Random general questions

[megasupermagnum]

I didn't want to muddy up different threads, and these are questions I have had rolling around in my head for a while.

I want to start with the patched round ball. Like many, I began shooting with a pre-lubed patch from TC. They work ok, but didn't seem ideal. More on that later. I decided to try some materials, and went looking for the tried and true pillow ticking. At Walmart, there is a good selection of different fabrics, including what is labeled ticking. I see so often people talking about .018" patches, but it doesn't seem like an accurate number to me. Measuring those TC patches, measured how I think they should be, they are right at .015". I see lots of people saying they squeeze the jaws to get the reading when compressed. The problem is that fabric doesn't seem to want to work. Based on how hard I squeezed, I could make it go as low as .010". Back to the store, I found a suitable ticking, which measures .016", but again I could squeeze the jaws as low as .010". I bought it, washed it, and took it shooting. The stuff seems to work quite well so far. It tears into strips with no effort, and cutting at the muzzle is no trouble at all. It might even be easier than trying to center the ball on a pre-cut patch.

Along with how to measure patch thickness, I am wondering how tight a fit people are using. I see one guy say you shouldn't need a short starter, and the next saying as long as it doesn't need a mallet you are ok. I tried my new patches with some .535" balls, and they start quite hard. I'm a big man at 6'5" 330 pounds, and I had to lean on it pretty good to start them. A normal person likely would have had to resort to a mallet. Once started though, they went down with hardly any more resistance than with a .530" ball. I have yet to do any formal testing, but the .535" ball seems to shoot better than the .530" so far. This is in my new to me TC Renegade 54 caliber. I also tried the larger combo in the New Englander, and they start just a tiny bit easier. That is likely the winning combo in that gun.

The third question pertains to the first two paragraphs, and that is patch tearing. I've been having the occasional patch tear, even with light charges. A quick side track, I tried some thin patches that measure .010", or .007 compressed hard with a .535" ball. They felt like they loaded nice, but did not shoot well. The little bits of what was left of the patch told that story. That is obviously bad. With the thicker patches, I'm not getting tearing around the outside of the ball. Every one that has a small tear, has it right in the center. At first I was thinking I was loading too roughly. The odd thing is my .535" ball and very tight patch combo seems to leave a clean patch you could shoot again, aside from the frayed edges. The TC patches are lubed with TC bore butter, and I was shooting my patches with windshield wiper fluid. Does the lube have an effect on the patch tearing, or is the tighter fit a better one?


I am a long ways from doing this, but I've always wondered about coning a muzzle. As I said earlier, once the tightest ball/patch combo is started, they go down easy enough. I have to wonder if a coned muzzle wouldn't make this even better. What I won't do is sacrifice accuracy, and that's where people seem to get weird. Claims range from "I couldn't tell" to "yes, it became worse". Never a mention on how much. Are we talking making a 1" at 50 yard gun into a 3" gun or what? The other part with that is how it effects conical's. I have had an on again/off again deal with the Lee Real bullets. I like shooting a patched ball for some reason, but the Reals seems to shoot as good or better. At the end of the day, all of my guns are hunting guns, and what shoots best is what I want to use. I have not considered doing this to my own rifles, but I was always curious how a coned muzzle would do. I do have a TC Impact inline with a QLA recessed muzzle. I did try with horrible results with the Lee Real. I later came to find out it was a problem with the gun, and have not tried it since.

[indian joe]

I didn't want to muddy up different threads, and these are questions I have had rolling around in my head for a while.

Just for fun heres some random opinions back

I want to start with the patched round ball. Like many, I began shooting with a pre-lubed patch from TC. They work ok, but didn't seem ideal. More on that later. I decided to try some materials, and went looking for the tried and true pillow ticking. At Walmart, there is a good selection of different fabrics, including what is labeled ticking. I see so often people talking about .018" patches, but it doesn't seem like an accurate number to me. Measuring those TC patches, measured how I think they should be, they are right at .015". I see lots of people saying they squeeze the jaws to get the reading when compressed. The problem is that fabric doesn't seem to want to work. Based on how hard I squeezed, I could make it go as low as .010". Back to the store, I found a suitable ticking, which measures .016", but again I could squeeze the jaws as low as .010". I bought it, washed it, and took it shooting.

f]good call - I always thought the guys taking their micrometer into the dress shop were kidding themselves - you can pick it by feel anyway OR take a lady with you - one that is interested in fabrics - read the label first - 100% cotton - good to go - all fabric is filled with goo(size) on the roll anyway, so its an educated guess until you get it washed out - I iron mine, makes cutting patches with a punch easier

The stuff seems to work quite well so far. It tears into strips with no effort, and cutting at the muzzle is no trouble at all. It might even be easier than trying to center the ball on a pre-cut patch.
Along with how to measure patch thickness, I am wondering how tight a fit people are using. I see one guy say you shouldn't need a short starter, and the next saying as long as it doesn't need a mallet you are ok. I tried my new patches with some .535" balls, and they start quite hard. I'm a big man at 6'5" 330 pounds, and I had to lean on it pretty good to start them.

Even at your weight if you can start it by leaning on it without a bit of a whack its not a tight load!
I am 9 inches shorter and 100pounds lighter, I use a short starter that takes one good swat with a closed fist to seat it - then the load goes down easy with the rod - have done well with that system for a long time - shot some nice groups - some good targets and a few wins .

A normal person likely would have had to resort to a mallet. Once started though, they went down with hardly any more resistance than with a .530" ball. I have yet to do any formal testing, but the .535" ball seems to shoot better than the .530" so far. This is in my new to me TC Renegade 54 caliber. I also tried the larger combo in the New Englander, and they start just a tiny bit easier. That is likely the winning combo in that gun.

The third question pertains to the first two paragraphs, and that is patch tearing. I've been having the occasional patch tear, even with light charges. A quick side track, I tried some thin patches that measure .010", or .007 compressed hard with a .535" ball. They felt like they loaded nice, but did not shoot well. The little bits of what was left of the patch told that story. That is obviously bad. With the thicker patches, I'm not getting tearing around the outside of the ball. Every one that has a small tear, has it right in the center.

I wonder about that ? cotton deteriorates in the light and over time - If you got stuff that was hanging round the shop on display for too long ? Shouldnt be a factor in Walmart but ya never know - one of my rules is torn patches = splatter groups - it plays out most times

At first I was thinking I was loading too roughly. The odd thing is my .535" ball and very tight patch combo seems to leave a clean patch you could shoot again, aside from the frayed edges. The TC patches are lubed with TC bore butter, and I was shooting my patches with windshield wiper fluid. Does the lube have an effect on the patch tearing, or is the tighter fit a better one?


I am a long ways from doing this, but I've always wondered about coning a muzzle.

seen a few - never done it - be very careful - only a tiny bit I think - would only take a couple thou at most

As I said earlier, once the tightest ball/patch combo is started, they go down easy enough. I have to wonder if a coned muzzle wouldn't make this even better.probably would BUT would it shoot any better ? I have had a couple round ball guns shoot close to two inches at 100yards with easy loads - open sights shooting sitting position What I won't do is sacrifice accuracy, and that's where people seem to get weird. Claims range from "I couldn't tell" to "yes, it became worse". Never a mention on how much. Are we talking making a 1" at 50 yard gun into a 3" gun or what? The other part with that is how it effects conical's. I have had an on again/off again deal with the Lee Real bullets. I like shooting a patched ball for some reason, but the Reals seems to shoot as good or better. At the end of the day, all of my guns are hunting guns, and what shoots best is what I want to use. I have not considered doing this to my own rifles, but I was always curious how a coned muzzle would do. I do have a TC Impact inline with a QLA recessed muzzle. I did try with horrible results with the Lee Real. I later came to find out it was a problem with the gun, and have not tried it since.

...........

[rfd]

whatever load is used, specially if the gun is relatively new, check the bore for rough rifling first by running a *tight* patched jag and look at the patch for any cuts or cloth weave pulls. there are a number of methods to smooth out any rough rifling.

measuring patch cloth thickness is near pure folly because of many cloth and measuring tool factor anomalies. the answer is to try different lots of patch cloth to see what will work best with the chosen "pure" lead ball diameter. there really is no viable way around that unless you get lucky. when a reasonable cotton or linen cloth is found, buy lots of it.

using a .535 ball for a .54 bore means you'll need to use a thin patch cloth that will probably blow through and/or be cut by the rifling, and still require a short ball starter. increase the patch cloth thickness and you'll need a hammer besides the ball starter. is that really all that necessary? was that how it was done in the 18th century? is there really a need for such tightly loaded patched balls?

personally, that ain't fun for me, that's a pain to load. specially out on a winter's hunt and you need a follow up shot and need to find a good sized rock to hammer down the load. i use a .526 ball swathed in something called .015 tight weave cotton patch cloth that's been fully saturated with grease or oil or both. this pushes down the bore with only the ramrod and no short starter or hammer required. 70 to 80 grains of compacted 3f and the ball is off to the races. this gives me offhand minute-of-deer death-blow accuracy at 50 yards or under, all the time. if more consistent accuracy than that is absolutely required, it'd be with really tight loads and maybe more compacted powder, but that nonsense ain't for me and i'd rather use my .40-65 or .45-70.

in any event, to each their own and good luck.

[bosterr]

Look into cotton linen. I use .015 and barely need a short starter and slides down the bore fairly easy in my .54 flintlock. Mine has a Colerain radius groove bore so may load a bit easier that one with conventional lands and grooves. The Lee molds I have are supposed to be .530 but actually drop .532. I have some .010 linen, but it's too thin but could maybe work better with .535 ball.

[indian joe]

whatever load is used, specially if the gun is relatively new, check the bore for rough rifling first by running a *tight* patched jag and look at the patch for any cuts or cloth weave pulls. there are a number of methods to smooth out any rough rifling.

measuring patch cloth thickness is near pure folly because of many cloth and measuring tool factor anomalies. the answer is to try different lots of patch cloth to see what will work best with the chosen "pure" lead ball diameter. there really is no viable way around that unless you get lucky. when a reasonable cotton or linen cloth is found, buy lots of it.

using a .535 ball for a .54 bore means you'll need to use a thin patch cloth that will probably blow through and/or be cut by the rifling, and still require a short ball starter. increase the patch cloth thickness and you'll need a hammer besides the ball starter. is that really all that necessary? was that how it was done in the 18th century? is there really a need for such tightly loaded patched balls?

personally, that ain't fun for me, that's a pain to load. specially out on a winter's hunt and you need a follow up shot and need to find a good sized rock to hammer down the load. i use a .526 ball swathed in something called .015 tight weave cotton patch cloth that's been fully saturated with grease or oil or both. this pushes down the bore with only the ramrod and no short starter or hammer required. 70 to 80 grains of compacted 3f and the ball is off to the races. this gives me offhand minute-of-deer death-blow accuracy at 50 yards or under, all the time. if more consistent accuracy than that is absolutely required, it'd be with really tight loads and maybe more compacted powder, but that nonsense ain't for me and i'd rather use my .40-65 or .45-70.

in any event, to each their own and good luck.

Seen a lot of guys do those mallet loads and dont reckon many of em gained much at all from it -----

chrono tested some ball loads one time in my flinter and very surprised how much difference it made changing the ramming technique - no matter what ya do - do it same all the time was the message!

[winelover]

My .54 cal Renegade likes Speer .530 round balls with Ox-Yoke pre lubed .010 thick .50 - .59 cal patches. I use a loading block made for that combination.

Winelover

[KCSO]

Shooting the muzzleloader and finding the right load, patch, ball and lube is a testing process. When I shot competition at 10 yards I spent most of the summer testing what would and would not work. This patch with this ball diameter and this lube with this load. in the end I was shooting a 2" group at 100 yards, To get the best results for your individual rifle and twist will take WORK and range time. I even went so far as to test where to rest the gun on cross sticks for the best grouping.

[arcticap]

Back to the store, I found a suitable ticking, which measures .016", but again I could squeeze the jaws as low as .010". I bought it, washed it, and took it shooting. The stuff seems to work quite well so far. It tears into strips with no effort, and cutting at the muzzle is no trouble at all. It might even be easier than trying to center the ball on a pre-cut patch.

The third question pertains to the first two paragraphs, and that is patch tearing.
The TC patches are lubed with TC bore butter, and I was shooting my patches with windshield wiper fluid. Does the lube have an effect on the patch tearing, or is the tighter fit a better one?

Aside from patch thickness, there's also patch density which I believe is measured using a thread count.
I'm not sure but that may be why a TC .018 blue pillow ticking factory patch appears to be tougher and less prone to tearing than the Walmart fabric.

And then there's the effect of washing the material which is said to be done to remove any fabric sizing that was added by the fabric maker.
I suspect doing this can weaken the fabric and cause the threads to loosen up.
Let's face it, if TC [or their contractor] buys fabric without the fabric sizing added, then they don't need to wash it out and weaken or loosen up the fabric.

Another comment pertains to the windshield washer fluid vs. Bore Butter.
Of course there is a difference in the viscosity and amount of lubrication provided by the 2 lubes by virtue of their ingredients, much like the difference between
patch density and their thread counts.
The lubes don't weaken the patch, they may offer greater or lesser levels of protection for the patch material.

The lube with thicker viscosity would tend to help prevent blow by of hot gases, as well as to leave a coating of wax and oil in the bore to help keep fouling soft
during both loading and firing.
It's the same kind of friction & heat protection as when lubricating 2 metal parts with oil or grease to protect each from "wear & tear".
How much friction protection is provided to the fabric by windshield washer fluid?
There's other patch lube products like Hoppe's #9 BP Solvent and Patch Lube for use in cold weather that can be tried.

You are fortunate to be strong enough to be able to start such tight loads by hand.
I resort to using cheap little mallets to tap in the patched ball with both short & long starters.
I don't like to whack my palm repeatedly, and I'm not even using the tight loads that you do.

Instead of coning, why not just use thinner patches or smaller balls when possible, such as for shooting steel targets or for woods walks or for follow up shots when hunting.
Or just use a mallet. Even a crab mallet can work and it fits in most possibles bags.
I do applaud your efforts to strive for top accuracy.

[pietro]

.

FWIW, I got the best accuracy in my T/C Renegade with a .535" ball & .015" (x2) patching, which is the correct sized load (.565") for that rifle - a .56cal Smoothbore (T/C Renegade 56SB), and not a .54cal.

While that same .535" ball & an .015" patch load size (.565") will be very tight in a .54cal, and give good accuracy, it's also harder to load than using the correct load (not ball or patch) size for a .54cal (.530" ball + .010" patch x 2 = .550").

As stated above, experiment with multiple versions of ball & patch size to determine which will give you a combination of accuracy & ease of loading in YOUR rifle.


.

[Texas by God]

Life was good when I was a teen and my .45 Kentucky rifle by CVA loaded easily and shot true with spit lubed tee shirt patches. My powder measure was a 2.5" .410 hull. I'm using ox yoke patches and .530" rb in my Lyman .54 pistol and they do require the palm smack on the short starter. Accuracy is fine.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[megasupermagnum]

Thanks for the answers. I have molds for both .530" and .535". At some point I'll shoot both enough and see if the tighter fit is worth it. So far though, the .535" is not tearing patches, but the .530 was. That seems backwards to me. Again, the tearing is not from the rifling, it's not the circumference of the ball. If I see a tear, it's a hole dead center. More shooting is needed to confirm, but so far, I have not picked up a patch from the .535" ball with a torn patch.

My walmart pillow ticking has been better in every way so far than the TC pre lubed patches.

With the lube, I would think a grease/wax type lube would protect better, but so far it seems the water based lubes work better. When it's this cold bore butter is as hard as beeswax, maybe something like crisco would work better. So far I'm liking windshield washer fluid though. Dirt cheap, and doesn't freeze. Plus I always have some. TC bore butter seemed better in the summer, but now the fouling is clearly set. With wiper fluid, I could probably get quite a few shots off without swabbing. Since I swab between shots when going for accuracy, it doesn't matter as much.

I don't care about the period correctness, I enjoy the traditional style shooting anyway. I always have used a short starter, I even carry it hunting. I don't see any reason to stop now. If the tight fit shoots better, that's what I'll use. It seems a large portion of the people online that are shooting amazing groups are using a .535" ball. That's why I want to stick with it.



One question I forgot to add, pertains to the ctmuzzleloaders round ball ballistic calculator. I realize this is only a mathematical guess, but one interesting thing I've noticed is the wind drift is less at higher and lower speeds than most people are shooting. If I put in my .530" ball, 10mph wind, wind drift is at it's highest at around 1500-1600 fps. 7.2" at 75 yards. If you slow down to say 1050 fps, it reduces to 4.7" at 75 yards. If you speed way up to 2000 fps it is 6.4". I would think this has to do with how a ballistic coefficient can change in relation to velocity. If this is true, I've never seen better evidence for less powder. Sunday night I shot a steel plate with ball and 60 grains of FF. A 44 magnum couldn't make a dent as big as this did. Maybe not a question, but food for thought.

[indian joe]

Thanks for the answers. I have molds for both .530" and .535". At some point I'll shoot both enough and see if the tighter fit is worth it. So far though, the .535" is not tearing patches, but the .530 was. That seems backwards to me. Again, the tearing is not from the rifling, it's not the circumference of the ball. If I see a tear, it's a hole dead center. More shooting is needed to confirm, but so far, I have not picked up a patch from the .535" ball with a torn patch.

My walmart pillow ticking has been better in every way so far than the TC pre lubed patches.

With the lube, I would think a grease/wax type lube would protect better, but so far it seems the water based lubes work better. When it's this cold bore butter is as hard as beeswax, maybe something like crisco would work better. So far I'm liking windshield washer fluid though. Dirt cheap, and doesn't freeze. Plus I always have some. TC bore butter seemed better in the summer, but now the fouling is clearly set. With wiper fluid, I could probably get quite a few shots off without swabbing. Since I swab between shots when going for accuracy, it doesn't matter as much.

I don't care about the period correctness, I enjoy the traditional style shooting anyway. I always have used a short starter, I even carry it hunting. I don't see any reason to stop now. If the tight fit shoots better, that's what I'll use. It seems a large portion of the people online that are shooting amazing groups are using a .535" ball. That's why I want to stick with it.



One question I forgot to add, pertains to the ctmuzzleloaders round ball ballistic calculator. I realize this is only a mathematical guess, but one interesting thing I've noticed is the wind drift is less at higher and lower speeds than most people are shooting. If I put in my .530" ball, 10mph wind, wind drift is at it's highest at around 1500-1600 fps. 7.2" at 75 yards. If you slow down to say 1050 fps, it reduces to 4.7" at 75 yards. If you speed way up to 2000 fps it is 6.4". I would think this has to do with how a ballistic coefficient can change in relation to velocity. If this is true, I've never seen better evidence for less powder. Sunday night I shot a steel plate with ball and 60 grains of FF. A 44 magnum couldn't make a dent as big as this did. Maybe not a question, but food for thought.

I had a lot of trouble digesting those round ball wind drift numbers when I first encountered them (I came from high velocity smokeless rifle viewpoint) but turns out its right - for ages I was shooting a 54 ball gun loaded hard (proly right in that 16-1800window) and the wind got me lots of times in target matches - on top of that I never really learnt to read flags

[megasupermagnum]

So your experience is that the program is correct? I always go for group size regardless, but it seems so many people completely skip over the 40-70 grain range for powder, that may prove fruitful. The only advantage being at 1050 fps the point blank range being about 75 yards, and at 1850 fps you can push that to 100. Using open sights, 3" at 100 yards is a challenge, even with a known accurate bolt action rifle. If the lower velocity significantly reduces wind drift, recoils less, shoots better, as well as using half the powder, that's a win-win-win in my book. It doesn't take long to burn through a pound of powder when every shot is 110 grains.

I think most of my questions were answered. I'll do some more shooting soon, less thinking.

[DIRT Farmer]

Measure the parch thickness with the friction knob on the end of the handle, that way you will put the same pressure on the cloth every time. If you are tearing the patch at loading use a stronger patch. Pocket drill works for a lot of guns. There is sorces for linen but buying a shirt from a thrift store will get you a lot of shots. I cannot see where coneing the barrel can improve shooting, even if it makes loading easier. The origonal barrels were dead soft iron and a wooden ram rod naturaly coned the muzzle with the grit and dirt on it.
I have target guns that I load without real problems ie .400 ball and .0200 patching. depending on the gun and is use I load in fifty cal guns balls from .490. 495, .500 and .505 with patching ranging from matress ticking from the fabric store to .0200 teflon patching. Yes the tight loads require a small brass mallet and a turned brass ball starter to seat the patched round ball in the muzzle.
It all depends what you want to shoot. With my almost 70 year old eyes I cant see some of the targets I used to shoot. I dont need the small gains in grouping that I used when I was a young man, but the matches are still fun.
I have used false muzzles on some of my old target guns, they are the true coned barrel but you remove them before you shoot. In ,voos shooting I doubt any losses would matter but in line matches I have known shooters to have a bit cut from the muzzle and the barrel recrowned during a week long match.

[indian joe]

So your experience is that the program is correct? I always go for group size regardless, but it seems so many people completely skip over the 40-70 grain range for powder, that may prove fruitful. The only advantage being at 1050 fps the point blank range being about 75 yards, and at 1850 fps you can push that to 100. Using open sights, 3" at 100 yards is a challenge, even with a known accurate bolt action rifle. If the lower velocity significantly reduces wind drift, recoils less, shoots better, as well as using half the powder, that's a win-win-win in my book. It doesn't take long to burn through a pound of powder when every shot is 110 grains.

I think most of my questions were answered. I'll do some more shooting soon, less thinking.

I resisted the idea for a good while - but it kept getting in my face - did enough research to become a believer - something to do with the surface (frontal) area of a ball in relation to its weight I think is the story - I backed that 54 down from 120 grains to about 85 FFg - I dont see the sights as well as I did a decade ago so who knows really but it certainly didnt get any more wind prone

[bob208]

it has been so long since I started it is now second nature. but one don't think you need to load powder with a shovel. for a starting load I use the caliber. example a .45 cal. use 45 grs. powder. you have to load the same way every time. for patch thickness the patch has to be thicker then the groves in the barrel. example if the groves are .008 deep you need a patch .008 thick then work your way up. look in one of the lyman loading manuals they will show how a patch ball load works.


I use a short starter but load is not too tight. a thick patch and small ball will start and load easier then a thin patch and bigger ball. the patch compresses lead does not. I use precut patches I get my material from Joanne's fabric store I use pillow ticking. hint when you buy ask if they have any remints you get a discount for taking the small leftover pieces.

go slow read the book and you will do fine.

[megasupermagnum]

it has been so long since I started it is now second nature. but one don't think you need to load powder with a shovel. for a starting load I use the caliber. example a .45 cal. use 45 grs. powder. you have to load the same way every time. for patch thickness the patch has to be thicker then the groves in the barrel. example if the groves are .008 deep you need a patch .008 thick then work your way up. look in one of the lyman loading manuals they will show how a patch ball load works.


I use a short starter but load is not too tight. a thick patch and small ball will start and load easier then a thin patch and bigger ball. the patch compresses lead does not. I use precut patches I get my material from Joanne's fabric store I use pillow ticking. hint when you buy ask if they have any remints you get a discount for taking the small leftover pieces.

go slow read the book and you will do fine.

So who's .008"? I'm looking at almost a .010" discrepancy, and more if we are looking at a fluffier material. It seems it is just as accurate to go by feel, and then try it. Soft lead balls most certainly do compress. Even a relatively loose fit leaves a small imprint on the ball. I'm guessing it would be a lot harder to compress wheel weights.

[bob208]

t-c uses a shallow rifling for them .008 is deep. my gpr is .012 so I use a .018 patch. no I am not saying you are compressing lead just the patch. but then if you have been shooting round ball at all you would know that.

[megasupermagnum]

t-c uses a shallow rifling for them .008 is deep. my gpr is .012 so I use a .018 patch. no I am not saying you are compressing lead just the patch. but then if you have been shooting round ball at all you would know that.

So how are you measuring the thickness? Are you measuring like you would a metal? Are you squeezing the jaws as hard as you can?

[rfd]

So how are you measuring the thickness? Are you measuring like you would a metal? Are you squeezing the jaws as hard as you can?

aye, there's the issue and the rub - attempting to achieve a finite measurement of patch cloth is an inexact science, coupled with cloth weave and density. attempting to duplicate precise patch cloth material can put one on a don quixote quest. good luck.