Shooting Round Balls Without Patches

[GregLaROCHE]

There are people shooting round balls without patches. I have heard you can roll the ball between two rasps to raise points on it, so it stays tight in the bore. I’ve also heard that what counts is that it rolls down the bore when fired. I guess this is to start it spinning to give it more stability. I would like to know what others think about these methods.
I’ll be shooting a .69 cal smooth bore.
Thanks

[Edward]

[QUOTE=GregLaROCHE;4719705]There are people shooting round balls without patches. I have heard you can roll the ball between two rasps to raise points on it, so it stays tight in the bore. I’ve also heard that what counts is that it rolls down the bore when fired. I guess this is to start it spinning to give it more stability. I would like to know what others think about these methods.



I’ll be shooting a .69 cal smooth bore.
My .610 was not accurate bare ball ,needed tite patch @ 50yds .Group opened up without and dimpled was a waste of time. Your gun might be different but I hunt with mine and a lubed patch works for me/Ed

[Maven]

Greg, I've tried patched RB's and bare RB's, albeit of different diameters in my 20ga. smoothbore and found the patched ones to be more accurate. Others, however, find the opposite to be true. Also, I've also rolled the larger RB's between 2 coarse files and found them to be no more (or less) accurate than the unroughened ones. Btw, whether the roughening thing -> more accurate shooting is open to debate. One thing about it is certain though, it allows you to dip lube the balls for "bare ball" loads. Lastly, the bare ball loads, as cast and roughened, I used shot to a different point of impact than the patched ones and required a larger powder charge to hit the target center.

[toot]

DUELIST 1954, MIKE BELEIVIEW, did considerable testing on dimpled balls. most impressive.

[sghart3578]

I like to read old accounts of shooters of long ago. One thing that stuck with me is the guys that would chew round balls with their teeth to dimple them.

I shoot a lot of round ball but I have not worked up the nerve to try this.

Best of luck,


Steve in N CA

[waksupi]

Something of interest.

From the Muzzleloading Forum. This make sense to me, as I never gained any appreciable accuracy from a dimpled ball.

My interest in the chewed ball comment was that it seemed to be implying that the old boys used rough/chewed balls to increase accuracy, and I don't believe that is the case. I have several items mentioning chewed balls from the period, but they all are concerned with "poisoning" the balls or otherwise increasing the injury they cause.

“For though the law of arms doth bar
The use of venom’d shot in war,
Yet by the nauseous smell, and noisom,
Their case-shot favor strong of poison,
And doubtless have been chew’d with teeth
Of some that had a stinking breath,”
“Hudibras”, in _A complete, Edition of the Poets of Great Briton_, Volume the Fifth, Robert Anderson 1795

The Guernsey had sixteen Men kill’d, and three wounded; among which was the Lieutenant, who died the same Day of a Wound he reciev’d in his Thigh, with a Musket Ball chew’d, which made the Wound mortal.”
The Voyages Dangerous Adventures and Imminent Escapes of Capt. Rich. Falconer 1784

“This day the Lord Fairfax sent a Trumpet, complaining of chew’d and poisoned bullets being fired from the Town, and threatening to give no Quarter if that Practice was allow’d…”
A Tour thro’ the whole Island of Great Britain, divided into Circuits or Journeys. By a Gentleman 1724

“Bullet chew’d, why does it wound incurably”
Q. What’s the reason that a Wound in any part of the body by a gnawn or chew’d bullet, proves incurable?
A. If it be really so, the reason may be, because the roughness of the Bullet, and its many unequal edges tare and Jag the Flesh in such a manner, that ‘tis impossible it should ever close again, or admit of any Cure besides Amputation.”
The Athenian oracle, an entire collection of all the valuable questions and answers in the Old Athenian Murcuries. Printed for Andrew Bell, Cornhil 1706

[StrawHat]

Several decades ago, I received “Muzzle Blasts”, the magazine of the NMLRA. Often to fill space there would be snippets of information from one of the ODG diaries. I do not recall reading about chewed or dimpled balls but going the opposite way. I recall mention of two thin patches. When loading became tight, just use one patch.

Never tried it myself.

Kevin

[pwc]

I know that golf balls are dimpled to give xtra range. Don't know why this works as it interrupts the laminar flow over the ball. I have heard that hollow point pistol rounds were packed with garlic, and that made a mortal wound no matter where struck. Remember in JAWS, the sheriff was putting poison in his bullets and sealing them with wax.

[LAGS]

And I have to pack my Hollow Point Bullets with Salt, because I hunt at such a long Range, I don't want the meat to Spoil by the time I retrieve my game. LOL

[dave951]

I shoot in the smoothbore category in the North South Skirmish Association. We aren't allowed to patch in smoothbore.

As for the method, ask 5 Skirmishers, get 12 answers. Some use a fariers file to raise whiskers on the ball, some use a custom made "dimpler", some (like me) do absolutely nothing. My load- 65g 3f Old Eynsford with a .685 ball dipped in the same lube I use in my rifle musket and I do not so much as remove the sprue. In my 42 Macon with .690 bore, this load will put every shot into a playing card at 25yd and hold 4in at 50, assuming the nut on the stock does his part.

I've tried the other methods and searched for a while before stumbling onto this load and it just plain works in my gun. If I had to guess what the most important factor is, that'd be the size of the ball relative to the bore. I have only .005 windage, others who use the file/dimple method, much more. I tried the file method and alox dip and it wasn't satisfactory. Fouling got really hard and accuracy fell off rapidly. I've tried the dimple method and the groups opened up. Again, this is in my gun with a .685 ball. A slightly smaller ball may respond better to the file/dimpler, but with my gun shooting as well as it does, I'll just keep that stuff in the "for later experiment" category.

As for why the dimpling/file method working in some guns, my guess it has nothing to do with aerodynamics, but more with keeping the ball centered in the bore. Think of it this way, if the powder charge causes any obturation at all, any whiskers and dimpling just got squashed. If the ball doesn't obturate, then maybe the centering effect is the ticket. Either way, no way to tell without experimentation with your gun and ball size and good luck in retrieving any ball for post shot analysis. I also suspect that occasional occult style rituals and howling at the moon can also help improve accuracy in a smoothbore.

[Handshaker]

Chewing on Lead? Now that's a long painful death and a brutal way to commit suicide, lol. Remember how the people in old sailing ships ate from lead lined cans? They went mad from lead poisoning and died.

[Maven]

I just returned from the range after testing "bare," i.e., unpatched RB's in my 20ga. Green River Forge trade gun (flintlock). The particulars will follow in a moment, but the verdict, at least for my gun, is that patched RB's are significantly more accurate than the bare ones, and those results are repeatable.

Today's frolic involved .618" - .619", i.e., bore diameter, weighed RB's (Tanner mould), seated over 80gr. Graf's Schuetzen FFFg + a grease wad. No OP or OS wads were used as those RB's are a tight fit in the bbl. I also swabbed the bore after each shot for loading ease and consistency. In this test, the balls were rolled between 2 coarse files and dipped in melted Crisco + beeswax. From a rest @ 25 yd. I could keep most of the 7 in an 8" bullseye, with some (2) near each other, but not touching.

Test #2 involved RB's cast (and weighed) from the same Tanner mould, but not rasped like the others. These were also fired with 80gr. of Graf's Schuetzen FFFg, but with the addition of a proper OP wad (~1/8" thick), a felt grease wad, and a thin OS wad to hold the unrasped but slightly looser fitting balls on the powder charge. The results? Better than the rasped RB's, but my 7th and last shot (high at 11 o'clock) really opened the group. This one is worth retesting, but it's still not as accurate as a patched RB in my gun.*


*My trade gun will shoot either a .014" or .018" pillow ticking patch + a .598" (Tanner & Lee moulds) or a .603" RB (Lyman mould) quite accurately @ 25 yd. with as little as 65gr. Graf's Schuetzen FFFg.

[Maven]

Here's another patched RB pic (same gun, etc.). Btw, I'm also trying to reduce the file size for a photo of the bare ball with wads target I shot earlier today.

[Maven]

OK, I think I've got the downsized, bare ball + wads (7 shots @ 25 yd.) photo to attach:

[725]

in re: chewed balls. I can't comment on the affects & accuracy, but surely bacteria from the mouth does nasty things to flesh. Human bites cause terrible injuries, even today. The medical treatments of yesteryear were, I can only assume, inadequate. If mortality increased with chewed balls, I'd be looking at infection from the bacteria, in addition to the nature of the wound, from one of those things.
Even today, folks loose arms and hands from human bites. Nasty business.

[Der Gebirgsjager]

Nice shootin' , Maven.

[carbine]

In the N-SSA we shoot round balls in Smoothbores w/o patching. Those are our rules. We shoot at 25 and 50yards. Some folks dimple the ball, some rasp and some do nothing. They are very accurate. Requires work up. Eric Fritz shot his .69 at 100 yards and scored 40/50. Most inmressive. More info at N-SSA.org.

[Maven]

Thanks, Mountain Hunter!

[bigted]

I just returned from the range after testing "bare," i.e., unpatched RB's in my 20ga. Green River Forge trade gun (flintlock). The particulars will follow in a moment, but the verdict, at least for my gun, is that patched RB's are significantly more accurate than the bare ones, and those results are repeatable.

Today's frolic involved .618" - .619", i.e., bore diameter, weighed RB's (Tanner mould), seated over 80gr. Graf's Schuetzen FFFg + a grease wad. No OP or OS wads were used as those RB's are a tight fit in the bbl. I also swabbed the bore after each shot for loading ease and consistency. In this test, the balls were rolled between 2 coarse files and dipped in melted Crisco + beeswax. From a rest @ 25 yd. I could keep most of the 7 in an 8" bullseye, with some (2) near each other, but not touching.

Test #2 involved RB's cast (and weighed) from the same Tanner mould, but not rasped like the others. These were also fired with 80gr. of Graf's Schuetzen FFFg, but with the addition of a proper OP wad (~1/8" thick), a felt grease wad, and a thin OS wad to hold the unrasped but slightly looser fitting balls on the powder charge. The results? Better than the rasped RB's, but my 7th and last shot (high at 11 o'clock) really opened the group. This one is worth retesting, but it's still not as accurate as a patched RB in my gun.*


*My trade gun will shoot either a .014" or .018" pillow ticking patch + a .598" (Tanner & Lee moulds) or a .603" RB (Lyman mould) quite accurately @ 25 yd. with as little as 65gr. Graf's Schuetzen FFFg.


Here's another patched RB pic (same gun, etc.). Btw, I'm also trying to reduce the file size for a photo of the bare ball with wads target I shot earlier today.


Maven, your results mirror mine. Looks like your bare ball load hangs about 3 to 3.5 inch ... mine do practically the same, I get ball's stacked through the same hole for two ... then a flier that opens up my group ... then a couple back in the little group followed by another flier or two.

My patched ball load is .595 ball dia. Wrapped in a .015 cotton tick lubed with bee wax/Vasoline mix. These are very dependable for up to 8 or 10 before swabbing is needed. Then I load a smaller load with patched ball and run a couple ballistol/water patch's up n down to clean the crud ring down by the breech along with the rest of the bore.

My powder is OE 2Fg powder. This is by far the cleanest powder I have ever used. I shoot it in about everything nowadays. I have 1.5F and 3F powder but by far my favorite is the 2F

I used some 1F GOEX the other day and my goodness ... what a mess. Shot 2 rounds outta the 20 and it was so sooted up I had to stop and clean rite down to the breech plug. Do not know how I shot that stuff for so long.

[dondiego]

Good shootin'! Good write up!

[Maven]

Good to know my gun isn't so different when using bare ball loads, bigted. As you can see, it does OK with patched RB's: 65gr. FFFg or 75 - 80gr FFg does well with a slightly larger ball than you're using, but the same patch thickness. When I use up the Graf's Schuetzen powder and the #1 can of Goex I won, I'm certainly going to try Olde Eynsford as I read nothing but good things about it. Btw, I use 1 Ballistol : 6 water as a patch lube and don't really need to swab the bore for an entire session (which isn't the case with bare balls, don'tcha know!).

[dave951]

248128

Here's a pic of my smoothbore testing. Open group is with "dimpling" the ball and removing sprue. Tight one is nothing done to ball, including leaving on the sprue. In both groups, the ONLY variable changed was dimpling the ball. Powder charges remained the same, same cap, NO wiping between shots. NO patches.

Group at bottom was shot first. Again, no wiping at all. Then the top group was shot, again, no wiping. Neither group was patched, wiped, or otherwise manipulated. Last shot was the one in the dot and it was done to confirm my sight picture.

The loose group was shot first followed immediately by the tight one. Again, only change in the load was the treatment of the ball, no wiping between shots, rapid fire, no patches. This was to simulate rapid fire conditions of a North South Skirmish Association smoothbore match.

[bigted]

Dave, that is way kewl brother! The top (tight) group was bare ball with 65 grains powder ... correct?

I missed the ball diameter, OP wad, powder type and granulation as well as over ball card. Maybe include your bore diameter if you please.

I can only do that good with patch's. If I could develop a bare ball group like that, I do not think I would ever use a patch again.

[dave951]

Smoothbore is a measured .690 at the muzzle. The ball is .685. No over powder wad. Powder is 65g 3f Old Eysnford. No over ball card. No issues with ball moving off powder charge, especially after the first shot.

I shoot in North South Skirmish competition and it's a balance of accuracy and speed so all that wad stuff is a non starter. My personal theory on this, for what it's worth, is that the ball only has .005 total windage so the powder ignition almost immediately obturates the ball to the bore. The musket lube on the back of the ball keeps the fouling soft. Just for giggles, I've quickly shot 16 in a row without wiping just to see what would happen. Same accuracy as the first shot, not much resistance to ramming. Ran out of ammo and gun was hot at that point. That happens when you're cracking along at 4 shots a minute.

Procedure to make my "Skirmish" ammo- put 65gr 3f Old E in plastic cartridge tube. Seat ball about halfway into mouth of tube (I go sprue down, but in testing I haven't found any difference in accuracy). Triple dip the exposed part of the ball into musket lube for a good coating on the exposed part of the ball. I'm using Len's Lube that's sold to NSSA competitors. If I had to guess, it's wax, olive oil, and graphite and maybe something else. That's it. Easy peezy.

To load, pop ball out of end of tube, dump powder into bore, place ball on muzzle (lubed side DOWN to powder), ram in one quick stroke, cap and shoot. I can repeat that process until I run out of ammo with no wiping between shots and the accuracy doesn't fall off one bit. Now with the lubed ball to the powder, I don't think I'd want to leave a round in there for very long since it may "kill" some of the powder, but for our speed competition, that's not an issue.

[dave951]

248147
Here's the culprit. It started life as a 1842 Armisport Springfield. During the War, the South collected damaged guns from the field and had them repaired at various arsenals. In the case of my smoothbore, the Macon Arsenal generally did the cut downs like this, so mine is a repop of what is known as a 42 Macon. That short barrel really makes for a well balanced gun and very quick on the reload. As a point of reference, the sheet of paper is standard 9.5x11. There are 6 shots at 25yds in the bottom "slice" of the pie and that was intentional. I flinched on #7.

[Afro408]

Hi fellas. I found I could get my home made 52cal smooth bore to shoot, by putting a thick felt wad under and one over the bare ball. Patching the ball gave big groups.
I was punching them from 3/8" counter lining felt offcuts scrounged from the local saddler. With the wads it shot only a little worse than it does now that I have rifled it.
If you're not shooting to strict comp rules, then a wad sandwich, is the way to go. If you can put the ball into a modern shotgun wad sabot, it is just as good.

[TheGrimReaper]

to me patched just makes more sense. but I have wrong in the past...just ask my wife.

[Earlwb]

As I understood it, they used unpatched balls in a combat situation, where they may be moving and firing on the run. No time to mess around with a precision load. They would keep some balls in their mouth to get the wet so the balls would tend to stick to the powder in the barrel and not roll out easily. it would not be a problem as they would be firing it off in seconds anyway. Accuracy wasn't much of an issue if an assailant was charging you and you fired from short range.

[bigted]

I would absolutely love getting a bare ball to shoot. Thing I gleaned is the lube triple dunked on a .005 inch under bore diameter ball.

Going to have to give this a try. Really never occurred to me to lube the bare ball.

Thanks for the hint!

[Good Cheer]

As I understood it, they used unpatched balls in a combat situation, where they may be moving and firing on the run. No time to mess around with a precision load. They would keep some balls in their mouth to get the wet so the balls would tend to stick to the powder in the barrel and not roll out easily. it would not be a problem as they would be firing it off in seconds anyway. Accuracy wasn't much of an issue if an assailant was charging you and you fired from short range.

Yeah, that seemed to be a practice that made the Baker rifle successful as a combat arm. If the enemy was far enough away to give you time to load a patched ball then you had the piece to reach out. When you closed then rapid fire with less accuracy was plenty accurate enough.

[59sharps]

248147
Here's the culprit. It started life as a 1842 Armisport Springfield. During the War, the South collected damaged guns from the field and had them repaired at various arsenals. In the case of my smoothbore, the Macon Arsenal generally did the cut downs like this, so mine is a repop of what is known as a 42 Macon. That short barrel really makes for a well balanced gun and very quick on the reload. As a point of reference, the sheet of paper is standard 9.5x11. There are 6 shots at 25yds in the bottom "slice" of the pie and that was intentional. I flinched on #7.

Dave which unit you w? I'm heading to the fort tonight get there sometime tomorrow

[Theditchman]

I was sighting in today and thought I would give this a try249141

50 yds...60g FFF......457 ball....felt wad under ball....I used balls made in my Ruger size mold and this was with peep sights on my T/C Hawken .45

[Theditchman]

I was sighting in today and thought I would give this a try249141

50 yds...60g FFF......457 ball....felt wad under ball....I used balls made in my Ruger size mold and this was with peep sights on my T/C Hawken .45

[rfd]

i am not using or needing my flintlocks for any manner of war situation. i see no appreciable advantage with loading naked balls. nor do i appreciate the leading that always incurs. patched balls rule, naked balls drool. ymmv.

[Maven]

I never got so much as a speck of lead when using bare ball loads, Rob (not the most accurate out of my gun though).

[megasupermagnum]

I have always wondered why oversize balls were never popular. I've often been tempted to try a lee .562" ball in a 54 caliber. That's over .010" oversize, but I can't imagine it being that terribly hard to start if cast very soft. There's nothing wrong with a patched round ball, but it sure is an adventure trying to find a ball/patch combo that works.

[LAGS]

Has anyone tried Powder Coating the lead balls for a better seal and limiting exposure of lead to the barrel.
Might be a lot of work to coat them , but I know it can be done.
Especially if you use Swedged lead balls or cast balls Tumbled in a rock tumbler to pound off the sprue to make them fully round.

[OverMax]

In the heat of close range battle field conditions I could imagine many scared & trembling young fellows trying to shoot bare ball. Today. To save a patch? Or to shave reloading time? Little benefit had when dentures or crowns & fillings fill the voids in ones mouth.
BTW Not to long ago I experimented with dimpled patched ball. But I refused to chew on lead. So as told by a fellow Down~Under B/P shooter "just put a hand full of ball in a towel and see-saw the towels ends back & forth." The Tip worked. Most ball I shot that were Patched & dimpled. Such ball were a bit more accurate but not enough to benefit my rifle shooting which typically is measured in paces/ feet ~not yards. Although if you have the erge to dimple as preformed by you're ancestors> have at it. lol

[LAGS]

I have dimpled the lead balls by tumbling them in my Rock Tumbler with Steel ball bearings.
I wanted to see if they would fly true because of the dimples being similar to the ones on Golf Balls.
They were accurate , but then I really couldn't see a measurable difference.
But then I am not much of a Golfer either , so the dimples in a golf ball didn't help me either.

[OverMax]

As told by a all knowing professional Coat'er some time back: His powder coating cast lead bullets garnered near 2-3 thousands additional diameter over its a bareness.
The same coating figured with a Ball? Do you~~think such coated cast Ball would drastically change in accuracy?
"You be the judge."

[LAGS]

I don't think it will change the Accuracy much.
But you won't lead the barrel.
You won't have exposed lead if you decide to put them in your mouth as a spit ball.
And you can reload them so fast Vs patched balls , it will seem like you are shooting a vertical machine gun .
Lol

[swheeler]

And I have to pack my Hollow Point Bullets with Salt, because I hunt at such a long Range, I don't want the meat to Spoil by the time I retrieve my game. LOL

that's funny [smilie=l:

[waksupi]

As I understood it, they used unpatched balls in a combat situation, where they may be moving and firing on the run. No time to mess around with a precision load. They would keep some balls in their mouth to get the wet so the balls would tend to stick to the powder in the barrel and not roll out easily. it would not be a problem as they would be firing it off in seconds anyway. Accuracy wasn't much of an issue if an assailant was charging you and you fired from short range.

Engagements during the Revolution usually started at 250 yards. Paper cartridges were the norm, so they were already paper patched.