mike
Bullet Hole
Posts: 65 
|
Post by mike on Dec 24, 2015 13:45:35 GMT -7
The .50/70 Government cartridge is really a great one. We can easily consider it our oldest centerfire cartridge was well as the real grand-dad of the buffalo guns. Shooting a .50/70 today is simply easy, new brass is readily available just as new rifles. And the .50/70 is not particularly fussy to load for, it usually throws bullets right where you want them without making a big deal or a big kick about it. Some doin's actually. So far my favorite bullets for the .50/70 are the copy of Lyman's #515141 but from a Lee mold and Accurate Moulds #50-470T, a paper patch bullet of my design. The grease groove bullet, or greaser, is what I like for paper punching and I like the Lee version of that bullet best because it has a slightly thick base band than the Lyman. Also, the Lee bullet weighs about 450 grains while the Lyman, with the alloys I've used, comes in closer to 430 grains. The paper patch bullet weighs just about 473 grains when cast with a 30-1 alloy and I wanted it to duplicate the old factory bullets for the .50/70 and .50/90. When loaded over 70 grains of Olde Eynsford 1 1/2F that paper patched bullet shoots quite well out of a C. Sharps Arms Model 1874 rifle. Soon I'll be trying some of the 450 grain bullets from The Bull Shop and I do hope to find them more consistent than the Lee bullets. Actually, I like the Lee bullets very well but I do wish the mold was a bit higher quality. If you've had other experiences with bullets for the .50/70 I'd love to hear about them. Shoot sharp, Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Dec 24, 2015 14:42:59 GMT -7
OK I will step up to the plate. When Sierra hunter then lovingly known as bullet head was three months old he his Mom and I went on an elk hunt in The Big hole MT. We camped a few days and I was blessed with an easy shot on a spike bull at perhaps 30 or so yards.
The rifle I was using was a an original Sharps conversion carbine in 50/70 gov. The load was with the Lyman 515415 over 60gn weight Goex FG.
The shot was with the elk coming straight at me and the bullet landed center of the chest. At the shot I stooped over to look under the smoke to see what happened. The elk was stumbling sideways and tipped over rolling down the fairly steep hill and stopped when he hit some lodgepole blow down maybe 20 yard down hill and never again moved of his own power. When I dressed out the elk I traced the bullet path and found it had passed through the heart, lungs, paunch and exited right beside the source for elk pellets. I don't remember the alloy used but it was likely wheel weight so I doubt it expanded at all but there is no sporting round available that could have dispatched that elk any better than did that 50/70 round.
If I dig a bit I can find a picture of me, the elk, the carbine, and Bullet head.
Sorry Jr. but I will always fondly remember you as Bullet head. For the rest of you folks we dubbed him Bullet Head because he didn't have any hair until he was a year old and to look at him well that is what always came to mind.
|
|
mike
Bullet Hole
Posts: 65
|
Post by mike on Dec 24, 2015 15:11:56 GMT -7
Some doin's!! I've never hunted with a .50/70, yet. The first Sharps I ever fired was a converted carbine. We were shooting loads much like yours that you got the elk with. Now the "hunting load" I like uses the soft paper patch bullet weighing 473 grains over 70 grains of Olde Eynsford. I'm pretty sure what the results will be if I ever get to use that load... Shoot sharp, Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Dec 24, 2015 15:41:51 GMT -7
I have never hunted with paper patch in the 50/70 but have on several occasions with the 50/90. When C.Sharps of Big Timber MT. finally came out with a 74 model Sharps I got one in 50/90. Before this one I had one of their model 75's in 50/90 and both were good accurate rifles.
With the 84 model I was deer hunting in the national grass lands on the MT. ND. border. I was working my way up a dry wash that was thickly overgrown with juniper. As I made my way up the wash I jumped a few mule deer that had been bedded in the thick juniper.
It was a short distance to the other side of the wash so I just waited for them to re appear going up the other side which they did within a couple minutes.
There was a pretty fair 4x4 in the group and he stopped with his neck and shoulder hidden behind about an 8" juniper that had just the right crook to it to hide his vital area. I cocked back the big hammer and waited because all he had to do is take one step and he would be in the clear. I was shooting off hand and after just a wee short time the rifle was getting heavy and awfully hard to steady.
I thought on the fact that the juniper was fairly small and the 600gn paper patch bullet rather large and being pushed by 100gn weight of Goex FFg.
With this in mind I set the trigger and held where the vitals should be on the buck behind the juniper. At the shot I saw large splinters of juniper flying past the deer and the buck dropping where he stood. That kind of performance certainly instills confidence in a cartridge.
I read the books by Miles Gilbert and Leo Remiger and looking through the records kept by the hide hunters I found that in the hands of White Jim the 50/90/550 was the only loading that came close to a 1 for 1 average for shots fired to hides harvested. Dropping down to the 40 calibers the average was about 4 to 1
I never got to shoot my 50/90's at long range but anyone that knows what a Sharps is about knows about the Billy Dixon shot. A good rifle in a capable chambering and lady luck riding on his shoulder that day.
|
|
mike
Bullet Hole
Posts: 65
|
Post by mike on Dec 24, 2015 19:35:24 GMT -7
This is my 3rd try to respond to your note. I get almost done and "Pooofff," my machine dumps my story. Somehow it must be your idea,,, maybe so I can't top your story. Don't worry, I can't top it anyway. But some years back I did get a black bear with a .50/90 using 500 grain paper patched bullets. That was with one of the step-side bullets from NEI, fired in my old Gemmer from C. Sharps Arms when they used Shiloh barrels and actions. I designed those bullets with the late Walt Melander and the idea was for use in the modern barrels that Shiloh was using then with the throated chambers. Those chambers had very abrupt leades to the rifling and the bullets had their ogive going back all the way to full diameter, then the diameter stepped down to a shank that received the paper patch. Those bullets worked very well for me in both .50 and .45 caliber and I'll still use them if I use those rifles again. Paul Matthews, in his book The Paper Jacket mentions me and some of the success I had with those bullets while, at the same time, saying how he didn't care for them. Paul also used them with smokeless powder loads and claimed that he got leading in the bore. I never found any leading but my loads were either full black powder loads or a mixed duplex loading. Anyway, the rather soft bullet hit that bear and the exit hole was actually gaping. The bear had been treed and it was a close range shot. I've never used the .50/90 for a shot beyond 100 yards while my .50/70 gets used at 200 yards almost with regularity. But, like the old times used to say, nothing kills like a .50. Shoot sharp, Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Dec 24, 2015 20:07:21 GMT -7
Interesting stuff Mike. I have those NEI molds in both 45 and 50 cal. It was one of those 45 500 I killed the wounded grizzly with, a story for another time. I do like that design of patch to groove for smokeless powder loads. I have done some awfully good shooting with that bullet in a Marlin 45/70. I iron on the patch by running them through a .459" sizer die in a lube sizer with a little lube pressure that puts a light film of lube on the patch. When they are to be used in the Marlin after patching I then invert the bullet and run it into the die nose first with the depth adjuster set just high enough to bump a small meplate on the nose so I feel comfortable running them in the tube mag. I seat the bullets so the patch is fully inside the case so there is no issue with the patch tearing when cycling through the action. I once used this arrangement to hunt caribou on the north slope of the Brooks range in Alaska and it worked well for me.
In my single shots with BP I prefer patch to bore diameter for which I use Kal-Tool adjustable weight molds.
My first PP mold though was the NEI you mention in 45 cal and it is still in the green and yellow box from Texas. I liked it so well I got the 50 cal too. My 45 is 500gn and 50 is 600 gn.
I didn't know you were the man behind the design. It is the easiest one I know of to apply the patch to.
|
|
mike
Bullet Hole
Posts: 65
|
Post by mike on Dec 24, 2015 20:56:44 GMT -7
Dan, Yes, they are easy to patch. Just follow the guideline, you might say. I have that bullet in .45 caliber, both in 410 grain and 500 grain. That's in a double cavity mould, one cavity for each bullet. The very first design was for the 500 grain .50 caliber. I never used those bullets in anything but the Sharps with the throated chambers. So, you've given them a more varied life than I have. I'll send a couple of The American Sharps Shooters to your email address. Shoot sharp, Mike
|
|
mike
Bullet Hole
Posts: 65
|
Post by mike on Dec 25, 2015 20:15:21 GMT -7
Dan, While on the subject of bullets for the .50/70, please tell me what wad you used under the hollow base bullets when you shot them. Or, did you use any wad at all? I'm wondering if a thin wad, such as punched from milk carton, would be pushed into the hollow base and pulled away from the sides of the bore which would make it ineffective. At the same time, a thicker wad such as a Walters' .060" should not be forced into the hollow base of the bullet but that would mean there is no advantage to having a hollow base. my guess, before trying any of them, is to load without a wad. If so, do you compress the powder charge before seating the bullets or compress the powder as the bullet is seated? I would enjoy hearing your thoughts on this. Shoot sharp, Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by Junior on Dec 25, 2015 21:36:25 GMT -7
I actually read a article on this today, and can say from experiance with shotguns, thicker wads are better.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Dec 26, 2015 6:53:54 GMT -7
I have not shot BP with that bullet yet so didn't use any wad other than packing popcorn filler. If using a wad I think the thick wad is a good idea or was also thinking that maybe the cavity could be filled with lube. If filled with lube it could be shot with or without a wad. Without a wad there will certainly be some hydraulic effect pushing on the base skirt. With a wad and with the cavity filled with lube I think it will be much the same as if the bullet was a plain base. In original loadings I think some type of fiber wedge was used and on recovered bullets found near Fort Buford and Fort Union on the Montana North Dakota border some of the bullets still have some of the fiber remaining in the cavity. Maybe this is the remains of a conventional wad that was pushed into the cavity, I don't know.
I am not sure about exactly what the intended purpose of the hollow base was but because of the small diameter compared to bullet diameter and shallow depth I don't think it was intended to aid in bullet base obturation. It may have had something to do with moving the balance point of the bullet forward to aid in form stability. Someone more knowledgeable than I that has studied the subject will have those answers but I just don't have enough experience through study or shooting to say what is the best way to go about loading the hollow base bullet in cartridges.
Maybe I should mention that when I do use base wads under the bullet with BP loads I make the wads from Styrofoam picnic plates. Usually a pair of those has the effect I want without adding projectile weight to the load.
|
|
mike
Bullet Hole
Posts: 65
|
Post by mike on Dec 26, 2015 8:35:01 GMT -7
Hmmm... Okay, I'll start with using Walters .060" veggie wads beneath the bullets. About your Styrofoam wads, many, many years I punched some patches for muzzleloading out of what turned out to be a nylon, or rayon, or whatever. Those "plastic" patches coated the bore of my .54 so well that all accuracy was lost. Then I had no way of cleaning that coating out other than simply by continued shooting. In time and after several days of shooting, the stuff did get cleared out. And after that experience, I'll put nothing plastic through my guns' barrels. Yes, a patch does have much more barrel contact than a thin wad but touching the bore is still touching the bore... Shoot sharp, Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by Junior on Dec 26, 2015 8:45:06 GMT -7
My understanding is that the HB was to push the weight to the front to help with stabilization.
|
|
mike
Bullet Hole
Posts: 65
|
Post by mike on Dec 26, 2015 9:10:10 GMT -7
We'll have to see about that...
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Dec 26, 2015 17:28:27 GMT -7
|
|
|
|
Post by Junior on Dec 26, 2015 18:14:12 GMT -7
That's a beauty!
|
|
mike
Bullet Hole
Posts: 65
|
Post by mike on Dec 27, 2015 8:06:16 GMT -7
I've thought about "Hawkenizing" a rolling block and I've got two actions just waiting for barrels and wood. Maybe someday... Actually, a near future project is to build a copy of the Kit Carson Hawken, a .54 with a 31 1/2" inch long barrel. I'm just waiting on the barrel. Back to the .50/70 bullets, I'll have to see about emptying some of my brass so those "new" bullets can be tried. No, that's not a difficult task at all, just to shoot some. Rain or shine, I look forward to doing that. Shoot sharp, Mike
|
|
mike
Bullet Hole
Posts: 65
|
Post by mike on Jan 8, 2016 7:58:02 GMT -7
Okay, 20 cases were emptied two days ago and now they're all polished and re-primed. This morning I'll load those .50/70s with the NOE bullets I got from you, over 65 grains of Olde Eynsford 2F compressed with a Walters' .060" wad. Then we'll see how well they make it down the barrel. Shoot sharp, Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Jan 8, 2016 12:56:51 GMT -7
I am at the edge of my seat with a white knuckled grip and tense anticipation.
BTW Pray tell what is your source for that powder?
|
|
mike
Bullet Hole
Posts: 65
|
Post by mike on Jan 8, 2016 13:46:53 GMT -7
Dan, I get my powder from Powder, Inc. A good place to buy.
Now I wish I had never said anything about going shooting today. It was not a good day.
I don't know why either, I mean I was wearing the right hat and everything. Before I say
anymore about the performance of those bullets, let me do more shooting, maybe in a different
rifle. Shoot sharp, Mike
|
|
mike
Bullet Hole
Posts: 65
|
Post by mike on Mar 1, 2016 17:33:20 GMT -7
Okay, after taking a good long break and shooting other guns, I'm going to give these .50/70 bullets another good try. A 20-round batch was just loaded, still using the 65.0 grains of Olde Eynsford 2F powder but with no wad under the bullet. They say when working up a load to change only one thing at a time. Well, I'm changing at least two things... First, no wad this time. The bullets are seated right over the powder, giving just a little compression. That means the hollow base of the bullets will be directly exposed to the powder and the pressures, maybe letting them do a better job. Also, I'll be using a different rifle, a 26" barreled .50/70 Hartford '74 Sharps from C. Sharps Arms that has proven itself already. On top of that, I'm giving the ammo I just loaded the real special treatment, they're going to the range cuddled in a soft Crown Royal pouch. I don't often drink that stuff but I do like their pouches. Okay, I'm off to the range, rain or shine, in the morning. My report should follow. Like they say in the news, film at 11:00. Shoot sharp, Mike
|
|
mike
Bullet Hole
Posts: 65
|
Post by mike on Mar 2, 2016 21:47:30 GMT -7
Alright, now for some spec's. When I first tried the 450 grain NOE .50/70 bullets from The Bullshop it was in my "heavy .50/70 with the 32" barrel. This time I used my "camp" .50/70 with the 26" barrel. Like I said yesterday, my most recent loads used no wad between the bullet and the powder. The bullets were simply seated down on the powder, compressing the 65 grain powder charge just a little bit. One characteristic about these bullets, in my humble opinion, is that they don't have large enough lube grooves. I say that with two things as a basis, (1) other bullets I've used in the .50/70s have larger grease grooves and (2) the "lube star" at my gun's muzzle was very thin and dry looking. Yes, these bullets are lubed with NASA lube and I certainly have no objection to that. I only wish the bullet carried more lube. That might be why these bullet worked with through the 26" barrel but not through the 32" barrel. They might have simply run out of lube while traveling through the longer barrel. While cleaning my 26" barreled Sharps, just before writing this, I looked for lead on the cleaning just because that can be another clue of a need for more lube. A couple very small specks of lead were noticed but not enough to be conclusive. That is something I'll look for again. Also, the NOE 450 grain bullets for the .50/70 are hollow based, that's been mentioned. However, The Bullshop believes NOE's hollow base is too wide, leaving too thin of a skirt. So The Bullshop uses a smaller hollow base pin, which produces as smaller hollow in the base of the bullets. The hollow base has a slight ridge around it perimeter. I must wonder if that very small ridge produced a tiny air pocket between the base of the bullet and the wad that I used in my first loads with these bullets. If so, that might be another point suggesting an advantage of using this bullet without a wad beneath it. And, let me say that I think The Bullshop is right, the hollow base as the mold comes from NOE seem to be larger than necessary. Now, about the shooting, while I was using a different rifle with a barrel six-inches shorter than the gun used for my first try, and the bullets were being used with no wad beneath them, I was wearing the same hat while shooting for consistency. And the shooting today was rather consistent. This shooting was done at just 50 yards but it was very pleasing too. My first 5-shot group, fired with blow-tubing between shots, would have scored a 50-3X in our short-range competition. (A shot at 1:00 o'clock looks like a 9 but it "pushed" the line to the 10 ring out of its way.) Then I fired a second group and that one is not quite as good, it scored a 47. Those two groups were fired without cleaning the barrel after the first target, and that's another thing which makes me believe the bullet should carry more lube. Cleaning the gun, of course, is a much quicker fix to that. Last night I did say "film at 11:00" and I took good pictures to show you. Adding one of those was just tried but it was bounced as being too big. Sorry 'bout that... My feelings now are that the 450 grain hollow based bullets from The Bullshop are very good and they will be put to their best use in rifles with 28" barrels or shorter when fired with black powder loads. That might mean these bullets would be perfect in .50/70 carbines or just short barreled rifles like mine. I'll be getting more of these bullets, I do know that. Maybe someday I'll do some hunting with them. Shoot sharp, Mike |
|
|
|
Post by missionary on Mar 3, 2016 15:33:51 GMT -7
Howdy Mr. Mike
This is a fun read. I also shoot a couple 50-70 Trapdoors.
I have also had the "low lube issue". An older Sharps shooter Danny Powell told me to "dip the noses" in my lube. Cured that issue. The Trapdoors have those long barrels but dipped noses fixed the lube issue.
Mike in Peru
|
|
mike
Bullet Hole
Posts: 65
|
Post by mike on Mar 3, 2016 22:27:34 GMT -7
And Howdy to you, Mr. Mike, Longer barrels do "ask" for more lube, that's a real fact. Several Sharps shooters want those 34" barrel for all of their advantages. But those advantages come with some disadvantages too. They need more lube. Dipping the bullet's noses in melted lube would do it as far as adding lube goes. That would be very good if you were going to shoot the cartridge right away. Myself, I like to prepare my ammo so I can carry it in my coat pocket. So, I'd look for a different solution. A lube cookie can be added underneath the bullet, with considerations for greater powder compression and all. With the bullets in question, larger lube grooves would more than likely handle the situation. The quickest fix, like I said, is to use those bullets in rifles with the shorter barrels. Yes, that means that I'll be treating my different .50/70 rifles as if they were actually chambered for different cartridges. But maybe I'll find a happy medium that both the long and the short barreled guns can enjoy. Thanks for commenting on my notes. And I think I've heard about Danny Powell but that must be from several years back. Maybe back in the days of John Baird and The Buckskin Report. Is there a chance of that? Shoot sharp's the word, Mike |
|
|
|
Post by missionary on Mar 4, 2016 14:56:57 GMT -7
That might well be the same. Danny did a lot of BP cartridge back in the 80's 90's. Then took up fishing more dividing his time between east ILLinois and Montana.
The Danny I know was a big help getting me pointed in the right paths with BP cartridges. When we are up north he is a regular visit. One of those many fine shooters that are a big help.
Dipping noses does have inherent problems. Hunting my first load is dipped then the others readily available are not if there needs to be a fast reload. Other dipped are carried in a tin to help keep the crud off. Two extra dipped are plenty in my hunting so far.
I hope this time up to get a 50 Alaskan put together. That will be my BP caliber 50 ever rifle. Right now it will be either a 1895 Marlin or a jap 1886. Decided on that caliber 50 due to brass and die availability. Plus if ever needed it would make one dandy big bore thumper.
Mike in Peru
|
|
mike
Bullet Hole
Posts: 65
|
Post by mike on Mar 4, 2016 16:25:49 GMT -7
Mike, For that .50 Alaskan don't forget the new Model 71s being made in Italy. Just a thought... Shoot sharp, Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by missionary on Mar 4, 2016 19:08:27 GMT -7
Have to look into that avenue... But it would be another rifle to buy and I sort of think a Henry Steel Frame 41Mag is going to be the higher priority. Prices are dropping on GB... There is one now that started bidding at $699. I am waiting till they get to the regular price of the 44 Mag Henry Steel.
Mike in Peru
|
|
mike
Bullet Hole
Posts: 65
|
Post by mike on Mar 4, 2016 19:23:30 GMT -7
Hmmm... A .41 Mag isn't the same as a .50 Alaskan at all. To each his own. Myself, I still kind'a want an Uberti '73 in .44/40 with a 30" barrel. Yes, I've been saying that for a couple of years and even watched a few go by. Just been busy with .50/70s and other Sharps I guess. Shoot sharp, Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by missionary on Mar 5, 2016 15:29:48 GMT -7
You are correct.. A 41 mag is nothing near a 50 Alaskan. But I have a rifle to send to JES Reboring in either the 1895 Marlin or the jap 1886. I do lean more to sending the 1886 as it has a octagonal 26 inch barrel that would be dandy with BP loads.
A Chiappa model 71 is going to be a big buy far more than a Henry 41 plus the $250 JES will get for the rebore and chamber job. The Henry 41 mags are slowly declining in price and in a month or two should be around the $675 zone the 44 mags sell for.
Typing is interrupted as I chomp a fresh peach... excellent peaches right now down here.
Mike in Peru
|
|
mike
Bullet Hole
Posts: 65
|
Post by mike on Mar 5, 2016 17:26:36 GMT -7
Alright my friend, please educate me. What is a .50 Alaskan? I was thinking it was a .348 blown straight out. Well, because the .348 is a necked down .50-110, wouldn't blowing a .348 back out just make it into a .50-110 again? There is new brass available for the .50-110 that would save on trying to form cases. Okay, I just looked on the Buffalo Arms web site and found the .50 Alaskan brass. So it is a straight .50 with a case length of 2.1" which, I will continue guessing, makes it more suitable for heavier bullets than the .50-110. Let me know if I'm on the right track. Shoot sharp, Mike
|
|
tom
Bullet Hole
Posts: 56
|
Post by tom on Mar 5, 2016 18:02:39 GMT -7
Mike, it's been a while since I messed with my 450 Alaskan, but it is the 348 blown out to 458. The 50 Alaskan is the same case blown out to 50.
My memory is a bit fuzzy, but I necked some 50 110 down to 450 Alaskan and it seems they were a bit longer than blown out 348s. I think the 50 110 was a little thinner in the web area. All of this "expert" knowledge from a dim memory,but that's what I think I remember.
|
|
