Minnie ball style bullets for oversize bores

AKA Hugh Uno

As to SHOOTING oversize BULLETS:

1. I have NEVER had to do this and have had excellent success with ALL of my TD rifles (and I have owned well over a dozen).

The use of "excellent success" may be very poor success to another. Can you quantify with 5 or 10 shot group sizes at 100 or 200 yards?

2. It is virtually IMPOSSIBLE to SEAT a .460 bullet in a modern (even unsized)45-70 case as the case mouth is gonna size it down to about .459" and/0r it ain't gonna FIT in the chamber. This was verified by a gentleman on the old Jousters TD forum. Thus "or larger" is NOT gonna work.

Actually it is very easy. Perhaps had you paid more attention to Wolf's book you would have learned that an over size expander is needed. That expander comes with the special Lee die set also recommended in that book. I have seated numerous 45-70 bullets in appropriately expanded cases and not had any "sizing down". Now that is my own measurements and not depending on someone else's statements. I regularly seat .464 bullets cast of 1 to 16 or 20 alloy in neck sized cases. .465" bullets are still a slip fit in most all cases fired in all of my TDs. I also regularly use a .4615" Rapine 460500 bullet with excellet accuracy (quatified as 10 shot groups at 200 yards under 4" or 2 moa). The .464" Lee 405HBs run 3 moa at 200 yards for 10 shots. Either of those bullets or Lyman's 457124 or 457125 sized .459 shoot into 3-4 moa.

3. I would try shooting a remington or other JACKETED bullet. If that keyholes, you can either try a hollow base bullet (and good luck with that) or buy another shooter.

The shooting of jacketed bullets in original TDs is generally not recommended by most TD authorities due to the softer steel of the barrels.

As for the late Mr. Wolfe's book,I personally think it is a very poorly written and researched book and a last choice for a beginner handloader.

Very easy to criticise another's work, especially when you fail to supply an alternative view. Spence's book is about replicating the military service loads for the TD. It is not about getting the best accuracy from a TD. Again, had you paid more attention reading the book, if you actually read it, you would know that. Most of us consider Spence's book to be the primer for reloading for the TD. It gives all of the basics in a simple and easy to understand format. If one wants to further work on accurate loads beyond the relm of Service loads then other methods can certainly be used. However, If one just wants to replicate the original service loads for their TD Spence's book is theway to learn how.

You have a nice day.

Larry Gibson

*********

unfortunately, even if this is done, getting this oversize case/round to CHAMBER in the rifle may be a bigger trick. It certainly was for the gentleman who actually tried it back a year or two ago and could not get the round to seat fully. A fired case TENDS to be within about .001 of the max chamber dimension (with the spring-back of the brass) and no case I have ever pulled out of one of my rifles would "accept" a .460 bullet inserted by hand. I guess I am just 'extrwemely' lucky.

A chamber that accepted a 45-70 round seated with a .465 bullet (.007+/- oversize) means the case neck area is going to hover around .487+ inches. THAT would be one BIG noticeably FAT necked round indeed. Why anyone would need/use such a round is beyond me.

As for accuracy, I can/have owned several TDs that would easily hold under 3MOA "all day long" with either smokeless or jacketed bullets. While not usually as accurate as an original or even better, modern reproduction rifle (like a Shiloh Sharps), a typical tight trapdoor with a nice bore should be capable of 3MOA fairly easily with most decent handloads.

As for jacketed bullets "eroding" bores, this is pure myth from the turn of the past century when there was in fact some erosion caused by early SMOKELESS powders in smaller caliber single shot target rifles. The actual truth is tha this statements has NEVER been proven empirically and even people like Mike Venturino now say it is a "personal" choice.

Try betting some softer bullets and see how things change.
john

I Used Spencer Wolf's book to work up a load to replicate the original military loading. The club I belonged to and helped found, as a group pobably used around 200 different trapdoors over a 10 year period. My father-in-law owned 50 himself. We found the only way to get consistant accuracy was with softer lead 10/1 lead/tin or even softer. I have used the Rapine and the Lee molds and I don't always size the bullets I cast. Just lube and load. I personally quit using jacketed bullets out of frustration (tumbling) and respect for my trapdoors. I also use only black powder to load. I feel that there is just too much chance to overload with smokeless powder and I rather like my trapdoor and my face. Larry was right about Wolf's book. It was about replicating the original military loads. I had the chance to visit Spence before he passed away. I think his book is very well done in the scope of material he intended to cover. For me it is the history and getting an old war horse to shoot the way they are supposed to shoot. I can honestly say that I have put literally thousands of rounds through my old trapdoors. I have experienced my share of frutration and also my share of success. I have a few award to prove it. I now shoot a rolling block 50-70 that belonged to my great-grandfather. Same formula for success. soft lead and black powder.

There was a reason that the original military loads used hollow based bullets. And I happen to have the original bullets picked up on the old Ft. Randall rifle range to prove that they were hollow based. Can't argue with Freeman Bull.

I have had excellent success with CAREFULLY made harder bullets.

In fact, this guy used wheelweight bullets at .4585 amd got excellent results also (frankly, I think lube is just almost as important).

But, just in case you don't want to read the whole article.

Nice TD rifle, wheelweights and 20-1 bullets around 500 grains, and smokeless powder = excellent results.

(and I also have had VERY good results with fairly hefty (but safe) loads of Varget. In fact, the most accurate and consistent CAST lead bullet I have ever shot in TDs is a Cast Precision 480 grain GAS CHECK bullet at .458 wth LBT blue lube.

Frankly, there is no ONE "best" ammo. LOTS of stuff "works."

However, my two basic suggestions are well-made 500 grain bullets, or the Remington 400 grain jacketed soft point. For the Rem, I would go with IMR4198 and for the lead bullets, I would go with Varget first. For BP shooting, almost any typical typical soft well-made bullet around 500 grain and all the other BPCR stuff (i.e. drop tube, slight compression, veggie-wad, etc.) yield very good results.

http://www.riflemagazine.com/magazin...=1094&magid=78


https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ure20111-1.gif

Very easy to criticise another's work, especially when you fail to supply an alternative view. Spence's book is about replicating the military service loads for the TD. It is not about getting the best accuracy from a TD. Again, had you paid more attention reading the book, if you actually read it, you would know that. Most of us consider Spence's book to be the primer for reloading for the TD. It gives all of the basics in a simple and easy to understand format. If one wants to further work on accurate loads beyond the relm of Service loads then other methods can certainly be used. However, If one just wants to replicate the original service loads for their TD Spence's book is theway to learn how.
Larry Gibson[/QUOTE]

**************************
quoted from the OLD JOUSTERS TD forum:

Posted By: *AKA Mr. (-)
Date: Fri 20 Oct 2006 11:37 am

First, saying someTHING is "wacky," or "not great," or "not clear," or "confusing" does not mean that some-PERSON is at fault, or has moral shortcomings. Heavens, who wants to speak ill of the deceased.

The Wolf book is not without value, it's just not the holy grail of LOADING knowledge. In fact, it is fraught with the possibility of doing more harm, or at least creating more frustration, than good for NOVICE reloaders.

Worth reading for most folks, yeah sorta? For collectors, YES, definitely.

OK, shall we tip-toe through the Tulips?
******************

P N-26: (Holt Bodinson's quote reprinted)

"Pat Wolf's book is the Mother Lode (sic) of all Trapdoor know-how. Forget everything you've ever read about reloading the 45-70 cartrdige for the Trapdoor." ... "more than just a clear guide to handloading the Trapdoor."

OK, here I say Holt Bodinson must not have known essentially diddly about shooting TD rifles to have expressed such un-bridled enthusiasm for such an incomplete and LIMITED book. I understand why Mrs. Wolf might put this enthusiastic piece in the book, twas her husband, but it's poop and Holt Bodiinson should know better.
****************

P. 8 "The average groove diameter of the rifle and carbine is .460 to .464."

According to WHO? Where did he get this fact? At least twice, he mentions this is as reported by OTHERS but not him. Why didint' HE do the reserch or at least indicate what research/sources he used. (yeah, he does mention "no footnotes," and "from memory." Fine, then this lack of specicicity means the book is not well-researched.
***************************

P.12 Where is Wolf getting his PRESSURE figures. Maybe I am missing something, but did he have a CUP measurement guage? DId he farm this out? Is he just deducting from loadinvg books? What!??
****************

P. 60: Recoil discussion?? The guy says start with light loads, then carbine loads, then rifle to get used to the recoil? OK, what was he talking about SPECIFICALLY? What's so bad about a TD recoil with BP? It's a light gun, but why not just mention that a Past Pad is just as effective?.
*************

P. 60: "Oft times however, modern-style loads do not perform accurately in the original Springfield." Duhh, and just as often THEY DO! In fact, he says the same thing earlier when he says the purpose of the book is to recreate original style cartrdiges.

***********
P.67: The "bore erosion" thing with jacketed bullets which has been debated ad-nauseum here (and apparently debunked, at least to most observers).
************

P. 69: The Lee 405 is the "ONLY (his caps) 405 bullet design that will give accuracy of 3MOA or less in the Springfield barrel." First, "HUH?" Second, 3MOA is pretty BAD in my book. I can get almost any commercial .405 to shoot 3MOA or less with about any propellent around. (OK, poor editing).

*************
Same page: "only a lead/tin mix" will obturate in TD bores. Yeah right..
*************

Same page: Having the "correct case neck tension and proper crimp .. is essential for accuracy in ALL (his caps again!) BP loads"

BS.. I can load up a BPCR load with BP with ZERO BULLET TENSION and ZERO CRIMP and it will shoot the lights out in a TD.
***********

Same Page: "The old warrior has a different type of barrel and we must adapt to it." Again, maybe if we are talking about HIS traditional loads, but the TD can shoot almost ANYTHING pretty well WITHOUT adaptation in most cases.

**************

P. 70: TD requires a "particular bullet" for "accurate shooting" and choice of molds is "neccessarily limited."

Yeah, to just about ANY lead bullet from 300 to 550 grains! Other than this, it's pretty "limited"!

************

P. 76: "Requirement" to ream out flash holes for accurate ammunition. Better spread the news to the hundreds/thousands of BPCR shooters that compress loads and would not dream of messing with a flash hole!
*******

P. 77: FROM WHERE is he getting this pressure information?
*****************

P: 86: no purpose in using a drop tube! Whoa, MANY folks have proven that the drop tube is one of the real keys to accurate loads and LOW SDs!
*******

P: 89: "Some bore sizes REPORTED by present owners." Not HIM, not White Labs, not some NRA article, OTHER PEOPLE. Right..
************
P. 93: No spring-back after compression. Uh, huh, not according to the published testing I have seen from others.
**************
P. 102 and 117: The Lee Factory Crimp die will damage lead bullets. Duhh, yeah sure if you MASH the thing! If you just use it to squeeze in the sides LIGHTLY and take out the flare, it is a SUPER tool to use. This is like saying "a hammer will damage the wood when building a house."
*********
P. 103: "other bullet designs can be used with MODERATE (his caps) success with BP." How about 'other designs can be used with EXCELLENT sucess.'
********
P.105 (all caps again): "ANYONE NOT INTERESTED IN FOLLOWING /MY ADVICE/...SHOULD USE JACKETED BULLETS /despite my telling you they erode bores/ AND SMOKELESS POWDER?" In other words, my way is the ONLY way to do things. Way off the reservation from the USEFUL place he started at which is recreating traditional loads.
*******
P. 106: average groove size is "460-463" ooops, I thought he said ".460 to .464" ealier??
********

P. 127 - 130: Where is he getting his pressure data from???

*****

P. 132: Flat base bullets give marginal accuracy. Correction, flat base bullets gave "YOU" marginal accuracy.
************

Bottom line, if you want to mess around and make RE-CREATED TRADITIONAL HIGH COMPRESSION HOLLOW-BASE BULLETS, THIS IS YOUR BOOK. If you want to load ACCURATE AMMUNITION in your TD, there are MANY MANY MANY other options. Most are MUCH easier to implement and do not require anything more than a BASIC reloading equipment and commercial bullets (lead or jacketed). Likewise, almost ANY "typical" BPCR load will shoot as well or BETTER than Wolf's hollow-base theory bullets.

Had the man not been so ABSOLUTE in his writing, (i.e. "must do this and must do that") and aknowleded that OTHER stuff MIGHT work, it would have been better. Since he does NOT teach a novice these things, the book CANNOT BE RECOMMENDED to such person.

My .03 cents, flame away.