Paper patch round ball

[Potato boy]

Hi, I’m going to try to paper patch my .690 round balls, anyone ever try it?

[leadhead 500]

I have had mixed results with it, I have used Mylar wraps instead of paper and the groups will be inconsistent

[longbow]

I tried and failed. I do use paper patch either cross patches or "tube" for smaller ball in wads.

0.690" is one RB I've never gotten to work well naked or in shotcup. Most shotcups I can find are too thick and the one or two that had thin enough petals to use didn't work anyway.

I tried paper patching a few years ago but results were no better so I retired my 0.690" mould. Now I load 0.662" or 0.678" round balls into shotcups or use 0.735" on a hard card wad column.

Some have gotten 0.690" RB's in shotcups to work though so don't take my failure as evidence it can't work.

Another option is donut wads. I may give that a try myself one day even though I have good round ball loads now but versatility is always good and 0.690" RB's are a nice weight.

I think BPI brush wads do well with 0.690" RB's too so that's another option.

Longbow

[Potato boy]

Ok, some preliminary results, I paper patched some .690” round ball. Two loads gave me descent accuracy. I cut the petals off the wads, 22.5 grains of Universal, 209 primer and paper patched in wax paper. I figured the wax would act as a lube and it did. I didn’t chrony it but will down the road.
I’ve got one 5 shot group at 2-3/4” at 50 yards and another at 3.3” for the same. The 2-3/4 “ shot had a card over and star crimped. The second group was a roll crimp with card. I will post more info as I progress
There was 3 other loads that were 6”+ in groups, so some failures as well.

[longbow]

Even 6" groups at 50 yards are decent on my opinion and with 0.690" RB very good so those 3" or so groups are very good. Of course the groups have to be repeatable to count. I've shot several nice tight groups at 100 yards but I sure can't depend on them. Normally there are fliers and/or unpredictable groups. Those same loads will run 3" to 4" at 50 yards dependably.

My good 0.662" RB's and 0.678" RB's in shotcups and 0.735" RB's naked do well but as mentioned, I've tried about everything with 0.690" RB's with no success. Too small naked, to big for most shotcups and failures paper patching so you are ahead of me with them!

Good going!

Longbow

[Potato boy]

Thanks, it was only 5 shots so yes I have to prove it again and again. Maybe a fluke. If I can get consistent groups at 50 yards I will be very happy. For me the round ball loads are a fun round for ringing steel at the range and defensive rounds for bears in my pistol grip 870. I’ll keep you posted. May be awhile though, trapping and hunting season is here.

[longbow]

The .690" RB is a good weight and should fit through any normal choke (not tight turkey chokes) safely if shot naked. Therein lies the problem... they are too small for the bore and bounce around. If you can keep the RB's centered in the bore they should fly well to at least 50 yards. Generally they are too big for shotcups (and that makes then not so choke friendly too) and too small naked. Donut wads is one solution I have not tried but will eventually.

My history with the 0.690" RB started back in the 70's. I wanted a 12 ga. "slug" for my JC Higgins bolt action 12 ga. (wish I'd kept it). The local gunsmith had a used Lyman 0.690" RB mould he said would work. Well, if by "work" he meant there would be a "bang" and lead going downrange then he was right but there certainly was no accuracy... but they were fun to shoot because they made big holes and made dirt fly.

Next they went into a used Winchester model 50 semi auto that had been cut down and rifle sights put on it. Same results.

Next I got a Pedersoli side by muzzleloading shotgun. I figured with the chokes it would help but nope! They still shot everywhere but where I aimed but these were naked balls.

Many years go by and I get interested in slugs again so out comes the round ball mould. I tried in shotcups, naked, paper patched, inverted gas seal, cylinder bore choked bore. In the end it just didn't matter, accuracy was always poor.

A few years ago I decided to buy several round ball moulds from TOW: 0.662", 0.715" and 0.735". I found the 0.662" RB's were way too small for regular shotcups but cloth patching them into a hull with wad worked well so I picked a cloth that with ball and wad made a nice tight fit to bore then patched some and went to the range. Amazingly enough I got quite decent accuracy. Recovered wads showed distorted gas seal and bottom of shotcup so I added 20 ga. nitro card wads and improved accuracy. Didn't take long I was getting 3" to 4" groups at 50 yards every time.

Decided to try the 0.735" RB's same story. Once I found that a solid wad column worked best for me 3" to 4" at 50 yards.

Got out the 0.690" RB mould and cast some more. Tried again in wads, etc. no accuracy! I gave up!

Round balls are easy to cast and easy to load. Good loads shoot well enough to at least 50 yards to be used for bear protection of hunting. 0.662" RB's are a little under an ounce in wheelweights, 0.678" RB's are about an ounce in wheelweights and 0.735" RB's are about 1 3/8 oz. in wheelweights. 0.690" RB's are about 1 1/8 oz. so a really good weight.

If I had to pick one I think 0.678" would be it because it fits many standard shotcups pretty well, from snug to a bit loose but good enough. Easy to cast, quick to load and fun to shoot with decent accuracy.

As said, if you can get the accuracy from 0.690" RB's more power to you! It is an excellent choice.

Longbow

[Bob9863]

I tried paper patching some .662 RB today, in the tightest shot cup that I could fit them in I was getting about a 2ft group at 45 yards, I paper patched them in a wad, and and seated them on a 1mm thick nylon washer today in a Winchester AS 1 1/8 oz wad and from the same gun that group went down to about 5" so it definitly made an improvement.
I'm going to mess around with the .690 RB now and see what I can do with them again as I picked up new barrel for that gun today just for slugs.
228449

[Potato boy]

Back from the range today, I tried to duplicate the success I had previously with no luck. The best I could do was 4-6” groups at 25yds with paper patch. Not horrible but not great. Back to the drawing board. I reacently read a book on roundball and buckshot from a 12ga muzzleloader. It gave me an idea. Cloth patch! I used 20 ga Remington cleaning patches, they are .010” thick. My first load was as folllows:

AA Winchester hull
209 WW primer
23.5 grains of Universal
.125 card
1/2” felt wad
Cloth patched .690 round ball
Overshot card and star crimped

Groups were under 3” at 25yrds and around 5” at 50 yards This is from a 26” cylinder barreled 870,
I also tried them in my IC marine magnum, accuracy was poor from the IC 870, over 10” at 50 yds.


My second load was as follows:

WWAA hulls
209 ww primers
23.5 grains Universal
WWAA12R wad with petals removed
1/2 felt wad
20 guage patch
.690 round ball
Overshot card star crimp

Accuracy with Marine magnum was great! Under 3” at 25 and around 4” at 50 with 2 touching! Accuracy with the cylinder bore was dismal, 12” at 50yards.

Looks like I found a load for both my shot guns with round ball. I have ordered lubricated patches from track of the wolf and will be loading those next. I would not hesitate to hunt with #2 load to 50 yards or more. Testing to continue

[Potato boy]

I tried a slight alteration to my loads today, a lubricated patch. Results were good. Accuracy is very good out to 30yards, good to 50 yards, that is however the limit as most balls fall within a 5 inch circle, however, there is the odd ball ( pun insert ) that goes to an 8” circle. Still my goal for a round ball load for bear defence and range fun has been realized.

[Ginsing]

Personally the .690" RB has been my most successful. I have a .662" and .680" and while they are easier to load havnt been as consistant.
Getting good results does take a bit of messing around cutting petals down on wads ect.
I use gold medal hulls, 33 gr hs-6 and federal 12s3 wads.
I put a 20ga 3/16" cork wad under the ball in the shotcup and trim the petals off just below the equator of the ball.
Getting the trim length on the petals consistant is the key.
This is all through a smoothbore, most of my testing is through an I.C. choke.
3"-5" groups at 50 yards consistently. Maybe 1 in 30 does something strange. The less I pay attention to how I trim the petals the worse the groups.

[centershot]

Personally the .690" RB has been my most successful. I have a .662" and .680" and while they are easier to load havnt been as consistant.
Getting good results does take a bit of messing around cutting petals down on wads ect.
I use gold medal hulls, 33 gr hs-6 and federal 12s3 wads.
I put a 20ga 3/16" cork wad under the ball in the shotcup and trim the petals off just below the equator of the ball.
Getting the trim length on the petals consistant is the key.
This is all through a smoothbore, most of my testing is through an I.C. choke.
3"-5" groups at 50 yards consistently. Maybe 1 in 30 does something strange. The less I pay attention to how I trim the petals the worse the groups.

Ginseng,
Did you mean to say "above the equator of the ball"?

[Ginsing]

Nope below.
Above would be too tight in the bore. Below works as the petals keep the ball centered on the trip down the barrel

[centershot]

Very good! In essence you've made what some call a "donut wad"! Clever!

[Ginsing]

It works for me YMMV
If you keep the petals trimmed around 1/8" below the equator it makes sure they are still below the equator when the ball sets back on firing. This is my theory anyway.
When I trimmed right at the equator I was still getting the occasional torn petal. It took some experimenting but I'm happy with the results. I tried a variety of powders and hs-6 works best. With all the success however past 50-60 yards it's still a **** shoot. The balls seem to go squirly at this distance and become unreliable. For bear defense ect it would be a sound choice though. When I'm camping I have a short over/under loaded with these close at hand