2 balls?

[flamenblaster]

last friday i tried out an idea..i loaded 2 balls over 30 gr in my 1860..i think they were 140 grs each..had to shave a small amount off the second ball i loaded with a sharp box knife in order to clear the barrel...not much though..im guessing 250-260 grs bullet weight total..like a 45 colt round..recoil was noticeably improved..pleasently so..just wondering if this is a safe thing to do in a steel frame pietta 1860...or could the pressure get to high with the extra lead?..anybody else ever try this??

[Ramrod]

I doubt it's unsafe. You can use conical bullets of almost the same weight. Do you get any accuracy with two balls? And why not use a few grains less powder, and skip shaving the top of the balls?

[rvtrav]

Ramrod,
  From  all the tales I've heard told, your idea is not a new one.
    Around here (Utah) there are lots of local stories of the "old west" where Outlaws and Lawmen alike would attempt to 'enhance' their edge in gunfights with double and even triple ball loads in their cap and ball pistols.
  One of the most common themes mentioned is that Porter Rockwell (well known in local legend) used such loads in shortened colts of various types.
  I've never tried the theory, and certainly do not want to encourage anyone to put themselves in jeapordy,but it sounds like double balls may be safely accomplished.
  I am very curious about what they do on targets, Buck and Ball loads from shotguns and muskets were commonly used during the civil war, and were supposed to be innaccurate but deadly effective against rowed  ranks of soldiers.

[rvtrav]

To continue;
  The innaccuracy of the 'buck and ball' loading was blamed upon the several projectiles disrupting one another in flight, causing each other to deflect badly off the aimed path.
  I've also wondered about the crediblity of the 'triple ball' loads-after three balls wether there is enough room for powder at all in the chambers, let alone enough for any kind of effective velocity.
  Still many stories of revolvers loaded in such fashion continue to be told, and I imagine that anything that would give an 'ol west guy in a gunfight some edge or even confidence was tried. It's a facinating topic, especially for a cap and ball revolver fan, and any kind of a history buff. :grin:

[rvtrav]

Pardon to all,
 I listed Ramrod as the addresee, sorry Flamenblaster, My apologies

[flamenblaster]

I only tried it on one shot...didnt really notice if it had any accuracy at all..pointed it at an old garbage can lid with a bazillion holes in it anyway..im sure it was a bullseye tho :grin: chose thirty grs. since thats what i usually load with..would probly fit with 28 gr. maybe. Recoil was very pleasent..i could really feel that extra weight..but would be very controllable methinks..might be interesting to try and recover the balls to see what type of distortion was caused by the soft lead being hammered together. Velocity coulndnt have been much so i wonder if they could actually be effective as a gunfighters load..especially if they seperate in flight..sure that the would only get cold forged together during firing at best so probly couldnt stay together more than a couple feet out of the barrel?..hmm..methinks ill experiment with some targets and a bullet ctch of old shop rags or something :grin:

[Rob P.]

I remeber seeing an artical awhile back in Shoot! magazine that was about the Army experimenting with two and three ball loadings in the 45-70 case during the 1880's. And have read more than a few articles mentioned previously about buck and ball loadings during the War of Northern Aggression/Civil War. Have also read an artical about naval warefare and pirates using anything that would fit to load up blunderbusses for shooting into groups of sailers and sail rigging lines when boarding ships. So I would say it is possible to load two or three balls into a C&B revolver. Would like to know if it could be pressure tested though. Would hate to see someone get hurt doing this.

Rob

[Flint]

I would imagine a double ball load would be fairly easy in a Dragoon, and a triple in a Walker with a fair amount of powder.

[Naphtali]

Although this has probably been done since, in the 1960s a ballistician, Edward M. Yard, completed several experiments pertaining to variables when shooting black powder. To make a long story less long his conclusions include: Doubling projectile weight doubles operating pressure on the projectile (within the container).

This becomes important two places.

1. Percussion cap lock revolvers can blow out the nipple. You may see the beginning of this if your hammer is being blown off the cap during ignition. Not good.

2. European governments require proofing. Although, theoretically, modern steels and their heat treat should be so over designed for black powder revolvers that no black powder load is an overload, it is unlikely that the proof "proves" your double-ball load.

[Will52100]

One thing I'd like to bring up about the repos, the steel is not that much better than what was used in the mid 1860's.  I will say that the repos of the Walker and Dragoons are a lot stronger than the old ones, but the steel being used for cap and ball revolvers today cuts and works very much like mild steel.  Mild steel would little if any improvement over the steel in an original 1860-1861 revolver.  If a manufacturer would use some thing like 4140-4150 arsenal steel it would be a vast improvement and the guns would probably last forever.  I am curious as to what steel the Colt second and third Gen. used in the cylinder/barrels.

 The only real differance between todays repos and the originals would be that todays steel would be a little cleaner and therefore stronger, maybe.

[flamenblaster]

I beleive that i read somewhere that the army contracted out for paper cartridges to aid in faster reloading and that these contained conical bullets that where much heavier than round balls..over 200 grains i think. If that is the case..did they have any problems with their guns as a result of the heavier rounds..just wondering if any history buffs out there can shed any light on this

[scotjute]

I believe that with the conicals, one typically shot a lower amount of powder.

[darrell8937]

I think some good Personal Protective Equiptment might be in order..EEEKKK

[Gatofeo]

An excerpt from my Feb. 11, 2003 post:

The February 1975 issue of the American Rifleman has an interesting article on what loads were used in Civil War .36 and .44-caliber paper cartridges for Colt revolvers.
No mention is made of Remington or other cap and ball revolver charges but they were likely identical or nearly so.
No granulation (FFG or FFFG) is noted in the article. Round balls were generally not used in paper cartridges, but were loaded with loose powder.
There was a surprising disparity in bullet weights and powder charges in paper combustible cartridges for the Colts, according to the article.
Conical bullets for the Colt M1860 Army .44-caliber revolver ranged from 207 grs. to 260 grs. Powder charges ranged from 17 to 36 grains of black powder.
Conical bullets for the Colt .36 Navy ranged from 139 to 155 grs. Charges ranged from 12 to 21 grains.
Nearly all of these variations are found in prepared, paper cartridges manufactured by private contractors. It appears that U.S. government arsenals made few paper revolver cartridges, preferring to contract this task.
Union Army ordnance manuals of 1861 specify a load of 30 grs of powder with a .46-caliber, 216 gr. conical ball in Colt M1860 revolvers.
The same manual specifies a .39-caliber conical bullet of 145 grs., over 17 grs. of powder.
An official Confederate States publication specifies a 250 gr. conical bullet over 30 grs. of powder for the Colt M1860 revolver.
The Confederate specification for the Colt Navy is the same as the Union (.39 caliber conical of 145 grs. over 17 grs. powder).

This article makes no mention of multiple ball loads in the old cap and ball sixguns. It's an interesting question. I may have to try it someday, over the chronograph.
My .36 Remington surely has chambers long enough to accommodate two balls and perhaps 15 to 20 grains of FFFG black powder. Ditto with my Remington .44 Army.
My Colt 1851 Navy may be a bit dicey; whether you could ram two balls down its chamber and still have room for any appreciable amount of powder remains to be seen --- but I doubt it.
I'd rather risk my el-cheapo Remington .36 (made by Pietta) than my 1851 Navy (Colt 2nd generation).
I was unaware that the murderous scoundrel Porter Rockwell used double-ball loads in his belly gun. I seem to recall seeing a photo of a Colt 1860 Army with the barrel cut just forward of the wedge slot, attributed to him. Or am I thinking of some other nefarious gunman? Such shortened Colts were not entirely unknown on the frontier.
But I don't recall hearing about double-ball loads in cap and ball sixguns. Doesn't mean it wasn't done, though.
There was lots of tinkering, gun and otherwise, in the Old West. Witness the wagons with sails for wind power across the prairies and Great Salt Desert (not a success) and other hare-brained ideas.
Hmmmm .. have to try that double-ball load just for fun.

On a related note, yes, the Army tinekred around with three-ball loads in the .45-70 case. I believe these loads were intended for guards and sentries, not for combat use in the field.
Some years back I assembled a few such loads for my Marlin .45-70 lever-action. It was three balls over Unique powder, with each ball separated by a Wonder Wad.
I made them as a prank on a friend, who had no shooting experience. I showed him the brigger, safety half-cock, how it was loaded and so on. When he wasn't looking, I slipped in a three-ball load.
He eased down on a big paper target 25 yards away and touched it off.
Bang! Three holes appeared!
He appeared puzzled, but said nothing.
Then I reloaded it with another three-ball cartridge.
Bang! Now there's 6 holes!
Continued puzzlement but no comment.
Bang! Nine holes!
"What the hell is going on?" he said to me.
I burst out laughing and let him in on the prank. He thought it was a pretty neat load. I still do too.
For a while, I had four such loads in my Marlin 1895 rifle as a house gun when I lived in apartment complex in Idaho. I figured three .457 inch balls at low speed would ruin any intruder's day but not overpenetrate and harm a neighbor.
Later, I started loading a 20 gauge shotgun with No. 6 loads as my house gun.
Multiple ball loads can be fun for tinkering. The biggest bugaboo is that most lead balls are made of very soft lead, and they'll lead a bore in short order. The Wonder Wads in my .45-70 load seemed to help discourage leading.