44-77 brass

[Nuclearcricket]

Good for you JB, Your findings seem to mirror mine with the new Captech brass. The manufacturing tolerance on the rim thickness is .073-.08 and that is what they told me. I called and asked and also asked about the annealing, as you can see above. I didn't check case length, I figured I would worry about that after fire forming. One thing that I did find out after I had written my other posts, I have ran all my brass over an expander plug, the Jameson brass was of a smaller neck diameter than the newer Captech brass. I don't see it as being a problem in the future but it was a pain in the behind for the first pass over the plug. I had a few cases with dinged up necks and had 2 that I didn't catch soon enough and they got spots with the lip of the neck folded inside. I guess those will be blow tube cases.
Sam

[J.B.]

Managed to fire form some cases during a match on the weekend and initial results are showing the cases shortening to the tune of 5-6 thou. Kind of wish they had been a little longer to start with but given the filling out they do in the Shiloh chamber, I guess the brass has to come from somewhere ! Average case length after firing is now 2.245". My RMC brass..which I ordered long to start with, I trimmed back to 2.266 ". It fire formed a little but not to the same extreme..and cases remained around 2.266 - 2.268" and still chambering and shooting happily with .446" gg bullets. Either way its nice to have some brass in some quantity now. Now I just need to learn to shoot consistently ..

[Nuclearcricket]

J.B., was this your first long session of shooting your 44? What are your initial impressions of the accuracy and recoil?
As to the cases getting shorter, don't blame that on the chamber, blame it on the case manufacturer. It has been my limited observations with bottle neck black powder cases, 44-40 and 32-20, that they manufacturer the cases with the shoulders pushed way back. I don't know why they do this but I am sure that there is some kind of reason.
Sam

[Mike]

Sam, About shoulders being pushed back on new brass, that is most probably due to variations in chambering. I am in the middle of re-making a rolling block in .44/77 and when the chambering reamer this particular 'smith had was compared to a fire-formed cartridge from my C. Sharps, the shoulder on the reamer was quite a ways back from where the shoulder is in my Sharps. The makers of brass want their cases to fit for everyone. The same can be said about .44/40 brass and the chambers in Colt revolvers are not quite the same as those in Winchester rifles. Anyway, we decided not to use that .44/77 reamer but to send the barreled action back to C. Sharps and have them chamber it. That way the reloaded ammo should fit well in both rifles.

[Nuclearcricket]

Mike, I agree with you assessment on why brass is made the way it is. I just feel that it is kind of a shame that things are not more consistent in the chambering of some firearms. I do feel that you have made a very good decision to send your barrel to C.Sharps to have them chamber it for you. The more things are the same the better things will be in the long run. If you look back on this thread you should find a drawing that I got from Pacific tool for their chamber reamer for the 44-77. that is what I will be using for my barrel. My guess at this time is that this will be my only rifle in that caliber. And since I am hoping that I will be able to reload with out ever having to full length size the cases I should be ok with however the chamber comes out unless it is grossly oversize, something that I hope doesn't happen.
And with the prices you have to pay these days for brass like the 44-77 you absolutely don't want to do anything to over work that brass and being able to shoot the same loaded rounds in either gun is a good thing, as it would suck to have different chambers and grab the wrong ammo on your way out of town to shoot and then find out it doesn't fit.
Sam

[Mike]

Sam, We should probably be thankful that things are as standardized as they are... Shoot sharp, Mike

[Kurt]

I have a CPA rifle being build and it should be ready anytime now. It will have a interchangeable .22 rim fire barrel along with a .44-75 Ballard. When I had the chamber reamer and sizing die made for the Ballard I almost decided to make it a .44-77 to match the original chamber casts I have. one is a Remington and one is a Sharps. If you look at the throat of those two casts you will see a very shallow lead less than a 3 degree. If you make a chamber cast of a .22 rim fire chamber you will find one just as flat or even flatter. Those are leads for lead bullets.
If I like this rifle when I get it I will order a barrel and get two reamers made, one chamber reamer and the other will be the case sizing die to match the chamber just like I did for the .44-75 Ballard.
In my mind from what I have seen on paper or iron I think the .44-77 is a great chambering for the falling block rifles.

Kurt

[Mike]

Kurt, I think quite highly about the .44/77 too and I know Don is right there with us because he recommends the .44/77 as much as any of us. Getting my roller chambered by C. Sharps Arms keeps me real happy because they use a 1 1/2 degree taper in the leade. That's what both my .44/77 and .44/90 have now and I don't want to change it.

[Don McDowell]

I really do like the 44-77, but I'm starting to think it may max out at 800 yds.... Altho need more time with some good bullets with it.

[Kurt]

Mike.

If you look at the cast the lead starts at the chamber wall in the old rifles. You might check with Pete at CSA and ask what the chamber end is. I have a chamber print for the .44-77 but I don't know what happened to it. It might be in my file backup before the blue screen.
But seems to me they use the standard 45 degree chamber end with a 1.5 lead. I don't know for sure.
I wanted to order one of their 85's but they would not use my barrel and reamer so I went with CPA.

Kurt