How tight or how hard to start an RB& Patch?

Well let me give my take & that's all the heck it is.I been shooting these guys awhile but
I,m no exspert on this.But I like the question & I can only give my 2 cents.We know each
gun is differant.My Lyman GPH likes .015 pillow ticking & a .530 ball.

She goes in very tight & I do use a short starter & always have.But Lyman GPH has a
deep rifleing.I was told when I first bought it that thick Pillow ticking worked best.

But maybe that has something to do with how tight they go in.Now on my .50 Flinter
the rifleing is not near as deep & I use .010 Pillow ticking & it not hard to seat at all.

Maybe that has something to do with it.But what do I know, I,m just guessing.

Fly

The only way I can tell if a patch was too loose ot tight is by examining a recovered patch.
It will tell you.

In my Cva hawken .50 ( range gun) I use a .490 ball and .18 patch. It's a real tight fit, and takes a few smacks of the palm to get started. But I can shoot all day and never swab the barrel. Even at the house it only takes a few strokes to get it clean.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by troy_mclure

In my Cva hawken .50 ( range gun) I use a .490 ball and .18 patch. It's a real tight fit, and takes a few smacks of the palm to get started. But I can shoot all day and never swab the barrel. Even at the house it only takes a few strokes to get it clean.

---

There is no doubt that the tighter the seal is the higher the pressure will run, and the cleaner the powder will burn. The trick for hunting is to balance accuracy with ease of loading. I am willing to give up some accuracy in the woods to be able to quickly ram another load home.

Best wishes,

Joe

I found that a flannel patch works reasonably well. Not the best but they load easy so I use them durring hunting.

For my new Crockett, the literature that came with it states the best accuracy is achieved with a 0.012 patch and a .310 round ball. With that combo I don't need a short starter. I can start it with the rod. I don't know what kind of groups I will get with it since I have only had one session with it, but I do know I was knocking the heck out of my boys life sized squirrel target at 25 yards with it. I am not concerned with groups as much as being able to bust bushy tails with it. If I can get 2 inches at 50 yards I will be good to go.

Best wishes,

Joe

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boerrancher

There is no doubt that the tighter the seal is the higher the pressure will run, and the cleaner the powder will burn. The trick for hunting is to balance accuracy with ease of loading. I am willing to give up some accuracy in the woods to be able to quickly ram another load home.

Best wishes,

Joe

---

Yea, I'm gonna look for some thinner material for patches if I decide to take it hunting.

I would think about changing the crown on the muzzle .Most modern made muzzle loaders are crowned wrong .There should be a long tapered crown and that will allow easier loading .Take the rifle to a gunsmith that knows real muzzle loaders , not those modern inline **** guns , and get his opinion.Arnie

Personal preference but I work a load up that uses easy loading.
At the most a nudge from my powder measure to get it started.
For the hotter loadings there are many types of backers I've used
and that will usually take care of chewed patches.
I don't shoot comp so when I find good enough I concentrate on
my end of the game.
I leave the bughole groups to them things I shoot with 3" forends
with big glass on top.
If I can bust a rat with my .40 and let the steam out of a whitetail
with the .54 I'm happy - and I'm happy.

For my Crockett I use a .311" cast ball and .020" ticking patch and it's snug but quite loadable in the field with a wooden rod. I use a short starter for all my guns. The requirements I place on loads are: 1. I absolutely have to be able to seat them in the field with the underbarrel wood rod 2. I use the thickest patch and tightest loads that still allow rule #1.

If it can't be safely seated (without rod breakage) in the field and under field conditions then I have no use for it. This same standard applies to both hunting AND the target range.

Back in the early 70's I decided to build my own .50 Hawkin and build it like the originals not the copies that were about then. I assymbled the parts from different sources --L&R or Davis lock(I can't remember which), Douglas barrel, etc. When completed I started out by buying .05, .10, and .15 patches. Then .490 & .495 swaged balls. I tried each in turn using carefully weighed charges from 80 grains FFFG to 120 grains FFFG black powder. I found the most accurate load to be 90 grains FFFG powder with a .490 ball, and a .15 patch. The next in turn of accuracy was a .495 ball, 95 grains FFFG pwoder and a .10 patch. That's what I stayed with shooting matches, except on very windy days I found I could go with a 120 grain load of FFFG powder and cut thru the wind better on the long range matches. I've still got the metals to prove it worked. It worked in my rifle but may not in any other but mine was the one that counted. What I did find when I tried .495 ball and .15 patch was a tendency for the sharp rifling to cut the patch enough to get blow by, not good and accuracy suffered some. My experience anyway, James

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hanshi

The requirements I place on loads are: 1. I absolutely have to be able to seat them in the field with the underbarrel wood rod 2. I use the thickest patch and tightest loads that still allow rule #1.

If it can't be safely seated (without rod breakage) in the field and under field conditions then I have no use for it. This same standard applies to both hunting AND the target range.

---

+1 to that. I don't have use for a load I have to struggle with, period.

Best wishes,

Joe