Cap and ball bullets for smokeless?

[Mohawk Daddy]

Hi folks. I have searched the site for answers, but haven't found them yet. Does anyone have any experience/opinions concerning Lee's "conical revolver molds" designed for cap and ball revolvers? I am specifically looking at the 90384 mold, the 456/200, being used for 45 Colt in smokeless applications in handguns. Is this a viable option, or are there better low-cost molds available? Yay or nay?

[nvbirdman]

I believe those bullets are tapered towards the rear in order to start easier in the Old Army cylinder, which would mean they would not "slug up" to seal the bore and would cause leading.

[Mk42gunner]

Same cost, better for your application would be one of Lee's RF molds. Or any of their various .45 cal handgun molds.

Two cavity Lee molds might not be the best, but the only one I have had unsolvable problems with was a used .54 cal REAL mold. They do make great learning molds; if you do manage to completely ruin one, you are only out twenty bucks or so.

Robert

[44man]

You can go the other way. I made a mold and at one time was given .45 ACP boolits to use in the Old Army and they shoot good. A friend loves my boolit in his 1911.
It is not tapered and still loads right.

[Dusty Bannister]

"I am specifically looking at the 90384 mold, the 456/200, being used for 45 Colt in smokeless applications in handguns."

If you need the additional diameter to fill the revolver throat, this would be an alternative. But if you have a fixed sight revolver, the heavier bullet would be more likely to shoot to point of aim.

I guess it depends upon whether you need this diameter to fit to the gun, or are you trying to make this mold work instead of getting the correct bullet style in the first place.

[Mohawk Daddy]

Thanks to all for the comments and advice. Looks I will be better served by staying closer to the tried and true. Going for cheap, one of Lee's molds in the 250/255 grain range might be easier for a noob, or even the 230 grain RN for 45ACP, which many have testified works for them.

[paul edward]

Going for cheap, one of Lee's molds in the 250/255 grain range might be easier for a noob

Boolits from a Lee 255 gr RF (90358) work very well in my 45 Colt Uberti replica. Just because these molds are not expensive does not mean they will not drop good boolits.

[bedbugbilly]

I shoot a 454-190 250 ish grain as well as a 200 grain SWC out of my 45 Cattleman. In regards to you original question though . . . if you can get some that are already cast up . . size them and try them . . . what have you got to loose? My throats in the Cattleman are pretty generous as are the chambers. Some of mine drop at .454 or so and some at .452. All shoot very well. You are referring to a mold that casts at .456 plus/minus. You should have .002 to .004 size down on that boolit depending if you size either .452 or .454. Again . . . try some and see how they load in your brass and how they shoot. That will tell you if they will work or not. If you don't have the mold, post a "wanted" in the WTB or Boolit Exchange section . . . someone ought to have that mold that can help you out to get you some to try. I don't have that particular mold as I mainly shoot .36 (Navy caliber) or I'd cast some up and send them to you. Good luck!

[Kraschenbirn]

Been there, done that...didn't work for diddly squat. Lee boolit shot just fine in my Uberti 1858 Remington but, even cast from straight WW and properly sized, printed 'buckshot patterns' from an S&W 1955 Target and even worse from a 1911.

Bill

[jimb16]

I occasionally load those in my .45 autos. They work pretty well for light target loads.

[Mohawk Daddy]

Thanks again to all who have contributed here. If I had an Old Army or 1858, I'd go ahead and get the mold anyway, but since I'm planning to load for a New Vaquero plus a family member's 1911, I'm getting the 230 RN for a start. After we try that one for awhile, I still like the Lee 255 for 45 Colt only, as has been recommended above. I'm just trying to color within the lines and still get molds that can do "double duty" for more than one cartridge whenever possible.

[RogerDat]

Thanks again to all who have contributed here. If I had an Old Army or 1858, I'd go ahead and get the mold anyway, but since I'm planning to load for a New Vaquero plus a family member's 1911, I'm getting the 230 RN for a start. After we try that one for awhile, I still like the Lee 255 for 45 Colt only, as has been recommended above. I'm just trying to color within the lines and still get molds that can do "double duty" for more than one cartridge whenever possible.

I went with these exact same two Lee molds. Worked very well for me. Only difference is I went at it the other way. Started with 255 RF for Ruger in 45 Colt then picked up the 230 RN when I wanted to make some 45 acp rounds for a friend. I have not tried the 230 RN in the revolver but am planning to, I figure the lighter weight might allow for an accurate load with less recoil. That Vaquero can hammer ones hand with 255 grain, enough to make a long day uncomfortable. A milder and accurate load could save lead, powder and be more suitable for the ladies and grandkids in the family.

[45-70 Chevroner]

I have shot the Lee 230 RN for years in my two Vaqueros and my Rossi 92. The only problem I have had was in the Rossi and that was from shooting light loads of bullseye. My loads of 6 grs of bullseye would not expand the case enough to seal the chamber and I was getting a little back splash of powder in the face, they still shot well for cowboy shooting. A good load of Unique solved that problem.

[.22-10-45]

I am using the Lyman 450229 hollow-base bullet in a circa 1980 Colt 1860 Army re-make .44 percussion revolver fitted with a Kirst .45 Colt cylinder. Using Bullseye & Tightgroup. Bullets cast soft with soft beeswax/lanolin/castor oil pan lube. Loads are kept on the light side due to the open top/held together by a wedge design. I have found better accuracy with these light loads using the shorter Starline .45 Schofield brass.