieve that. Do you think it would do it much damage if I put maybe 5 balls of each through it? I’m thinking that after 44 years of use, it’s about as banged up as it will ever be!

Shutzer, I would just use it with lighter loads and enjoy it for target, plinking and rabbit hunting.

Kansas Jake said:

Shutzer, I would just use it with lighter loads and enjoy it for target, plinking and rabbit hunting.

Click to expand...

I hear you but I’m not a collector, I don’t hunt, and I already have my other BP guns that can take heavy loads to practice with. I don’t have a lot of use for guns that I can’t carry for self-defense, which is why I’d like to test it to see if it can achieve at least 200 ft-lbs of energy, which translates to roughly 800 fps with .454 balls, which is what I have. If not, I will probably take good pics of it, document its performance, and sell it here! It looks like these guns from the 70s are relatively rare, and this one looks nice and feels very solid, much more so than modern Pietta’s. It also has a MASSIVELY strong hammer pull, which leads me to believe it will have far fewer cap jams. If it would fit my Pietta, I may cannibalize the hammer spring and put it in my Pietta.

I just fired 100 20 grain charges of 3f through a pair of .44 Brass frame Navies , with Traditions wads over the powder

No problem, all the balls seated firmly over the powder and accuracy was as good as I could hold

Schutzer said:

I just acquired what appears to be a 1979-made brass Armi San Marco Navy in .44 caliber. I bought it due to the relative rarity (to me) of the San Marco’s, but to my disappointment when I got it home I realized that the cylinder is smaller than ”modern” Pietta .44 Navy’s— it looks like they just took a .36 cylinder length and hollowed it out further to accommodate the .44 balls. The modern Pietta .44 Navies have longer cylinders and smaller forcing cones. Anyway, I’m disappointed because it’s obvious I won’t be able to get as much powder into the chambers as my steel Pietta… am going to do some tests with a chronometer to see if I can get velocities of about 800 fps— if not, am going to sell it because it would not be as effective as my modern Pietta. Am thinking that it would take loads of at least 32 grains of BP and maybe 23 grains of 777 to achieve that. Do you think it would do it much damage if I put maybe 5 balls of each through it? I’m thinking that after 44 years of use, it’s about as banged up as it will ever be!

Click to expand...

20 grains of 3f is plenty of pop for any .44 cap and baller.

For reference, the .45 Short Colt and Schofield cartridge used 27gr of powder, and the 1860 Army used a 24gr charge and a conical in a Nitrate cartridge. So 20 grains and a round ball isn't Mouse Fart stuff but is also ok on older brass frames

Stantheman86 said:

20 grains of 3f is plenty of pop for any .44 cap and baller.

For reference, the .45 Short Colt and Schofield cartridge used 27gr of powder, and the 1860 Army used a 24gr charge and a conical in a Nitrate cartridge. So 20 grains and a round ball isn't Mouse Fart stuff but is also ok on older brass fr

Click to expand...

Stantheman86 said:

20 grains of 3f is plenty of pop for any .44 cap and baller.

For reference, the .45 Short Colt and Schofield cartridge used 27gr of powder, and the 1860 Army used a 24gr charge and a conical in a Nitrate cartridge. So 20 grains and a round ball isn't Mouse Fart stuff but is also ok on older brass frames

Click to expand...

Thank you for your response!
Unfortunately, most everyone online and on YouTube who has posted their results, show that even 28 grains (of Pyrodex or BP) in a Colt .44 Navy generates only about 613 fps which calculates to only 113 ft-lbs of energy, which is woefully inadequate. Once the load jumps to 35 grains of BP, this generates roughly 860 fps or 229 ft-lbs— which is above 200 so is adequate (200 ft-lbs being the standard). Paul Harrell just dropped a video in which he shoots a .454 ball and 30 grains of BP through his Ruger Old Army, generating acceptable greater than 800 fps velocities. This shatters the front ribs, destroys the interior oranges, and breaks the rear ribs on his meat target. However, the Ruger likely has a far superior seal to open top Colts, so it would make sense that it would take closer to 35 grains in an open top to generate those kinds of velocities. Meaning, I’d have to put well over 30 grains of BP through the Colt to be effective.
If 28 grains as I mentioned earlier only generates 613 fps and 113 ft-lbs, 20 grains would likely be down in the circa 400 fps and maybe 50 ft-lbs of energy, if even that, which would be just as likely to bounce of your leather jacket than penetrate it! I doubt it would pierce or shatter even the front ribs on Harrell’s meat target. I don’t think I could trust my life to energies that low.
If more than 30 grains in a brass pistol is way more than it can handle, then it really isn’t a good choice for self-defense.
I do wish Paul had featured different increasing loads in his video, showing the increasing effectiveness against the meat target, but I imagine that would have gotten expensive!

If you're using a Brasser for self defense you can put Max loads in it, 20 is just a regular shooter load.

If I had no choice but to use a cap and baller for home defense I'd use a Dragoon with 50 gr of 3f and Kaido conicals. And a snubbed 1851 for carry with 40 grain charges and round balls.

The thought of relying on a percussion revolver for defense does not give me great confidence but if it has to be done , it has to be done.

Stantheman86 said:

If you're using a Brasser for self defense you can put Max loads in it, 20 is just a regular shooter load.

If I had no choice but to use a cap and baller for home defense I'd use a Dragoon with 50 gr of 3f and Kaido conicals. And a snubbed 1851 for carry with 40 grain charges and round balls.

The thought of relying on a percussion revolver for defense does not give me great confidence but if it has to be done , it has to be done.

Click to expand...

What do you think of the Ruger Blackhawk? I have an opportunity to purchase one but it seems like a LOT of money for something that is ahistorical, as well as only slightly more powerful than the historical copies, plus it looks VERY large and bulky. The only advantages would be virtually unlimited loads and from what I’ve heard, no cap jams.
I agree with you about the Dragoon etc. As far as accuracy, there is just something about the 1851 that fits the hand perfectly, feels very comfortable, and incredibly good accuracy— I can always hit center of bullseye at 7 to 10 yards, one handed. Which is further than most self-defense situations would warrant. When I was a policeman I carried the Glock and there’s no way I could boast of doing that consistently with it, one handed! These reproduction guns are are far more accurate than most people think.