Muzzleloader 32-40 barrel ??? will it work

[kens]

I am an old school muzzle loader of patched round balls. This new thing of the fast twist (1:28) inlines with sabots in .50cal is relatively new to me.
I also see that the shallow groove 1:28 inlines will stabilize a .50 conical in a .50 barrel without a patch nor sabot, the bullet will 'bump up' into the grooves.
My question is about twist rate and the amount of 'bump up' or obturation that can be done with a muzzleloader. We all know that round balls work with slow twist and elongated bullets work with fast twist. My thinking is that the smaller the bore the faster the twist.
Can I take a 32-40 barrel blank bore/groove 314/321 with twist 1:14; and muzzle load it with a soft cast .308 bullet?
Possible use a paper patch or thin cloth patch to make up the difference of a .308 bullet and the 314 bore?
Will it bump up?
Will it stabilize?
Will the twist be too fast?
The original 32-40 cartridge was black powder and ran about 1500fps. Why couldnt I duplicate that with a front loader?

[mooman76]

I don't see it being too fast a twist. If you are going to use regular bullets, I would think paper patching would be the best route.

[Good Cheer]

Kens that sounds like a super fun project.

[rodwha]

A felt wad may be needed as well.

I’ve been wondering about this very thing but with a larger caliber.

[kens]

A felt wad may be needed as well.

I’ve been wondering about this very thing but with a larger caliber.

Do you mean using a .45-70 barrel and muzzle load it with soft cast 45acp bullets??

[Nobade]

It works, but you end up with a very long powder column in such a small bore. And you have to load pretty heavy to get it to shoot. If you have an interest in guns like this, I'd suggest reading "the muzzleloading caplock rifle" by Ned Roberts. Folks have been using rifles like this for a long time.

[John Taylor]

Pope liked the 32-40 and would load the bullet from the muzzle with a paper patch and load the cartridge from the breach end. He had some amazing groups.

[kens]

I just talked to a fellow that is knowledgeable of the Scheutzen type rifles. He is shooting a .45 muzzle loader 1:16 twist with a 540gr bullet. He stated he is going out to 600 & 1000 yards with this setup. He gave me encouraging words on my little project. I know he is heavier caliber, and longer range, however, if I could get 300yards 'most' days, and 500yds on a 'good' day, I would be happy.
I'm starting to shop around for one of those Unertl scopes, with the external adjustments.

[oldracer]

Like Kens noted, I am also shooting 45 caliber fast twist 540 grain grease groove bullets. I use 80 grains of Goex FFG with a fiber wad on top, no compacting of the powder and the bullet slides down the bore with just a tad bit of friction. I can get 1 MOA groups on cross sticks out to 300 yards on a day with little to no wind but when windy I do not do well as I have only been doing this for a few years. I started with Pedersoli Gibbs stone stock except I put Lee Shaver sights on it. This rifle has been a world champ winner right out of the box soooooo I figure the shooters must be pretty darn good to?! My latest is a home made 45 caliber with what we think is a Pope gain twist barrel and a 12 power Unertl scope that was found on Gun Broker at a pawn shop in Arkansas. I have only shot it at the range on 7 or 8 days and went out to 300 yards after 2 days! So far the weather at our range in San Diego has been the normal strange spring stuff so a load work up has not happened yet. My other slug guns have Green Mountain barrels, 1 in 18 twist and all 3 shoot just as well as the Pedersoli. In looking at my Pedersoli I saw it has the same type of rifling as Pope made I.E. very wide grooves and slightly rounded groove bottoms. Making these type of shooters is a great challenge and it is really fulfilling.
John

[rodwha]

Do you mean using a .45-70 barrel and muzzle load it with soft cast 45acp bullets??

More like a .38-55/.375 Win barrel or even a 10mm carbine barrel or some such. Something no more than .458”. I had also contemplated 7mm and .308” but just don’t know what kind of oomph they’d retain with a heavy for caliber bullet out at 200 yds or so. Seems a little more caliber will keep additional thump and may have enough for larger game as well.

I had been told that BP is very limiting and that a velocity of about 2000-2400 fps is about all they can be pushed to regardless of caliber or bullet weight.

[kens]

If a rifle tops out velocity with the lightest bullet, then all my muzzleloaders top out with roundball, that would be the lightest, correct?
I chronographed round balls at about 1850fps.
Yes, black powder is limited in velocity to 1800 or 2000fps, however, I feel like, and have not proven yet, black powder pushes heavy bullets better than smokeless, up to a point.
I mean you can take the same say, 70gr load of BP, and add conical vs RB and lose little velocity.
Whereas if you took a metallic .308 and little 110gr bullet load, then take same load and top it with a 200grainer, your pressure would go off the charts, and you lose a whole lot of velocity in order to maintain book pressure.

[Good Cheer]

I am an old school muzzle loader of patched round balls. This new thing of the fast twist (1:28) inlines with sabots in .50cal is relatively new to me.
I also see that the shallow groove 1:28 inlines will stabilize a .50 conical in a .50 barrel without a patch nor sabot, the bullet will 'bump up' into the grooves.
My question is about twist rate and the amount of 'bump up' or obturation that can be done with a muzzleloader. We all know that round balls work with slow twist and elongated bullets work with fast twist. My thinking is that the smaller the bore the faster the twist.
Can I take a 32-40 barrel blank bore/groove 314/321 with twist 1:14; and muzzle load it with a soft cast .308 bullet?
Possible use a paper patch or thin cloth patch to make up the difference of a .308 bullet and the 314 bore?
Will it bump up?
Will it stabilize?
Will the twist be too fast?
The original 32-40 cartridge was black powder and ran about 1500fps. Why couldnt I duplicate that with a front loader?

If a .308 patched up will work that could be a really great choice for a barrel seeing as there are so many .30 caliber bullet molds floating around.
Makes me wonder though, might'n you need to get rid of the lube grooves for better accuracy? Thinking that no grooves could allow for consistent swaging of the bullet when the powder charge kicked it's behind.
I haven't tried that in my .458 bore rifle but I'm threaten' to.

[rodwha]

If a rifle tops out velocity with the lightest bullet, then all my muzzleloaders top out with roundball, that would be the lightest, correct?
I chronographed round balls at about 1850fps.

Maybe. But maybe not. There’s a fellow on another forum who tested a ball vs a bullet with the same charge from his revolver and found the bullet to actually be a tad faster despite weighing about 40 grns more (140 vs 180). It’s thought that the weight along with additional friction due to the longer bearing surface built more pressure and maybe a better burn just to get the bullet moving. This has only been observed with this one bullet (ball-et iirc).

[kens]

If a .308 patched up will work that could be a really great choice for a barrel seeing as there are so many .30 caliber bullet molds floating around.
Makes me wonder though, might'n you need to get rid of the lube grooves for better accuracy? Thinking that no grooves could allow for consistent swaging of the bullet when the powder charge kicked it's behind.
I haven't tried that in my .458 bore rifle but I'm threaten' to.

The guys I have talked to thus far indicate the loob groove thing is non-decisive. They all say they tried it, and all say they had some success with it. then they turn around and the same thing about a slick sided with paper patch. So umm, the jury is still out on lube grooves.

[Nobade]

I've certainly had better luck with paper patched slicks.

[kens]

how do you muzzle load those without tearing the paper?

[Ballistics in Scotland]

If a .308 patched up will work that could be a really great choice for a barrel seeing as there are so many .30 caliber bullet molds floating around.
Makes me wonder though, might'n you need to get rid of the lube grooves for better accuracy? Thinking that no grooves could allow for consistent swaging of the bullet when the powder charge kicked it's behind.
I haven't tried that in my .458 bore rifle but I'm threaten' to.

I think there is a pretty good chance that a land diameter bullet would expand if it wasn't too hard. But a grooveless bullet would probably be better. Imagine the opposite, stretching a piece of rubber rod with grooves in it. Most of the stretching would take place in the narrow bits, and in just the same way most of the upsetting of the bullet would take place in the grooves, where it will do you no good. With any upsetting flat-based bullet I think you would be best with a wax or grease cookie between card discs. A felt wad is compressible, and its cushioning effect would reduce the upsetting.

People like Pope didn't rely on upsetting, though. Their muzzle-loading was generally done with a false muzzle in which the bullet was placed before loading into the real muzzle. It was often made from a piece of the same barrel, located by pins and hooks, and the bullet could be started with a simply bullet starter or levers like the sophisticated kind of corkscrew, only in reverse. It was usually cut from the barrel blank after drilling the locating pin holes, although I don't see why a smoothbore false muzzle wouldn't work. Nowadays you could probably locate it with a cerrosafe cast of the bore.

Another system sometimes used was the crosspatch. Two wide, shallow grooves were cut across the false or actual muzzle, at right angles to one another. Two strips of paper were laid in the grooves, and enveloped the bullet as it carried them down the bore. The main advantage was probably guaranteed instant detachment as the bullet left the muzzle. I did a search for "crosspatch etymology" and found it wasn't the origin of the word "crosspatch" for a highly temperamental person, but it might be understandable if it was.

[northmn]

Ballistics pretty much explained it, but also Pope made his own bullet molds and some were slightly tapered for muzzle loading. The project should work as some rifles were made with 45-70 barrels. Also paper patched bullet molds should be available for a 32-40. One individual used to keep a section of the barrel and then "pre-rifle" the bullets by driving them through the cutoff section and then loading them. Fouling still was an issue but they worked for him. Personally I would rather just play with a 32-40 breech loader and BP.

DEP

[Nobade]

how do you muzzle load those without tearing the paper?

The patched bullet is just a touch under bore diameter. Usually it will slide down with the weight of the ramrod.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Sliding down fairly easily works well with medium-hard, heavy-bullet and heavily-charged .450 long-range rifles. That bullet might be a little longer, which I think is what controls upsetting (weight of lead compared with cross-section), but I am fairly sure a .32-40 would work without unusual bullets.

At least some of Pope's tapered moulds (biggest at the base) were used for separate breech-seating, ahead of a case which was reloaded time after time without sizing. Some people had a probably pointless belief that the use of the same case improved accuracy. I can't see a straight taper in either direction being advantageous for muzzle-loading, but a bullet which is push fit for the first couple of bands and then a driving fit for the rest, rather like the current Lee cap and ball revolver bullet, might work well. I think it would have to be grooved and lubed, not patched, and it would be specially good for hunting, where you don't want to bother with a false muzzle.