bare balls in rifles

[rancher1913]

I have a bunch of lead balls at .496, they are to big for my patches and fit tight by themselves. I know you can shot bare balls out of pistols with no problems but have never gave a thought to a bare ball in a rifle, would this have a leading issue or am I better finding some very very thin patches or a under wad of some sort. gun is a smooth bore if that makes a difference.

[Outpost75]

I shoot bare 1:40 lead balls of. 509" diameter in my Green Mountain LRH barrel with 28" twist rifling, using 100 grains of 2Fg and a lubricated Ox Yoke Originals wad loaded under the ball. I use a mallet and short starter to get the ball into the barrel. Velocity is 1800 fps from a 30" barrel, accuracy is excellent and it is a stone killer. Your .495 balls will require a 0.008" patch to load properly and shoot well. I use muslin pocket drill.

[Rustyleee]

when I was into muzzleloading I used to read a lot of classic books on history and such. Along the way I read some books about Simon Kenton who was a contemporary of Daniel Boone. The indians had a name for him that meant "he who's gun is always loaded." I read how he would be on the run and he would pour a load from his horn ( a terrible safety hazard today) and spit a ball down the bore because he had stuffed several balls in his mouth a the first sign of trouble. He would them slam the butt of the rifle on the ground to make the ball slide down the bore.
After reading that I wanted to try a naked ball. I didn't load from the horn and I didn't slam the butt of my rifle on the ground. I did use a ramrod. At 25 yards I was still able to keep everything in a 6" group. While I wouldn't shoot a match like that, if I needed a quick follow up shot to put down a wounded animal It wouldn't be a wasted shot.

[Mk42gunner]

With a smooth bore, I would get a ½" arch punch and some 1/8" felt and make my own over powder wads, as long as the balls fit tight enough to stay in place.

I did read an article by Ed Harris in one of the Digests about shooting patchless .454 or .457 balls from a .45 cal rifle that normally took .440 balls.

Robert

Robert

[rfd]

try .005" linen patch - rifling with a patched ball will always be better than a bare ball. you can always bump up the patch thickness with cigarette paper, too.

[johnson1942]

i had a 45 1/28 twist sidelock i sold. i once and a while shot over sized roundballs in it with a 60 thousands fiber wad between ball and powder. used 70 grains of powder. kept it in a nickel at 50 yards from a rest. never ever any leading. the oversized bare ball went in easy with a punch from the palm on the starter then on to the powder very easy. why use a patch when it works so good? my 3 cowboy revolvers all shoot round balls bare and are very accurate, why not a rifle?

[Maven]

What Outpost75 & johnson1945 wrote about an unpatched/bare RB in a fast twist or even a slower (e.g., 1:60) twist is so. I tried reducing .530" RB's to .518" and loaded them in my Knight Bighorn (Green Mt. bbl., 1:28 twist). I used 60gr. Diamondback FFg and only the base of an MMP green sabot as an OP wad. Here's a PDF of the 50 yd. results:

img005.pdfimg005.pdf

Although the results were encouraging, a patched RB (.490") was considerably more accurate and easier to seat.

[Sharpsman]

when I was into muzzleloading I used to read a lot of classic books on history and such. Along the way I read some books about Simon Kenton who was a contemporary of Daniel Boone. The indians had a name for him that meant "he who's gun is always loaded." I read how he would be on the run and he would pour a load from his horn ( a terrible safety hazard today) and spit a ball down the bore because he had stuffed several balls in his mouth a the first sign of trouble. He would them slam the butt of the rifle on the ground to make the ball slide down the bore.
After reading that I wanted to try a naked ball. I didn't load from the horn and I didn't slam the butt of my rifle on the ground. I did use a ramrod. At 25 yards I was still able to keep everything in a 6" group. While I wouldn't shoot a match like that, if I needed a quick follow up shot to put down a wounded animal It wouldn't be a wasted shot.

If you'll read a little more on Kenton....you'll discover he tripped and swallowed 3 round balls! Autopsy showed that's what killed him!!

[rfd]

lots depends on what each of us want from their ml's. it's a fair statement that i'm not gonna be chased by a shawnee war party too soon, so bare balling - with it's inherently inconsistent accuracy - ain't my game. and if hunting critters, i'd still be interested even more so with accuracy of both the first and follow up shot(s). however, there is no question that if an emergency short distance and large target shot was required NOW, getting the shot off asap would be the correct priority over time wasting loading methods that might offer better accuracy. it's all subjective stuff to some degree, and idle talk as y'all know what works best for ... you. and that's all that matters most.

[John Taylor]

In a timed match I have used bare balls many times in a 62 cal.

[C. Latch]

Powder coat them?

[daleraby]

There are a few "issues" with this practice. The first one is safety. If the charge is heavy enough, even an undersized ball might obturate enough to engage the rifling, BUT if if the ball rolls forward and is no longer seated on the powder charge when you fire the gun, you could be setting off a pipe bomb right in front of your face as an unseated ball can act like a bore obstruction. So, to be safe you have to have a ball large enough engage the rifling, which can be major pain to get started. Maybe its just me, but I don't particularly like to use things like a mallet to pound a bullet into a bore that has a powder charge in it. Probably not really a safety hazard, but it just kinda bugs me. Now, as it is a ball and not a bullet, there are no driving bands on it, so unless you want to strip the bearing surface on the ball, you have to keep the charge pretty light. Also, bullets have grooves for to put bear grease in, round balls don't. Unlike a revolver cylinder, you can't easilly apply grease to the round ball once it has been seated as it is generally a couple feet or so down a small hole and you certainly do not want to leave little balls of grease half-way down the bore unless you want to see if you can get a rifle barrel to bulge. If you use a bare ball without lube, you are going to get leading and possibly some pretty bad powder fouling. No real reason you could not use something like an appropriate sized Wonder Wad under the ball to reduce leading due to the charge melting the base of your ball, and I suppose you could also use one atop the ball to keep it from rolling down the barrel, that's basically how a muzzle-loading shotgun works.

I've tried the bare ball method in a rifled bareel only once. I had a T/C Patriot pistol in .36 caliber. I wanted to see how it shot, but didn't have any .350 round balls or .36 caliber bullets. I did, howver, have some .375 round balls for a .36 caliber revolver. I cleaned the barrel, dried it, lubed it with T/C's version of Bore Butter and charged it with 18 grains (volumetric measure) of fff. Started the ball with a light brass hammer, following up with a bullet starter and the gun's ramrod. Once I had the ball "resized" by hamering it into the undersized bore, it seated easilly enough. I was able to hit the aluminum soda can at seven yards. With only one shot fired down a clean bore, I didn't experience any kind of fouling issues.

I've also fired a few .690 round balls down a 12 Gauge T/C New Englander. I used two methods. The first was a simple lubed patch around the ball. As the bore was un-choked, getting the ball started was no issue. The problem that quickly manifested was that the ball and patch created a very good air seal with no rifling to relieve pressure as I compressed the air column atop the powder charge... so I had to go slowly.

The second method used an over-powder card wad and "pushin' cushion" or fiber wad with the ball atop that and then another over-powder wad atop the ball to hold it in. I guess i could have used an overshot wad, but in my mind that thin card wad might not have held the ball in place and the thin walls of a 12 gauge barrel might blow at even a lower pressure than a rifle barrel if the ball moved forward.

If memory serves, accuracy with both of these arrangements was about equal, surprisingly accurate, but at the same time, not nearly as good as a patched round ball in a rifled bore. I had no noticable leading or excessive powder fowling with either methodology.

So... in a nutshell, be careful, have fun, and get yourself some bronze bore brushes and Murphy's Oil Soap, 'cause your going to need 'em.

[minmax]

I try to keep my balls away from any part of a pistol or rifle. As I would like to keep them attached.
Sorry I couldn't help myself.

[bhuch5]

I use a bare .562 round ball lubed with liquid alox in 2 of my 54 cal muzzies (a Cabelas investarm Hawken and a Sharon barreled underhammer) with very good results. Loaded over 90 grs Goex with lubed felt wad. Requires a GOOD rap with short starter but goes down easily . I found a .550 rb mold which loads much easier and hope to try this week. Both rifles accounted for a nice buck 2 years ago... 1 at 70 yds, 1 at 40.
Good shooting to ya, Bruce H

[curator]

German "Jaeger" rifles were loaded with 'bare" round balls using a mallet, before those pesky Americans started wrapping their undersized balls in bits of cloth. I have loaded several of my muzzle loading rifles using bare balls of groove diameter or slightly over with excellent results. Loading does require a mallet (I prefer a heavy rubber one) to get the ball started. After started into the rifling the ball loads easily. I usually wipe the bore between shots with a slightly damp patch so fouling is not an issue. Accuracy improves slightly with a 1/8 felt wad between ball and powder charge. I have never found any trace of leading even at velocities approaching 2000 fps. A bare ball that fills and seals the rifling against powder gas leakage will usually shoot more accurately than a patched ball from a clean barrel. I use .515" balls in my .50 caliber rifles and .480 in my .45s. If it were not for the need to hammer the ball to get it seated, I would skip patching and patch knife altogether. Obviously, bare balls are quite impractical in the field.

[waksupi]

If you'll read a little more on Kenton....you'll discover he tripped and swallowed 3 round balls! Autopsy showed that's what killed him!!

I really doubt swallowing three round balls would kill anyone. They would pass through the system pretty fast, just like when a kid swallows marbles.
Might crank the porcelain on the way out, though!

[triggerhappy243]

I think if it is a smooth bore, I would want a patch.... just for the sake of easy loading.

[rfd]

patched balls only, in my smoothie!

[OverMax]

So long as the ball fits a bit snug. Why not. Black powder fowler's and smooth bore barrels are capable of many different styles of shooting. Ball_ Shot.
Tow, Patched, Wad. or bare even. Only difference between a fowler and a smooth bore rifle is their Maximum allowable powder charges measured I'm thinking?

[johnson1942]

in a 44, 1/28 twist i sold a while back i shot a lot of over sized round balls tapped into the bore with a small rubber hammer and a starter. used a 60 thousands fiber wad between ball and powder. charge was 70 grains. shot as accurate as a pp bullet. never leaded. those big horse pistol colts shot a heavy charge with a bare ball. once they are in the bore they go down easier than a patched ball. after that could never figure out why to use a cloth patch.