I have read many of the postings in other threads on using smokeless powders with a burn rate slower than 2400 for low pressure loads for antique revolver cartridges. Win 38-55 had supplied much information that peaked my interest, and I too would like to venture into experimenting with loads along these lines.
My Project:
I am loading for a Navy marked Webley Mk1 built in the first month of production. It had been Nitro Proofed at sometime during its life. It's been refinished, and the bore is pitted some, but it shoots quite well and has all of its original parts except for the grips (I have repro's coming).
I've measured the cylinder fronts, and they are within spec at .4495"
I slugged the barrel, and it too is within spec at .449". I was initially puzzled at the sizes for the cylinder fronts and the bore. After a bit of enquiry, a freind loaned me a copy of Bruce & Reinharts fine Webley book. A bit of searching turned up a copy of the sealed pattern for the mk1 revolver. It gave the specs for most parts of the revolver including screws. It was then I had found the answer. To make a long story short, the Webley Mk1 was initially adopted as "Revolver, 6 shot, .441 caliber". However, they were from inception chambered for the .455 Mk1 cartridge. This made finding a suitable bullet much easier.
I chose some .451" 250gr. lead roundnose flatbase "cowboy" bullets that are manufactured locally. I decided early on for this project that I would use the Mk1 case length. My thinking was, that I could use both smokeless and Black powder. It would be nice to have the versatility. I was able to obtain a fair bit of Starline 45 Schofield brass, and it was trimmed to .870" and the rims thinned to head space properly.
My only loads so far have been with Unique. While the loads are fairly accurate, I would like a higher load density. When I read the postings about low pressure loads using slower burning smokeless powder, I began to think this might be a viable solution.
I know "WIN 38-55" used 4198 in developing his 45 Schofield loads, but I'm thinking that it may be too slow for the Mk1 Webley case.
So that's where I'm at. I would appreciate any help with which of the slower burning smokeless powders would be a good starting point.
Jake
My Project:
I am loading for a Navy marked Webley Mk1 built in the first month of production. It had been Nitro Proofed at sometime during its life. It's been refinished, and the bore is pitted some, but it shoots quite well and has all of its original parts except for the grips (I have repro's coming).
I've measured the cylinder fronts, and they are within spec at .4495"
I slugged the barrel, and it too is within spec at .449". I was initially puzzled at the sizes for the cylinder fronts and the bore. After a bit of enquiry, a freind loaned me a copy of Bruce & Reinharts fine Webley book. A bit of searching turned up a copy of the sealed pattern for the mk1 revolver. It gave the specs for most parts of the revolver including screws. It was then I had found the answer. To make a long story short, the Webley Mk1 was initially adopted as "Revolver, 6 shot, .441 caliber". However, they were from inception chambered for the .455 Mk1 cartridge. This made finding a suitable bullet much easier.
I chose some .451" 250gr. lead roundnose flatbase "cowboy" bullets that are manufactured locally. I decided early on for this project that I would use the Mk1 case length. My thinking was, that I could use both smokeless and Black powder. It would be nice to have the versatility. I was able to obtain a fair bit of Starline 45 Schofield brass, and it was trimmed to .870" and the rims thinned to head space properly.
My only loads so far have been with Unique. While the loads are fairly accurate, I would like a higher load density. When I read the postings about low pressure loads using slower burning smokeless powder, I began to think this might be a viable solution.
I know "WIN 38-55" used 4198 in developing his 45 Schofield loads, but I'm thinking that it may be too slow for the Mk1 Webley case.
So that's where I'm at. I would appreciate any help with which of the slower burning smokeless powders would be a good starting point.
Jake


















































