45-90 vs 45-110

[oldred]

This is related to the other thread I had regarding twist rate but that is settled now due to the purchase of a Shilen 1-20" raw barrel blank for my next (and last) Highwall project. I already have a 45-90 but that is soon to be a 45-110 to correct a poor choice of reamers that gave me the Winchester chamber that results in extreme limitations of bullet choice in the 500 grain+ range. The decision now is whether or not to chamber the new one in 45-90 (Sharps chamber this time) or use the 45-110 for the new rifle also, in any case I will not consider the Winchester chamber again! I most likely will limit the 110 to BP only and that is a consideration since I do also shoot smokeless loads sometimes in the 45-90 but that is not a "make or break" consideration, obviously the 45-110 has a bit more "oomph" than the 45-90 but other than that what would be some of the pros/cons with one vs the other? The goal is to use what I learned from building the other rifles and make this last one into the best I can, it should be lighter than the 14+ lbs of the first one and with a shorter barrel plus double set triggers this time. I am not concerned about the higher cost of the 110 brass if I choose that one nor do I mind buying the extra reamer if I decide to use the Sharps 45-90 (or more correctly Sharps 45 2.4"), what is a concern is getting the best all-'round caliber for a 28" barrel +/-10 lb Highwall style rifle that will be shot out to about 600 yds.


Thoughts?

[Gunlaker]

I really like my .45-110's ( although I'm quite happy with my new .45-90 ). I think that the Norma .45 brass is much higher quality than the Starline stuff that most use in their .45-90's. That's a plus for the .45-110. I'd make it a heavy rifle though. I have one with a 32" heavy Badger barrel and it's excellent for a sitting over cross sticks rifle but light for prone. My second is a Tollofson style Sharps rifle with a 30" bull barrel that is much heavier. It's not much different than a .45-70 for prone.

Both were much easier to develop a load for than what the forums would have you believe, but then I shoot paper patched bullets exclusively in mine.

The only thing I'd say against the idea is that a .45-110 is pretty overkill for 600 yards. I would not let that stop you though :-)

If you go with the .45-110 I'd recommend getting a few pieces of Norma brass for measurements before ordering the reamer. The brass is a little thicker at the mouth than most .45 cal brass which may cause you some trouble with a tight chamber.

Chris.

[Don McDowell]

Just my opinion, but a 20 in twist barrel is wasted on a 2 7/8 case. That case was designed to be able to hurl 550 gr bullets,to 1000 yds something that might be a bit iffy at 20 twist. 28 inch barrel may not get the full use of the powder charge in a 2 7/8, and velocity will likely fall into the 45 2.4 category, but the recoil will stay at the higher level.
For shooting to 600 yds, the 45-70 is dang hard to beat on the target and easy on the shooter..
But having said all that, it's just a matter of what you want.. input from others on this is just so much fluff..

[oldred]

What would you consider heavy for a rifle like this? The first one was planned to be about 12 lbs but wound up closer to 15 by the time it was finished, changes were made that resulted in thicker sidewalls for the receiver and a bit heavier barrel. This time I was going to save weight by making a shorter and slightly thinner barrel and removing unnecessary material from the receiver, I still intend to use slightly thicker sidewalls but I intend to shave out metal from non-critical areas.

[oldred]

input from others on this is just so much fluff..


No actually it's not, I honestly do seriously consider the input and it may prevent me from making the same kind of mistake I made with the reamer choice on the earlier project. For example what you have said right there is giving me reason to re-think my barrel choice which I was already concerned about, at this stage I might just either sell that one or use it somewhere else and opt for a better choice such as 1-18"? I would have chosen 1-18" but Shilen only offered 1-14" or 1-20" options, as luck would have it I had no sooner ordered the darn thing when Midway listed the Green Mountain 1-18" raw blank as "available" again much sooner than expected! Of course that's another consideration, a different barrel maker possibly? All these things matter and what is most important to me now is to get it right this time, I genuinely appreciate your input and will definitely take into consideration your thoughts on this.

[Gunlaker]

With respect to weight, I'd say it depends on whether you want to shoot in matches or not. Personally I'd get as close as possible to the weight limit for NRA long range matches and go with a 1:16 twist, but that's just me. I'm no long range expert.

With my heavy Sharps I went for Shiloh's 18 twist 16lb barrel. I would have gone for the 25lb barrel but the aesthetics just didn't work for me. I think the barrel just looked to big for the action.

At some point I plan on ordering another bull barreled .45-110, but I haven't decided on what I want to do for a chamber yet. Besides, the gun budget is blown for me right now :-)

Chris.

[Don McDowell]

That 1-20 barrel will work grand for a 45-70. But I think it's really to slow to take advanatage of the powder capacity of the 2.4 and longer cases.
As to weight, it really depends on what the rifle is going to do. Iron sighted bptr rifles can go to 15 lbs. bpcr sillouette is capped at 12 lb. 2 oz.

[oldred]

For sure I will never shoot competition due to an uncorrectable eye problem but I would like the rifle to have the capability, this is what I meant about getting it the best I can this time. I have no problem with the mechanics of the thing and I'm thoroughly familiar with the strengths and weaknesses (mechanical) of the design but where I am sorely lacking is the finer points about what makes a good top shooting rifle. This is going to be my last effort with this rifle type and I will not cut cost corners nor spare any effort to get it right, as much as I have enjoyed shooting my first rifle I quickly realized I made a serious mistake by not waiting on that Sharps style reamer. Maybe re-thinking the barrel choice is the thing to do and if so that's not a problem, any other suggestions would also be appreciated. I would really like to keep this rifle under 12 lbs and I am so partial to the crescent Butt-plate that I have already decided on that stock style as well as a full octagon barrel but the weight of the barrel could still be an open consideration as could the over-all weight of the gun in spite of my first choice at under 12 lbs.

[Chill Wills]

First the old rifle chamber: Is it so bad that a throating reamer could not fix the front end of the chamber? the area in front of the case mouth? Making it a Sharps chamber in your words?
The next step up would be the 45-100 or 45-2.6" Sharps of which Starline brass can supply cases. It is a match winning round! I know. I have one.
45 -2&4/10" or 45 - 2&6/10" , it is the same throat you want ahead of the case.

OK - new rifle: 20 inch twist ain't that bad but the 18" twist is the no fail and the 16" twist is great too but 16's can be harder to find. I shoot booth and 17 twists too. On any given day it is hard to tease out the differences. They have their respective pluses and minuses.

A 30" barrel or a 32" would be the better choice and lighten the action and stock to the extent possible and put the weight into the barrel for many good reasons! 11lbs, no less for this kind of rifle. You will not be packing it around hunting - Right? Heaver is better. Even as little 12lb over 11lb is good! Trust me - rifles under that weight and the big 45's don't play well with others.

Michael Rix

[oldred]

Chill, back when I first realized I had erred with the Winchester chamber I mentioned re-reaming it with a Sharps reamer but it was pointed out that the throat would still be different and the Sharps reamer would not clean it up, maybe simply throating it would solve the problem? As far as the 110 vs 100, there is no real reason except I suppose it's just that for years I wanted a 45-110 but then that is just based on want and nothing more. I had considered the 45-100 but it seems little is said about this cartridge compared to the 45-110, discussions seem to jump from the 45-90 to the 110 but I will take a hard look at the 100 and see what I can learn about it before ordering a reamer -still plenty of time before the reamer will be needed!

Sorry for all the questions and it may look as if I am a bit lost as to what to do but the situation is that the extent of my BPCR shooting is on my small private range and almost always shoot alone as I rarely have anyone else around, of those that are they know nothing of this sport and what I have learned other than just general shooting knowledge has been gleaned from here and one other internet site but by far mostly from here! Only a couple of years ago I saw no need at all to mess with nasty black powder in my cartridge rifles but thanks to the folks here I have discovered that not only is it not "nasty" it's the most fun I have ever had shooting!

[Lumpy grits]

Go with 1/18 twist in the '90 & '110. There's a reason why Shiloh and C' Sharps went to the ROT in the .45cal.
BTW: the '90 works very well with 3F Goex.
I load 78-80 gns, push'n a 540gn PJ C'moor and ave. 1355 fps.
LG

[Chill Wills]

Chill, back when I first realized I had erred with the Winchester chamber I mentioned re-reaming it with a Sharps reamer but it was pointed out that the throat would still be different and the Sharps reamer would not clean it up, maybe simply throating it would solve the problem?
I am not sure that is really true. No one really knows unless they know the geometry of the throat area ahead of the case and then know what throat might work by reaming. By Winchester chamber you are talking about a Win 1886 45-90 chamber with little throat in it - I think. A lot of possibilities there. Not hard to sort out tho. And you know what that throat is by checking the reamer that cut it or if the reamer is gone, then by doing a chamber impression. With the measurements in hand check with Manson or your preferred reamer source for a throater - which will re-cut any 45 chamber throat after your done fixing the 45-90 into a 45-2.4". :wink:



As far as the 110 vs 100, there is no real reason except I suppose it's just that for years I wanted a 45-110 but then that is just based on want and nothing more. I had considered the 45-100 but it seems little is said about this cartridge compared to the 45-110, discussions seem to jump from the 45-90 to the 110 but I will take a hard look at the 100 and see what I can learn about it before ordering a reamer -still plenty of time before the reamer will be needed!
You should get a 45-2 -7/8th if you really want one. One thing about that though; you can always ream out a 45-70 longer but it is a rebarrel job to make a big 45 into a smaller one. I have to tell you, just so it is said. The 45-70 Gov. is never a wrong choice! [smilie=1::-D

Sorry for all the questions and it may look as if I am a bit lost as to what to do but the situation is that the extent of my BPCR shooting is on my small private range and almost always shoot alone as I rarely have anyone else around, of those that are they know nothing of this sport and what I have learned other than just general shooting knowledge has been gleaned from here and one other internet site but by far mostly from here! Only a couple of years ago I saw no need at all to mess with nasty black powder in my cartridge rifles but thanks to the folks here I have discovered that not only is it not "nasty" it's the most fun I have ever had shooting!

I have to tell you that I am completely impressed with you building your whole rifle! As well as being smart enough to ask good questions.

FWiW -I am going to tackle a Wighwall in the coming year. I am just getting my bits and pieces together as well as the order of operation so I don't screw it up too bad. I think it will be on the two year plan. Go slow!

Post to let us know how it goes.
all the best, Michael

[oldred]

After a bit of studying, researching, and coin tossing I have decided two things, first the 1-20"x30" (would have been 28" finished) barrel is going to have to sit on the rack a while and I am going to just buy another blank. I think I will make the barrel 30" with a 1-18" twist and with the 45-100 chambering, the other rifle with the Winchester chamber will most likely end up with a "throat adjustment" and remain a 45-90 for the time being but it too may end up as 45-100 if that chambering works out well in the new rifle. With all it has going for it from what I have been able to find I am surprised the 45-100 is not more common, 45-90 and 45-110 info/discussions are plentiful but it's almost as if the 100 is a "Red-Headed stepchild" of the family. In spite of that and oddly enough brass for the 100 is easily found and at about the same price as 45-90, both only slightly more than 45-70, while 45-110 is nearly 4x the cost!

[M-Tecs]

I am going the 45-100 route also. Now I just have to decide on what reamer.

[oldred]

I am going the 45-100 route also. Now I just have to decide on what reamer.


Now ya dunnit! :evil:

Seems as if there are two 45-100 reamers at Midway, 45-100 Sharps straight (available) and 45-100 Shiloh Sharps (special order). This is the same quandary that led to my choosing the wrong reamer the last time, one was available while there was a wait on the other one so I choose to take what they had on hand. That time I had neglected to order the reamer until I needed it, had I known what I do now I would have waited however, but this time I will order it well ahead of time!

Ok what makes one a better choice than the other?

[Lumpy grits]

I am going the 45-100 route also. Now I just have to decide on what reamer.

You gonna shoot PP or GG bullets?
Have you tried to find .45-100 cases of late?? GOOD LUCK--
What do you think the '100 will do, that the '90 can't?
LG

[M-Tecs]

Have you tried to find .45-100 cases of late?? GOOD LUCK--


https://www.starlinebrass.com/brass-cases/45-100-Brass-45-26/index.cfm Ship Date: 01/05/2015

[Gunlaker]

If it were my rifle to build, I'd go one of two routes.

1) look at the print for that Shiloh reamer and see if it is really the same as what Shiloh uses. If it matches the bore and groove specs of your barrel then it's likely a good choice.

2) Look at Dan Theodore's chamber designs and modify them for the .45-100. They are a proven design. Dave Manson has many of Dan's designs on file.

I say this not because I'm some sort of expert, but because they are proven designs that will make for an accurate rifle if the gunsmithing is done well. My Shiloh's are accurate, as are my rifles with Dan's chambers.

That's my $0.02.

Chris.

[M-Tecs]

Ok what makes one a better choice than the other?

For PP or GG bullets I don't know. I have all my reamers custom ground in carbide with oil groove bushing by PTG. I have had very good performance for long range match rifles with my designs or by following Dave Kiff's recommendations. I thinks I understand chamber and throat design for jacketed but I have no real experience with PP or GG. When I decide between PP or GG I am planning on give Dave a call for recommendations.

[Lumpy grits]

https://www.starlinebrass.com/brass-cases/45-100-Brass-45-26/index.cfm Ship Date: 01/05/2015

Ck to be sure it hasn't been pre-sold to back orders.
Get your name on that list. you will have to anneal the mouth of those cases. Even Starline sez this--
Good luck,
LG

[kokomokid]

Wish I could be more help here but the 45-100 I had was going to be long range and silhouette. Too much powder fouling for silhouette and loading down with cork wad stack etc was not going to get me a master score. I used starline 2.6 brass and norma 45-120 cut down to 2.6. The norma is a little thick but would be about right for PP. That highwall now has a Krieger 17-1 twist wide land in 45-70 that is comming along very well.

[Don McDowell]

The best bet would be to call PTG and ask them for the drawings, and see the differences in that sharps and the Shiloh chamber.
I would not poopoo the 100 chamber, at least not until you look at the scores the Bryan Youngberg has piled up with his..

[Chill Wills]

You gonna shoot PP or GG bullets?
Have you tried to find .45-100 cases of late?? GOOD LUCK--
What do you think the '100 will do, that the '90 can't?
LG

It came up because we are talking about one possible fix on a 45-90 chamber by cleaning it out with the next larger chambering -45-2.6". Plus -they can be outstanding. A good bullet and a load of Fg Swiss has been a good load.

Once you get all your arrows flying true, it is no longer the arrow; it's the Indian. Right?

[Chill Wills]

I would not poopoo the 100 chamber, at least not until you look at the scores the Bryan Youngberg has piled up with his..

That is a fact.

And Dave Gullo has been hammering us with his 45-100 for a number of years now.

[Don McDowell]

Yup, biggest problem I can see with the 45 2.6, it's not a 44.

[Lumpy grits]

Load that '90 with 2 or 3F, and watch what it can do. [smilie=w:

[Lead pot]

This is related to the other thread I had regarding twist rate but that is settled now due to the purchase of a Shilen 1-20" raw barrel blank for my next (and last) Highwall project. I already have a 45-90 but that is soon to be a 45-110 to correct a poor choice of reamers that gave me the Winchester chamber that results in extreme limitations of bullet choice in the 500 grain+ range. The decision now is whether or not to chamber the new one in 45-90 (Sharps chamber this time) or use the 45-110 for the new rifle also, in any case I will not consider the Winchester chamber again! I most likely will limit the 110 to BP only and that is a consideration since I do also shoot smokeless loads sometimes in the 45-90 but that is not a "make or break" consideration, obviously the 45-110 has a bit more "oomph" than the 45-90 but other than that what would be some of the pros/cons with one vs the other? The goal is to use what I learned from building the other rifles and make this last one into the best I can, it should be lighter than the 14+ lbs of the first one and with a shorter barrel plus double set triggers this time. I am not concerned about the higher cost of the 110 brass if I choose that one nor do I mind buying the extra reamer if I decide to use the Sharps 45-90 (or more correctly Sharps 45 2.4"), what is a concern is getting the best all-'round caliber for a 28" barrel +/-10 lb Highwall style rifle that will be shot out to about 600 yds.


Thoughts?

You can do a lot with just a throating reamer yourself. I had a .40-65 browning BPCR that had a factory screwed up chamber so I made a chamber cast and had a Manson throating reamer made with a 4 deg/1-1/2 compound lead to take out the 45 degree chamber end and bad lead. I went in just enough to make that .40-65 into a .40-72 this made enough to clean out the bad chamber and made it a fine shooting rifle I could go deeper and make it a .40-82 using this reamer. http://i704.photobucket.com/albums/ww43/Kurtalt/th_IMG_0430.jpg (http://s704.photobucket.com/user/Kurtalt/media/IMG_0430.jpg.html)

This reamer I used to make a .45-70 into a .45-90 taking out the 45 degree chamber end changing it to a 5 degree/1.5 compound. You can go deeper if you want.
You can do a lot of good but also screw up a chamber also using it.
http://i704.photobucket.com/albums/ww43/Kurtalt/th_IMG_0283.jpg (http://s704.photobucket.com/user/Kurtalt/media/IMG_0283.jpg.html)

[oldred]

Well now I am finding that I probably need a custom reamer to get the best chamber for whatever mold I select since the "one-size-fits-all" stock versions are usually not the best, even finding an interchangeable pilot version in 45-100 as a stock item proved to be difficult. No matter however, since I won't need this reamer at this point in the project anyway I should be able to have one ground to fit my needs and have it here by the time I do need it. NOW, all I have to do is figure which mold style I will be using so I will have the info I need when I call the reamer manufacturer. The plan is to use a GG bullet as I don't intend to try PP for the time being, maybe later but if I do it would probably be for use in the rifle that's chambered in 45-90 right now. So I guess the next step would be to determine the shape and weight of the bullet based on 30" to 32" barrel, 1-18" twist, BP only and 600+ yards.

That 12 lb weight limit is not a finial decision either if there is an over-riding advantage for a bit more weight for the barrel?

[Lead pot]

I'm getting a good collection of reamers in my storage box :smile: mostly cloned from old original chambers for the .44 calibers.
I'm working on a .28 caliber Stevens for the next one.

[montana_charlie]

Chill, back when I first realized I had erred with the Winchester chamber I mentioned re-reaming it with a Sharps reamer but it was pointed out that the throat would still be different and the Sharps reamer would not clean it up,
I think I got these from Manson's, back when I was trying to find a reamer.
To compare the two, just look at the numbers in the boxes to see how they are different.
You'll see that the differences are inconsequential until you reach the throat.
Concentrating on the throat, the Winchester chamber has a .1" freebore while the Sharps chamber only has half of that ... and the Sharps has a 'five degree leade'.

Otherwise, there is little difference between them.

In the end (of my search) I had my chamber done by Lee Shaver using his "match reamer".
Numerically, it is essentially identical to the Winchester chamber drawing.

http://i684.photobucket.com/albums/vv203/montana_charlie/chambers_zpsf9552acf.jpg


Then, moving on to the Shiloh chamber (for comparison) I have a drawing from Pacific.

It has the same .050" freebore as the Sharps chamber, and the angle of the leade is over 2 degrees per side.

http://i684.photobucket.com/albums/vv203/montana_charlie/ShilohChamber_zps30fce8a8.jpg

With a short (virtually non-existent) freebore and a sharp leade angle, there is little allowance for setting a non-bore riding bullet out of the case - if the shooter should want to.

The 'roomier' throat and the more gentle leade of the Winchester/match chamber allows some leeway ... without being the 'half-inch deep freebore' as found in the early Shilohs.


As for cutting a throat that matches your favorite bullet ... how does that work?
You usually find out which bullet the rifle likes, not the other way around.
But if you have a chamber throat that could be called a 'standard' one ... you can pretty well bet there is a bullet that has been designed to fit it.

[oldred]

Charlie now you have me puzzled, I used a PTG reamer for the 45-90 Winchester chamber and while it seems to work good for 400 grain J-word bullets and the 500 grain Lee 459-500-3R I can't use a fatter nose 500+ grain without having to seat it deeply??? Looking at those drawings it looks as if it should work, maybe I just need to experiment with some different bullet nose profiles and leave that chamber alone????

[Chill Wills]

Everything looks good on the 45-90 2.4 Sharps print until you get to K, N & O. R is up for debate.

The Shiloh print is for the 45 Gov

Thanks for printing them. I could live with the 45-90 print but neither are great.

-Michael

[Chill Wills]

Remember - they have lots and lots of different reamers for the same round.

And you can do much better than the Lee bullet designs.

[montana_charlie]

Charlie now you have me puzzled, I used a PTG reamer for the 45-90 Winchester chamber and while it seems to work good for 400 grain J-word bullets and the 500 grain Lee 459-500-3R I can't use a fatter nose 500+ grain without having to seat it deeply??? Looking at those drawings it looks as if it should work, maybe I just need to experiment with some different bullet nose profiles and leave that chamber alone????
One thing I forgot to point out on that Winchester print ...

Add the values for K and O together. According to them, the total chamber depth for a Winchester chamber is 2.425" ... or 25 thousandths over the nominal length of 45/90 brass.

That would make one think that you have even a little more room to play with, than you have thought.

Have you ever done a chamber cast to see what you actually have in there?

CM

[oldred]

And you can do much better than the Lee bullet designs.


I have no doubt about that but that mold was originally bought for use with a H&R 45/70, after I finished my rifle I tried those things in it and they seemed to work pretty good but then it must be considered what was being done with them. Iron sights on a private range with makeshift targets, lots of fun (LOTS of fun!) but little in the way of real precision shooting. I actually got better groups with them than with the 405 gr Remington jacketed bullets I had bought for my Marlin 1895s, but then I got good groups when shooting the Lees in the Marlins too (loading them single shot) but again not what I would consider precision shooting.

[oldred]

No chamber cast but I have Cero-safe and I could make one, I'm beginning to think maybe I jumped to conclusions with those bullets I tried. These were given to me to try and when I encountered the problem with them and had to seat them deeper I "assumed" it was due to the chamber design since the 400 grain "J" bullets and the pointy nose Lees worked just fine. This is interesting, I will check into this a bit more thoroughly tomorrow.

[Chill Wills]

Charlie, I think you have posted DanT's chamber prints in the past. What do you have for the 2.4" you can post?

Dan loaned me his 45-2.4" PP reamer some years back. I have a PP only rifle with a tight chamber set-up for bore diameter brass. Fired cases will hold a bore diameter patched bullet - a regular GG loaded round does not have a chance of going in there. I know you are shooting groove diameter bullets in your chamber. What is the area ahead of the case like and how does it shoot GG bullets, assuming you have shot any?

-Michael

[Gunlaker]

That Sharps chamber is very tight at the case mouth at 0.479". Assuming 0.010" for brass thickness you have zero clearance with a 0.459" bullet. My .45-90 brass is usually a little thicker than that. I think my Shiloh chambers are 0.481" at the mouth IIRC. I don't remember their leade angle, but the 0.050" freebore is the same, at least on the .45-70.

Chills, how do you like that PP rifle? I recently got C. Sharps to build me a rifle using that reamer. It's an 1885 with a #5 weight 32" barrel, 1-16 twist. I've just finished fire forming my brass and it looks like it'll be a great rifle.

Chris.

[Gunlaker]

I just google'd (is that a verb) for Dan's .45-90 reamer print.

https://www.google.ca/search?q=Dan+Theodore+.45-90+reamer&rlz=1C1ASUC_enCA615CA615&espv=2&biw=1196&bih=427&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=RSCSVIvVBs-eyATDzIKYAw&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=caKF9La8nnrdkM%253A%3BiAARBVO2z8gEeM%3Bhttp% 253A%252F%252Fwww.bpcr.net%252Fsite_graphics-apps%252FPP_.45-90-Starline-Reamer.gif%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.bpcr.net%252Fs ite_docs-results_schedules%252Fdocuments%252FDan_Theodore_A _Tale_Of_Three_PP_Bullets.htm%3B677%3B475

Chris.

[semtav]

Old Red.
Not sure what your "winchester chamber" even looks like, but some of those guns can shoot an awesome patched to Groove dia load. A diagram of your chamber would be needed to even give you any suggestions.

[Chill Wills]

44's are way cooler than 45's and I would be shooting them 'cept I am in over my head with 45 stuff. ....all the stuff[smilie=s:
I'm not sure I could keep my head from swimming gathering everything for the 44!

[montana_charlie]

Charlie, I think you have posted DanT's chamber prints in the past. What do you have for the 2.4" you can post?
The only 45/90 GG chamber from Theodore I have saved is this one.

http://i684.photobucket.com/albums/vv203/montana_charlie/45-90ModernGreaseGrooveDesignNoAddr_zps0b33cc78.jpg

The actual chamber (the body) differs from a 'regular' 45/90 chamber in that there is a cylindrical area .400" long right at the mouth. That sorta makes the difference between an everyday 'straight taper' and a 'match chamber'. The bullet gets better support from the untapered cylinder.

The throat is the main part where DT did his 'designing'.
There is no freebore after the 45 degree transition, and the leade angle (which is pretty steep by comparison with some) begins right at the end of the chamber.



The 'match chamber' Lee Shaver cut for me is like Dan's up to the cylindrical bullet seat. Beyond the case mouth I have a 0.1" long freebore (which includes the transition step) at .460" (groove diameter); and a 1.5 degree leade angle (3 degrees included).

It is a 'modern' chamber which means it assumes that GG bullets will be used. But it works quite well for bullets brought to groove diameter by wrapping them in paper, too.

If a picture would help visualize that, try this.

http://i684.photobucket.com/albums/vv203/montana_charlie/MyPPLoad_zps9b5b7cbc.jpg

Does that cover what you asked?

CM

[Don McDowell]

44's are way cooler than 45's and I would be shooting them 'cept I am in over my head with 45 stuff. ....all the stuff[smilie=s:
I'm not sure I could keep my head from swimming gathering everything for the 44!

[smilie=s: Only thing you need to make the transition is 44 moulds, and a sizing die, them 45 brass make good foundation for the 44's.

[Lead pot]

I deleted the last post I made of my .44-75 Ballard reamer I used in my last rifle I had build. That chamber drawing was wrong. It was drawn for the .45-2.4 parent brass. It was to short for the .44-75 Ballard Everlasting that had a 2.5" chamber.
I haven't had it long enough yet to work up a load for it. The weather just hasn't been fit with the constant fog and rains we been having.
I shot one midrange match 2-3-600 yards and no sight settings using this rifle with just throwing a load together 348-6X out of 450. I lost 30 points shooting 3 tens. Cross fired on the wrong target shooting into the early morning sun at the 200 yard line :) I just could not see.
So far the chamber is showing promise and with a little load development I think it will be OK.

http://i704.photobucket.com/albums/ww43/Kurtalt/th_44-75Ballard_zpscc6f6aac.jpg (http://s704.photobucket.com/user/Kurtalt/media/44-75Ballard_zpscc6f6aac.jpg.html)

[Lead pot]

Here is what the loads look like. It shoots all three bullets very good
http://i704.photobucket.com/albums/ww43/Kurtalt/th_IMG_2115_zps8d951a11.jpg (http://s704.photobucket.com/user/Kurtalt/media/IMG_2115_zps8d951a11.jpg.html)

[Chill Wills]

Does that cover what you asked?

CM
__________________________________________________ _________________________
Absolutely and thank you. It is helpful to look at the prints.

I think you hit it in a past post; fit a bullet to the chamber you have and make it shoot.
This is what happens more often than not.

On the other hand, designing a chamber and throat around a certain goal (bullet) can be done. But, if someone does not have clear goals as to what they want to do a mainstream chamber design is fine. I think it is only after you have had and shot a lot of different rifles do you get specific ideas about how the "next one" should be.

[Chill Wills]

[smilie=s: Only thing you need to make the transition is 44 moulds, and a sizing die, them 45 brass make good foundation for the 44's.

[smilie=s: Ha-Ha (hey, I like that little guy) Not the only thing...... still missing a 'lil ol' Rifle or two in 44. :mrgreen:

[oldred]

One thing for SURE is that this thread has been a real learning experience for me! While chambers were not a total mystery to me there were a lot of unanswered questions about varying design and this has helped me to understand the whole thing a lot better, past searches on the 'net only led to more confusion but those prints make a lot more sense now with the added discussion. I have discovered that the difference between the Winchester type chamber I have and the Shiloh chamber that would have been my other choice had I decided to wait on it to become available is not as extreme as I had thought, at least not in the way I was thinking.

Thanks to everyone for the input!!!!!

[Don McDowell]

Aw shucks Chill, we both know Eron, and Mike, and Curt, and Dan and, and, ,, would all be more than happy to help you turn those 45 barrels into tomato stakes and replace them with good 44 barrels. LOL

[Lead pot]

Yeh and you don't need a .45 caliber hole to shoot a 500 gr plus bullet either. :)

Don, You forgot Kelley Roos how well he shot his girly caliber .44

[Gunlaker]

Kurt, I've heard of 550gr bullets being shot in the .44's. How long would those bullets generally be? How much twist would you need to stabilize it?

Chris.

[Don McDowell]

The most impressive thing I've witnessed from 44 shooters is what ol Zack Taylor did at Byers at the 2013 Rocky Mountain regional.
http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f358/Ranch137/P1010029e_zpsab7c5d1d.jpg

[Lumpy grits]

That Sharps chamber is very tight at the case mouth at 0.479". Assuming 0.010" for brass thickness you have zero clearance with a 0.459" bullet. My .45-90 brass is usually a little thicker than that. I think my Shiloh chambers are 0.481" at the mouth IIRC. I don't remember their leade angle, but the 0.050" freebore is the same, at least on the .45-70.

Chills, how do you like that PP rifle? I recently got C. Sharps to build me a rifle using that reamer. It's an 1885 with a #5 weight 32" barrel, 1-16 twist. I've just finished fire forming my brass and it looks like it'll be a great rifle.

Chris.

That .479 is 'tite' for a Shiloh. Both of mine show .480-.481. after firing.
LG

[Gunlaker]

[smilie=s: Ha-Ha (hey, I like that little guy) Not the only thing...... still missing a 'lil ol' Rifle or two in 44. :mrgreen:

For me the big thing would be the casting. Only a few of my rifles shoot the same bullets do I've got a lot of molds and need to have a lot of different cast bullets on hand to keep me going through the winter and late spring.

Chris.

[Don McDowell]

Chris you know sometimes I think we've made this bullet choice thing to hard on ourselves. Been reflecting a tad on bullets and have about decided if a person had a single nose pour adjustable patched bullet mould about .004 under bore for a given rifle in the traditional creedmoor or even the new postel nose, and a greaser .001 over groove, and just enough weight to make the range requirements at the Whittington Center, a fella would have a bunch more money and time to spend on getting real good with his/her rifle...

[Chill Wills]

Chills, how do you like that PP rifle? I recently got C. Sharps to build me a rifle using that reamer. It's an 1885 with a #5 weight 32" barrel, 1-16 twist. I've just finished fire forming my brass and it looks like it'll be a great rifle.
Chris.

It shoots fine. But, I put it away for match shooting. I found that it was no more accurate than my preferred GG rifles and my match scores went down when shooting it, thus putting me out of the competition for winning, place or even show. I shot good scores with it but not winning scores, and I go to win. The reason I feel I could not shoot my best was that the wiping was more critical than GG and it became a distraction. On some really hot days my GG rifles will lead up BUT they will keep shooting accurately. With PP, when the wiping goes wrong, the wheels will fall off (for me) and then I am spending my concentration on what I need to do to correct my wiping and loose track of the changing conditions and putting the bullets in the middle. If you want to win one of these big matches or even place, your focus needs to be completely on the conditions that take your bullet out of the center of the target. Then stay on top of them and continually correct. PP added a whole extra layer to that. I was out of my span of control.
I see others have that trouble with PP and even with GG bullets - just too many balls in the air when they need to be thinking on a small flag change or a slight pick-up in tail wind... You get it.

The funny thing is with my Pedersoli Gibbs rifle, I shoot PP bullets well and they are no more trouble than the GG bullets in that rifle and so my scores are about the same or better with PP.

I wanted to fool around with the PP cartridge rifle more in 2014 at the local matches and see if I still had interest or needed to sell it. As luck would have it, either weather, family stuff or health got in the way and I did not shoot any long range here at home the whole year. Kinda weird!
Michael Rix

[Chill Wills]

Don, I must have been writing while you posted. I started and put the 'puter down and came back later to finish and you had posted yours. My above post kinda addresses that point you make......

[Don McDowell]

There's an awful lot of truth in your post about the patched bullets. While it's way easy to make them shoot so extremely well at home where there's no rush, and nothing else around to distract, they can be a big pain, in the heat of the battle (so to speak)
I do enjoy being at the matches and seeing the scores you hard holders, can shoot tho.

[Gunlaker]

Chris you know sometimes I think we've made this bullet choice thing to hard on ourselves. Been reflecting a tad on bullets and have about decided if a person had a single nose pour adjustable patched bullet mould about .004 under bore for a given rifle in the traditional creedmoor or even the new postel nose, and a greaser .001 over groove, and just enough weight to make the range requirements at the Whittington Center, a fella would have a bunch more money and time to spend on getting real good with his/her rifle...

I think that paper patching makes it easier for sure. All of my .38's can fortunately use the same elliptical mold. My .45's have three different PP molds but I'm pretty sure I can get that down to two. Mostly due to differences in bore diameter in the rifles. The greasers is where it gets tricky. I've got a couple of rifles that really need a fat bullet, and a few that aren't very picky at all ( Shiloh .45-70, and Browning BPCR ).

My biggest problem is that I spend too much time experimenting with different combinations. I have a couple of rifles that I never fiddle with. Those are the ones to shoot matches with :-).

Chris.

[Gunlaker]

I think you guys are correct. That's the biggest difficulty with shooting PP. The more time you have to keep an eye on the wind the better off you'll be.

Slightly off tangent, but somewhat related, I've been thinking about the new DZ Arms scope. I think the Unertl style mounts make it easier to keep on top of last second wind changes.

Chris.

[Lead pot]

Kurt, I've heard of 550gr bullets being shot in the .44's. How long would those bullets generally be? How much twist would you need to stabilize it?

Chris.

Chris.

The length would depend on the bullet ogive.
My elliptical and the prolate in the above picture, they are 1.460" long. The KAL Elliptical is .432" in diameter and cast with 1/16 T/L it weighs right at 500 gr.
The longer and sharper prolate is from a Brooks mould and it is 1.460" long but it weighs 476 gr cast wit 1/16 T/L and it is .433" in diameter unpatched.
So the ogive makes the difference in weight more so then the length.
The bullet of the three in the photo is one of the original design used during the Creedmoor matches and I can shoot that bullet in the slow 1/19 ROT in the .44-90 BN Sharps weighing in at 520 gr and it is 1.4" long flat base. If that bullet was cup based it would weigh even less at the same length.
I have 5 .44's 2 .44-90 BN's they have a 1/19 ROT and the original bullet at 1.4" 520 gr will shoot well at the 1K as well as the .44-77 with a 1/19 ROT is good for the ram line but it does not to well at the 1K.
The .44-100 Rem 2.6 st has a 1/17 ROT and it will shoot all three of those bullets great accuracy to the Buff at around 1200 yards at Raton. Not really sure just how far he is.
The .44-75 Ballard has a 1/16 ROT and I only shot it out to 600 yards so far with a untested load and it held the ten and X ring when getting sight settings using the prolate patched to .4385".
But to answer your question how long of a bullet can I shoot in these ROT bores....will still shoot in the 1/19 .44-90BN out to the 1K but it will not in the .44-77 past 600 yards.
The 1/17 ROT I know will still hit the 1580 yards with out a problem using a 1.460" long bullet.
The .44-75 Ballard is still a question with the 1/16 ROT and it also has a screwed up bore/groove that has a very overly deep groove at .4495"

Kurt

[Don McDowell]

Chris those Unertl mounts are nice. I have both the DZ mounts and the MVA's. The DZ allows more elevation adjustment without changing rear block height.

[Lead pot]

It sure does Chris. Good scope and mounts.

[Gunlaker]

Thank you very much Kurt. I will make a copy of that so that if/when I get into the .44's I don't have to ask again.

Does Kelly O'Roos still compete? I used to enjoy his posts. They were a bit inflammatory at times, but the man knows what he's talking about, and can sure shoot.

Chris.

[Lead pot]

Chris.

Ask any time and I will answer if I can.
If you ever want to go with a .44 PP chamber I have a very good reamer for the .44-100 Rem st. also that is based on the .45-2.6 brass that is an excellent shooter as well as the .44-75 Ballard Everlasting that I'm not sure of yet you are welcome to use. Or you can use this to make one for the .44-100 st.

http://i704.photobucket.com/albums/ww43/Kurtalt/44-100Rem_NEW.jpg (http://s704.photobucket.com/user/Kurtalt/media/44-100Rem_NEW.jpg.html)

K.O knows his stuff. Yes he was a little abrasive at times but you could take to the bank what he said. It's been a year or so since the last time I had contact with him and I don't know if he is still competing.
He gave me some of the .44 reamer prints he was using and when I'm ready for a smaller .44 GG chamber I will get a reamer made.

Kurt

[semtav]

Old Red
Did you ever get that gun shooting well?

[oldred]

Actually it wasn't that it didn't shoot well, with that long barrel I can get better results with it than either of my 45/70 Marlins shooting the same bullet at about the same velocity. I was getting really good results with the 405 gr Remington jacketed bullets and smokeless powder but that's not what I was wanting to shoot, I very much wanted to load 500+ grain cast with BP but the problem was that I couldn't seem to get it to properly chamber 500+ gr bullets except for the pointy nose Lee 459-500-3R. The design I was trying to use came from a GS up in Kentucky and I honestly don't know what mold was used but since they had a more rounded nose profile and would not chamber properly I "assumed" the problem was due to the Winchester chamber which was meant for the much shorter 300 gr factory loads, I just melted them down and recast them in the Lee mold. However since studying the reamer prints posted by Montana Charlie and the generosity of Chill Wills in providing me with some different designs to try I have discovered the problem was apparently that particular design I was trying to load. I have shot a select few of the different designs provided by Chill Wills and the results were delightfully promising with no cambering problems at all! I am going to hold off shooting any more of these until I can get a scope mounted (temporarily) on the rifle to eliminate the iron sight handicap and get a truer picture of what is actually happening and then select the mold I will buy based on that. As of right now I have seen enough that I probably will just leave the chamber alone as the rifle already shoots better than I do but probably not at a competitive level which was never the intent when I was building it anyway. Right now I am concentrating on the new rifle and trying to incorporate what I have learned and avoid the mistakes I made with the first one, it does ok but I want to take make this last one the very best I can. BTW, I am nearing another decision point, the stock of this new rifle will retain the brass crescent butt plate but I am toying with the idea of a pistol grip instead of a straight grip this time. I will be using double set triggers and I have found pics of that setup with both straight and pistol grips but I was wondering about advantages/disadvantages of one vs the other.


Many thinks to Chill Wills for his generosity and to MC for providing those drawings and to everyone else who has helped me along the way, I pretty much shoot alone and this site and the people here are my source for info and inspiration.

[semtav]

I was going to send you a pm but can't.
If you want to try a couple moulds, I have several you could try at your hearts content to see which you like as I have gone strictly to PP ing but have several very good shooting
GG bullet syles for that chamber.

[powderburnerr]

I ran into a couple lee bullet designs in 500 gn that would not chamber in much of anything I have, but they were the only moulds that I had trouble with,