most inherently accurate roundball cal

[Marvin S]

I have owned probably 40 to 45 different muzzle loading rifles in my time from 32 cal to 62 cal and have always had trouble getting the small bores to shoot as well and consistent as the larger ones at a reasonable distance of say 40 to 50 yards and we will take wind out of this factor and are talking center to center groups.

I find the 45 cal to be the absolute tipping point where accuracy really starts to happen for me and all of them would stack balls into one ragged hole. The 45 and 53 cal have won many matches for me in the past and some pretty nice prizes as well.

So why does one suppose I can't get the small bores to do this? General educated thoughts are appreciated. The small bores I'm working with now are a 40cal with a A weight Colerain barrel and a 36cal with a Green Mountain BBL.

I have tried most all the standard tricks from ball diameters of +.005 from standard, .010 patch to .015-.018 patch. Clean well between shots and various lubes.

[williamwaco]

A small dimple, say .005 in depth is 1.5% of the diameter of a .30 caliber ball but only .95% of the diameter of a .53 caliber ball.

It would not be unreasonable to expect that same defect to have a 50% greater impact on accuracy. If the .53 caliber ball is deflected 1 inch, the .30 caliber ball would miss by 1.5 inch.

On the other hand, a dimple that size in a .30 caliber 170 grain cast bullet would have no measureable effect at all.

This is all idle speculation (except the .30 caliber cast bullet part) - because I am bored stiff today.

I have never fired a black powder rifle in my life and have NO idea what is necessary to achieve accuracy with them.

[troy_mclure]

possibly a heavier ball is slower to spin or veer off course.

[williamwaco]

possibly a heavier ball is slower to spin or veer off course.

Good point. An object in motion will continue forever on the same path until some force causes it to change direction. Gravity is the first example. But a heavier ball will require more force to move it sideways because it will have more inertia.

Any physics major? All I have is math. Please step in here.


.

[Hanshi]

I have rifles in several calibers and have never found one to be more or less accurate than another. Some rifles I certainly shoot better but it has nothing to do with the caliber. But then I can't shoot worth **** anyway.:-(

[white eagle]

most inherently accurate roundball cal
54 cal

[John Taylor]

At one time I put six in one hole at 50 yards with a 50 cal shooting offhand but that was over 35 years ago. I never did get the small bores to shoot good. I won more than one shoot with a 54 and the last few years I was in to competition I used a 62. There was one small bore that did better than most would think, it was a little underhammer BB gun. Used about 4 grains of 4F and did good on the 25 yard pop cans even tho it was a smooth bore. Found out shooting it in the back yard was not a good idea, it would go through a 1" board at 25 yards. The old Daisy BBs with the little flats would not shoot good at all but the more expensive polished ones did great.

[DIRT Farmer]

Marvin I think the small bores are more sensitive to any varation. I had one 32 rifle that the elevation would change 3 inches at 50 yards with loading pressure.
That being said I know of several match rifles in 32 that shoot very well and a lot of 32 pistols.
This is from a guy who shoots mainly with a 54 smooth bore, but I do have my 32 flinter to hunt small game. The rifle will keep them on a squirrels head at 50, if the shooter will.

[Alan]

It is certainly easier to get the 50+ calibers to shoot, though I don't know that they are any more accurate - they are just more forgiving of ball imperfections. My .54 & .58 GM barreled Renegades are tack drivers, although they take a lot of powder to get there. Haven't had time to wring my 16-bore flinter out yet, but preliminary loads are < 3" at 100. It acts like it wants to shoot better than that.

the only real load development my .72 needed as far as accuracy was concerned was just getting enough powder in it.

Alan

[Good Cheer]

Hmmm, wonder if those hexagonal bores that were sometimes used in smaller diameter rifles were a better mouse trap. Saw one in an issue of The Rifileman one time and always wondered about how well the ball seated into that bore.

[John Taylor]

Hmmm, wonder if those hexagonal bores that were sometimes used in smaller diameter rifles were a better mouse trap. Saw one in an issue of The Rifileman one time and always wondered about how well the ball seated into that bore.

The Whitworth took a special bullet and the bore was very hard to keep clean. I made up a barrel several years back but have not had a chance to install it on anything for testing. It is 4' long and I was thinking under hammer.http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l132/johnptaylor/Whitworth.jpg

[Marvin S]

Good thought's and observations guys. I done an internet search and and have been a subscriber to to a couple of traditional muzzle loading magazines and have read several books and never seen a study on the matter, while we pick locks and their speed and function to death as well as barrel maker's.

[451 Pete]

A couple of thoughts. The .36 round ball weighs in at about 70 grains, the .40 is about 96 grain's and a .50 is around 188 grain's. So an increase in diameter of only .04 inch creates a weight gain of a lead ball by about 37% and a gain of .1 inch in diameter increases the weight by about 95%.

I have to think what we are seeing is that the major increase in the mass of the projectile in relation to the relatively minor increase in the projectiles diameter is what account's for the smaller caliber round ball being so much more sensitive to any small change's in loading, minor imperfections in casting or in any variations in the range conditions.

Pete

[bob208]

it has to do with twist. as the cal gets smaller the twist gets faster. this is what we have found.

.50-.54 1 in 66
.45 1 in 52
. 40 1 in 48
.32-36 1 in 40

i have seen alot of .40 barrrels cut 1 in 60.

i have a hoyt .40 cal barrel 1 in 48 . it will shoot all day long with out wiping with 40 gr. 3f .395 ball .018 patch.

my .45 1 in 52 will go with out wiping when shot with .440 ball .018 patch and 45 gr 3f.

[Marvin S]

We are assuming the proper twist is used for the caliber of bore.

[nanuk]

interesting thoughts on the imperfections

I remember reading an article where they cut an X into the ball, and seated it X to the muzzle. it shot very poorly. X to the powder, it shot normal.

I have no idea why....

[mooman76]

I'm thinking with the x forward going into the wind the air cutting across the x's caused it to be unstable.

[Marvin S]

Think I remember that in Muzzle Blast, by the bevel bros. Think it's easier to upset a gyro from the top than the bottom.

[mjones1579]

Don't know guys, but, you see a lot of match rifles for sale in 40 cal.

[Uncle R.]

Can't offer any expert opinion, but my .50 with swaged Hornady balls and light charges of triple-F is amazing - ragged hole at 50 yards accurate. Apparently that's not unusual. I always wanted a .36 as a squirrel rifle - maybe I can justify the purchase to SWMBO as a research project.
:roll:
Uncle R.

[7of7]

How do they put the dimples on golf balls? Wonder if doing that to a lead ball would have any special effect..
Always wondered that..Still would have to use the patch.... but, once it leaves the patch..

[nanuk]

a dimpled golf ball is about reduced pressure on one side, causing the ball to be pushed to that side.

a dimpled RB might make a big loop in the direction of twist... think exaggerated spiral (helix? in the air

[Black Powder Bill]

I've seen guy take a horse hoof file or rough rasp and roll the RB around till it was all skinned up. They said it shot better. Increased the dia,grabbed the patch better and mimicked golf ball dimples.

[405]

I've seen guy take a horse hoof file or rough rasp and roll the RB around till it was all skinned up. They said it shot better. Increased the dia,grabbed the patch better and mimicked golf ball dimples.

I've never tried it but I like it :). Certain densities/shapes of small dimples or texture to the surface of any object can reduce drag thru the air... or water for that matter. Some sea mammals have testured skin for exactly that purpose- reduced drag, same for the golf ball thru air. Also, whether or not the object is sonic or sub-sonic may have bearing, but ????

As to the OP, I think the mass to surface area ratio of a sphere increases geometrically as radius/diameter increases, so the posts attributing better results to the larger sizes idea has merit. Exactly where the break line is ???? It may be a matter of degree but I know that it's easier to get a larger caliber RB gun shooting well than a smaller one.

[Boerrancher]

Well I think all the factors discussed has merit. Remember the one key rule of the muzzle loader: "The name of the game is the same." Loading it exactly the same way every time, makes it shoot better, large or small cal. We all know that it is also easier to get larger capacity cases, to shoot more consistently than smaller cases in metallic cartridges. In a 30-06 with a 50 grain charge, a tenth of a grain is nothing to be off, and you won't even notice it in most cases. Be off a tenth of a grain with a 25-20 and see what happens to your point of impact. As was mentioned previously that in a 36 cal you could change the point of impact by 3 inches just in how you seated the ball. When you add up all of the possibilities of inconsistency in a small bore rifle, and compare them percentage wise to the larger bores, it is easy to understand why it is harder to get them to shoot well. Everything from powder pressure, to ball imperfections, or even the surface area to mass ratio of the ball, it all adds up and based on percentages the larger cals have a lower percentage of error inherently built into them.

Best wishes,

Joe

[Alan]

So I'm waiting now to take this information and run with it: Who's going to be the first to build a 4-bore bench rest gun? :^D

[Plastikosmd]

not a ball gun, but do have a 75lb 69 cal muzzleloader that shoots a conical that weights close to 1800 grains (bit over 1/4 lb) ahead of 300+ grains of BP
http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j5/plastikosmd/eb3fc9ad.jpg
left to right, 22 55g, 357, 45 250g, .485 630g and then 2 69cal slugs with different profiles
http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j5/plastikosmd/933f79d9.jpg

[Marvin S]

75lbs! Where are the axle and wheels? All kidding aside I bet it shoots well with little wind deflection.

[Plastikosmd]

thx. Gun is based on a heavier 100lb gun (per report.) It was stolen years ago,(built by Resor) the tooling survived. It was re-created by Briesen. At 75lbs I fear it is a bit light based on reports of the owner and his orthopedic surgeon. I have made a sled for it to add another 30 lbs + or so. As far as shooting, the targets are all (x)'s.

[Dirty30]

most inherently accurate roundball cal
54 cal

You said it all amigo. Good for thumping elk too.

[Bullet Caster]

My gosh. I don't think I've ever seen a black powder shoulder fired cannon (till now). I'll bet that thing has some major recoil, kinda like the .950 I saw on a you tube video. I don't think I'd be big enough to pull the trigger on that beast! BC

[Plastikosmd]

still casting for it, while I'm sure recoil is 'stiff' it will prob be manageable. I did some calculations and it seems to come in around a 3" 12 gauge based on load of 300 grains of bp and 1750gr projectile and 75lb rifle. Maybe less 'sharp' as it is bp also. A bit more weight with the sled should tame it down to maybe a 30-06 or so.

[Ragnarok]

Like White eagle and Dirty30 say...the .54 has proven hard to beat for round ball shooting.