Thoughts on balls

[jonk]

So I've been thinking about my balls. Muzzleloading balls that is. :-D It seems to me that every time I start one the starter (brass with a wooden palm ball) leaves a big nick or mar on the top of my ball.

This cannot be conductive to accuracy.

I'm wondering about the conventional wisdom here of using a thick tight fitting patch. I'm wondering if maybe a LOOSE patch with extra material wadded over the top of the ball might not be better? Yes, less grip on the rifling, but also less bullet distortion.

For that matter, consider black powder revolvers. The loading arm totally distorts the ball to a roughly spherical lump of twisted lead, often shaving a ring off when starting. That's probably why I can't hit anything wiht mine at over 15 feet.

What do you think?

[mikenbarb]

Have you thought about a different kind of ball starter? I have seen some with a soft nylon tip for starting balls with no distortion to them.

[waksupi]

John, you are loading too tight. I've looked at a lot of original shooting bags, and the great majority had no short starters.

[curator]

Some muzzle loading rifles will shoot a loose patched ball with reasonable accuracy. Most require a tight fitting ball/patch combination for serious, match winning accuracy. In the mid-1800s Alvin Clark invented the "false-muzzle" a removable coned devise that allowed the loading of a very tight patch/ball combination and still have sharp rifling at the muzzle. These rifles were extremely accurate--more so than other rifles of the day not using the new technology.

You can load a very tight patch/ball combination if your loading tools are designed to do this without deforming the soft lead ball in the process. I have found that my short-starter surfaces should exactly match the curvature of the caliber ball I am loading. My most accurate match rifles use a ball about .002 to .005 over land diameter and a patch thickness of at least 1.5X groove depth. If the patch material does not impress its weave where the ball lies in the grooves, the patch is too thin.

I use a large rubber mallot to start the ball into the muzzle using a carefully made "ball-set" then cut the patch with the ball just flush with a very sharp knife sharpened on only one side. Once the ball is six inches down the bore it slides very smoothly all the way to the breech.

There is good information out there about match winning accuracy shooting patched round balls. Google "Dr.5X" Dutch Schultz to learn about his "system".

[jonk]

I googled it but couldn't find anything. Dr. 5X brings up a lot of stuff on hackers; Dutch Shultz and "muzzleloader' brings up his name but not an article.

[missionary5155]

Good morning
I do not understand why a mark on the top of a round ball would drasticly affect it´s accuracy ?
Maybe match shooting... Maybe a rifle far more accurate than I have ever owned... But if a casting sprue turned straight up does not affect accuracy ... how can a slight gouge on a ball ? And when the black powder is exploded in the barrel does not this also obturate the ball (pure lead) actually changing the diameter and shape.
I agree the ball starter should match the curvature of the ball but that mark let on top of the ball rotating along the axis of the ball should not be much of a hinderence. Again in a precision bench rifle (chunk gun) there might be some noticible accuracy drop off but would it matter in an average muzzleloader?

[Maven]

A couple of points: (1) You won't find anything about "Dutch Shultz" & BP accuracy because you're misspelling his name. It's Dutch SchOULtz. Try www.blackpowderrifleaccuracy.com (2) I've resized .375" RB's to .359" for my .357mag. and they shot within 2" @ 25yds. from a rest with 2.8grs. Bullseye. Ergo, a bit of "distortion" isn't a bad thing for a RB I'm thinking. As for the original point, I think you need a different short starter or at least a different tip on the existing one. Btw, Schoultz's advice is first rate!

[mooman76]

Your ball starter should be concaved and it should match your caliber to minumize deforming the ball. Maybe you don't have a good match.

[Baron von Trollwhack]

This is much concern over nothing. The sprue nib is essentially a RB defect. It is generally agreed that a base defect in a bullet is hard on accuracy while a nose imperfection is not nearly as negative. That is why the usual advice is to load sprue up for RB. Remember all those fanciful RB ramrod tips tips to make Xs or whatever on RB? They fell out of use because they added nothing to RB effectiveness, even though they did not affect accuracy. BvT

[TCLouis]

Coupla times a year I hang around some folks that are shooting RBs and they are doing it for accuracy. Many of them are shooting balls so tight that they use a small brass or plastic mallet hammering on a short starter to start the RB and patch down the bore.

Many folks knock them, but I use Lee RB molds because the way they cut the sprue (tangental) there is little or no nib and so I can orient them any way I want. Many times I can not even see where the sprue was cut off.

Now if I could just shoot really well. Heck I'm pretty sure I was a better shot back when I was burning a couple of pounds of powder a week. Though that was really not hard to do at 110 grains a shot!

[Baron von Trollwhack]

Now if you cast your RB, sprue or not, put a fair quantity of then in a flat bottomed cookie tin , quantity to allow for rolling about, and put the tin in the car trunk for a month as you drive about they get even rounder and the sprue reduces considerably. BvT

[madcaster]

Sometimes a thicker patch and smaller ball combination will do better,as in a smoothbore-maybe you might apply this logic to a rifled gun?:coffeecom
My balls,they are in a safe place,I had told a buddy that he could have them if I died before him,but he showed me that he was no friend after all and I disowned him,so now I'll just keep what I've got!

[northmn]

Until you shoot the combination, distortion or not you cannot say. Most RB shooters that shoot for accuracy use a tight fitting combination. It helps to use a ball starter that fits. I used to make them using a jag that was designed for the bore. Shoot the load and see. Generally even with a little nose distortion, they will shoot very well and generally will outshoot a maxi ball or REAL bullet or whatever. The Friendship 50 yard buffalo sticks target had to be made in Double Bull so that all shots could be seen. They do not use a loose combination.

DP

[eka]

Just last Sunday, I was at the range with a .50 shooting roundballs with Wal-Mart pillow ticking. The .490 ball and patch are tight. I left my preferred ball starter in another shooting bag and ended up with one that didn't fit the contour of the ball well at all. When I started the ball, I cut a deep circle into it. Yikes, not what I wanted to see at all. But, that was the only ball starter I had. Using that ball starter and the disfigured balls, I shot three targets at 50 yards using 80 gr. of FF Goex. and homemade moose milk lube (NAPA cutting oil and water 10:1). All three targets had three round groups with all holes touching; clover leafs. So, from what I have seen, the disfigured ball from a short starter doesn't seem to matter to my rifle at fifty yards. Now, I can't say what would happen past fifty, but I don't think it would make a heck of a lot of difference at reasonable roundball hunting ranges. For me, that is 100 yards or less. As a matter of fact, I'm thinking all my round balls need that circle cut in them if they're going to shoot like that :-D. Now, I usually use a starter that has a shallow concave face. It doesn't mark the ball. You can use a file to make your starter fit your ball better and you won't have any more circles on your roundballs. I prefer to have a roundball that is unmarked, it just makes me feel better, I guess. But, I won't worry about it much if it does.

Keith