Maven
07-08-2008, 07:43 PM
It was so hazy, hot & humid today that I didn't feel like cleaning the grill so that I could move it indoors in order to stain our rear porch. Such days are tailor-made for a leisurely range session, and with a muzzle loader, it IS leisurely. If you've been following my testing of the Knight inline on the Front Stuffers bd. (see posts of 6/25 and 7/03), you'll remember that the rifle flew in the face of the conventional wisdom. To wit, it shot .490" RB's with .010" patches very well albeit with reduced loads. Odd thing though is that it didn't like .495" RB's & .018" patches at all whereas my other ML's love it. Then too there's the Lee R.E.A.L. experience: the 250gr. ones shot miserably, but the 320gr. ones were about as accurate as the .490" RB's, but with higher powder charges.
Today I decided to retest the 250gr. R.E.A.L.'s with 70gr. Pyro RS after paper-patching them (2 wraps of 16lb. erasible bond paper, cut to 3.171") and a new-to-me T/C Maxi-Ball mold (368gr., weighed). First, the paper-patched R.E.A.L.'s: These shot into 1 1/2" @ 50 yds. with several touching and two in virtually the same hole. They were much a much tighter fit than their unpatched brethren. The Maxi-Balls, which I weighed yesterday* were the tightest fit of all CB's tested to date. Such "goodness of fit" was a mixed blessing however. Since they fit the bore so well, I expected great results and got them, but back pressure with 70gr. & 80gr. Pyro. RS was enough to blow hot pieces of #209 primer out of the action. A reduction of the charge to 60gr. solved the problem. Btw, 5 Maxi's went into 1 1/2" @ 50 yds., with 4 touching. I should also add that I cut 1/2" discs from a cereal box (Cheerios) and seated them under every conical I tested.
In sum, since I bought the inline mostly for target purposes, Ineed to decide which CB's to stay with. The RB's are the most economical with respect to powder & Pb, but the 320gr. R.E.A.L.'s and the Maxi-Balls are about as accurate even though greater amounts of materials are used. The paper-patched lighter R.E.A.L.'s were satisfyingly accurate, but quite time consuming to produce. I.e., better results were realized with less effort with the other projectiles. If there's a lesson here it's simply that each rifle is unique and may perform much differently than the conventional wisdom suggests.
P.S. I'm not enamored of the fiber optic sights since I'm not getting the clearest sight picture with them. A receiver sight is definitely something to think about and order!
*I cast 2 batches of Maxi's, one with the ladel above the sprue hole and one with it in contact with it. The 2 methods produced significantly different results, regarding weight & weight variation & mold fill out. The ladel-in-contact method was superior in those respects for the Maxi's, but not the R.E.A.L.'s.
Today I decided to retest the 250gr. R.E.A.L.'s with 70gr. Pyro RS after paper-patching them (2 wraps of 16lb. erasible bond paper, cut to 3.171") and a new-to-me T/C Maxi-Ball mold (368gr., weighed). First, the paper-patched R.E.A.L.'s: These shot into 1 1/2" @ 50 yds. with several touching and two in virtually the same hole. They were much a much tighter fit than their unpatched brethren. The Maxi-Balls, which I weighed yesterday* were the tightest fit of all CB's tested to date. Such "goodness of fit" was a mixed blessing however. Since they fit the bore so well, I expected great results and got them, but back pressure with 70gr. & 80gr. Pyro. RS was enough to blow hot pieces of #209 primer out of the action. A reduction of the charge to 60gr. solved the problem. Btw, 5 Maxi's went into 1 1/2" @ 50 yds., with 4 touching. I should also add that I cut 1/2" discs from a cereal box (Cheerios) and seated them under every conical I tested.
In sum, since I bought the inline mostly for target purposes, Ineed to decide which CB's to stay with. The RB's are the most economical with respect to powder & Pb, but the 320gr. R.E.A.L.'s and the Maxi-Balls are about as accurate even though greater amounts of materials are used. The paper-patched lighter R.E.A.L.'s were satisfyingly accurate, but quite time consuming to produce. I.e., better results were realized with less effort with the other projectiles. If there's a lesson here it's simply that each rifle is unique and may perform much differently than the conventional wisdom suggests.
P.S. I'm not enamored of the fiber optic sights since I'm not getting the clearest sight picture with them. A receiver sight is definitely something to think about and order!
*I cast 2 batches of Maxi's, one with the ladel above the sprue hole and one with it in contact with it. The 2 methods produced significantly different results, regarding weight & weight variation & mold fill out. The ladel-in-contact method was superior in those respects for the Maxi's, but not the R.E.A.L.'s.