I asked my computer and it told me the 577-450 MH in the Martini rifle uses a right hand twist of 1/20"
We argued about it a bit because I thought the Martini rifle used a gain twist and a squeeze bore. 
If anyone knows for sure I would like to hear it.  I called my computer a liar so we are now not on speaking terms. 

bullshop wrote on Mar 26^th, 2026 at 8:05pm:


The British military Martini Henry has a tapered throat that starts at the breech and extends 8 inches to the cylinder section of the bore. There is not a fixed location for the chamber where the throat starts in original chambers. Generally speaking throats are either .468  for MK I, MK II and  MK III.  Some MK IV are .472.   No gain twist.

The cylinder section of the bore is .462 to .464, major diameter, .450 minor. 

The rifling is Henry pattern.  It is 7 groove 1 turn in 22 inches.  Henry rifling consist of flats and peaks.  The tops of the peaks and the center of the flats are the same diameter, the smaller or minor diameter. The corners are larger or the major diameter.  

To grasp this, consider an octagon barrel. The measurement across the flats is smaller than across the corners externally.  The Henry rifling is simply internal instead of external polygonal rifling.   

The Treatise on Ammunition 1887 say this about the paper patch:

The bullet " has two turns of fine white paper wrapped around it from right to left, that is contrary to direction of spin, so that the paper untwists in passing through the bore and leaves the bullet free."

The original bullet was .45" at the base, made 12 parts lead, 1 part tin.  This is seems undersized,  even paper patched. But of note is the fact that the Treatise says the bullet had small hollow in the base which upset on firing grasping the rifling. 

I am unaware of anyone making such a bullet mould of this diameter today, although a similar mould would be the Wolfe designed hollow base 45/70  mold  Lee makes.

Source material.

Treatise on Ammunition 1887
SAIS No. 15 .450 & .303 Martini Rifles and Carbines by Skennerton.

At .468 patched diameter no hollow base needed, flat base will work fine.  Preferably a bullet with a long shank and shorter nose - I seat mine out quite a bit, but I still want to have enough bullet in the case.  I necksize only, some neck tension is a plus when shooting with this kind of throat configuration.
And indeed, IME the direction of patch wrapping doesn't make any difference at all.  Especially with Henry rifling, which is pretty good at cutting the patch.
Just make sure you use a thick, soft grease cookie - and forget loading procedures for 45-70's:  No powder compression needed, no powder fill to the base of the bullet (that would be close to 100grs - OUCH).  That 577-450 has a big,cavernous case...
The rifle will shoot, but it does take some getting accustomed to when loading cartridges.

I can't speak for foreign cartridges, but I have 4 or 5 original boxes of paper patched bullets by JM Marlin and UMC and all are wrapped CCW as you're looking at the base of the bullet.
These are .44-530 grain Creedmoor bullets, .40-410 grain, and .38-55-255 grain Ballard, and .32-40-170 grain Ballard bullets.

Like Gert said the Henry Rifling with its corner peaks, does a good job cutting patches. 

Gert does a great job with lose powder.  The charge is large enough to slump and not form an air cylinder.

The original charge was 85 grains of RFG (subscript)2 powder.  It had a grain size roughly equivalent to Swiss 1-1/2 FG and a SD equivalent to Wano FFG. 

For filler in the 577/450 Martini consider closed cell 5/8" diameter backer rod.  Cut a length just long enough to be slightly compressed when the bullet is seated-backer rod is usually available at your local hardware or building supply store and always at Lowes or Home Dept. It the same stuff as those yellow ear plugs.  Use it the same way, roll it between your fingers to make small enough to pass through the neck.  Push it down with pencil or dowel until sits on the powder.  The lower part will expand to fill the roughly .577 diameter powder chamber, the upper part expands to fill the .45 neck. No airspace to cause problems.  When fired the closed cells compress and rupture and the fine dust like particles left over are blown out the barrel.   

To learn more about loading these large capacity cartridges, I suggest you get a copy of Greame Wright's book,  Shooting the British Double Rifle. Buffalo Arms sells it.

Paper patches can't really unwind as the rifling cuts the paper and it should open up between the cuts made by each land.

That is what I am told but not sure it is 100% correct.  I sometimes find sections of patching paper that are large enough to have multiple land marks.  I do believe it weakens the paper at those points so are more susceptible to separating where the land impressions are but not actually being clean cut. 
I believe that in the day bullets were patched specifically for rifling twist direction at least that is what I have read in vintage writing on the subject.  As I said earlier it cant hurt and might help in the process of the patch leaving the bullet so why not do it ?  It takes exactly  the same amount of effort either way. 

If you're seeing intact patches on fired bullets the bullet diameter is too small for the bore diameter of the gun. A properly sized paper patch bullet should be sized to bore diameter so the patch fills the grooves, and the lands cut the patch so it falls free after exiting the muzzle.

oneatatime wrote on Mar 30^th, 2026 at 12:57pm:


I disagree with your  " totally replaced " observation.  For a time in BPC competition PP bullets were dominant. The reason is ballistic coefficient.  A smooth bullet of the same profile as a grooved bullet packs more weight in the same length which raises the BC.  The top shooters meaning the winners  were using PP bullets and as always the lesser shooters were emulating them.  
At some point the advantage of improved BC of the smooth bullet gave way to simplicity.  So it seems to go in cycles as in the days of the demise of the American bison the PP bullet was dominant as I believe most if not all the ammo supplied by the Sharps company used a PP bullet. 
If you read from Leo Remiger's   The Encyclopedia Of Buffalo Hunters you find that most supply runs included powder, pig lead and patching paper.  I found it interesting that the softest lead possible was preferred because it didn't shoot through  so was often recovered under the hide on the off side where as hardened lead would more often shoot through and be lost.
  Then for a time PP did seem to go out of fashion but  was revived in the early days of BPC competition and with the help of books from Paul Mathews like " The Paper Jacket " and a few others that sparked interest in patched bullets again.
So Like Steve Garby once said  about smokeless powder being a passing fad maybe patching bullets is a recycling fad too that repeats itself every so often. One thing I can say for sure about patching high power bullets is that no other form of lubing or insulating a cast lead alloy bullet comes anywhere near the velocity potential of PP. 

The biggest reason you saw supply lists with paper included on them was simply because grease groove bullets were not that common during the buffalo hunting days. As grease groove bullets became the most common type loaded in factory ammo, then you saw less and less hunters paper patching bullets. Eventually it became nothing but grease groove or metal jacketed bullets, and none of the ammo makers offered paper patch ammo or bullets.

Just looked up some old factory boxes of bullets from UMC.
For the Sharps 44-77 were some 405 grain patched in 1 to 19 alloy. For Sharps 45 550 grain patched were some in 1 to 14 alloy. Why does everyone now think the bullets should be soft?

On the other hand, for the same length bullet the grease groove one will weigh more than the paper patched one because the full width of the grease groove bullet is lead whereas paper is used to make up the full width of the paper patched bullet. Right?

I was reading last night in Mike Ventorino's book about buffalo rifles where he said in the 45-90 case they could only fit 70 grain weight of FFG in the case because the Lyman # 457132 that was used when the Postell bullet or any greaser is seated so that all lube grooves are covered it uses up too much case volume.  He then goes on to say that with a tapered paper patched bullet that can be seated out farther he felt the full 90 grain charge would fit because the OAL could be longer.  So that too seems like an advantage favoring the PP bullet if shooting BP. Point is that there are reasons people still use PP bullets and they are far from extinct .  I have to admit that I likely use more GG bullets than PP bullets in my BPC rifles but not because its better but just because its easier.  When I was a tot my Dad used to tell me  "the easy way is seldom the best way"

Look for Mike Venturino's article on shooting the 577/450 Martini.  He hated it and sold the gun shortly after he wrote the article.

He followed his own advice on how load a BP cartridge.  Loaded it all the way up into the neck-some where around 109 grains of powder.  Beat the snot out of him. I talked with him shortly after the article came out.  I had talked with him a number years, but I was just one of his many fans.  When we talked about this subject he remembered there was some one outh there that understood, he just could remember of the many people he talked to, who it was.

The 577/450 is not a straight wall case. Well sort of not.  It is a straight wall case with the front part squeezed down to hold a smaller bullet.  Load for the back half straight wall section and you should be fine. The squeezed down section for bullet stuff. 

I have a modern 577/450 Reamer made to CIP standards.  Often thought about building a barrel with a straight non tapered bore and chamber with this reamer. This modern reamer has a step down from neck diameter to bullet diameter, like modern conventional chambers.   

The original 577/450 Martini chamber does not have a step down from neck diameter to bullet diameter.  It is straight, like a heeled bullet chamber, from neck to tapered rifling.

I often have thought about having a heeled bullet mould made for my original guns.  Front driving bands outside neck-throat diameter, back half driving bands, inside neck diameter. Think .22LR or .310 Cadet bullet.

To many other projects, and my shooting skills are no longer good enough to appreciate the gain, if any.

KFW, that was a rhetorical question. To explain in detail take a 45 caliber barrel. The bore diameter is .450 and the groove diameter is .458. The bullets are both 1.4 inches long. The PP bullet is .450 in diameter and uses paper to get to .458 or .459. The GG is .459 in diameter and everything over .450 or.451 is lead less the grooves which are .005 to .015 in depth. So, yes, the GG bullet of the same length as the PP bullet is significantly heavier because lead is heavier than paper.