Book of Cartridge Conversions and Antiques?

[Fox]

Does anyone trust the loads in this book for black powder antiques?

I saw a load for 44 Webley as a smokeless conversion and although it would be nice not to load BP and clean it all up at the end it soft of freaks me out to shoot smokeless in a gun from the 1880s.

 

[vagrantviking]

I have this book and some of the conversions are completely out to lunch so I don't automatically trust anything in it.
I do refer to it for ideas but do independent research online before making any decisions.

Years ago I was against the idea of smokeless in most antiques but over the years have learned a lot about pressure curves and modern powders behavior. Now I use smokeless in places I wouldn't have before but not everywhere. It really is nice to not have to strip them down for a full cleaning as that has it's own wear and tear.

 

[Fox]

I have this book and some of the conversions are completely out to lunch so I don't automatically trust anything in it.
I do refer to it for ideas but do independent research online before making any decisions.

Years ago I was against the idea of smokeless in most antiques but over the years have learned a lot about pressure curves and modern powders behavior. Now I use smokeless in places I wouldn't have before but not everywhere. It really is nice to not have to strip them down for a full cleaning as that has it's own wear and tear.

It would be nice, but as you suggest, might this be flipping a coin with the gun?

 

[mooncoon]

I think part of the equation is what sort of gun are you using the loads in? I would not worry very much about using them in a strong rifle action but would be very cautious in a revolver. I think the margin of safety is much greater in many rifles but certainly not all. For example I have a Wesson rifle in need of major repair. I am thinking of sleeving the barrel with a 44-40 liner but will probably chamber it to only accept a shorter shell to prevent someone loading it with modern ammunition and that is because I do not consider the action very strong. Also while I do look in the book for potential smokeless loads, at least some of them I think are either obsolete smokeless powders or ones which I do not have

cheers mooncoon

 

[Fox]

I think part of the equation is what sort of gun are you using the loads in? I would not worry very much about using them in a strong rifle action but would be very cautious in a revolver. I think the margin of safety is much greater in many rifles but certainly not all. For example I have a Wesson rifle in need of major repair. I am thinking of sleeving the barrel with a 44-40 liner but will probably chamber it to only accept a shorter shell to prevent someone loading it with modern ammunition and that is because I do not consider the action very strong. Also while I do look in the book for potential smokeless loads, at least some of them I think are either obsolete smokeless powders or ones which I do not have

cheers mooncoon

The 44 Webley is a first model iver johnson, which is a solid frame revolver, but also not well built.

I also have a 25 Stevens chambered Cooey that I am int he process of making ammo for it, the 25-10 listed, which is a conversion to centerfire for this round seems like a lot easier as it was designed in the 20s to shoot smokeless, not BP.

 

[Pete04]

Does anyone trust the loads in this book for black powder antiques?

I saw a load for 44 Webley as a smokeless conversion and although it would be nice not to load BP and clean it all up at the end it soft of freaks me out to shoot smokeless in a gun from the 1880s.

Is the book Handloaders Manual of Cartridge Conversions by Judy and John J Donnelly?
The load is 4gr of Bullseye with a 200gr lead bullet in a modified 44 MAG case.

 

[Fox]

Is the book Handloaders Manual of Cartridge Conversions by Judy and John J Donnelly?
The load is 4gr of Bullseye with a 200gr lead bullet in a modified 44 MAG case.

John J . Donnelly
Bryce Towsley

44 Bulldog 170gr over 3.5gr of bullseye

44 Webley 200gr over 4.0gr of bullseye

No idea how accurate this is