PCI Ammo 41 Long Colt Experience.

MosinMan13

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
18   0   0
I’m not going to call this a review, because I don’t own a chronograph, or any of the other tech required to break down the specs, but rather my experience with this “PCI Ammo” brand as seen at Rusty Wood Trading Co, and specifically the 41 Long Colt, 200gr Soft Lead ammunition.

The claim:
-New Starline Brass.
-Soft Lead 200gr Hollow Base Round Nose projectiles.
- Real Black Powder Charge.
- Suitable for all firearms of this caliber in good condition

$275 + Shipping etc for 50 Rounds.

After firing 6 rounds at 15 yards from a suitable firearm(1877 Thunderer) in excellent condition, at a 2’x3’ foam
board to pattern, I noticed a few issues.

- Sound report was a little sharp.
- Smell was different
- Less Smoke and Foul
- Every round that made the board key-holed the target.

My first suspicion was maybe the charge, did I accidentally get the smokeless loads, or could it have been a substitute BP?

I reached out to Rusty Wood Trading Co to find out, in the meantime I pulled 4 additional cartridges apart, documented all the weights and specs while I waited for an answer, my findings;

- 185gr Projectile, hard cast/linotype HBRN
- Some sort of liquid dipped lubricant that doesn’t seem like typical BP lube, empty ridges.
- 16-16.5 gr charges, looks like BP but doesn’t smell like any BP I’ve used.
-Low or no compression of charge
- New Starline Brass.

So overall not entirely misleading, I can live with the charge and the powder, but I don’t believe this to be the cause of the tumbling lead, at this point I believe the hard cast lead isn’t allowing the skirt of the hollow base to expand, to achieve a better seal to the bore, and seat the rifling to better stabilize the projectile.

Rocky Mountain replies to me, insisting genuine BP. I don’t know how to test it but at this point I believe to have found the issue, I explained my findings and questioned why the Ammo is hardcast when it’s clearly advertised soft lead, even pleading my case for the lack of proper performance. Essentially in so many words I was told “41LC is hard to load for” also “have you slugged your bore” and a direct quote “It was NEVER meant to be a target round -more just a noise maker – LOL”

For clarity I do my own hand loads and purely bought this ammo at a premium out of curiosity. My load, as taught to me by members on this site, as follows;

-200 gr MP mold HBRN Soft/Pure lead (196gr average)
-18-18.5 gr of Schuetzen 3FG BP (still playing with the amount)
-Slightly compressed charge
- Lambs tallow/ Beeswax lubricant pan lubed.
- Starline brass

To make sure I'm not crazy, I loaded up 6 of my own, took a similar sized foam board and printed a group to see, and sure enough zero keyholes, and for a guy with absolutely zero training and a century old revolver, the group was relatively good.

Conclusion, be careful as a consumer, I’m not saying avoid that brand, or that store, I’ve shopped there a lot before, but buyer beware. If you’re like me and your Colt revolver relies on a soft HB bullet to achieve a stable flight, this ammo is no good, or at very least inconsistent. The store is about the same if you run into trouble.
 
That sounds like a complete clown show for $275 a box.
Linotype or even straight ww I'm thinking will cause more wear and tear on your barrel.
Not likely. Lino just won’t expand properly with the hollow base. WW I would expect to shoot just fine. Not sure why you’d cast these with pure lead when 20 or 25 -1 pours much nicer and expands beautifully.
 
That sounds like a complete clown show for $275 a box.

Not likely. Lino just won’t expand properly with the hollow base. WW I would expect to shoot just fine. Not sure why you’d cast these with pure lead when 20 or 25 -1 pours much nicer and expands beautifully.
If you're experienced at casting you shouldn't need tin to cast perfectly.
Tin is more about making hunting bullets that will expand.
 
If you're experienced at casting you shouldn't need tin to cast perfectly.
Tin is more about making hunting bullets that will expand.
Improving fill out is a net positive. It doesn’t take much tin at all to achieve, even 2% helps. Tin being used specifically for expanding hunting bullets is nonsense not sure where you heard that. There are some excellent books about bullet casting available for free as pdfs on Anna’s Archive.
 
Improving fill out is a net positive. It doesn’t take much tin at all to achieve, even 2% helps. Tin being used specifically for expanding hunting bullets is nonsense not sure where you heard that. There are some excellent books about bullet casting available for free as pdfs on Anna’s Archive.
Tin is expensive when casting in high volumes. It's not necessary for cowboy action, target or metallic silhouettes.
Lot of these books are nonsense. Examples a bead of sweat from forehead can cause an explosion, drop tubes, mold heating methods,etc,etc
 
two thoughts come to mind; first is try dissolving the powder in water; it should dissolve leaving the charcoal portion undissolved. Smokeless will not dissolve at all and I have never tried dissolving Pyrodex. The second point is that alloys melt at a lower temperature that its components. That means that the molten lead will fill out the cannelures more completely an it only takes about 5% antimony to have that effect without making the bullets excessively hard

cheers mooncoon
 
two thoughts come to mind; first is try dissolving the powder in water; it should dissolve leaving the charcoal portion undissolved. Smokeless will not dissolve at all and I have never tried dissolving Pyrodex. The second point is that alloys melt at a lower temperature that its components. That means that the molten lead will fill out the cannelures more completely an it only takes about 5% antimony to have that effect without making the bullets excessively hard

cheers mooncoon

Thanks for the tip on the powder, I’ll have a look tonight for #### and giggles.
 
I don’t know if it matters whether it’s BP or a substitute, but it would be easy to figure out if it’s explosive (like BP) or smokeless (like something along the lines of trail boss). Because Supersonic powders pop, and smokeless powder burns when ignited without being under pressure.
Maybe not as technical or specific as you want, but just throwing it out there in case it helps.

Mooncoon2s response is quite informative and above my knowledge of black powder.
 
That sounds like a complete clown show for $275 a box.

Not likely. Lino just won’t expand properly with the hollow base. WW I would expect to shoot just fine. Not sure why you’d cast these with pure lead when 20 or 25 -1 pours much nicer and expands beautifully.
It sure is.

I don’t think I mentioned In my write up that I did sift my backstop and managed to find one of the fired hardcast bullets. I wanted to see if the base skirting expanded and by how much. Basically what I found was an entirely intact projectile, that apart from a couple small abrasions from impacting gravel in the backstop, there was zero measurable deformations. I’ll probably update my OP with photos later this weekend, but I think just at face that alone speaks for the hardness of the lead, and thus its inability to function properly like they do with pure/soft leads.

To answer your question though, because I’m still a newbie and because I shoot a lot more antique cap and ball, keeping one hardness of lead just keeps it simple. I do occasionally tin slightly when I’m doing a lot of 45-70 or 41LC, but only enough to improve the flow.
 
It sure is.

I don’t think I mentioned In my write up that I did sift my backstop and managed to find one of the fired hardcast bullets. I wanted to see if the base skirting expanded and by how much. Basically what I found was an entirely intact projectile, that apart from a couple small abrasions from impacting gravel in the backstop, there was zero measurable deformations. I’ll probably update my OP with photos later this weekend, but I think just at face that alone speaks for the hardness of the lead, and thus its inability to function properly like they do with pure/soft leads.

To answer your question though, because I’m still a newbie and because I shoot a lot more antique cap and ball, keeping one hardness of lead just keeps it simple. I do occasionally tin slightly when I’m doing a lot of 45-70 or 41LC, but only enough to improve the flow.
I've had some rifles shoot better with softer basically lead bullets but I can't recall any shooting better with straight WW.
I'm using black powder lube and basically black powder velocities. Example even in a 30-06 I'm not trying to get smokeless high velocities.
I used to have all these different alloys for different things. Now it's just salvaged lead and not worried about it.
 
I've had some rifles shoot better with softer basically lead bullets but I can't recall any shooting better with straight WW.
I'm using black powder lube and basically black powder velocities. Example even in a 30-06 I'm not trying to get smokeless high velocities.
I used to have all these different alloys for different things. Now it's just salvaged lead and not worried about it.
Totally and thats what I mean, I’m a little less worried about it in my modern rifles etc.

The old 1877s are a delicate little thing, and 41 LC is a smidge more temperamental. I could slug each gun, load heeled bullets specific for each revolver, but like so many I just trust the softer pure leads to seal it up. Hasn’t let me down yet.

For anyone else strolling by this thread in the future, especially someone green to the life, this is also a great case for why to be dubious about buying handloaded or unknown to you ammo. I don’t know if this is genuinely PCI ammo from the states, they do seem to offer something similar down south of the boarder, but I really don’t know, and the retailer didn’t suggest anything otherwise, only got defensive when asked. So fortunately it was just bad projectiles, but if someone can make that mistake, they can mix up anything. Even $275 ammo is cheap compared to your hands, fingers, face etc. Buy from trustworthy places or learn to load yourself and stick to it.
 
I've had WW tumble out of a 41 LC. That was my main problem.
Stayed with PL over 4.3 - 4.5 Unique, shoots like a damn

Absolutely! Moral is if you want it done right, do it yourself.

The final word I got from Rusty Woods was;

- The lead isn’t hard, I’m wrong about that.
- He didn’t cast these bullets.
- He’s never had a complaint with any of his ammo ever.
- If I’m such a pro reloader why don’t I just go reload them.

Of course I did find out with a little digging around that he’s had several complaints of his loaded antique rounds, with no powder/squibs, improper charges (alleged blown up gun) and more of my scenario. It could all be heresay and I can’t validate any claims but the formula for how he handled all those complaints matches my experience.

I didn’t even ask for money back, I was polite until the end, but some accountability and maybe an apology would have been nice. Live and learn I guess.
 
I don’t know if it matters whether it’s BP or a substitute, but it would be easy to figure out if it’s explosive (like BP) or smokeless (like something along the lines of trail boss). Because Supersonic powders pop, and smokeless powder burns when ignited without being under pressure.
Maybe not as technical or specific as you want, but just throwing it out there in case it helps.

Mooncoon2s response is quite informative and above my knowledge of black powder.
I don't think real black powder is explosive. I had experts on Alberta outdoorsmen all say I was basically stupid and wrong but I don't care what they or government experts say.
If you pour out black powder on ground it doesn't explode when you light it. It puffs faster than smokeless.
In a gun the compressed black powder doesn't explode. I think it burns slower than smokeless? Less pressure than smokeless in a compressed charge. You can see at night more powder burning out past the muzzle.
I think Canadian government labeled as explosives is quite a stretch. Example if determined you could make a bomb out of lots of different common available components. I think the government is either stupid or they are doing this to make things harder for us antique black powder shooters
 
The difference between flammable and explosive is that explosives burn supersonic when not compressed/contained. It is recognizable by hearing the “pop” because it breaks the sound barrier. This happens with black powder.

Smokeless powder is not explosive because when not compressed, it burns slower than supersonic, or slower than the speed of sound. That’s why there’s no “pop” or “crack” but just a burn.

Explode doesn’t inherently mean dangerous, and firecrackers are safely and casually used all around the globe for fun.

Even NON-explosives will burn faster than the speed of sound when compressed, and this in fact happens with smokeless powder when it’s contained in the cartridges and ignited within the barrel. It still isn’t an explosive because even when contained the rate of burn within the actual powder itself isn’t happening instantaneously like it is with true explosives. So while it isn’t intrinsically explosive we make the gases expand faster than the speed of sound by containment, but not the actual fuel itself..

We all burn gases in our vehicles and they don’t explode. That same liquid when gasified and contained like in an empty Jerry can is capable of exploding. For this reason I never leave “empty” Jerry cans in my garage, because there’s still a little something in there.

At least that’s my understanding of it. I don’t believe the laws and agencies have anything to do with science, but just division of power and duties.

There are videos by Saami online showing firefighters safely extinguishing truckloads of smokeless ammo to demonstrate that they don’t explode and aren’t explosive, as you you mention . Or at least there were a few years ago.
 
The government also made nitric acid for stump removal controlled to the point that it’s nearly impossible to get effective stump removal without paying hundreds or thousands to a stump grinding company. Just because the ingredients can be used by people for bad things, though I’ve never heard of it happening.
 
The government also made nitric acid for stump removal controlled to the point that it’s nearly impossible to get effective stump removal without paying hundreds or thousands to a stump grinding company. Just because the ingredients can be used by people for bad things, though I’ve never heard of it happening.
Black powder if you pour out on the ground makes a puff sound. Not a Crack.
I think compressed Black powder burns slower than non compressed.
I suspect. I don't know for sure but contained in a rifle. I think smokeless is opposite. I think it burns faster than black and this is why more pressure and less muzzle flash with smokeless.
This is just my theory.
About our government banning stump removal. I think Ottawa should concentrate on drugs coming and going in our country. Maybe even start to get serious and actually inspect some of the containers coming into our ports.
 
I don’t know if it matters whether it’s BP or a substitute, but it would be easy to figure out if it’s explosive (like BP) or smokeless (like something along the lines of trail boss). Because Supersonic powders pop, and smokeless powder burns when ignited without being under pressure.
Maybe not as technical or specific as you want, but just throwing it out there in case it helps.

Mooncoon2s response is quite informative and above my knowledge of black powder.

I did a little research and hobby investigation of my own, the powder did dissolve in water, which is indicative of genuine BP. I also took a sample out and ignited it, ignition took a good minute to catch but the burn was very positive of genuine BP. My other findings, and I only say this in archival fashion for the future user searching old posts for answers, the actual grains of powder looked like BP as opposed to what I’m seeing on the internet, where the substitutes look like small pearls or balls rather than small coal shapes crumbs like genuine BP. The aforementioned methods will all help anyone uncertain in the future make that designation. As for the lack of fouling, different smell etc, I can only guess that perhaps this is say Swiss powder or something along those lines? Perhaps it’s just a cleaner burning powder.

As for the lead, if anyone has a Lee Lead Hardness tester they would be willing to sell/lend/rent to me, I’m looking to get a more scientific/absolute answer.
 
Back
Top Bottom