kwestion: Can conversion cylinders for black powder revolvers

idk anon

Don't even think about it. Not even a pellet.

>>34186509
Black powder explodes, flinging the projectile down the barrel, making a relatively small amount of pressure. Smokeless powder burns, letting off gases which push the bullet out of the gun. The difference in the two is pressure. Smokeless makes a very large amount of pressure. Just stick with black powder anon, you don't want to overload it and blow your hand up.

>>34186509
No, absolutely do not do this. Black powder has a much lower pressure than smokeless. Seriously. Don't.

>>34187400
How can smokeless powder only burn if it's thrice as powerful as BP ?

OP here, i did some digging and a Kirst brand conversion cylinder is rated to 12,000 PSI smokeless or black powder.

>>34187423
Like I said, rapid expansion of gases. It burns quick as fuck, it just doesn't propel the projectile with the initial explosion. Something exploding, and rapidly filling a chamber that wasn't designed for it with gas are two different things. I'm telling you man, your going to blow your ass up if you do it. Don't fuck with smokeless, my home town does a sort of ren fair, but set in the 1700s, everyone dresses up in French and Indian clothing and camps out and shit, it's tons of fun. One year, everyone lined up to shoot flintlocks and shit, some dude loaded his pistol with smokeless, he went out and fired it, and it mulched his fucking hand. The fucking hammer came back and hit him in the mouth, broke half his fuckin teeth, and put this fucked up jagged cut in his lips. The guy still has a huge scar on his face from that shit, and an amputated hand. Don't do it anon.

>>34187423
There's more potential energy in smokeless. It chemically reacts to create more pressure.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4ig3V6MaMI

>>34187536
Rapid burn rate and explosion are the same thing. I fail to understand how a substance that burns quicker than gunpowder is not considered as an explosive.

>>34187643
>I fail to understand how a substance that burns quicker than gunpowder is not considered as an explosive.
Not him but black powder is considered an explosive and smokeless is a "propellant"

>>34187643

More pressure, arriving quicker and for a longer time.

The steel those guns and their replicas are made of is not of the same quality as modern guns.

File: 4008-hmm.jpg (17KB, 408x286px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 408x286px

>>34187656
Yet smokeless powder generates much more pressure... ?

>>34187686
>The steel those guns and their replicas are made of is not of the same quality as modern guns.
This is exactly why cowboy loads exist. They are generally safe in converted guns, they're loaded painfully low like 8 grains of shit powder and a soft lead bullet, additionally some of these old guns, simply through the design are pretty stout.
>>34187687
It's likely that smokeless powder has much more energy density, like comparing a gasoline car to an electric car.
I do know that black powder is much more volatile (sensitive to pressure, temperature) than smokeless, this earns it a hazard label and an extra $30 to ship any quantity through residential postage.

time for a random story
>family has a burning pile
>mom always bitching to me about my black powder
>says its super dangerous it'll explode any time even though i keep it in a safe under ground with stable temperatures
>one day throws the can in the burning pile
>Dad lights up burning pile because he was never informed
>be asleep
>hear the loudest most concussive bang ever
>whole house shook (pile is at least 40 feet away)
>go outside
>a layer of grey smoke over the entire property
>all our neighbors are staring
>1lb of black powder=being hit by artillery i guess
>mom tries to pin it on me
bitch what you think would happen.

I once got a ram-rod stuck on a double charge, i fired it straight up into the air, the rifle kicked so bad it left a bruise but it somehow survived.
I'm pretty sure some of these manufacturers low-ball the pressures.

File: 1487783908494.jpg (35KB, 628x504px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 628x504px

>>34186509
Conversion cylinders are safe with low pressure cowboy loads. IE 700fps 45lc

Purpose built .38spl, 45lc, or 44-40 uberti cimmeron factory conversion repros are safe to shoot with their associated calibers but not +p
Safest being 1858 conversions due to their rock solid design/topstrap

Smokeless powder in a black powder cylinder, any amount, makes your gun a hand grenade. Much higher pressure spike. 1 gr of smokeless pistol powder will a blow I up your gun, a full a cylinder ~40gr of black powder under a ball in an 1858 will just make a bigger fire ball; it is physically impossible to load enough black powder into a BP revolver to rupture it's cylinder.

The only revolver safe to shoot smokeless powder in is a Ruger new army, which is built to handle it.

>>34186509
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_XNWeMqCT0

>>34187536
You're retarded
Black powder and smokeless are both low explosives that deflagrate. They do not detonate, they expell gasses. The pressure spike of smokeless powders is what is several times higher than black powder and BP substitutes. This is what makes putting smokeless into a blackpowder rifle a pipe bomb.

>>34188143
>Safest being 1858 conversions due to their rock solid design/topstrap
But topless revolvers are the sexiest.

File: Colt Paterson Revolver & Capper Shaun Flanagan.jpg (778KB, 1024x605px) Image search: [Google]

778KB, 1024x605px

>>34188204
I agree.

>>34187746
Your mother is a retard

>>34187746
anon, I probably would have beaten her. i love my mom and all, but if she was so goddamn stupid to almost kill my father i would probably have to punish her.