Maximum loads in 1:48 twist with patched round ball.

[flynth]

The round ball bench rest shooters have been through all of this and if you want to learn go sit with them with a note book. I knew a very sucessful one in the medal count, his 50 ran a 505 patched ball started thrugh the false muzzle with a starter designed just for it.He loaded 150 grains of Dupont fffg which he had several 25lb kegs of from the same lot just for this rifle. His twist rate for shooting out to 400 yards was 1 turn in 14 feet, and yes that is what I ment to write. If you want to shoot match call the barrel maker, depending on the bore the maker will tell you the best rate of twist for his barrel and the load range for the bullet or ball you intend to shoot. And yes the old CVA round ball barrels with 1/66 shot good.

Wow, that's 1 turn in 168 inches. I wonder if any custom barrel maker would make a set of barrels for a double muzzleloader and how much would it cost. I would love to have a go at regulating and soldering them myself, but I would prefer someone else to bore, rifle and turn the outsides.

[indian joe]

.

T/C used mostly 1:48' twist barrels, and their loading manual show their maximum suggested PRB load for different bore sizes with a MAXIMUM label.










.

Those loads are top end accurate loads for a 66 twist - would not work worth a squirt in the 48 twist guns I have had in my hands (or seen close up) - never owned a TC tho----
100 yard target tells the story in the end - if it works it works - thats about the only "rule".
Deeper rifling and a tight patch ........maybe?

[indian joe]

The round ball bench guns shoot like bench rest guns should. I was watching a quater match one day, the target was x centerwith the x ring 1/2 inch. the shooter lost the bet because he left part of the line on the x ring. Most have bases to shoot open sights, peep sights and scopes. 40 pounds and up and they regulary shoot out to 200 yards with round ball. Even I could shoot round balls off the target frame.

hmmm I have zero interest in doing 40 pound rail guns off a machine rest or whatever they do - but their result makes that MOA idea seem a bit less ridiculous. thanks for the answer.

[FrontierMuzzleloading]

110gr 3fg shoots excellent out of my 1:48 twist traditions barrels. I do not push them that fast however as its not needed. 70gr 3fg and shes perfect on everything from hogs to elk.

[charlie b]

I guess I would ask why try to make a round ball shoot like a bullet when you can use a bullet? I would think a Minie would be a good match at that caliber.

[megasupermagnum]

I guess I would ask why try to make a round ball shoot like a bullet when you can use a bullet? I would think a Minie would be a good match at that caliber.

I'm far from the expert on the subject, but what I've heard of minie ball accuracy ranges from good enough to hunt big game to outright horrible. What I gather is the minie ball was made to load quickly, and fly far. Accuracy was never a consideration.

Outpost75, how are unpatched balls for loading a dirty bore? Do you have to swab between shots? Can I get some numbers as far as accuracy? X" at 100 yards best patched combo vs X" at 100 yards full size ball please? That sounds like something interesting for me to try.

[flynth]

110gr 3fg shoots excellent out of my 1:48 twist traditions barrels. I do not push them that fast however as its not needed. 70gr 3fg and shes perfect on everything from hogs to elk.

What is your bore diameter, ball size and patch thickness?

I guess I would ask why try to make a round ball shoot like a bullet when you can use a bullet? I would think a Minie would be a good match at that caliber.

Just as megasupermagnum said:

I'm far from the expert on the subject, but what I've heard of minie ball accuracy ranges from good enough to hunt big game to outright horrible. What I gather is the minie ball was made to load quickly, and fly far. Accuracy was never a consideration.

Exactly. Also I would like to add that this is discussed in the book I mentioned at the beginning of the thread. Round ball (from the same bore)has three advantages over a bullet in a double rifle hunting environment where your longest shot is around 100m and most shots are under 70m.

First is that thanks to light weight the ball has much faster muzzle velocity therefore about 30-40% less drop ( it is a difference in the region of 2.5 inches vs 3.5 inches of raised trajectory at 50m for the same rifle zeroed at 100m - not much, but it is there and supposedly it makes it easier to hit what you aim for) and in the unlikely event of shooting at a moving target the projectile gets there 30-40% faster.

Second, a round ball hits with a much bigger area so there is higher probability of it dumping all of its destructive energy in the target rather than going through and carrying a good portion of its energy away. Also, the book mentions big bones deflect bullets easier - I have no idea if this is true.

Third, in a muzzleloader double rifle with loose fitting minie bullets if you shoot one barrel it is possible for recoil to move the projectile in the other barrel and cause a dangerous situation where there is a gap between powder and the projectile. Balls are held by their patches a lot tighter so this is a lot less of a possibility. Again, I personally have not observed this despite shooting a lot of minies, REALs etc from my double recently (I always check with my ramrod just in case), but I read few accounts of people saying it happened to them.

[charlie b]

Ok. And I missed the part about this being for a double rifle.

Terminal effects are a give and take. Yes, a round ball will probably dump energy well, but, a flat front bullet cuts a better hole which will bleed faster. A round ball of .50 cal has same frontal area as a .50cal bullet. A bullet has a larger sectional density, which means it will penetrate more.

Deflect from bone? All bullets either go through the bone or deflect. Which happens depends more on the bone and angles of impact than from bullet type. A bullet has more potential to penetrate the bone given the higher sectional density.

The big difference is you can drive a ball faster cause it is lighter. The trade off is the effective range is less cause they dump speed so fast.

For any of the above, if the odds were so much in favor of the round ball we would be shooting them in breech loaders.

I think the biggest choice for you is the double rifle and your confidence in the bullet staying on the powder.

[flynth]

I think the biggest choice for you is the double rifle and your confidence in the bullet staying on the powder.

I agree, the main factor behind using a round ball is as you said my confidence in it staying on powder.

I haven't got any personal experience regarding terminal effects with a large round ball so I may be mistaken with this, but the claims made by the book author seem logical to me so I'll attempt to defend them a bit.

Please bear in mind we're talking about fairly large bore ( .58 cal in my case) balls (at 1600-1700fps) and bullets at black powder velocities (1100-1200fps) so not a lot of expansion is assumed. If this assumption is wrong, it changes the conclusion in favour of bullets. Also, I think all those positives of round ball are really only applicable in calibers where it is impossible to drive a bullet to comparable speed with manageable level of recoil in a rifle not heavier than 9 pounds (4.5kg). So in my opinion .58 and up.

Terminal effects are a give and take. Yes, a round ball will probably dump energy well, but, a flat front bullet cuts a better hole which will bleed faster.
A round ball of .50 cal has same frontal area as a .50cal bullet. A bullet has a larger sectional density, which means it will penetrate more.

If by flat front you mean a wadcutter-like front then I agree, it will punch a nice hole, but most bullets used for things other than target shooting have some sort of a cone or ogive to improve their long distance performance. The same improvements that streamline them to lower air resistance also lower resistance and therefore energy transfer when they go through soft tissues. A round ball is fairly blunt compared with most minie designs. Therefore one could argue a hole punched with a blunter object (a ball) at faster speed will cause a bigger wound channel and consequently faster bleeding than similar hole made by a streamlined object that slices through more than it punches. I of course agree that the bullet will penetrate further, but once both projectiles penetrate fully what does it matter if one could penetrate more than is necessary. The book I mentioned gives an example of a 14 bore (.69) ball of soft lead driven with 5 drams of powder (137grain) being able to penetrate through an elephant's head or an Asian buffalo lengthwise. That sounds like a proper amount of over-penetration to me

Deflect from bone? All bullets either go through the bone or deflect. Which happens depends more on the bone and angles of impact than from bullet type. A bullet has more potential to penetrate the bone given the higher sectional density.

I can only speculate, but it would seem logical that a projectile with that streamlined cone or ogive on the front pretty much guarantees an unfavourable angle of impact unless it hits the bone right head on. A ball seems to have an advantage here by means of being blunter.

The big difference is you can drive a ball faster cause it is lighter. The trade off is the effective range is less cause they dump speed so fast.

Agreed. I wouldn't be comfortable with a range over 60-70m (although old books, and others claim 100m hunting range).

For any of the above, if the odds were so much in favor of the round ball we would be shooting them in breech loaders.

But we are, we just call them slugs. What else other than a slightly modified 12 bore round ball is a foster slug? We even use similar velocities to those used by black powder rifles with round balls (1200 to 1900fps depending on requirements). I can also imagine a short blunt bullet that would have all the same properties of a round ball, but I thought we're comparing typical minie bullets with round balls rather than bullets in general.

Also, regarding popularity of bullets today the major factor making them useful is smokeless powder and ability to achieve velocities that guarantee really good expansion in calibers that were called pea shooters 150 years ago This makes them perform as good as huge round balls at short range, while being significantly better at long range. However, if we revert to black powder velocities, and we want to limit recoil in a rifle one can carry a long time it is natural to take advantage of the best short distance projectile available - huge round ball.

[brewer12345]

At 50 caliber and up expansion is a nice to have rather than a must, imo. Given the expansion I got last fall with a 12ish bhn boolit that impacted a doe at 1600 or so fps, I have little doubt that a soft round ball, minie or conical would expand at black powder velocities. So I think the choice of projectile depends on your needs. Rounds balls stay firmly on the powder, minies load quickly, and conical have more energy downrange. I will be looking for elk next month and I chose a conical because a shot might be a bit longer and I want to ensure penetration on a 500 pound animal. For deer I would likely default to a ball for preference.

[charlie b]

^^^this.

Black powder velocities and bullets .577 Black Powder Express, 570gn at 1700fps. You can make black powder push bullets at speed.

And, yes, the bullets I shoot are good to at least 300yd and are semi-wadcutter design (.50cal). Big flat fronts. And round ball will deflect just like a bullet, maybe even more so.

Basically, a round ball is simply a really short bullet with the ONLY benefit being that it is a little faster at shorter ranges. Even a small 'skirt' on the ball will make it fly and penetrate better. Your reference to a Foster is a good example. When you add the skirt it is now a bullet The Foster is more like a Minie than it is like a ball.

Will any of this make any difference on an elk or bear at 75yds....no. All will do the job.

[megasupermagnum]

I have zero experience with any real black powder cartridges, beyond loading modern cartridges with black powder for fun. From a muzzleloader perspective, the big problem I've always had with the conical is the fit has to be perfect. The Lee REAL doesn't fit tight in any of my guns. It should bump up during firing, but it sure doesn't seem to help. I never could get them to shoot as good as a round ball. My TC Renegade, which I've spent a lot of time with this year, does seem to really like the TC maxi ball. It is definitely better than the REAL, but I still do not trust 100% that it will stay seated. I've heard too many people say they will move up the barrel over time. As a hunter, this will not do. More time will tell if this is an actual problem for me. A patched round ball will stay seated in all conditions provide it is not a super loose fit.

There is no doubt the maxi ball will penetrate more than a round ball, and it should retain velocity better. Being as it starts out much slower, inside of 100 yards is a wash. If shooting out to 200 yards or more a round ball is at a disadvantage. From what I've seen, a maxiball does not cause that much damage to a deer compared to a round ball. A round ball will flatten out, and the maxi just plows through. The maxi hunter may be better, but the maxi ball doesn't even have a big flat on it. Most of my rifles are 54 caliber, and there is no source of maxi hunter 54 calibers. For my 54 caliber 1:48" twist guns my choices are the REAL or the maxiball, and I'm not convinced either is better than a round ball.

I've seen impressive things done on paper with both conical and round ball, I'll call the accuracy a wash. I load round balls in 12 gauge and 10 gauge shotguns too. While I have yet to match the accuracy of a factory rifled slug, round balls have proven to be more accurate than cast foster slugs. Range testing has shown that round balls are every bit as aerodynamic (or lack of) as a foster/rifled slug. Penetration of a round ball is better than a rifled or foster slug, and this is something I have tested myself. I have never tried a minie ball, and I don't intend to. I don't believe they are going to be more accurate than a ball, and the pointed shape is not at all what I want to be shooting for hunting. We had a stint of 3 deer shot with a Hornady FPB that did not expand (essentially a copper plated minie ball), and we will never use them again. Pin holes is about what they made. I don't expect the Minie ball to be much better. To make matters worse, most loads I see guys use are on the order of 40 grains of powder, any higher and the skirt may blow out. Not exactly a powerhouse.

A purpose built conical gun is one thing, but for the average gun, the choices to me are a ball, a REAL, or a Maxi ball. Between those three, the ball has distinct advantages. I do believe a better conical can be made, but so little development has been done since the sabot craze started.

[brewer12345]

A purpose built conical gun is one thing, but for the average gun, the choices to me are a ball, a REAL, or a Maxi ball. Between those three, the ball has distinct advantages. I do believe a better conical can be made, but so little development has been done since the sabot craze started.

Well, I will hopefully have a chance to gain some field experience this fall as I hunt for both elk and deer with a muzzleloader. I am planning to use the same load for both simply because it is accurate: 54 cal 380 grain REAL lubed with bore butter, over powder wad, and 120 grains of Black MZ. If the round ball had proven more accurate that is what I would have chosen, but the REAL was better. Inside 50 or 75 yards I would expect some expansion, out to 125 I expect complete pass through even on a cow elk.

[megasupermagnum]

Well, I will hopefully have a chance to gain some field experience this fall as I hunt for both elk and deer with a muzzleloader. I am planning to use the same load for both simply because it is accurate: 54 cal 380 grain REAL lubed with bore butter, over powder wad, and 120 grains of Black MZ. If the round ball had proven more accurate that is what I would have chosen, but the REAL was better. Inside 50 or 75 yards I would expect some expansion, out to 125 I expect complete pass through even on a cow elk.

I wouldn't worry about the REAL, or even the maxi ball for that matter as far as expansion. Both are blunt enough to cause plenty of damage.

[Edward]

Well, I will hopefully have a chance to gain some field experience this fall as I hunt for both elk and deer with a muzzleloader. I am planning to use the same load for both simply because it is accurate: 54 cal 380 grain REAL lubed with bore butter, over powder wad, and 120 grains of Black MZ. If the round ball had proven more accurate that is what I would have chosen, but the REAL was better. Inside 50 or 75 yards I would expect some expansion, out to 125 I expect complete pass through even on a cow elk.

Round balls have more load development required (size/patch/amount of powder/powder type)so expect more time invested but they can be capable of exceptional accuracy .Like anything else worthwhile it requires dedication (time). Ed

[flynth]

Talking about REAL's. In my fast twist (1:24) .50 cal Hawken Hunter the short two band Lee REAL is the most accurate projectile other than a modern sabot. The bore diameter is such that the lower band engages the rifling slightly. The bullet can be pushed half way in by hand, and the top band requires a proper blow with the wooden ball of the short starter to engrave. With 70gr of powder it flies at around 1400fps and makes 1.5 inch groups at 50m from bench.

Unfortunately REALs in 58 caliber I tried were very loose compared to the above. I used a three-band design in 58 with 1:48 twist. The lowest band could be wiggled in the bore, the middle band didn't even engrave in rifling and the top band could be engraved with a solid push on a short starter. As predictable accuracy was worse than shooting a .715 round ball from a 12ga smoothbore at 50m. I wish lee made the short version of the REAL in .58 cal and they made it few thou bigger.

[brewer12345]

Round balls have more load development required (size/patch/amount of powder/powder type)so expect more time invested but they can be capable of exceptional accuracy .Like anything else worthwhile it requires dedication (time). Ed

I think you are quite correct. My 54 seemed to yield decent accuracy round balls without a fuss. The 50 seems to be more finicky. I need to spend more time fooling with it and maybe try a thicker patch to see if I can get better accuracy at higher charges.