New bullet

[Kurt]

I have finally had a chance to do some 500 mtr tests using the .44-77 with a 1/17 ROT. The best performer was the bullet on the left that was cast with a Sagebrush mould. It is 1.456" long and weight is 510 GR.
The second was the center bullet from a first run BA 2 pin mould I converted into a DD. It is 1.402" long and weighs 493 gr. It shot slightly better than #3 on the right that is a new BA DD 1.439" long and 505 gr. I used this bullet at the Alma MI silhouette match and it shot as good as I could hold the rifle, but I did not shoot well with only a 20 for the best score on Saturday and only a 16 on Sunday. I don't remember ever shooting that low with a scoped rifle. I guess the 1-1/2 year lay off I went down hill. Just cant hold tight anymore. The cross hairs were on and off those iron critters resting on the cross sticks. I thought the high winds did it at Lodi but I'm not so sure after last weekend when the conditions were calm.
But the Sage 1.456 long put a group at 500 you could cover with the palm of your hand on the ram.
I have used that bullet here on my home range at 200 yards using my 19 ROT Shiloh hunting rifle and it had put 10 rounds under 2" at 200 yds.

Yes length has a factor compared to the ROT but also the ogive shape is a very large factor keeping a projectile stable.
I have shot 520 gr at 1000 yards using a 1/19 ROT using the .44-90bn that has a larger powder capacity and that bullet has the original Sharps profile and as well as several other manufactures used back in the late 1800 ads that looked close to what Don posted above.
The ogive shape makes a big difference with the slower twist bores as well as the tighter twist used that center bullet for many years in the .44-90 bn as well as in the .44-77 with the 1/19 ROT and it has kept me pretty high at the Quigley and the Mt 1000.

[Don McDowell]

Jim the 17 twist 44 straight barrels both shoot the 1.35 inch bullets so well, I see no purpose in trying to stretch it out to a longer length. I'm talking about repeatedly hitting to locator disc at 1000 yards type accuracy.
The 1.3 inch bullet in both a creedmoor shaped nose and more of a metford shaped nose has proven to me in my 19 twist rifles to both work well out to 1000 yards. Matter of act the 1.3 inch bullet saved a complete zero at 1000 at Raton during the nationals for me, and that's when I became completely convinced that length about as long as it can go in a 44-77 with the 19 twist.
I'ms being much the same thing going on in the 45's with 16 and 18 twist. The really interesting part is the 16 twist shoots the .446 525 money bullet quite well to 600, and decent at 1000, but the .446 535 will shoot tighter at 1000.
Hopefully this weather will give me enough of a break with the wind to sit down and do some good load development with this new bullet, but so long as we keep getting this much needed moisture, I'm perfectly content to not be able to do load testing.

[Distant Thunder]

Don,

Have you tried the 1.350" bullet the 19s? Also, if 1.300" shoots so well in the 19s, how would a 1.325" bullet do in them? How would it do in a 17-twist?

I am impressed with how well the "Medford" design shoots in general.

[Don McDowell]

Yes Jim I shot the 1.35 length in the 19. Matter of fact BACO produced the 434470 at my urging . Got my fanny kicked bad bad bad with the 1.35 (both grooved and patched) at distances past 800 yards. Couldn't figure out what in the world was going on, had people ( well intentioned, but ill advised) telling me all sorts of reasons why I was such a horrible shot, but not a one of them would mention the bullet length. Then one day while sitting here at the desk pondering why the problems at distance ,and looking at the various bullets on that I keep on top of it. The original Sharps bullet that was a pull down from a 44 2 1/4 Creedmoor round, jumped out at me like a lightning bolt. It was a good bit shorter than some of the bullets in line with it. So I grabbed my calipers and measured it. Guess what the length is? Wanna take a shot at the weight?
So out to the casting bench I went, shortened up the nose pour adjustable to (that's right) 1.3 . Loaded a few and off to the range I went.. After that range session a letter was sent to Brooks with a check for a fixed bullet at 1.3...
In the meantime Dan t had come up with a money bullet for the 44's at 1.35, I got a hold of some and tried them. Same results as the patched work well till the wind comes up. Another 44 shooter even bought one of the 1.35 money bullet moulds, and dang don't you know he found the same problem. After enough talking with Dan he designed another at 1.3.....
Don't know what would happen with 1.32 in the 17 twist. The first 44 st shot so well with the 1.35 bullet , it was one of those why mess with success deals.. The second one is the same way.
I test loads here on steel to see if there's some possibility, shoot paper for confirmation. Test loads in relative calm conditions, the confirm them in less than ideal condition.
Now days I seldom ever start load testing at less than 600 and mostly take them directly to 1000, then move in to closer ranges.

[Kurt]

I use this bullet in the photo for long range with the 19 twist .44-90 BN. It has put me into third at the MT 1000 and I shot a 41 at the Quigley using this bullet and during practice several times with stiff conditions. I also used this bullet at Lodi one year and I ended up in 4th place with a 450 something using the .44-90 BN 19 twist rifle.
That bullet is swaged using my Corbin swage setup and it's 1.4" long at 500 gr depending on the alloy temper. I had REC clone the bullet used for the 1870's Creedmoor matches Metfort and some of the other's used.

I also have a .44-90 BN with a 16 twist and this bullet does not do as well in it as it does in the 19 twist for some reason. I have not swaged any for the 17 twist Farmer .44-77 yet but I will later this year and use it for the silhouette matches.

With that cup base I need to use a twisted patch tail tugged into the cup to protect the shirt, but the shirt has a function from what I have read in the old books what it was designed for. They mentioned that the thin skirt expanded fast to seal the bore. This makes sense to me and I studied the bases to see what damages they get with twisted tails and just folded under patches and seen just how much the skirts expand under pressure with 1/10 to 1/30 alloys.
If I was to use a bore diameter PP with 1/10 alloy it would be a cup based bullet over a flat based.

There is something about this ogive design that holds the stability better with a longer overall length. Yes it needs a little more elevation than the longer pointer nosed bullets at the 1K but it gets there in fine shape.

[Distant Thunder]

Don,

I remember you telling me about the original .44 PPB being 1.300" and I am not surprised at that length being used then. I am sure they understood the whole length/twist thing pretty well.

It does somewhat matter on velocity in that the faster you can drive a bullet the longer that bullet can be and still be stable. So you can shoot a longer bullet if you can push it 1400 fps or more and if recoil is not a concern.

I really studied this length/twist a bunch when I had Shiloh rebarrel my old 1874 and I decided to go with a 17 twist. Unfortunately I got that rifle back from Shiloh right in the middle of the China pandemic and I didn't get to shoot it as much at matches as I would have liked to last year. Being I live in the wooded hills and bluffs of northeast Wisconsin shooting any real distance around here is limited and shooting at matches at longer distances is where the lead meets the paper.

This year is starting out very slow match wise and there just haven't been many matches so far, like one! If I had known I wasn't going to shoot very well I would have used my .44 2 1/4 and at least I would have learned something. I did pull the .44 out on Sunday at 800 yards, last relay of the match, and it did fairly well for me in some not so easy winds. At least well enough to give me some hope for this cartridge.

I had the BACO JIM430520 loaded over 86 of 1 1/2 Swiss a bullet which is close to Medford's design. Medford's bullet had a nose that was a little shorter at a bit over 37% of the length if you don't count the short and very slight angle before the actual nose starts. I'm not sure if that angle is really part of the nose and I've seen similar angles on other old designs. As near as I can tell they patched up over this angle and to the start of the ogive. I think it may have been a way of preventing the leading edge of the patch from catching and folding back as the cartridge was chambered. Medford's design would be very stable in tough winds if the OAL matches the twist. My bore diameter bullet is 1.457 long and weighs 518 grains +/-. My calculations say a 1.480" bullet would be stable at 1300 fps from a 17 twist. I always like to be just a bit shorter than the maximum length figuring that more stabile is more better and this bullet is good just as it comes from BACO.

I always use 1300 fps when calculating bullet length and that helps keep the numbers in relation to one another. 1300 fps is easy enough to get with the cartridges I use, .45-70, .44-77 and .40-65. Any velocity over 1300 fps is just a plus in stability the way I figure it. I'm pretty happy and comfortable with a velocity between 1300 and 1350 fps for all my shooting.

Using my numbers for a 19-twist .44 the maximum length would be 1.320". Staying a little short of that would put it right where you are with your 1.300" and would give you very good bullet stability in the hard winds.

The other BACO mold I have for my .44 2 1/4 is the JIM441505EPP. That bullet is a 2-D elliptical PP bullet that Arnie Seitz and I designed for my 17-twist .44-77 and it has shot very well for me out to 600 yards. I shot it once at 1000 yards last year but I had way too many other problems to know if the bullet was doing any good.

The one mistake I made on this bullet design is the length of the base band. I was worried about being able to get enough powder if the 2 1/4" case and I kept the base band as short as possible. That results in 90 grains of 1 1/2 Swiss being needed to fill the case. I could not get that much powder to work with minimum compression and adding more powder wasn't something I wanted to do.

With the the JIM430520 being a bore diameter bullet I've just been seating it deeper and using less powder with very good accuracy. So I now have some of the JIM441505EPP bullets loaded up with 85 grains and just seated deeper in the case. I will test these at 500 yards on Saturday at a gong match. That will give me an idea of how well it shoots with less powder and more compression. Not as good as paper but it's what I have.

If it looks good I'll load more the same and try them at a paper match in August. Yea, August! My match schedule is not too good this year. Too many matches on the same weekends and I promised the local guys I would be there if they had a match. I intend to keep that promise and I'll have to pass on some paper matches farther away to do so. I prefer paper though.

I do have an adjustable BACO mold and I have shot bullets cast from it in my .44-77 ranging from 1.100 to 1.420" and all have shot fairly well from my 17-twist. The problem with this mold is it is a shade too small in diameter for my rifle and paper. I need to open it up .002" like I did the 430520 which now shoots much better. I'm not sure when or if that will happen.

When it come to bullet length and twist it can be interesting as to what works and what doesn't. There are other factors in play that I don't yet fully understand, such as nose shape and velocity.

[Don McDowell]

Jim 17 twist in the 44's is about right I think.
That 434470 bullet is just a touch over 1.35. cast from 16-1 it tips the scales at 469 and 474 from 20-1. In my 44-77 I was running it and the Brooks 470 gr postel grease groove right on top of 1300. Both bullets shoot well in that 19 twist to 800 beyond that it can and will give you very low scores on paper. Steel in might keep you in the running, but as we know there's a ton of difference between an x on the score card in steel and paper matches.
The 17 twist shoots the 1.35 bullets very well. I have no idea about the velocity, but I would guess a bit over 1300. 82 grs OE 1 1/2 with the grease groove variety and 84 with the patched, in Jamison 45-90 cases sized to 44-90 straight.
I need to get the new 44-77 Shiloh out and give it a good run here with the 1.3 inch bullet to just what it can do, but seems way to many things in the have to list, to be able to dig into the want to list as much as I would like.
I believe the ODG's had a fair handle on twist and bullet length but I don't think they ever got a complete handle on it, but they did keep increasing case length to gain velocity, but stayed with bullets just a touch to long for the 18 and 20 twists common by the time the Creedmoor era ended. Given a few more years I'm betting some rifle crank somewhere was going to build a 16 twist in the 45's and a whole new level of scores would open up. As it were we had to wait another 100 years to apply to the blackpowder cartridges what they started figuring out in the new fangled small bore smokeless. Want a longer heavy bullet to shoot well, the twist needs to speed up.

[Distant Thunder]

I would bet that a good number of the .45 caliber shooters out there today are using a bullet that is just a touch long for their 18-twist rifles. Some many want a 540 or 550 grain bullet. I did for years and never knew it.

This is even easier to do with a Shiloh .44 caliber because of the 19-twist they use. A 17-twist in a .44 seems to be a good place to be. I had an 18-twist .44-100 ST at one time and it shot pretty well with the correct length bullet. I don't recall the length but it was around 485 grains. I have the mold around here somewhere, it's a greaser. I also have a .44 Government GG mold that's really cool. Both are Brooks molds. I think that Gov't bullet would shoot really well in my .44-77 if I ever wanted to run a greaser, but I don't.

Don, I happen to have a bunch of Starline .45 2.6" brass that has been sized to .44-100 ST if you would be interested. It's used but not much. Probably 200 or so cases. I doubt I will ever have another .44-100 ST to use them in.

[Don McDowell]

Jim I have brass for the 44's running out my ears, but I'll bet there's someone that will need it somewhere.

I think that there are probably a lot of shooters wondering why they have some problems at longer distance, and probably like so many of us do, start doubting loads, eyesight etc... But in reality if they just dropped the bullet length a tad things would turn around quick.
2 bullets I really like in the 45-70 are the Saeco 645 and the BACO .446525. I did shoot the 446525 in my 16 twist 45-90 with reasonable results but that tad bit of extra length of the 535 it holds better at 1000.
Here a while back when testing some loads in this 77 I shot about 15 of them. The 18 twist in this barrel sort of showed some promise with that bullet but the wind conditions were so switchy it was hard to get a good read on the bullets perfrormance at 1000. One thing that has me real curious is when I went to clean the target up for the next load, there were 4 fresh bullet holes you could cover with the palm or your hand in the railroad tie just under the target.. But the question then becomes were they all 4 the misses we couldn't see dirt on in one string, or were they randomly there in that tight group by coincidence... more questions with no answer,, yet..

[Kurt]

Don,
We all have our good and not so good days shooting matches or just burning powder. There is no just one good or magic bullet.
I tend to use bullets that are on the upper end of the length. For the 18 twists I try to use a bullet 1.4" and the 17 or 16 twists in the .44 and .45's I will stretch them to 1.5" but I select the ogive shape and powder capacity doing this. Heck for the 22 ROT .50-90 I use a bullet 1.5" and when conditions get rough I pick that rifle over the others if I have it along with me.

You mentioned above the difference between paper targets and iron. Paper or iron are the same in the end, there are winners and losers in both disaplins. Paper you shoot with numbers and irons you shoot with hits. The intensity with both disciplines is just as intense. You are shooting against the same shooters that shoot Nationals and Internationals, and frankly iron shoots are mostly larger with competitors now days than the paper matches.

I wish I had a place I could shoot out to the 1000 yard target for load development or practice but there just is not a place around east of the Miss. you can do this unless you do it during a match and even then some don't even have a 1/2 days practice for getting sight settings or checking a load.

Well I have to get back to the loading bench and fill some more cases for the Quigley or I cant go.