Lee cap n ball "bullet"

[bigted]

been looking at the Lee conicals for 36 cal cap n ball revolvers. anybody tried them and if so ... how are they for loading and accuracy ... do they outdo the good old round ball?

thanks for your reports ... lookin to maybe buy one and then maybe more from others but want to experiment with a cheaper mold first if it be worthwhile.

[swathdiver]

No direct experience with that one but from all reports I've read over the years, the round ball is still more accurate.

What do you want to do with it, hunt? Then the Kaido conicals are for you, that I do have some knowledge of with regards to casting and shooting.

[Hickok]

Just my experience with conicals. They are more tedious to load, as you have to get them started straight or accuracy suffers. On some revolvers, you may need to open up the area where you place the conical into to load,(Barrel area ahead of rammer) as it can be a tight fit, whereas round balls slides right in.

Also a conical will shoot higher than a roundball due to its heavier weight.

The boolit rammer may or may not deform the nose of the conical somewhat, as most are shaped to fit a round ball.

Just a few of the things you may encounter with a conical. Nothing that can't be corrected.

I prefer a round ball seated over a greased wad.

[curator]

The Lee .36 C&B conical loads beautifully in my Uberti 1851 Navy replica. The "rebated" bottom band slides neatly into each chamber allowing the bullet to be loaded straight with a nice thin ring of lead shearing off as it is seated. I cast mine from 1/40 tin/lead alloy and get good fill-out at 750 degrees. Loading this slug over a 3/8" felt wad helps with down range accuracy which is as good as round ball loads. As you probably know, not all C&B revolvers have the correct chamber diameter in relation to their bore and the Lee slug might not fit.

[StrawHat]

My experience is similar to what Curator reports. I have not tried a wad between powder and boolit as I was looking for as many fps as I could get. The Lee mold I have casts a 36 caliber conical with a HP. I was trying for a "hunting" load for groundhogs and similar. Accuracy was not as good as RB but terminal ballistics seemed better.

I also have the 44 version of this HP mold. Similar results. Nice idea, not enough powder.

Kevin

[bigted]

Thanks for all the thoughts and suggestions. I have a hoot shooting round balls and thought if the conicals were way more accurate ... I would give em a try. But if there is no noticeable increase in accuracy.

Thanks again.

[Omnivore]

Depending on who made your revolver and when, it can have a rifling twist of between 16" to about 32". The shorter twist, all else being equal, would be much better for the conical bullets, whereas the long twist is more ideal for round ball.

My Ubertis and one of my latest Piettas have the faster twist.

Also, the "streamlined" or New Model Colts (1860, '61 and '62) have the "creeping" lever design, which is superior for conicals in that it applies a much more linear force to a much more well-supported loading plunger, which provides straighter seating of the bullet. Additionally, the plunger in my Uberti 1861 Colt Navy is actually shaped for the period style conical bullet nose. I had to get an extra plunger to optimize one for either round ball or flat points.

In summary; there are several factors which would influence the results in your individual circumstances.

The best groups I've fired to date with any handgun, modern cartridge or percussion repro, round ball or conical, were from my slightly customized Uberti '62 Colt Police using a 100 grain "conical" bullet (Accurate Molds 38-100C). Your mileage may, and almost certainly will, vary. I've done OK with the Lee 36 conical in my Uberti '61 Navy also.

Given that the 38-100C mold was around 100 dollars, compared to about a quarter of that price for the Lee mold, starting with the Lee would make sense.

Some guns don't take some conicals well at all until the loading cutout in the frame or barrel has been modified. The Pietta 44s for example have been particularly hostile to loading conicals. My Uberti '61 Navy, as I recall, took the Lee bullet just fine without modifications. The '62 Police needed work before I could load anything but round ball.

[bigted]

That is a good report and I thank you for it.

Guess I will just have to purchase the Lee and see how my Pietta will handle the conicals before I contact Tom at accurate for yet another super mold from them

Thanks again and I will check the twist rate in the Pietta 61 Colt ... Even tho it is a 5.5 inch barrel ... Kinda short.

[Petrol & Powder]

I've been using the Lee round ball in 36 caliber cap & balls revolvers for years. Works fine. I've shot both the RB and the conical, the round ball works far better.

[will52100]

Same here, I use both the 36 and the 44 conicals for Colts type revolvers. I don't use wads, either with round ball or conical. The conicals make lubing over the ball unnecessary, though every 3-4th cylinder full it's a good idea to keep the fouling soft. I don't lube over round balls for chain fire prevention, if your chambers are correct and the rite size soft lead ball is used it's not going to happen from the front. What not lubing will do is cause accuracy to go south, and in short order the cylinder to bind up.

So far the conicals are just as accurate as balls for me. The only real down side is the conical moulds I have are two cavity, the round ball moulds I have are 6 cavity. And you've got to lube the conicals, on the ball it doesn't need lube for one cylinder full, or just a swipe of lube for multiple cylinder fulls to keep everything running. The conicals do hit just a bit harder though, but since I'm hitting steel it doesn't make that big a difference. YMMV.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

I've used them a long, long time ago in an original Navy Colt. They worked very well, except for one chamber which turned out to be enlarged. I wouldn't say they do any better than round ball, but for me they were as good.