Unusual UMC .50-70 loadings


#1

NORMAL LOOKING 50/70 U.M.C. LOADING EXCEPT:
SMOOTH DEEP CANNELURE .527 from case mouth AND, TOTAL CARTRIDGE WEIGHT OF 574.8 grs. WHICH IS ABOUT 113-116 grs. LIGHTER THAN USUAL LOADING.
HEADSTAMP: U.M.C. S H .50 - 70.
CANNELURE IS roughly .025 deep

ANY IDEAS???


#2

Oooohhh, sounds rare and valuable, Mora!
Guard it well,
Jon


#3

Hi Rea
sounds like, assuming it has a conventional pointed bullet, you have a gallery case (round ball load seated below the mouth) that has been re-fitted! At any rate the only case with that hs & cann. in my collection is a round ball gallery. Hope this is of help.
AZ kid


#4

[quote=“Pete deCoux”]Hi Rea
sounds like, assuming it has a conventional pointed bullet, you have a gallery case (round ball load seated below the mouth) that has been re-fitted! At any rate the only case with that hs & cann. in my collection is a round ball gallery. Hope this is of help.
AZ kid[/quote]
Pete, this is (as far as I can tell) a factory loading. The bullet is normal configuration. I have the round ball gallery loading and the cannelure is .333" from the case mouth. The one in question has the cannelure .520 from the case mouth. The only one I have seen in 60 years of collecting!


#5

That gallery loading is pictured on the UMC cartridge board lithograph with the naval background. Rea or Pete, I’d be most appreciative if it wouldn’t be too much trouble for one of you to post a photo of the round. Thanks.

Rich


#6

[quote=“Rich B”]That gallery loading is pictured on the UMC cartridge board lithograph with the naval background. Rea or Pete, I’d be most appreciative if it wouldn’t be too much trouble for one of you to post a photo of the round. Thanks.

Rich[/quote]
Rich, I’m a dummy when it comes to computers! I’ll have to get my son to get that picture on this site. It may take a few days. M.Rea


#7

Thanks. Waiting a few days to see something I didn’t think I’d ever see is just no problem at all. Rich


#8

Thanks. Waiting a few days to see something I didn’t think I’d ever see is just no problem at all. Rich[/quote]


Headstamp of Buck&Ball and The Round in Question

Buck & Ball and Round in Question side by side

Common Buck& Ball on left and Sectioned third is B&B and the 4th is the Round in Question.


#9

Thanks for posting the pics, Mora. Both of the cannelured rounds are new to me, but I’ve only been back in the game for a relatively short time. The cannelured buck & ball looks identical to the item pictured on the UMC cartridge board lithograph, though it is labled on the board as a gallery round. The Round in Question is completely new to me…I’ve seen no UMC 50-70 with that low cannelure. Randy? Bruce?

Rich


#10

Hi, Mora and Rich…The Buck & Ball with the cannelure is pretty rare…(or, should I say just “Gallery Ball”, as these .50-70’s were sometimes loaded with just the ball and not the buckshot)…The “Mystery Round” is new to me…Mora and I have been discussing this for awhile…judging by the photo, the cannelure is placed at about where the base of a standard 450 grain bullet would be…but Mora says the total round weight is lighter than standard…and that cannelure looks “much deeper” than usual…Mora…you were, at one time, going to have it X-rayed…Do you suppose…this MIGHT be some sort of a “souvenier” round, where…the bullet is much lighter than usual, etc., etc…although, I don’t know why UMC would do this…Randy


#11

I guess I’ll have to have my son x-ray it when he gets a chance. The x-ray may shed more light on the subject. M. Rea


#12

I guess I’ll have to have my son x-ray it when he gets a chance. The x-ray may shed more light on the subject. M. Rea[/quote]
I had my son x-ray the round. The bullet seems normal however, the powder seems to be semi-smokeless/smokeless and only takes up half of the powder space. So, I think that the smooth cannelure is to denote a smokeless cartridge, much the same as the cannelure on early smokeless rimfire rounds. M. Rea


#13

Whoa, now that makes it even more interesting . . . thanks, Mora!

.


#14

I guess all the larger manufactures played around with different ideas and configurations, but it seems that U.M.C. was among the most prolific at that practice. I’m sure there’s a perfectly logical explanation and the smokeless designation makes as much sense as anything I can think of. But why such a deep cannelure? Does the bullet base rest on the cannelure and can you tell if there is a wad at the cannelure? Thanks indeed, Mora.

Rich


#15

[quote=“Rich B”]I guess all the larger manufactures played around with different ideas and configurations, but it seems that U.M.C. was among the most prolific at that practice. I’m sure there’s a perfectly logical explanation and the smokeless designation makes as much sense as anything I can think of. But why such a deep cannelure? Does the bullet base rest on the cannelure and can you tell if there is a wad at the cannelure? Thanks indeed, Mora.

Rich[/quote]
Rich, the bullet rests on the cannelure and there is no over powder wad. Also, while I am thinking of it, the “buck & ball” with the higher cannelure showed to be only a gallery loading in the x-ray. M. Rea