why are inlines able to take more powder?

[nelsonted1]

I have a 50 Hawken in I think 1 in 48 twist. It shoots round balls best at 40 grains, for targets, reals at 80 or so without losing accuracy. I understand about 100 grains is the max for these rifles.

I have always wondered why inlines are rated at or at advertised at 150 grains capable. Does that mean they shoot well at 150 or is that for advertising or a stress test of some sort.

What I'm wondering about are the guys packing in 150 grains of powder cause it says they can mean it is also efficient at 150 or are they throwing away 50 grains (plus getting pounded)?

Is this some kind of magical deal like bordello creepers making a person into a ghost?

Ted

[mooman76]

My inline is only rated at 100gr. I got mine cheap because they were starting to come out with the new "magnum" inlines. It is because they have better steel that they could rate them that high. I have never shot one but BP get very inefficiant when it gets into the real heavy loads and just an educated guess but I believe there is very little to gain much past 100gr and you are just burning extra powder. Bigger is always better. Right?

[6pt-sika]

I have a pair of Knight Disc Rifles that are rated for 150 grains of Triple 7 , but all I ever use is 110 grains .

One hundred fifty grains in most inlines is a distinct handfull on the recoil recieving end or atleast i think so !

In my flinters I load about 80 grains of BP in my 45 , about 90 in my 50 and 90 in my 54 . They shoot great and should be plenty stout enough to kill the man eating deer of Virginia

[Lead Fred]

Anything over 80 grains is a waste in most rifles under 54 cal.

You can fill the barrel up, and fire it, it wont hurt the barrel.
It may blow the nipple off tho

Dixie Gun WOrks did just that, there is a pic of it in the back of thier catalog

Not recomended to do so <--- liberal mandated safety warning

[StarMetal]

Better steel. For those that think shooting more powder is a waste try shooting over a chrono and look at the results. Yes, lower velocities surely will take deer, but the higher velocities extend your accurate distance and energy distance should you need it.

Joe

[Boz330]

Anything over 80 grains is a waste in most rifles under 54 cal.

You can fill the barrel up, and fire it, it wont hurt the barrel.
It may blow the nipple off tho

Dixie Gun WOrks did just that, there is a pic of it in the back of thier catalog

Not recomended to do so <--- liberal mandated safety warning

With BP and slugs this is true to a certain extent, BUT with Pyro or 777 and sabots the velocities are way up above what is possible with BP alone. Taking a deer is one thing but when you go after something like elk that extra energy and trajectory (or lack of) come in handy.

Bob

[KCSO]

Bpttpm line... it sells guns.

You can make a nippled or flintlock traditional muzzleloader that will stand a 150 grain charge but in a traditional rifle that would not be pleasant to shoot. I made a special english stalking rifle in 62 caliiber for an Elk gun for a friend. He routinely shoots very heavy charges and had killed elk and deer at what I would consider twice normal range for a traditional gun, but he practices with another gun or cuts his loads drasticly when not actually hunting or sighting in for hunting. Since I don't hunt at extreme range I see no need for anything over 80 grains of powder and a good round ball.

[StarMetal]

...and it is selling guns. With the new BP substitutes and sabot jacketed bullet on scoped rifle....they shoot darn near like modern cartridge rifles. Not that is my cup of tea. I still use the old Maxi-Ball in my BP rifle and I'm forced to use BP substitutes because BP is getting harder and harder to get in many places now. My rifle can handle the 150 grain charges, but I don't use them because simply I don't need that much and I'm not shooting the extended ranges.

Joe

[Underclocked]

I would say there are next to no inline shooters actually using 150 grains of loose powder (at least among those that have bothered to learn a little more than the salesman told them). Most guns rated for 150 grains are rated for 3 of the dern "50 grain equivalent to something" pellets - not loose powder. "Magnum" is boolchit.

[peter nap]

Ithink it's already been said. It sells guns.
As a traditional rifle builder and a lover of larger bores (.58 and up) and hunting in Virginia where shots are generally short, I usually load 70 to 80 grains.

The only inline I ever owned was a Knight that I got from someone that owed me money. For the fun of it, I tried to blow it up using T7 and 450 gr Great Plains bullets.

I couldn't do it. At 175 grains, I got scope nose and bled all over the thing and at 200 grains, I got bored and quit.
Gave the thing to another friend who wanted an inline but couldn't afford one.

[GabbyM]

I used to use 110 grains of fffg in my 45 cal Hawken. Once the nipple burned out a bit the hammer would recock from the blast out the nipple. Now my trigger is kind of botched up. I did that when I was a teenager and had no more sense than average.

[725]

Agree. It's a fine marketing ploy to sell more stuff. In some cases, however, it seems to be just what the Dr. ordered. If it works for you, go for it. Personally, less is more for me. Very efficient hunting is regularly done in the 70 to 80 grain range. If I were going to Kodiak Island, I'd be loading 150 grains even though accuracy tends to suffer somewhat.

[Hurricane]

Consider that the only thing sealing the chamber is the spring pressure on the hammer on a traditional muzzle loader. Too high a pressure can push the hammer up and release gas on the shooter. GabbyM gave an example of the hammer recocking with a 110 grain load. I once tried a 100 grain load under a maxi-ball and I got my eyebrow hair singed. My safety glasses protected my eyes. I now use 50 grains for plinking with round balls and 80 grains for a hunting load with either round ball or maxi-ball. Both Hodgdon and I recommend not using more than 100 grains when using Pyrodex pellets regardless of the advertising of the gun maker.

[Geraldo]

I found this on another board-the Davenport formula is how to figure out how much BP a given barrel can burn efficiently. That is, beyond 11.5gr per cubic inch of bore you reach the point of diminishing returns in regard to extra velocity. In other words beyond that point your velocity increases won't be worth the extra powder.

The formula is 11.5 (gr of BP)x 1/2 the bore diameter squared, x 3.1416 x barrel length in inches.

Using a 28" .50 , it would look like this: 11.5 x .0625 x 3.1416 x 28 = 63.22gr

I don't completely hold to this formula for a couple of reasons; use of 2f vs. 3 and differences in brand of powder. I've never done all the necessary chrono work, nor do I intend to, and it may have no value with substitutes, but it is a reasonable place to start. Of course the powder companies would be happy if someone developed a 200gr rifle.

My opinion is that if you need a bigger hammer, it's called a .58 or .62, not a .50 with 2-3 times the powder.

[StarMetal]

Why don't your traditionalist start pounding on the magnum centerfire rifle that are just magnum cartridges of standard ones...such as any of the 300 magnums, the 7mm magnum, 270, etc., etc., etc.. Just because you don't like or use them doesn't mean there's no place for them. Ditto to the new breed of inline 150 grain powder shooters.

By the way I'm one of those that does use loose powder in my inline and cast bullet....no plastic sabots or pellets for me.

If we want to get real traditional why don't we push for a bill to band all muzzle loaders that aren't of the old traditional style? hmmmmmm

Joe

[JesterGrin_1]

In many places they are starting to not allow the inline rifles to be used during Black Powder season. As Black Powder season was intended for traditional muzzle loaders not the fancy stuff they came out with when they started Black Powder seasons.

And I am sorry but I agree that these modern rifles that just happen to shoot black powder should not be allowed to be used during Black Powder season.

[StarMetal]

In many places they are starting to not allow the inline rifles to be used during Black Powder season. As Black Powder season was intended for traditional muzzle loaders not the fancy stuff they came out with when they started Black Powder seasons.

And I am sorry but I agree that these modern rifles that just happen to shoot black powder should not be allowed to be used during Black Powder season.

Many states have modified that a step further by making the season you talk about a primitive season and then have a season for the modern stuff.

I'm still hearing the "traditional" talk out of you fellows. Going to dictate what folks can hunt with now?

How many of you shoot the BP substitutes, but yet the BP is available in your area? Tell the truth, do you shoot it because of the so called problems, mess, and having to clean your firearms with BP? Why do powder companies keep coming out with new substitutes..one of the latest being Blackhorn 209 which isn't corrosive or hygroscopic.

Hey how about a spear season, whatya think?

Joe

[frontier gander]

heck traditional sidelocks have been shooting 150gr charges since the hawken days. Todays modern inline shooting 150gr charges is nothing new at all.

Trying to blow up a rifle while you're holding it is the dumbest thing ive ever heard of. Hopefully that scope nose knocked a little sense into you. If you want to blow something up, mount in in a vise or something and tie a LONG string to the trigger and hide behind a steel or cement wall.

[StarMetal]

heck traditional sidelocks have been shooting 150gr charges since the hawken days. Todays modern inline shooting 150gr charges is nothing new at all.

Trying to blow up a rifle while you're holding it is the dumbest thing ive ever heard of. Hopefully that scope nose knocked a little sense into you. If you want to blow something up, mount in in a vise or something and tie a LONG string to the trigger and hide behind a steel or cement wall.

I think it was TC Arms that said don't believe that story that a muzzle loader will blow the excess powder out the muzzle and not blow the barrel. The said it could be done. That U.S. Navy said don't believe that BP can't reach smokeless powder pressures too.

Joe

[Geraldo]

I'm still hearing the "traditional" talk out of you fellows. Going to dictate what folks can hunt with now?

How many of you shoot the BP substitutes, but yet the BP is available in your area? Tell the truth, do you shoot it because of the so called problems, mess, and having to clean your firearms with BP? Why do powder companies keep coming out with new substitutes..one of the latest being Blackhorn 209 which isn't corrosive or hygroscopic.

To me the primitive vs. inline thing is overblown. If I want to hunt with a muzzleloader I will do so and I could care less if someone else uses a .308, an inline, or a shotgun loaded with slugs. I grew up in a state that mandated shotgun slugs for deer, so maybe we had an unfair advantage when we used muzzleloaders during gun season and others were stuck with Foster slugs from a smoothbore.