Use of Pyrodex Pellets in .50 Calibre '63s

[Todd Birch]

I just spoke to a technician at Hodgdon Powder regarding the use of their
.50 calibre Pyrodex pellets (not powder) in Sharps .50 calibre percussion rifles.

My first question was: "Is it a safety concern in any way".
Answer - "No".

Next question: "Is the difference in the size of the pellet compared to the chamber a concern?" (The chamber is at least .600" and the pellet is .450")
Answer - "No."

Next question: "What about an air space between the pellet and the base of the bullet?" (the pellets are .715" in length)
Answer: "Not a problem. It's in a muzzle loader that you don't want an air space betwen the powder and the projectile."

Next question: "What about ignition?"
Answer: "Ignition could be a problem due to the long flash channel. A failure to fire or delayed ignition could happen".

Next question: "How about a paper cartridge with a 'primer' of BP at the base (a duplex load) with or without a bullet?"
Answer: "Sounds like it might be a solution."

Next question: "Is it likely that if it works, Hodgdon would consider making pellets in .54 calibre?" (they currently offer them in .45 and .50).
Answer: "No, we can barely meet the demand now for use in muzzle loaders and Cowboy Action Shooting."

Thinking about the chamber space factor, if a '63 is loaded with loose powder, (historically done and an option today) once the powder charge falls back into the breech block recess, we have that condition.
With a paper cartridge, the recess in the breech block is one awfully big expansion area once the powder ignites.

With a pellet, the nose of the flash cone is going to prevent the charge from moving into the recess. If the pellet is part of a 'duplex' cartridge, it is going to be a chamber fit and central to the flash hole.

I think I'll give it a go.

Todd

[Omaha Poke]

Just one question, Why would you want to do this? Randy

[JAGG]

T B ! I don't know about the tech. that you spoke to ! But JAGG and his buddy damn near blow up a Trapdoor with 2- 50 gr pellets and a 325gr bullet in a 45/70 case some years ago, when those pellets first came out ! And that is without an air space ! That stuff can go like smokeless ! So watch your eyes ! JAGG

[Todd Birch]

Good question.....

It may be an easy way to roll cartridges around a solid pellet and make for a semi-rigid round that would take some handling and bouncing around in a shirt pocket.
There are any number of people out there who don't fancy getting into the art and science of black powder reloading of any kind, particularly with percussion rifles taking paper cartridges.

My thoughts were that it would facilitate a rapid reload if necessary when hunting.

You might also wonder why people want to stuff Pyrodex pellets into pistol cases. Some people find that more convenient than trickling powder through a drop tube into hundreds of cases, compressing, wad insertion, case cleaning, etc.

I have a question for you, Jagg.

Why would anyone want to put 100 grs of powder behind a 325 gr bullet in a .45-70, assuming that two Pyrodex pellets totalling 100 grs is the equivalent of 100 grs of FFg?
We are entering the realm of the .45-125 Winchester Express which used a 300 gr bullet in the Winchester Highwall, a more skookum action than the Springfield. The British equivalent to that round was the .500/.465. used in very strong British rifles.

The .43 Egyptian, .43 Spanish and .45 Danish use 50-75-78 grs FFg behind 375-400 gr bullets. These cartridges were chambered in the Remington rolling block, again, an action with a little more integrity than the Springfield.

Todd

[JAGG]

Because they fit just right ! Ps, In the old days they would muzzleload a primed empty case with 100grs of powder or more into a breach loader to save from buying a new rifle ! This stuff ain't no 2fg ! It can raise pressures fast ! JAGG

[Drain Rock]

Todd

A couple of years ago, my brother nearly blew-up a TC muzzle loader with two Pyrodex pellets; shattered the stock, bulged the barrel, blew out the nipple and partially backed-out the breach block. For some time, he had been using one pellet with success but wanted to hunt bears so he felt the need to magnummize the old 50 cal.

I was not there and don’t know all the details, so many questions remain unanswerable. Possibly, the rear pellet ignited but not the front one, which became the actual projectile, then the intended sabot projectile became an obstruction in the barrel and then the second pellet ignited. I keep telling the kid (56 yr.) to use black power, but does he listen,
nooooo.

Be careful with smokeless powder, the long duration of the peak pressures of that new fad stuff can be much more destructive to steel than the higher but shorter duration peak pressures of black.

Many many years ago, I made a merger living crafting flintlock rifles in Virginia. The shop had just taken on a line of barrels made by a wild man named Bill Large. The barrels were rough and Large was an unknown quantity, so we decided to proof test his product before setting the barrels into our rifles. We triple charged a 50 cal. barrel topped off with two tightly patched balls. The barrel was U-bolted to a plank, long trail of power to set it off. It was cool. Very loud, cracked the plank, tore loose from the bolts, but the barrel held together. Upon close examination, the start of thread yielding was observable on the breach block. The sight slots were also reflected in the bore where the pressure wave deformed the metal into these thinner spots. But the barrel did not bulge. Fired in a rifle, that charge would have rip loose from the stock and planted the tang squarely in the shooter’s forehead.

I’m sure TC’s barrels are at least as strong as Large’s were. The pressure from the two pellets must have been very large indeed.

Something to think about.

Harold

[Todd Birch]

Hey Harold

I think your theory about the blow up of the TC rifle is probably correct - one charge acting as a projectile against the bullet.
There is no way I could get more than one 50 gr pellet into the chamber of a '63 nor would I want to.
The pellet is .715" long. My paper charges (powder only) measure just over 1" before compression with a short starter. The space behind a throat seated bullet is .970", a difference of .255". I could esily make this up as described below.
Hodgdon puts a coating of BP on the base as an accelerant. If ignition turns out to be a problem, I'll make up a 'duplex' paper round with a 'primer' of a few grains of FFFg in the base.
Apparently, Pyrodex pellets are used in '63s by shooters in the NSSA as an approved method. If it was a safety issue, I believe it would be disallowed.
Some of the 'purists' might be offended by this approach as they load up with their electronic powder measures and high tech loading gadgetry, but that is their prerogative. Today's rifles and loading techniques are a far cry from what was commonly done historically.

I've known lucky fellows with barrels made by the late Bill Large. One unappreciative owner had filed a cockeyed dovetail into his barrel to relocate the rear sight on his flinter. It nearly brought another guy to tears (a barrel maker who admired Large) who offered to buy the rifle in order to rescue the barrel. No dice.
You pays you money - you takes you choice.

Todd

[JAGG]

TC and others had to make special barrels the take the 2 and 3- 50gr pellets pressures in their rifles so as not injure the shooters ! JAGG

[gmartin]

Todd'
We've been discussing this issue you and I, and I was interested in Pyrodex in a paper cartridge with bullet inserted simply because P is nore availabe to me than BP., and you are sincerely interested in devising an easier hunting combo. And as thorough as you are your research was exhaustive. But, now, as I said before, "you try it first".
Good luck, Gregg

[Todd Birch]

Just had another conversation with Hodgdon re: use of Pyrodex pellets in a '63 Sharps.

This tech felt that the way to go with my .50 was to use the .54 cal. pellets rather than the .50 (measuring .450") to avoid any possible misalignment with the flash hole.

As best as I can measure with my calipers, the chamber measures at least .600+ at the breech which means that the .54 cal. pellets will chamber.

I'm going to give it a go with the .54s, if I can get some. If not, it's been an interesting exercise; perhaps best described as "an ingenious solution to a non-existent problem".

We also discussed how shooting a paper Sharps with loose powder or shearing off a paper cartridge causes the dreaded air space behind the projectile when the powder falls back into the recess of the block.
This flies in the face of conventional wisdom both for muzzle loaders and in cartridges for breech loaders but doesn't seem to pose a problem with the Sharps.
Hodgdon did some pressure testing to assuage the concerns of customers about the air space between pellets and the bullet in both pistol and rifle cases.
There was not a problem, however, Mike Venturino has said that the use of a wad is to be avoided as there is no purpose re: compression and there is that "air space" problem.

Todd