Reduced charge in .54 1863. Would this work?

Support for the 1863 shooter. Discussions of powders, loads, bullets, etc.
Post Reply
MissedAgain
Posts: 217
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:26 pm
Location: Aridzona

Reduced charge in .54 1863. Would this work?

Post by MissedAgain »

I have been looking at Shiloh 1863 .54 carbine. I would imagine that the recoil would be pretty stiff with a full charge of BP. I saw these Pedersoli cartridges and thought that I could make something like this that would hold less powder. (Thicker walls) I could even recess the open end to hold the bullet. Would this work?

Image
MissedAgain
Posts: 217
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:26 pm
Location: Aridzona

Post by MissedAgain »

I should have done some reading before posting my question. I see that there are several questions regarding the brass tubes, but reading through the threads left me a bit confused about one thing. What is the powder capacity of the .54 caliber 1863 chamber? I have seen references to anywhere from less then 50 to 125 grains. What is it?
User avatar
snapcap14
Posts: 279
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 10:07 am

Post by snapcap14 »

I use charlies tube w/ 42 gr 2ffg swiss and grits for filler or 44 of 3fffg swiss w/ a Steve Brooks mold that for me. Don't know how to add photos or i would
ped brass tubes onlt work in their gun that has a modified gas check from what i remember
Standing on the ROCK
14th VA. Cav.
N-SSA
Rich Siegel
Posts: 610
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2002 7:53 am
Location: Maine

Post by Rich Siegel »

My Shiloh carbine was made in the 1990s. A paper cartridge glued to a 490 grain Rapine ringtail bullet holds 50 grains of FFG black powder. This exactly fits into the chamber.

Shiloh 1863 military rifles have a longer chamber and hold more powder.

Rich
1stregtengr

reduced load

Post by 1stregtengr »

either use charlie's tubes or roll your own, and use a filler such as corm meal, pufflon etc to make up the difference. An accurate load can be found between 40-50 grains, which will not be too bad to shoot
HvyMtl
Posts: 256
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 6:44 pm
Location: Soviet state of New Jersey

Post by HvyMtl »

I have a 1859 Ped. and a 1863 Farmer, neither of which those brass shells fit into. I don't think you need to use a filler in these rifles, thats as per Kirk last time I asked. Unless it's an accuracy application.

Ken
mtnwinds
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 8:05 pm

Post by mtnwinds »

I shoot a Pedersoli 1863 sporting rifle. I roll my own using hair curler paper and 60 grains of 1.5 Swiss. I think my chamber will hold more powder, especially if I just poured it in. If you want to measure your chamber volume, just seat a bullet, fill the chamber with powder, pour it out and measure it. I think different manufacturers as well as different years of production may have different volumes.
Todd Birch
Posts: 2133
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 12:01 pm
Location: Somewhere in the Cariboo ....

powder capacity

Post by Todd Birch »

Missed Again

My .54 Shiloh Sporter holds close to 100 grs of powder; much more than I want to shoot more than a few times. I'd like it better if it was in .50.

My .50 carbine and Military Rifle hold a more comfortable 60 grs; less with a rolled cartridge, which is how I shoot them. I'm glad they aren't in .54.
I can shoot them indefinitely without recoil being a factor.

Original paper Sharps were made in a variety of bore sizes. Check Seller's book and other cartridge references.

A pal has a Farmingdale carbine in .45 calibre. Seems 'whippy' to me as it has a smaller barrel contour.
"From birth to the packing house, we travel between the two eternities ....." Robert Duvall in "Broken Trail"
Post Reply