Author Topic: how far? (Read 1110 times)

pistolero · « **on:** May 10, 2003, 09:08:05 PM »

here is another one of my questions......

What is the range (distance ) that I can expect fromn my colt walker with 30 grs and .451 ball? Is the distance directly porportional to the amount of load until diminishing returns come into play? If there there is , what is the rule to figure distance?

The price of freedom is payable only in blood spilled.

thanks guys....

Pistolero......

howdy doody · « **Reply #1 on:** May 14, 2003, 05:03:13 AM »

That is one tough question pard, I keep coming back to this post to see if anybody has any answers for you. I'd like to know too.

MOGorilla · « **Reply #2 on:** May 14, 2003, 07:09:20 AM »

I would suggest a .454 or evena .457 for the Walker. I shoot a Pietta 1860 army, 25 grains and a .454 ball. I have a detachable shoulder stock and got 2.5" grouping at 50 yards. I would expect better from a bench rest. If you can hold that chunk of iron steady, I would expect pretty good accuracy and distance, well, My backstop was about 40 yards behind my target and I was seeing dust at about mid range, so I was getting a good 90 yards out of the 25 grains with no problem. I think the orginal sights are supposedly set for a hundred. If you are shooting more than a 100 yards with a pistol, all I say is YOU THE MAN!

HWooldridge · « **Reply #3 on:** May 15, 2003, 08:36:49 AM »

When I was a teenager, our neighbor had an old abandoned outhouse across a field that I shot at with an original 1860 Army (with gain twist rifling). It was an uphill slope about 6 feet high and approx 300 yds across the pasture so we would rest across an old car to shoot. We tried to walk in the bullets but could not get either balls or picket bullets to reach the building. I think the charge was around 30 grs of FFFG. Once or twice, a round ball would hit and roll up to the wall but no amount of elevation would hit it directly. This revolver was pretty accurate at 50 yds and would stay on a Clorox bottle if I did my part so in other words, I think you would be real lucky to hit anything past 100 yds.

S.S. · « **Reply #4 on:** May 15, 2003, 09:11:08 AM »

Only one way to find out, Go to the range and try!
You may be surprised!
I have an old .31 cal. that I once put all 5 shots
into a 3 inch circle at 60 yard away! We set up water filled
milk jugs at 100 yards distant and "PLINK" at them with .44
Dragoons. We actually hit them pretty regularly. They
don't "Explode" when hit though. There is normally just
a good thump and a .44 diameter stream of water starts shooting out
the hole!

Flint · « **Reply #5 on:** May 15, 2003, 10:09:07 AM »

The only projectile shape worse than a round ball would be a cylinder like a wadcutter, or an upside down hollowbase wadcutter. Your reloading manuals should list ballistics for different coefficients, and the coefficient for a roundball, and knowing or assuming the muzzle velocity, you can determine the trajectory and velocity at various downrange distances.

Jeff Vicars · « **Reply #6 on:** May 15, 2003, 03:47:40 PM »

A few years ago I loaded up my Remington Target and all the stuff needed to shoot a cap and ball revolver and headed to the range. When I got to the range, I noticed a sign that read "Range Closed for the monthly Blackpowder Cartriage Match".
I gotta talking with the guys there for the Match and they asked if I was going to shoot. I told them all I had with me was a cap and ball. They said I could use the cap and ball, then laughed. Well I always have enjoyed a challenge and besides I wasn't going to get to shoot if I didn't join in.
The course was 5 shots standing at the 200 meter rams.
I hit the ram 4 out of 5 and got a red Second Place Ribbon that still hangs from my gunsafe. I didn't win but that revolver did get a bit more respect from those rifleshooters.

Gatofeo · « **Reply #7 on:** May 18, 2003, 06:14:49 AM »

Here in the remote Utah desert, I regularly shoot my Colt 2nd generation 1851 Navy and Pietta-made 1860 Army marketed by traditions.
Both are high-quality guns.
I'm going out on a limb here but I feel I must comment.
I have sometimes hit man-sized rocks and bushes out to 300 yards or so with the Navy and its .380 round ball.
The accuracy is there, to be certain, because the balls all hit to about the same place at that range. When they do that you simply keep elevating the barrel until you've got the range.
Unfortunately, this means elevating the front sight until it's the brass bead is well above the notch in the rear hammer. At that point, you just have to memorize about how much barrel should show past your hammer nose.
In my instance, it's about 3-1/2 inches of barrel showing, measuring from the muzzle. This isn't really accurate, but most of the hits would be close enough to keep an aggressor's head down.
The .44 Army uses about the same amount of muzzle elevation to lobs its 457 balls onto the target.
In the .36, I use 24 grains of Goex FFFG black powder with a well-greased felt wad between the .380-inch ball and powder. In the .44, I use 35 grains of FFFG powder and a felt wad between the powder and the .457-inch ball.
Both balls have the trajectory of a thrown grapefruit. However, in these two revolvers they also shoot very consistently, landing at the same place each shot.
Long-range shooting with a cap and ball revolver is possible. The biggest hindrance is the primitive sights. The Ruger Old Army or a modern-sighted Remington .44 would be easier to use, but you'd run out of sight adjustment at such ranges.
What's needed is a post front sight, and a rear sight with a flip-up ladder. Frankly, I don't see such a thing being marketed but it sure would be fun to tinker with.