1861 Springfield .58 cal

Discussion in 'Black Powder Shooting / Muzzleloaders / Handguns' started by Millwright, Nov 13, 2007.

  1. Millwright

    Millwright Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2005
    Messages:
    1,872
    Anyone have any experience with any BP substitutes in this arm ? Or, rather, repros of it.

    Thinking particularly of Shockley's Gold and Hogdon's 777 under a 510 gr. minne' bullet. >MW
  2. mrkirker

    mrkirker New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Messages:
    3,067
    Just wondering, why are you wanting to use substitute propellant in a classic design such as one of the '61 models? At the range and in the field, I've noticed that most of the sub propellants are used in the non-traditional units that will never see a genuine grain of B/P. You've already 'graduated' to the real deal! Consider using the 'real' propellant! ;)
    Before anyone begins to sharpen their knives: My comment is in no way intended as a 'slam' toward anyone using or advocating the use of non-traditional firearms or substitute propellants, Ok? We are all 'shooters', just traveling different avenues . . . . . .
  3. armedandsafe

    armedandsafe Guest

    Since I have to travel to another state to get black powder, my "traditional" Hawkens are used to "artificial" black powder. Some of us don't have the choices others have.

    I have found that the subs are quite similar in performance to true black powder, so long as you use a volume measurement. 777 is a tad hotter than most BP and hotter (in my experiments) than any other sub. Drop the initial trial loads about 10% and work for an accurate load. Don't be afraid to use the lighter loads, if that is what it takes for your arm to reveal its accuracy.

    Pops
  4. Millwright

    Millwright Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2005
    Messages:
    1,872
    Hmmmm.....Interesting responses.

    We did shoot the thing a couple of days' back at around 100 yds and couldn't keep it on a 3'X4' cardboard. Visual conditions were lousy and we couldn't 'spot' the misses and the sights were a tough read as well.

    I suspect not enough 'oomph' to set the minne bullet with any of the loads used. These were purchased and I don't know the alloy mix, but they do seem soft enough. Triple Seven, Shockley's and Goex were all tried. Of the loads shot, the 777 had the most 'bark' and felt strongest, but I'm chary of shooting it too strong as its FFFg, (bought with pistol work in mind) and I don't like that fine a granulation in a bore this big.

    I'm also looking into paper patching. I don't expect stellar accuracy, but the condition of the arm indicates better than I'm getting and not all of the problem can be my technique.......At least 'errors' ought to be consistant. I'll continue to play and report on what I find. >MW
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
Black Powder Shooting / Muzzleloaders / Handguns 1861 Springfield accuracy question Jul 11, 2010
Black Powder Shooting / Muzzleloaders / Handguns 1861 Springfield made in Japan? Oct 30, 2009
Black Powder Shooting / Muzzleloaders / Handguns Which 1861 Springfield replica and why? Oct 31, 2008
Black Powder Shooting / Muzzleloaders / Handguns Video- Shooting the 1861 Navy revolver Feb 23, 2014
Black Powder Shooting / Muzzleloaders / Handguns Decided to shoot my 1861 Navy. Need advise on lubes, power loads. May 7, 2013

Share This Page