AmericanLongRifles Forums

General discussion => Black Powder Shooting => Topic started by: Daryl on September 27, 2010, 08:19:23 PM

Title: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: Daryl on September 27, 2010, 08:19:23 PM
I copied this from another forum I frequent withing the Cast Bullet Association, of which I belong.  This is the second post and of more clarity and precision, I think. I hope it will lay down what works for all of us here in the North.

We deal with humidity from 5% to close to 100% and temperatures that range from 0F below to in excess of 100F.  This pretty much covers the gamut of climate. We see no increased fouling in any of the extremes, BUT - notice that some guns do require thicker then normal patching in etctremely hot, dry climates. We always lube the same - saturated patches & we win matches, attesting to the accuracy we enjoy throughout the temperature and humidity range.  NEVER do we see a burning or smoldering patch from our guns - patches are re-usable if we care to pick them up and simply re-lube them.  I've shot many local trails with old patches, picked up while shooting on the main range, testing loads or when filing in new sights.

The post:

I've used the backs of the legs from old jeans, but prefer to purchase my patch material by the yard or meter.  Worn clothing is not as strong as new material.  Mattress ticking also makes good patches for many rifles (most of mine) in .0215" thickness.  I take either calipers or a mic with me to the store and after acertaining the material is 100% cotton, I measure or mic it.  The mic is given a good swirl with the ratchet brrrrrrrrt and read.  It gives readings from .0015 to .003" smaller than my 3 sets of calipers. The caliper measurements vary due to differences in the width of the jaws on each set.  With calipers, I pinch the jaws togther over the material with my thumb and forefinger and read the dial while pinching the material, just as it would be compressed in a bore. I look for a reading of .020" to .022" with the mic and .0225" to .025" for the calipers.  The material should be washed before shooting to remove the sizing - I run a regular wash with the new material, then run it through the complete cycle without soap.  Washign softens the fabric and shrinks it to a tighter weave, increasing it's strength. Most materials will lose a thou. or 2 when washed., but some cotton weaves that shrink a lot might gain thickness even though losing the sizing. My ticking did just that, increasing from .0205" to .0215".

Ball size - we use balls that are .005" smaller than the bore in rifles for the most accurate shooting. In my .40 target rifle, I use a ball that is .002" larger than the bore, with a .019" patch.  It loads easily with a 3/8" hickory rod.  It's all in the muzzle. No - the muzzles of my rifles are not coned - I do not believe in coning as it opened groups both times I tested it in 2 very accurate rifles, a .45 and the .40 match rifle.  It would be OK for a purely hunting rifle, although I will never do it again - I prefer guilt edge accuracy, on the range and when hunting. Coning more than doubled group sizes. if coning improves accuracy, it must have been pretty dismal before, is all I can say. One of the guys I shoot with often, has a coned .40 and he cannot easily load the larger ball and patch in it, that I use in my rifle, even though the combination is .002" looser in his bore. Mine is undersized by that amount.  The reason might be as simple as a long taper produces more friction, than-does the short 'drawing taper' I put on my muzzles. This is simply a polished machine cut to remove the corners.  This type of crown allows very tight combinations that do not cut the patch.  I have shot normal groups of 5 shots, retrieving the 1st patch, re-lubing it and using it for each of the 5 shots, just to prove the material and thickness is good.  I've come to the conclusion that if the patch is not totally reusable, the material or thickness is wrong. Patches with any burns or cuts are not suitable - or - the crown needs work.  Most people err on using too-thin a patch.

Back to balls - for hunting, I suppose a person could use a ball that is .010" small than the bore for slightly easier loading maybe - we see no real difference in loading with our loading techniques and lubes when using the larger .005"/under ball.  That means a .495" ball in a .50, .445" in a .45 and a .535" in a .54, etc.

Some factory guns have very shallow button'd rlfing that is less suited for shooting patched round balls than are the more deeply machined, cut rifle grooves. We have had good accuracy in button'd barrels with round balls if using a ball .010" smaller, ie: .490", .440" and .530" when using a thick denim patch of .022".

 Some makes of denim list it by weight.  If your store lists it this way, get the 10 oz. weight.  I use this too and it usually runs .022" to .0225" with the mic, and thicker yet with calipers. It is very accurate in all my rifles as well as other's rifles we've tested it in. Linen, if it can be found thick enough, makes a superior patch material.  It is also very expensive. I have heard of people using .010" to .012" patches - we won't even use those for cleaning as they are too thin for that job as well. Flannel is the best material for cleaning paches. Bady diapers used to be the best but are hard to find now a days.  A thin patch does not seal the gasses behind the ball, and a thin patch does not hold enough lube to keep the fouing soft.

The Crown, The Crown!

We've found over the years that no factory gun has a suitable muzzle crown - as received. Most all of them have a machine cut angle from wider than the groove depth to the tops of the lands.  This leaves 2 sharp angles at the top of the cut to the bottom of the grooves and at the tops of the lands. This sharpness cuts patches and makes the lead ring up when attempting to seat a thich patch with the ball.  Rounding this angle vastly improves loading and helps the patch and ball swage or draw into the bore much more easily and without damage to the ball.  Emery and your thumb will do wonders for the crown and it takes only a few minutes to do well. Rotating your thumb and rotating the barrel periodically keeps the crown perfectly concentric with the bore's axis.

 

Patches - why do we use thick patches - well - thicker than what most use.  Thicker patches hold more lube - more lube softens fouling making loading easier. Soft fouling also maintains an exact, consistant condtition in the bore making for improved accuracy and eliminating the need for frequent wiping.  Fouling does not build up shot to shot. Loading is exactly the same all day long as there is never more than one shot's fouling in the bore & that is easily wiped down by the ball and patch as you load the next one.

 

To load a tight combination, one must use a short starter.  There is no repeated hammering or need of a mallet as some describe their loading attempts.

 

Lubes - for hunting, we use Mink Oil as sold by Trackofthewolf, or Neetsfoot Oil, or Marmont Oil, or Bear's Oil/Grease.  For target work, we simply use a spit patch, or a combination of a few ounces of an oil, mixed into winter windshielf washer fluid. Note that patches must be wet - ie: saturated with lube. No, it will not destroy the powder charge. Licking a patch is not using spit for lube, just as a dab of grease or oil does not constitute a lubed patch.  The patch must be wet- ie: saturated.  In very large bores, I've used a card wad or extra patch between the grease patch and the powder, when hunting.  The .62 and .69 cal rifles do not seem to be negatively effected by the additional patch or wad, however all of my smaller bores are effected by the extra wad or patch - negatively as to accuracy. I do not use a 'wad' in them and the powder seems just fine.

 

Hope this helps - if not, let me know what's up and we'll try to sort out any problems.

 

Edited for clarity and spelling/typos

Daryl

The ball and patch combination along with the rifle particualars follows.

GM .45 barrel 42" long with .450" bore, .010" square rifling at .470" groove diameter. .0215" ticking patch + .445" pure lead ball = .488" diameter minus bore of .470" = .018" divided by 2 = .009" compression of ball and patch per side (all the way around) ensuring a 'sealing' fit of ball to bore.  I used the rifle's 3/8" hickory rod - note the loading technique and how easily the rod pushes the patch and ball down the barrel.  The video starts with seating the patched ball into the barrel using the short, cupped knob on the starter.

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v638/DarylS/th_Movie-LoadingandShooting.jpg) (http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v638/DarylS/?action=view&current=Movie-LoadingandShooting.mp4)

Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: bgf on September 27, 2010, 10:09:50 PM
Daryl,
I wish I had read and believed that before I ever took my first shot.  Factory recommendations and local gurus wasted pounds of powder and (undersized) lead for me.  The work that needs to be done on the crown is amazingly simple -- takes all of 15 minutes at most, but it makes a huge difference.  I did it in two steps, just to play it safe, so it may have taken half an hour:).  Only thing I can think to add is that the green scrub pad treatment recommended by Don Getz and others will help a new or rough bore and it seems to be good insurance against cutting patches if the crown is good.  Pick up patches and look -- any hole or scorch at all is suboptimal, in my limited experience.
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: Al Lapp on September 27, 2010, 11:43:37 PM
Daryl;
  Great article. Thanks   Al
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: Daryl on September 28, 2010, 01:43:22 AM
TKS RB and guys for the coments. Post repaired. BGF - that's it.  I always look for a scorch where the bottom of the groove would be. It will be a brown line usually. This shows powder gasses are getting by and a thicker patch should be used.  Trouble starts in warmer temps than when the scorch is noticed, where the scorch becomes a burnout - sometimes.  Less than a good fit usually does not produce the accuracy a barrel is capable of. We must maintain a consistant bore for consistant accuracy.

Years ago, I went overboard perhaps with patch thickness, but it taught me what a smooth and radiused crown would do. I was using a TC .50, with .495" balls and a .022" denim patch, loaded with the rifle's 3/8" hickory rod.  Most would find that a bit tight in .004" deep rifling - it was tight, but it shot well with right up to 120gr. 2F whatever powder I was using then - probably Curtis and Harvey's.
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: Simon on September 28, 2010, 01:44:30 AM
I've never put the study time in as Daryl has and I have learned a lot from him about patch material and lube.  I have  used the .005 under bore sized ball vs. the .010 since I was able to get different sized balls and moulds.  I just thought they shot better.  We didn't have paper matches when I started in black powder,  just a live turkey shoot  once in a while(100 yds.  off hand).  A dollar a shot at the turkeys head behind a log.  That's when I decided the larger ball was much better.

I have tried some of the thicker patch material, but so far I  haven,t  had much luck in finding anything not available from Wally World,   but  there should be better accuracy in some of the other material.
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: YORKTOWNE54 on September 28, 2010, 05:05:27 AM
Is it safe to say that a larger rb is always a better choice? Seems the patch is more of a variable when sealing off the bore good and tight. Variables are not good in shooting.
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: Daryl on September 28, 2010, 05:30:53 PM
In my own opinion, a larger round ball will always give better accuracy than  smaller round ball.  The fact that the bench guns and 'buffalo match' guns of the 1970's at Friendship all used and use larger than bore sized balls shows this trend.
In my own guns, a .400" (.002" larger than the bore) is more accurate than a .395" ball.  A .445" ball was more accurate than a .440" ball and the .570" ball is more accurate in the .58 double (both barrels) than a .562" ball.  Now, every one of these ball sizes was used with a patch that produced at least .008" or more compression in the grooves and sealed perfectly - yet in all instances, the larger ball was more accurate.  Taylor's more deeply grooved .50 Virginia with a rounded rifling Rice barrel also showed better accuracy with the larger .495" ball, than a .490" ball.  One of thes days, we'll do a range session with it and the .508" ball.  In testing patches, we found a pocket drill patch of .019" that fits perfectly with that .508" ball - nice fit, no cutting on pulling the ball out of the muzzle.  The only thing left is to bench it and see how it shoots.
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: northmn on September 28, 2010, 05:59:37 PM
While you are discussing rifles, I have gotten very good accuracy in my 20 smoothbore with the 600 ball, where some are swearing by the 595.  I do not have a 595 to test against it, but can see absolutely no reason to order one with the results I am getting.  It has rifle sights.  I have won a few matches myself and can more or less agree to ball size/patch thickness like Daryl recommends.  You really start seeing the difference off of X sticks and that sort of match.
Somewhere some one pushed the virtues of easy loading for hunting rifles. For the one shot you usually take, a target quality load is very doable.  Also, you can carry one or two easy reloads in the field, for a fast reload if the occurrence is needed.  However, I have even started carrying cleaning patches out in the field so that I can give the bore a good swabbing before reloading after shooting.  It does not hurt to let the critter have a little time to lay down after the shot and before you get on the trail.  If a hunting load does not load easily enough to use the rifle rod, you are using the wrong lube.  While short starters may not be PC, a short started load will outshoot a thumb started load.  In the heavy brush, while the ranges are shorter, you sometimes want to thread a needle to take a shot through brush and a little extra accuracy does not hurt.  As in this view from my deer stand.  While you may not need a load that can hit field mice at 100 yards in the field, it does not hurt either.
(http://i550.photobucket.com/albums/ii425/Davidpeck16/013.jpg)

DP
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: Daryl on September 28, 2010, 11:56:59 PM
While you are discussing rifles, I have gotten very good accuracy in my 20 smoothbore with the 600 ball, where some are swearing by the 595.  I do not have a 595 to test against it, but can see absolutely no reason to order one with the results I am getting.  It has rifle sights.  I have won a few matches myself and can more or less agree to ball size/patch thickness like Daryl recommends.  You really start seeing the difference off of X sticks and that sort of match.
Somewhere some one pushed the virtues of easy loading for hunting rifles. For the one shot you usually take, a target quality load is very doable.  Also, you can carry one or two easy reloads in the field, for a fast reload if the occurrence is needed.  However, I have even started carrying cleaning patches out in the field so that I can give the bore a good swabbing before reloading after shooting.  It does not hurt to let the critter have a little time to lay down after the shot and before you get on the trail.  If a hunting load does not load easily enough to use the rifle rod, you are using the wrong lube.  While short starters may not be PC, a short started load will outshoot a thumb started load.  In the heavy brush, while the ranges are shorter, you sometimes want to thread a needle to take a shot through brush and a little extra accuracy does not hurt.  As in this view from my deer stand.  While you may not need a load that can hit field mice at 100 yards in the field, it does not hurt either.
(http://i550.photobucket.com/albums/ii425/Davidpeck16/013.jpg)

DP

Excellent annalogy
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: D. Taylor Sapergia on September 29, 2010, 12:20:49 AM
It boils down to this...if you want to re-enact and make a boom and some smoke anything will suffice.  If you want to hit a pie plate every time shooting offhand, at whatever range you choose, right out to the limits of your vision and iron sights, use a tight fitting patch/ball and the starter.  Think of it as an accuracy tool.
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: hanshi on September 29, 2010, 02:20:52 AM
I am shooting .600 soft lead ball with .016 patches though A little work remains to be done.  That can wait until after deer season as it shoots well enough at 50 yards though a few inches high.  I had a .590 mold made because I want to use WW metal and a .607 WW ball has to be pounded down and that is unacceptable (to me) in the field.   A fairly tight first load is fine in my book with somewhat easier loads held in reserve.  In my rifles I get excellent accuracy - or as good as my shooting will allow - with .010 undersized balls.  Fired patches can be reused.  Still, I am going back to the .445 ball in my .45 for a while as an experiment.  If it still loads with reasonable force I suspect it may be even more accurate.  I polished the crown on my Traditions .50 and will be testing it at the range soon.  It is an easy and quick procedure.
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: YORKTOWNE54 on September 30, 2010, 03:23:44 AM
just had the crown polished on my green mtn. what a difference in loading the tight combos I like to shoot. I even tried some old levi jeans that pushed .030, with the 535 rb and it went down ok with the lehigh soaked patch.Why in anyones opinion would you not polish every rifles crown? To what advantage is there not to smooth off the lands?
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: California Kid on September 30, 2010, 04:56:01 AM
So Daryl what is your guys theory on a patched ball for a fowling piece? .030, .020 undersized ball or what?
I'm specifically speaking of a 14 bore barrel that mics .693. Lyman makes blocks in .662 and .678. Seem to be the only commercial options. I know J. Tanner will make whatever you want. I was thinking the .662 Lyman blocks. Already have handles. What say you?
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: Daryl on September 30, 2010, 06:12:32 AM
For a smoothbore, I'd go with .020" ball and an 18 to 20 thou patch.   I

The .678" is a bit big for a .693" bore, but trying one would show one way or the other. For that reason, a bag of 25 from track for testing might be the best way to go.  I'd probably go with a 16 bore ball- that's the .662" as I already have that mould.  It would probably load just fine with the heavier denim- the 12oz. that runs .025" with the mic and up to .030' with calipers.  Note that measurements can vary up to .003" to .004" with calipers- depending on technique, how hard the jaws are pinched on the clock before measuring as well as how wide the jaws are.  I read the measurement while pinching the jaws with both forefinger and thumb - it is the only way I can get consistant readings and being pinched and compressed is exactly what the bore is doing.
Generally the math will tell what to use for a patch.
.662 + (2x.025") = .712" - .693" = .019" divided by 2 = .0095" compression per side.
.662 + (2s.020") = .702" - .693" = .009" divided by 2 = .0045" compression per side.

The heavier patch is quite tight, the thinner less so and with .0045" compression, will probably shoot well.

In my 20 bore - .615" muzzle, .620" bore, I use a .595" ball with either a .0215" ticking patch or the .0225" denim. Both load well and seem to shoot about identically.

Due to the choke, I was concerned about patch burnout due to the choke allowing .0025" slop per side after being pushed below the choke, but apparently the 300gr.+ ball does slug up enough at the breech when the 82 to 100gr. 2f goes off and it seems to seal well and cleanly.  Patches are reusable in either this gun, or my .58 rifles.  It never needs wiping and once started, it's a 2 finger load. Starting is easy with the short cupped nub on the starter, or merely smacking the ball with the starter's big knob - pounding motion as in my .58 double rifle loading video.

Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: California Kid on September 30, 2010, 06:34:41 AM
I think I'll go with the .662, that's what I've been thinking if I even do it.Just something I was thinking about. I built the gun to shoot shot and it does it well. Getz barrel. Gun is posted on here somewhere under English Fowler if your interested in seeing it. Thought it fit in with the topic of this thread.
Thanks for the observations. Barrel is cylinder bore by the way.
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: Daryl on September 30, 2010, 06:02:17 PM
Have you thought about jug choking it?
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: zambezi on October 22, 2013, 03:53:38 AM
Daryl,could you go into a little more detail on your muzzle crowning technique?I want to do it,but don"t want to mess things up.l
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: Daryl on October 22, 2013, 07:34:30 PM
With a machined crown- ie: a cutting tool, bit or chamfer tool has been used to cut an angle into the end of the muzzle, a simple length of emery, coned around your thumb, pushed into the muzzle and twisted with your wrist will smooth and re-cut the crown. Note the smoothbore's crown. Then end of the muzzle had about a 45 degree angle tool cut, but when I loaded it, the machined angles cut the cloth, thus burning the patch when it was shot.  The muzzle's crown, smoothed and nicely radiused with just a couple grades of emery, stopped the cutting and burning completely.

Note - I push a patch of flannelette down into the muzzle to catch the metal and emery dust.  It is easily removed after the job is completed with tweezers or long nosed needle nosed plyers.

If the muzzle is square, if finished flat and sharp & I can no use Taylor's lathe for crowing, I use one of the angled stones that hardware stores sell for use with an electric drill, ie: 1/4" to 3/8" shaft.  I run this into the muzzle with my electric drill with emery cloth wrapped around it to cut the initial radius. Then, I use my thumb as shown in the picture below.  I rotate the barrel a few times while doing this, to ensure an even 'crown'.  Your thumb is resilient enough to nicely round the cut angles and create the perfect angle to 'draw' (move metal to reduce diameter) the patch and ball into the muzzle.  Some people call this "swaging", but it is actually "drawing". To swage is using a smaller diameter to bump up into a larger one. To draw, is to reduce in width to fit a smaller 'hole'.  

Thus we can make a ball and patch combination that is larger than the groove diameter, fit that barrel perfectly - that is what is happening when we have .004" or .010" compression in the bottom of the grooves.  Lead is moved to allow it to fit - the ball actually lengthens slightly as it is reduced in diameter, thus DRAWN - in this case the action happens by being pushed, rather than by being pulled.  

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v638/DarylS/Muzzle%20Crowns/PB241921_zps562d2707.jpg) (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/DarylS/media/Muzzle%20Crowns/PB241921_zps562d2707.jpg.html)

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v638/DarylS/Muzzle%20Crowns/PB241922_zpsb5cca558.jpg) (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/DarylS/media/Muzzle%20Crowns/PB241922_zpsb5cca558.jpg.html)

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v638/DarylS/Muzzle%20Crowns/P4242100_zps80518abd.jpg) (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/DarylS/media/Muzzle%20Crowns/P4242100_zps80518abd.jpg.html)

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v638/DarylS/Muzzle%20Crowns/PB141918_zpsbd7b72c5.jpg) (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/DarylS/media/Muzzle%20Crowns/PB141918_zpsbd7b72c5.jpg.html)

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v638/DarylS/Muzzle%20Crowns/P6101151_zps60eb38b8.jpg) (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/DarylS/media/Muzzle%20Crowns/P6101151_zps60eb38b8.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: sydney on October 22, 2013, 11:47:16 PM
Hi--I agree with what you are saying but not your use of the terms swage and
     drawn  when referring to metal
      Drawn is used when you are for example making wire-metal is started into a die then pulled through to reduce the diameter
      Swaging metal is pushing metal into a die to change shape
       So when seating a bullet you are swaging the bullet to shape
         by pushing-not  drawn as you would have to pull it into the barrel
       I stand to be corrected
        Sydney
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: zambezi on October 23, 2013, 04:37:42 AM
Thanks for the info.I have a Rice barrel with round bottom grooves and their normal crown.I can probably use my thumb as you have.Do you use 320 grit emory cloth?
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: Daryl on October 29, 2013, 03:53:36 AM
Hi--I agree with what you are saying but not your use of the terms swage and
     drawn  when referring to metal
      Drawn is used when you are for example making wire-metal is started into a die then pulled through to reduce the diameter
      Swaging metal is pushing metal into a die to change shape
       So when seating a bullet you are swaging the bullet to shape
         by pushing-not  drawn as you would have to pull it into the barrel
       I stand to be corrected
        Sydney

I guess you'd better write to Corbin's and tell them they've wrong.

Their swage dies are larger than the core and bullet jacket. Those are placed into the die, then they are swaged to shape, ie: increased in size to fit. To reduce a bullets diameter, they sell drawing dies. 

Yes- you are probably right and they probably have it wrong, although they've been in the business of making swage and drawing dies for decades. 

Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: sydney on October 29, 2013, 09:22:35 AM
Hi Daryl--I still do not agree-check your encyclopedia for swaging
          Swaging--a process in which the dimensions of an item are changed by using a die into which the item is forced
              It goes on to say in firearms and ammunition--swaging is the process of a bullet entering a barrel and being squeezed to conform to the rifling--which is what you are doing
             In the past when I disagree with you, your reply s quickly become
very sarcastic--this is unfortunate -if you are going to put your methods and ideas
in print you must expect that people will not always agree with you
        Sydney
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: Dphariss on October 29, 2013, 04:30:35 PM
It boils down to this...if you want to re-enact and make a boom and some smoke anything will suffice.  If you want to hit a pie plate every time shooting offhand, at whatever range you choose, right out to the limits of your vision and iron sights, use a tight fitting patch/ball and the starter.  Think of it as an accuracy tool.

Thank you and Daryl as well.
Far too many people do not take the accuracy thing seriously.
I can load pretty tight loads without a starter and have for years.
HOWEVER, the starter is much easier on the rifles wrist and I use one on my swivel most of the time and for "dry lube loads". But I made an antler spud for both starters and then are only long enough to put the ball below flush. It is possible to harm the crown with an improperly made/used brass spud, BTDT.
I also dispute the starter and the bullet board being incorrect for the Colonial Period since I have seen a write up that stated the German Mercenaries who came over at the time of the Revolution used bullet boards to cut patches for their rifles. Push in a ball with the patch material then cut it with the knife/repeat. David Cooke, B. 1760s used one but we don't know for how long of course since he died in the 1840s.
But that's another topic.

Dan
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: Standing Bear on October 29, 2013, 04:44:35 PM
You can increase or decrease the size by drawing or by swaging.

Drawing is pulling the material thru or over a die or other shaper.

Swaging is pushing the material.
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: mjm46@bellsouth.net on October 29, 2013, 04:55:01 PM
Hi Daryl
Back in the early 1970's when I got my first muzzleloader and I didn't know anything I did this to my muzzle. To the horror of my muzzloading friends. It made loading much, much easier to the point that I could thumb start the ball. It was a Dixie Pennsylvania rifle with square bottom grooves similar to the Rice Builder barrels, that were shallow. I think it shot very well with somewhat thin patches..

After many years and listening to a lot of people about not altering the muzzle on the first rifle I built that had round grooves, I didn't alter the muzzle. Every patch out of that rifle was shredded. I finally smoothed the crown and the patches now look great.

All the rifles I build for my use will have a rounded crown, although the rifles I build to sell I leave the muzzle in factory original condition. Some people just cannot be convinced.
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: Dphariss on October 29, 2013, 05:28:08 PM
Swages and drawing and sizing and such.
Corbin can call their stuff what want and they are likely technically correct even if  the process can be described accurately with another name. It is not necessary to pull a metal to "draw" it.
There are numerous ways to describe "drawing". Brass cartridge cases are drawn(stretched, thinned and case head formed from a little hockey puck looking cup punched from a thick sheet of brass) using a set of punches and dies that progressively stretch and shape the brass. This is called "drawing". But its done with presses and a lot of pressure in some operations.
So while wire is "drawn"  by pulling through dies to thin and stretch it, cartridge cases and other metal objects  are also  "drawn" by being pushed through a die with a punch that, due to the fit between the die and the punch at one point draws the brass longer by pressing it thinner.

Dan
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: hanshi on October 29, 2013, 10:37:58 PM
Semantics, semantics.  Really now!
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: Daryl on October 30, 2013, 07:55:23 PM
Thanks Dan - the ctg. case forming from punched blanks is a good example. Indeed they are known as drawn cartridge brass or cases as opposed to those that are lathe turned or formed by wrapping.

Hanshi - it happens.

The important thing aboutnomenclature is that it is more important to get our firearms terminology correct as much of it is being degraded and discarded.

Have you ever heard - "I'm going to cast (or buy) some leads and go shoot my black powder?"  Another example - some guys think it's 'smart-ass'(or something) to say boolits, instead of bullets - I'm seeing this more and more on various web sites.

Makes my skin crawl.

Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: sydney on October 31, 2013, 06:07:22 AM
Hi--I agree about the importance of nomenclature ( nice to see you are using your
      thesaurus when posting  )   
     Re your post of sept 27 2010 you said ( swage or draw a patch and ball
      into the bore)-- terms were interchangeable at the time ??
     Re your post of  oct 6-- using a micrometer
       there is only 1 anvil -the other half is called the spindle
       you mentioned a barrel this called a thimble which rotates
       you mentioned a body this is called a frame
       The thimble rotates around the sleeve--the sleeve being part of the frame
          As you said it make my skin crawl
              sydney     
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: Vomitus on November 02, 2013, 10:22:00 PM
  Hey Daryls, Got any leads for my black powder? LMAO! Yep, we've got some good mileage on that one! Here in Prince George we call a re-entry a "Roger Fisher" because here, there is no such thing as a re-entry. All out of respect for the man. When we shoot a "Roger Fisher", it's a second shot at a target we missed.(while shooting practice rounds). Hope Roger is doing good. I always keep him in my prayers and I hope others are too. Sure miss him!
  Want accuracy? Shoot tight combo's and a good lube....the end
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: Dphariss on November 04, 2013, 04:57:31 PM
Semantics, semantics.  Really now!
It does avoid confusion afterall.
A flintlock is not a wheellock and a forming die/swage block is not a drawing die.

Dan
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: Curtis on November 08, 2013, 09:54:08 AM
Daryl

I take everything I read online with a grain of salt.......   after some testing I came to agree with your bp rifle loading philosophy  nearly 100%.  Hasn't failed me yet


Curtis
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: D. Taylor Sapergia on November 09, 2013, 07:15:31 AM
Curtis, you may not know how fulfilling your comment is.  We read of all of the issues shooters seem to have, and make our own observations on how we think they can deal with them....over and over again, until I'm sure some are sick to death of our opinions.  But, in the relatively small circles in which we revolve, Daryl and I have enjoyed a life time of being in the winner's circle, and still, at retirement age, are a considerable force.  It is simply our wish to take away some of the frustration that some shooters experience.  Might I add that what we have come to know has come through reading books such as "The Muzzle Loading Caplock Rifle" by Ned Roberts, and "Shooting and Winning with the Champions" by Don Davis, and then putting what we read to practice.  We have never had the benefit of mentors for shooting muzzleloaders, but I will concede that we were both trained to shoot by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and by our own perseverance. And I love the cliche philosophy of "Aim Small - Miss Small".
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: Don Steele on November 09, 2013, 01:56:32 PM
Gentlemen,
I came to patched RB shooting relatively late in life after decades of precision shooting cartridge rifles and handguns. As many here know...in that world, the integrity of the barrel crown is sacred. With that background....when I got my first brand-spanking new Green Mtn. "roundball" barrel, I also received some excellent advise about loading "tight".
When the predictable patch-cutting evidenced itself the gentleman I bought the barrel from advised me to use my thumb and a piece of emery cloth to smooth it out.  :o For me, that was a total leap of faith. I have to admit I was hesitant to take something so non-precise and just sort of "have-at-it". Following the telephoned instructions as best I could....the result was night and day.  ;D
The real lesson was to illustrate how much I had to learn. That was in the mid-90's. I come here everyday and generally learn something with each visit.   
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: Daryl on November 11, 2013, 11:11:08 PM
Taylor has hit the nail squarely on it's head.  Thanks Taylor, Don, Curtis, Wade and everyone else who has tried and found that what we've been saying over and over again, actually works so well.

Don - it's amazing, isn't it - the sharpest crown, or nowadays an 11 degree crown was/is the ultimate for perfect delivery of the projectile, yet here we are using a thumb and emery and achieving accuracy the 'best' crown shape could not give us.  Loading at the muzzle, changes many of the rules.
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: Curtis on November 13, 2013, 01:55:56 AM
The very tight, wet lubed patched roundball shooting clean is really quite logical when you think about it.  What do most bp shooters do to clean their bore?   Why shove a tight wet patch down it of course!  The fact that the combination shoots so consistantly accurate is a bonus!

Curtis
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: WadePatton on November 17, 2013, 09:09:09 AM
I learned to fix crowns with less-than-precision tools way back then on breechloaders. 

With small calibers one might use a round-headed brass screw chucked into a drill with lapping compound. He might indeed.

Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: Artificer on November 17, 2013, 02:31:34 PM
I grew up hunting with shotguns and .22 cal. rifles, but had no experience with high power rifles until I joined the Marine Corps.  I was amazed at the thought of shooting a peep sighted rifle at 200 yards offhand before I started doing it.  In Boot Camp, I ran 7 consecutive Bullseye’s at the 200 Offhand until I fired my 8th shot, and in recoil, realized I had lined up on the target next to mine.  It was also a bullseye, but did not count as it was not on my target.  After that, things went downhill fast….Grin.

During Boot Camp leave, I bought a .50 cal. TC “Hawken” rifle.  Using balls cast from the mold provided and their patching material and with the 60 grain load they recommended, I sat down on frozen Iowa ground in January, took up a good sitting position and placed three balls where the maximum spread between two shots was 1 ¾” on a target by actual measurement.  I knew I did not yet have the best/most accurate load for the rifle, but I was hooked. 

Within less than two years from that date, I began my one year apprenticeship to build National Match Rifles and Pistols, Sniper Rifles, etc. for the Marine Corps and spent most of the next 23 years in that capacity.  While the Junior Armorer on THE Marine Corps Rifle Team in 1975, I learned the importance of “touching up the crown” or refreshing it, every 400 to 600 rounds to keep the rifles shooting at top notch accuracy. 

During those early years, I also went to Friendship to compete with flintlock rifles and smoothbores and see some of the better shooters on the Primitive Range and from the “Tin Tipi’s,” though much more on the Primitive Range over the next 7 years.  I also began working original and reproduction Civil War guns at the Spring and Fall National Shoots of the NSSA for 23 of the next 30 years.

You really can’t compare having to refresh the crowns of modern rifles to muzzle loaders all that much.  Modern rifles “burn out” the muzzle crowns much faster than in muzzle loaders; from the gas igniting at the muzzle, the higher pressures and the fact we shoot a LOT more rounds per year than muzzleloaders are shot.  Also, in Muzzleloading, we are not trying to keep 10 shots within a 3” circle fired from a machine rest at 300 yards on a NM M14, or a 4 3/4” ten shot group fired at 1,000 yards from a bolt action sniper rifle in a machine rest.  This last group size was fired from a Model 40A1 sniper rifle with the then “new” long range ammunition in the mid 1990’s.  I was the Shop Chief of the Marine Corps Rifle and Pistol Team Equipment Repair Shop when that group was fired and was there in person to witness the shooting and measuring the group size.  Yes, we were astounded at that accuracy.

The famous “11 degree crown” on highpower NM rifles actually came from a test made by Springfield Arsenal on an EARLY M1903 cartridge/bullet combination.  It was found it was best for that bullet, but not all bullets of that time.  Still, once found, it became the indisputable muzzle crown angle from then on and was used on GI crowning tools throughout the era of the Springfield 03 and M1 Garand.  Benchrest shooters later actually proved  the angle of the crown was not nearly so important as how exactly uniform the crown was cut/formed – no matter the angle.

If a muzzleloading barrel crown is cutting a patch, that often means there is a burr or sharp edge in the crown.  That is not good for accuracy even on modern rifles and is strictly avoided when touching up modern rifle crowns.  However on modern rifles, it won’t take long for the tight fitting bullets to break off a burr.  That would not happen for many more rounds fired from a muzzle loader. 

I think the reason one can get away with using the thumb and garnet paper to smooth a muzzleloading crown is the bullet does not directly engage the lands and grooves with a patched ball.  I also think that most of the time, you don’t reach the crown right at the ends of the lands and grooves (in the barrel) when you do that and that’s where a uniform crown is the most important for accuracy.  Looking at the last picture that Daryl submitted, it is easy to see the crown right at the ends of the lands and groves were not polished by the garnet paper.  (On NM rifles, we made sure we cut deep enough with the crowning tool that the end of every land was recut.)   Still, I’m pretty sure if a person did it enough to seriously deform a uniform shaped muzzle crown, it would negatively affect accuracy. 

It seems a good number of people have reported a loss of accuracy in a patched ball barrel when the muzzles were coned.  Perhaps this was because the cones were not cut concentric to the bore?  Or perhaps that allowed the bullet sprue to shift positions in loading from shot to shot.  I’m not sure about that, as I don’t have much experience with coned bores. 

Over the years, I have used different bore guides to recut the crowns on more minie ball barrels than patched ball barrels (both repro and original barrels of both types), though I’ve cut a couple dozen of the latter with 11degree, 12 flute carbide cutters we used for modern rifles.  It always made a positive difference in accuracy, though the more worn or non uniform the crown was, the more noticeable the difference in accuracy after crown was recut.  ALSO, if the muzzle face was not uniform to the bore, that leads to more inaccuracy even when the muzzle or bore crown was done in a uniform manner.  It’s often easy to see if the muzzle face is not concentric to the bore when you cut the barrel crown with a pecision cutter, because the barrel crown then is not the same distance all the way around the barrel.

Gus
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: WadePatton on November 17, 2013, 09:29:53 PM
Yes, non-precise screw/drill/compound method allows screw "cutter" to follow the bore/muzzle relationship established by the mfg process.  New or Old, production guns often need help out of the box.
Title: Re: Old/New Topic on patches and ball fitting
Post by: Daryl on November 17, 2013, 11:01:53 PM
Most barrel makers or rifle builders simply use a tool to cut about a 45 or 60 degree angle in the muzzle of the barrel.  Many shooters, paying mega or not so much for the rifle, think this barrel is crowned - they can see the angle cut at the muzzle - it isn't square, thus it is crowned.

What they have is actually a fairly sharp, but angled & sharp edge on each land and groove that cuts the patch if the combination is tight enough to even 'almost seal in the bottom of the grooves - thus with the patch cutting on loading, accuracy is non-existent & erratic.  Thus, the shooter tries a looser ball and patch combination and finds that shoots better in THAT barrel than the tight combination - it's OK, he thinks, that he has to wipe it often due to fouling buildup or accuracy loss with repeated shots without wiping. 

Of course, those of us who've been down that road, know that smoothing the crown to allow that tight combination to do it's work, also know we will be rewarded with much superior accuracy than the original non-touched muzzle can deliver.

Although your thumb and emery sounds less than exact, turning the barrel periodically while working on it or using the same thumb/emery method while the barrel turns in a lathe, ensures an even crown.  It is easier to cut a wonky crown with a standard cutting tool as the hole might not be EXACTLY in the middle of the barrel or the barrel not perfectly centred in the lathe.  The thumb and emery automatically centres what you do in the hole itself.