I tried the Whitworth for the first time at 100 metres yesterday (10 shots prone) and it seems to work ok. There are six shots in the left group, and there seems a slight inconsistency in my technique due to the fact that there are two tight groups. I'll have fix that in the next couple of months.

That's excellent shooting! I hope to be able to work with one of these conversion cylinders later this year. I'll be sure to post a range report here when I do.

Meanwhile, my project is to master combustible paper cartridges for the .44 Remington and Colt army models, Colt's .36 navy and .31 pocket models. I have been researching the 19th c. manufacturing methods and am now trying to achieve the best configuration of materials and process for ease-of-making as well as practical loading at the range. I am trying to limit myself only to those materials that would have been readily available to 19th c. makers, so I am sourcing 100% cotton rag "onion skin" bond paper, potash, water glass (sodium silicate), etc. When I have made some more progress, I'll post a note here to let you know how it is going, if you are interested in that?

Best regards,
-H.

Mustaruuti, what shoots better in your rifle, a light weight bullet or a heavy one?

There are six shots on the target (X-X-X-9-9-8). Unfortunately, I messed up on the second

Thanks. I appreciate the additional information. I have been seeing the same advice from retailers here in the States, re: carrying with the hammer down on an empty chamber for safety.

I'm happy to see also, according to the patent owner here in Virginia, that cartridges loaded to the approx. specification of the 19th century U.S. Army .45LC combat round (~30gr. vol. FFFg, ~250gr. bullet) are ok to shoot from this conversion cylinder. For competitive accuracy, your lighter loading does seem better, however.

Best regards,
-H.

I've also tried max loads and conical bullets, but with less satisfying results.

Mine has the safety notches, but I rarely carry it loaded in a holster. For safety reasons I guess it's safer to rest the hammer on an empty chamber.

Some sellers that do business here in the USA (I live in Virginia) offer a six-chamber cylinder, while some offer a five-shot version. I've checked with Taylor's, Midway and Buffalo Arms, as well as the Howell's Old West Conversions website.

I'm not sure why there are two versions, as it seems like under any conditions six would be more efficient than five shots. Can anyone clear that up? For example, are there loading limits for cartridges in the six shot cylinder that don't apply to the five chamber model (given the thickness of the steel in the chamber walls)?

I ask this because every 19th century source I have come across (U.S. Army small arms test reports, etc.), and 20th c. sources (authors like Elmer Keith and John Taffin) emphasize the versatility of the .45LC cartridge with max. black powder loads of 40(forty!) grains of powder under a 255 grain conoidal bullet. Backing off that maximum, a couple of my sources write that the army came up with combat loads of 30-ish grains of powder with military ball ammo (prob. soft lead bullets the same weight as the max. load or near it), yielding muzzle velocities that are comparable to the 1911 .45 ACP cartridge. That was the typical army .45LC round that the 1873 Peacemaker used. Taffin writes that his tests using RCBS bullet mould 45-255 and 38.6 grains of FFFg resulted in a muzzle velocity of 949fps and were "most accurate."

I want to be able safely to shoot up to Taffin's .45LC tested black powder load in my Uberti 1858 Remington using a conversion cylinder.

My other question concerns the engineering of the R&D cylinders. Mr Flatnes' great article shows clearly that his version of the 45LC cylinder has the Remington safety notches between each chamber, milled into the backplate. In my view, this is hugely important, as it allows the weapon to be carried safely with all six chambers loaded, just as can the cap-and-ball cylinder for this gun. It is one of the Remington revolver's best features.

However, most of the R&D conversion cylinders I've seen on the market don't seem have this feature. Why is that? Taylor's tells me that I would have to carry the pistol with the hammer on an empty chamber for safety. Not the best option, surely? So, where do I find one of these cylinders that can take the army/Taffin load, and has the Remington 1858 safety notches?

Thanks for any advice you have.

Respectfully,
-H.

I am sure Trond has much better representatives of the Krag Peterson than I have. I also only have one example of this treasured rifle in my collection. If you would still like pictures of it please send me an email at eiden@centurytel.net

Thank You
John

I'll be shooting six classes with three rifles:
Maximilian/Pennsylvania O. with a civilian jaeger rifle by Christof Schel, Sweden (ca. 1730) with a German barrel dated 1648. Probably an ex-wheellock .65 caliber.
Minié/Lamarmora O. with a Lawrence & Robbins P-1853.
Whitworth/Vetterli O. with a Swedish M1860 Wrede.

I'm onto something that (in my eyes)looks like precision with the .577. The Wrede needs a lot more testing. The jaeger performs well at 50m but I have difficulties at 100m. I have a .650 Jeff Tanner-mould for this rifle and I can't seem to get rid of air pockets below the sprue. I have opened the filling hole, tried 'force-feeding' lead, swirling and tapping but so far with poor results.
Anybody have a tip how to get better roundballs with these moulds?

Best regards,
Tor

Hi Klaus

I owned a Sanftl rifle some years ago. I shot it from when I was 14 til I was 18.
It shoots well with the right bullet and load.
I could not shoot it with swiss no 2, because my nose got too much of a kick from the stock. I used the german PP-powder and about 30 grains. I used a light minie bullet with quite a pointy nose.
I know though that there is a maxiball bullet that is better.

As I got older, the rifle became to light for me, but I scored 98 at best at competition with it.

The most important for my rifle is the lubrication, it only shoots well at 100m with one kind of lubrication.
At 50m the rifle shoots well with both round ball and patch and with the minie bullet.

• Miquelet O - Swedish Musket 18,5mm
  
• Tanegashima O & Hizadai O - Japaneese Teppo .40
  
• Vetterli O - Correvon a Morgens 10,12mm
  
• Lamarmora R - Hege Whitney .54

Smaniotto: Thanks, I hope it's not pure luck. I guess I'll find out the next time.