How tight or how hard to start an RB& Patch?

[Willyp]

How hard should it be to start RB and lubed patch into the muzzle?????? I've been using a 495 ball and 15 patch in my Lyman Deer stalker. It is a little ruff to get started but will go down, once it is!

[Bullet Caster]

Willyp,
I use a .490 RB and .10 patch and don't have any trouble starting the PRB down the muzzle. It shoots very accurate as far as I can tell. I've got a Pedersoli .50 flintlock and use a short starter to get it started down the muzzle. The first time I tried to shoot 2 in a row, I ended up breaking my rammer. Now I know to wet patch and dry before trying to load the next PRB. BC

[725]

Different schools of thought. Some target shooters like very tight RB & patch. Takes time to get it started and care not to deform the ball. Hunters like an easy load that is accurate. Lots of variation between patch size, lube, & ball size. I'd tend to go for one that isn't too difficult to load, that doesn't end up with ball deformation, and that will start with a ramrod only for those times when I'm out in the field without a ball starter. (I'm usually properly prepared, but stuff does happen.) Sounds like your set up might be too tight.

[Ragnarok]

I wouldn't patch it too tight myself..can get in all sorts of trouble with a really tight ball/patch combo.

[gnoahhh]

Depends entirely on the dimensions of the bore as to what patch/ball combo will be most accurate. In one rifle, an early Ithaca .50 half-stock percussion gun, a .490 ball/.015 pillow ticking starts with only the rammer and shoots closer than I can see. The one sitting next to it, a custom flinter with an old Getz barrel, won't keep that combo on a paper plate at 25 yds, but will cloverleaf with a .495 ball/.015 pillow ticking- after a sharp rap with the starter the ball goes down the hatch slick as goose snot. 50gr. FFFg in both of them. Same rate of twist in both of them.

[smoked turkey]

I have been where you are and I personally opted to go down in ball size in order to have easier loading. Based on my experience I recommend you go with a .490 ball. I have found that the .015 patch material works best for me. If you want to try the .495 with some thinner material you might try Wally World or a fabric store for thin muslin for the patch material.

[waksupi]

I've looked at lots of old original bags, and out of well over a hundred, only two had short starters. So, they were not commonly used.
My biggest phobia on short starters, is I have seen too many people short start the load, and forget to ram it on down. This leads to bulged, or burst barrels. Neither are fun.
When my arthritis is really acting up, I do use a short starter on my .62 sometimes, but don't like to do it. I DO tend to talk a bit on the range. Inattention is what gets you.
Coning the barrel can eliminate the hard starting, and I am thinking on opening my .62 out a bit more.

[Plastikosmd]

I mostly shoot bench guns. I usually need a short or mechanical starter and a mallet. Not good for out in the field!

[gon2shoot]

I generally like it snug enough for a short starter with medium pressure (I know thats relative).

I made a flask once with a short starter on the end of it, worked like a champ till I broke it.

[plainsman456]

I use a 490 ball and a 15 patch and have had no problems with starting and seating the ball.
If using a 495 ball and a 15 patch it is just larger than the bore.Like was said get a thinner patch material.

[mooman76]

You really gotta try and see kind of thing. It really isn't needed for the average shooter to be super tight, just snug will usually work fine. .490 ball usually is fine in most 50 cals and after they get some wear to them(long time) if the accuracy starts to drop off, you can sometimes bring it back with a bigger and tighter fitting ball.

[subsonic]

I am no expert by any means, but for the two rifles I've shot with 60gr charges and down (rules) the .495 ball and .015 patch were considerably more accurate. Now maybe that's because 60Gr doesn't obturate the ball very well, or maybe the 777 I was shooting doesn't "hit" the ball hard enough to obturate, or maybe they just like a tight combo. But they definitely require a short starter and a good smack from the palm of the hand.

The guns:
Encore
GPR caplock w/ slow twist

[subsonic]

I second trying the .490 ball if .495 is too tight insted of .010" patches.

[stubshaft]

I generally prefer a tight ball/patch combo and have coned all of my barrels from .32 to .54. It gives me the best of both worlds as I no longer need a short starter and can still load a tight patch with little effort.

[Boerrancher]

I shoot a 495 ball and a 125 patch. I also use a short starter, but can in a pinch bump it down with just the rod. I made the short starter that I use, from a piece of walnut and a dowel rod. I use a short starter out of habit. It was what I learned with 30+ years ago, so I stick with it. I don't like a tight load. I want to be able to shoot a dozen times before I have to run a wet patch down the gun. I like to squirrel hunt with my 50cal so accuracy to the point of being able to consistently make head shots at 25 to 30 yards is a must, and so is being able to load it with out issue repeatedly. I have not noticed enough of a difference on paper to justify a super tight patch and ball combo. Maybe if you were shooting in competitions where a 1/4 inch matters, but for most folks who mostly hunt they will never see a difference between an easy load to ram home or a tight one.

Best wishes,

Joe

[Good Cheer]

After a while I started wondering why I'd want rifling in a round ball hunting gun. Once the load is worked up right the "smooth rifle" is plenty accurate for most hunting. Target shooting is another story.

[gnoahhh]

When deer hunting with my .45 Vincent Rifle, I load with a .445 ball and .015 patch, but carry .440 balls in my shooting bag for quicker re-loading in the field. The .445's are a real bugger to get started, but accuracy is decidedly better with them than the .440's. Switching to .010 patches with the .445's saw a drop in accuracy to about the same as the .440/.015 combo. Again, this rifle has an older Getz barrel, and shooting buddies with other old Getz barrels report much the same phenomenon. I suspect the grooves are slightly deeper than the norm, although I never measured them.

[405]

gnoahhh,
I've come to believe that is correct. The width relationship between the lands and the grooves along with groove depth both play a big role in both accuracy, relative ease of loading any PRB combo and how heavy a charge a load can handle and retain accuracy. At first glance PRB loading/ballistics seems simple, but the deeper one digs into it the more complex it becomes.

In the end, I've settled on a couple of ways to load a PRB depending on purpose.
If only for shooting at paper on the range where time and equipment are not limiting, I go with a tighter fit purely for accuracy. If for hunting I have to decide on how much accuracy I'm willing to give up for the convenience of fast, easy loading. I would rather take one super accurate shot to POA at closer range at a game animal than worry about how fast I can make a follow up shot after firing a less than precise shot. So my compromise to a slightly looser PRB fit for hunting doesn't go very far in the LOOSE, easier to load direction.

[Alan]

Most of my guns are over .50, so take this w/ a grain of salt for smaller bores. In .50 I like a .490" ball and .018-.022" patch. It is a tight combo, but loads w/ one smack on the short starter. I cut my patches at the muzzle, and use plenty of lube. One benefit of the tighter combo is never having to swab the bore til you get home. With a bit of work, you can find a patch/ball/lube combo for most rifles that will accomplish this, as well as accuracy.

Alan

[mooman76]

How tight is really to each his own. What one person considers tight another may consider not and visa versa.

[Fly]

Well let me give my take & that's all the heck it is.I been shooting these guys awhile but
I,m no exspert on this.But I like the question & I can only give my 2 cents.We know each
gun is differant.My Lyman GPH likes .015 pillow ticking & a .530 ball.

She goes in very tight & I do use a short starter & always have.But Lyman GPH has a
deep rifleing.I was told when I first bought it that thick Pillow ticking worked best.

But maybe that has something to do with how tight they go in.Now on my .50 Flinter
the rifleing is not near as deep & I use .010 Pillow ticking & it not hard to seat at all.

Maybe that has something to do with it.But what do I know, I,m just guessing.

Fly

[Longwood]

The only way I can tell if a patch was too loose ot tight is by examining a recovered patch.
It will tell you.

[troy_mclure]

In my Cva hawken .50 ( range gun) I use a .490 ball and .18 patch. It's a real tight fit, and takes a few smacks of the palm to get started. But I can shoot all day and never swab the barrel. Even at the house it only takes a few strokes to get it clean.

[Boerrancher]

In my Cva hawken .50 ( range gun) I use a .490 ball and .18 patch. It's a real tight fit, and takes a few smacks of the palm to get started. But I can shoot all day and never swab the barrel. Even at the house it only takes a few strokes to get it clean.

There is no doubt that the tighter the seal is the higher the pressure will run, and the cleaner the powder will burn. The trick for hunting is to balance accuracy with ease of loading. I am willing to give up some accuracy in the woods to be able to quickly ram another load home.

Best wishes,

Joe

[mooman76]

I found that a flannel patch works reasonably well. Not the best but they load easy so I use them durring hunting.

[Boerrancher]

For my new Crockett, the literature that came with it states the best accuracy is achieved with a 0.012 patch and a .310 round ball. With that combo I don't need a short starter. I can start it with the rod. I don't know what kind of groups I will get with it since I have only had one session with it, but I do know I was knocking the heck out of my boys life sized squirrel target at 25 yards with it. I am not concerned with groups as much as being able to bust bushy tails with it. If I can get 2 inches at 50 yards I will be good to go.

Best wishes,

Joe

[troy_mclure]

There is no doubt that the tighter the seal is the higher the pressure will run, and the cleaner the powder will burn. The trick for hunting is to balance accuracy with ease of loading. I am willing to give up some accuracy in the woods to be able to quickly ram another load home.

Best wishes,

Joe

Yea, I'm gonna look for some thinner material for patches if I decide to take it hunting.

[Arnie]

I would think about changing the crown on the muzzle .Most modern made muzzle loaders are crowned wrong .There should be a long tapered crown and that will allow easier loading .Take the rifle to a gunsmith that knows real muzzle loaders , not those modern inline **** guns , and get his opinion.Arnie

[750k2]

Personal preference but I work a load up that uses easy loading.
At the most a nudge from my powder measure to get it started.
For the hotter loadings there are many types of backers I've used
and that will usually take care of chewed patches.
I don't shoot comp so when I find good enough I concentrate on
my end of the game.
I leave the bughole groups to them things I shoot with 3" forends
with big glass on top.
If I can bust a rat with my .40 and let the steam out of a whitetail
with the .54 I'm happy - and I'm happy.

[Hanshi]

For my Crockett I use a .311" cast ball and .020" ticking patch and it's snug but quite loadable in the field with a wooden rod. I use a short starter for all my guns. The requirements I place on loads are: 1. I absolutely have to be able to seat them in the field with the underbarrel wood rod 2. I use the thickest patch and tightest loads that still allow rule #1.

If it can't be safely seated (without rod breakage) in the field and under field conditions then I have no use for it. This same standard applies to both hunting AND the target range.

[TNsailorman]

Back in the early 70's I decided to build my own .50 Hawkin and build it like the originals not the copies that were about then. I assymbled the parts from different sources --L&R or Davis lock(I can't remember which), Douglas barrel, etc. When completed I started out by buying .05, .10, and .15 patches. Then .490 & .495 swaged balls. I tried each in turn using carefully weighed charges from 80 grains FFFG to 120 grains FFFG black powder. I found the most accurate load to be 90 grains FFFG powder with a .490 ball, and a .15 patch. The next in turn of accuracy was a .495 ball, 95 grains FFFG pwoder and a .10 patch. That's what I stayed with shooting matches, except on very windy days I found I could go with a 120 grain load of FFFG powder and cut thru the wind better on the long range matches. I've still got the metals to prove it worked. It worked in my rifle but may not in any other but mine was the one that counted. What I did find when I tried .495 ball and .15 patch was a tendency for the sharp rifling to cut the patch enough to get blow by, not good and accuracy suffered some. My experience anyway, James

[Boerrancher]

The requirements I place on loads are: 1. I absolutely have to be able to seat them in the field with the underbarrel wood rod 2. I use the thickest patch and tightest loads that still allow rule #1.

If it can't be safely seated (without rod breakage) in the field and under field conditions then I have no use for it. This same standard applies to both hunting AND the target range.

+1 to that. I don't have use for a load I have to struggle with, period.

Best wishes,

Joe