AmericanLongRifles Forums
General discussion => Black Powder Shooting => Topic started by: nemovir on May 21, 2019, 05:38:41 PM
-
Hello. I want to get a .54. It will be a Jim Chambers flintlock. It going to be either a Christian spring's or English Gentleman's. What I like to know, with loads being equal. Which has less felt recoil?
****************edit************************
sorry, I screwed up the subject of this thread. i have no problem with recoil. my problem is choosing between the two. i keep going back and forth. I figure that felt recoil will be the deciding factoring. that why i wanted your input.
-
Those two style rifles will likely be about even. As far as I am concerned, round ball muzzleloaders with flat butts like on those guns, don't start to recoil until you get up to very heavy 140 to 160gr. loads in a .58.
If you cannot handle even weak recoil of a .54, you should perhaps think about .45 or .50. These have no recoil.
Much depends on what you want out of the rifle. If you want to hunt moose and elk, then a .54 is wonderful, however
you will have to load it for power, flatness of trajectory and accuracy. That will require tight combinations and sufficient powder to
achieve the desired results. Most guys I know who use a .54 for the big animals up here in the North, use 120gr. to 130gr. 2F GOEX (not 3F).
These do have a little recoil, but should not bother a man, however would likely be to much for a woman not used to shooting big guns. Some do
just fine with them. Average rifle weight would be in the 8 3/4's to 10 pound range. The Christian Spring's rifle is especially nice, with it's Germanic
flavour. The English Gentleman's rifle is also special, a little more refined, perhaps.
love em both. The Christian Spring's rifle would make a nice .62 to .66 calibre big game rifle.
-
What makes you think recoil would be an issue? Do you have a flinch already? Or are you sensitive to other guns (careful, don't start throwing modern ctg names around). Or have you just been reading a lot-and are taking on the "concerns" of others. And there's no shame in having physical requirements for less recoil, so don't think I'm "talking down" about it. Everyone is different.
The only time I noticed my 54's recoil was that one double-charge event, and after a while on the bench--but I use an elevated bench for more of an upright position. If you're shooting game-recoil is the last thing you'll notice. If you're pounding targets from prone or table positions, then sure it can add up. Off hand and proper stance mitigates lots of recoil issues.
Benching heavy hitters of my past, I used a lead-filled drag bag (home brew). HTH.
-
I can't decide between the two, so recoil with be the thing that will decide it for me.
-
With the stock geometry of either of these two fine rifles I wouldn't be concerned. I shot unti recently a .58 with a crescent butt. If loaded with 120 grains or higher it had recoil but still not as much a hunting cartridge in smokeless for big game. I am having a new big game rifle & pistol combination made for deer, elk, and bear by Lowell Haarer. I could have had any caliber I wanted. Both are going to be in 54.
-
I’m a big recoil wuss unless shooting a flintlock. Then my intent to focus overcomes noticing much else except with heavy loads. I’m good to 100 grains in a .58.
But I’m a “bleeder” with a clotting disorder (mild) and noticed a bruise on my left shoulder today from an overvthe log shoot Saturday. I’m learning to shoot left handed so I can see better but obviously have bad form. It was a .36!
Many folks have bad recoil experience from TC guns which for me have too high a cheekpiece or something. With a CS architecture my .58 is quite more comfy.
-
Recoil doesn't bother me in a decent gun. I have a .54 and have shot targets and killed deer with 110 grains of 3F. The only time I recall something that hurt was the day following an afternoon of bench shooting a .50 with a crescent butt plate. There were bruises, not unusual, but a really sore shoulder for a few days. Other than that, no problem.
-
Nemovir, recoil is a function of Newton's laws. If you have energy released, you will have an opposite reaction of the force involved. But note that the formula for energy is Energy = velocity squared time mass. That "velocity squared" is the key point - higher energy comes from squaring the speed, therefore, the more speed, much more energy.
Our black powder roundballs just do not develop enough speed, at reasonable powder loadings, to cause a whole lot of recoil. A .54 round ball is about 224 grains of weight, a .50 is 178, and so on. But at our typical muzzle velocities, you don't get a whole lot of reaction.
I agree with Daryl that there will be little difference in recoil between the English Gentleman's and the Christian Springs rifles. I would lean a bit on the side of the CS - with that "German" flair, the rifle will be just a wee bit heavier, thus less felt recoil. And heck, you could always fill the patch box with lead balls to soak up even a bit more recoil.
Generally, our "old-fashioned" firearms are tons of fun to shoot, and unless you spend the whole day at the firing bench, you won't come home sore at all.
Best of luck to you - you'll find it a fascinating sport and hobby.
-
I find even with my .69 shooting heavy long range powder charges, the purple and yellow shoulder marks disappear after a week or two. ::)
If I wear my past shoulder protector (the thin one) - no colouring of tissues at all, and easy shooting.
-
One thing to consider is how well the rifle fits you, it means alot on accuracy and recoil. I wouldnt imagine either rifle in that caliber would be punishing but I don't know your circumstance but I do know how it is with a boogered up shoulder and elbow, I made the buttplate on the rifle I did fit my shoulder and made the LOP to work with my elbow and it made a world of difference to me, recoil is something that doesn't cross my mind when shooting it, thank goodness.
-
...
****************edit************************
sorry, I screwed up the subject of this thread. i have no problem with recoil. my problem is choosing between the two. i keep going back and forth. I figure that felt recoil will be the deciding factoring. that why i wanted your input.
Oscar India Charlie (O I C)
Then flip a coin I suppose because I don't think that you'll be "punished" by either of those guns in 54 with hunting loads. But you do bring a nice question, which is in my mind: which of these guns, with proper historic architecture, might give the shooter more felt recoil with the same loads. I think this is better than choosing a style of gun and then asking the maker to "de-recoil" it by changing the architecture.
So with that sorted, I'm sure some more guys might weigh in on the angles and drop and how that affects perceived recoil (as some have already). Of course actual recoil with same load in same weight gun is exactly the same energy, it's just in how that energy is translated to our structure.
Of course the best answer is always get one now, and the other one later! 8)
-
Nemovir,
Maybe ask Jim Chambers how they feel and the differences.
In theory, the English should be V comfortable to shoot, but as the Christian Spring's will be a bit heavier, it may suit better and as has been noted, the flat wide buttplates are all pretty comfortable.
Let us know what you decide!!
R.
-
The Eddie Marshal gun is going to be heavy in .54, you're not going to have any recoil issues with it.
-
I have the english gents rifle from Jim Chambers. Its a 58 cal. Does it have more recoil? a little bit more, yes. But my son when he was young shot it and had no trouble with it at all.
-
Stock it similar to Smart Dog's English rifle and forget the crescent butt plates and
recoil will not be a problem. A .54 round ball weighs about 250 grains,maybe and
a military style hollow base about 400,maybe.
Bob Roller
-
Target loads would be 55-60 grains. Hunting load 70 grains. Recoil will be mild. If you feel the need run her up to 100 grains, punch your shoulde and slap your face. I've killed bear, deer and moose with 50 to 70 grains of bp. None of those animals complained that I didn't use enough powder!
Nit Wit
-
What you haven't told us it what game you'll be hunting and what is your max distance for shot.
Like nit wit, I don't use heavy loads of powder. 80gr of 2f for elk, bear, and mule deer. I've never lost any game i've shot. Heavy loads of powder expand a round ball too fast and you don't get the penetration. If I can put a hole in both lungs my load is heavy enough. I do enjoy getting close but I can take longer shots with my load. Some will shoot heavy powder loads so the ball will shoot flatter. That's ok I guess but knowing where your load shoots at all distances works too. A little Kentucky windage is part of shooting muzzleloaders for me.
-
What you haven't told us it what game you'll be hunting and what is your max distance for shot.
Like nit wit, I don't use heavy loads of powder. 80gr of 2f for elk, bear, and mule deer. I've never lost any game i've shot. Heavy loads of powder expand a round ball too fast and you don't get the penetration. If I can put a hole in both lungs my load is heavy enough. I do enjoy getting close but I can take longer shots with my load. Some will shoot heavy powder loads so the ball will shoot flatter. That's ok I guess but knowing where your load shoots at all distances works too. A little Kentucky windage is part of shooting muzzleloaders for me.
Nemovir,,,Take note,lots of wisdom here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!,,,,Ed
-
Recoil is also a function of architecture. I've read that with a wide buttplate, it is distributed well. Also, there is a formula that if the line extending from the top of the comb intersects with the vent, a gun will create the least recoil.
-
Traditional muzzleloaders, in general, aren't that recoil friendly. A stock that has a comb that slants forward is much easier on recoil. The comb pulls away from the cheek on recoil. You'll only find that with modern guns.
All we can do is hold the gun tight to our shoulder and hope recoil isn't too bad. I like Hawken style guns with quite a curve to the butt plate. When shouldered right it's across the chest and is against the shoulder and bicep. That way it doesn't bang into the collar bone. As was said already. Shooting offhand helps too.
-
I agree that the traditional later period rifles were not comfortable to shoot with heavier loads in larger bore sizes.
The earlier American guns designs that followed even earlier German Designs were the best of the American's for handling recoil.
The flattish wide butts helps distribute recoil and the straight stock shapes also helped with less rise and move backwards movement.
The more drop in the stock's heal, and higher combs as on some later Lehigh guns, along with the hooked narrow butts of the Plain's type rifles
just exacerbated the recoil in larger calibres. .58 is close to the tops for a Hawken or Dimmick-type rifle.
The wide shot-gun butts of the earlier rifles (Marshal, Jaeger, Lancaster styles as well as earlier English Rifles), along with the later English guns as
well, handled recoil very well in comparison.
-
Try 1F powder. The slower acceleration will be more comfortable to shoot.
-
Try 1F powder. The slower acceleration will be more comfortable to shoot.
He says he has no issue with recoil in his revamped OP, but that he's going to use it to help him decide which gun he should get. And I say a coin flip would be just as effective/meaningful if recoil is no issue. Wondering if he's placed his order yet?
-
sorry, been busy. as for it use. i just want a .54 to complete the set. have a .32, .40. figured not much of a different between .50 and .54, but larger size would better, if I plan to hunt. as for ordering, I haven't yet. Maybe tomorrow or next year.
-
If I was going to have a rifle to shoot rendezvous AND hunt big game, it would most certainly be a .54 or .58. Either suits as a long range (200yard) target gun and either
are capable of killing moose and elk out to that same range - IF the hunter is up to it.
I have personally witnessed a .54 used on a good sized mature bull moose shot at 170 yards, with what I would call a rendezvous load of 100gr. 2F (equiv) powder. The
ball penned both lungs and heart and ended up on the off side under the hide. The "power" was between 200 and 300foot pounds energy. The bull took off like a race horse,
running 40 yards and dropped dead mid-stride. I thought I would put this in, just in case someone thought FPE meant killing power or actually had ANYTHING to do with power,
killing power or effectiveness.
-
I didn’t see anybody ask about the rate of twist. That’s a very important question. The slower the twist the more powder it will take to stabilize the bullet, and the more recoil the gun will develop. A 1in66” would be my twist of choice, if recoil was a concern. Many .58’s are 1 in 72” which will take more powder to stabilize, and develop more felt recoil.
Hungry Horse
-
I have the Chamber's E. Marshall rifle in .62 cal My bear and moose load is 120 gr FFg . Everything else, deer , target etc is 100 gr FFg. This rifle is not unpleasant to shoot at all. The design of the butt plate and the stock are perfect for larger bores. A .54 cal would be heavier and offer even less felt recoil. Get the rifle you like best of the two you mentioned, and you'll be fine.
-
About all ML barrels made today have good round ball twists. I have proven to my self, that a nice snug load in a .58 will shoot well from 48" twists
to 78" twists. The 48" twist & 72" and 78" twist bl'd rifles were all military rifles. The 66" twist was an inch and an eighth octagonal Hawken bl.
The 78" twist military bl. shot really well with 85gr. 2F, as did the two 48" twist mil. barrels. The 66" twist did not like less than 140gr. 2F, while the
72" twist military rifle preferred 120gr. 2F. This simply shows guns and barrels have their own rules. There are general trends as Hungry-Horse and Bob
note. Usually the slower the twists, the more powder is required - but not always. In my tests, the slowest twist I tested, shot best with the same powder
charge as the fastest twist. It shot as well, with a LOT more powder, but that charging was not necessary.
How much powder you have to use depends on what you want from the rifle. In the days of testing those bls. I was interested in shooting 50yards for
sight adjustments, and 100yards for groups.
They all shot well at closer ranges - of course.
-
That's why I shoot game at 50yds. Even a blind man like me can put it center kill zone. :)
-
I'm with Daryl on this. I've never felt recoil in muxxleloaders until you get way up on charge on larger bores, even with pointy Hawken style butt plates.
-
Every ones recoil tolerance and power requirements will vary. I like to shoot bigger balls fast just because IMHO I get a flatter trajectory which is good if you hunt open plains type country. Over the years I have built up some extra recoil tolerance by shooting bigger than average bore guns but that is decreasing now as I get on in years. I would guess this happens to most shooters. Just a fact of life so we deal with it best we can.
-
IMO....blackpowder doesn't recoil.....it just pushes!! ::)
-
.69 with hunting load - 480-gr. round ball and 140gr. 2F.
(https://i.ibb.co/dpKVk1y/cid-60-C1-E34-C-7-AC8-4-D74-9-E25-C4-D1204-C0-E3-Alocal-zpse9583bea.jpg) (https://ibb.co/n1kYQZS)
.58 with a decent hunting load for deer/bear and moose. 285gr. round ball and 110gr. 2F. This rifle did not kick much at all with this load.
(https://i.ibb.co/d6KBBsL/Mixed021907-6-Corr-zps8551e52b-1.jpg) (https://ibb.co/tcCBBwx)
-
I owned an original Westley Richards 16 bore stalking rifle . It had a 10 groove tapered barrel that kept the weight at around 7 pounds. I consulted with Ross Seyfried who advised me that it was optimized for a relatively light charge of 70 grs. Off the bench, that rifle was brutal. Fortunately it didn't need much tweaking for a group or a zero. I never felt the recoil when shooting at a deer. My long winded point is recoil may be relative to what you want to do with the rifle.
-
When I shot a .58 caliber full stocked "Hawken" rifle I did get pushed around quite a bit due to the horrible crescent butt those type of rifles used. Got smart and dumped it and now shoot a .54 caliber flintlock with a better designed butt. I can shoot it all day at the range or on monthly club shoots with absolutely no discomfort. Its all about stock geometry. Providing photos of what a proper rifle should look like if you want a comfortable shooting firearm.
(https://i.ibb.co/Vv9G84j/Picture-5.jpg) (https://ibb.co/sFR4rYm)
(https://i.ibb.co/D7qc6jk/Picture-8.jpg) (https://ibb.co/CnrCXSv)
(https://i.ibb.co/pn3bJm7/Picture-10.jpg) (https://ibb.co/DL7z5qJ)
(https://i.ibb.co/GMR5yf4/Picture-11.jpg) (https://ibb.co/fNHxfVz)
-
I like the Hawken curved butt plates. It has a purpose. It helps hold up the heavy barrel but you have to shoulder it different than the straight butt plates. The gun should be shouldered across the body and not perpendicular like a modern gun. It should be between the shoulder and bicep.
When shouldered right it's very comfortable. I can shoot it all day with no discomfort.
-
I like shooting my .54 Hawken. Old Mtn Man is correct about how the crescent butt should be placed. My Hawken weighs 10.5 lbs, with the .54 barrel. Most shooting done with 60 grains of 2f. When hunting I use 110 grains of 2f. Never notice recoil when shooting game.
-
I like shooting my .54 Hawken. Old Mtn Man is correct about how the crescent butt should be placed. My Hawken weighs 10.5 lbs, with the .54 barrel. Most shooting done with 60 grains of 2f. When hunting I use 110 grains of 2f. Never notice recoil when shooting game.
We're pretty close with our loads. I use 60-70gr for fun shooting and i'm still working up a hunting load. I'm at 100gr of Goex 2F now and was thinking of 110gr.
I'm just hunting for bear now.
-
I know how to hold a crescent butt rifle, have had several over the years and they are period correct for many rifles. However there is no comparison on comfort when you compare it to a slightly curved or "shotgun" butted rifle, and that is the concern of the person who posted this thread.
-
He also asked about a .54 and you told him about a .58 being horrible.
I don't know anyone who held a Hawken style gun correctly that complained about the recoil. Especially, with the weight they have that tames down the recoil.
The problem with straight butt plates is they don't offer any support for holding up heavy barrels.
Actually, with his edit, he's not worried about recoil. So, holding up the barrel might be more of a concern.
-
The rifle I posted pictures of is a .54 as are most of my muzzleloaders. If the heavy crescent was such a good idea why did Christian Sharps put a very slightly curved butt on his big long range rifles with heavier barrels than the Hawken's or "plains" rifles? Just asking? Again he was asking about felt recoil on a .54 caliber. Just trying to help out a new member get off on the right foot, but I guess he will first have to decide what era of rifle he wants. We can probably all agree on that.
-
Recoil sensitivity varies a lot. Some folks are built differently and instinctively hold or have to hold a rifle differently to be comfortable and get a good sight picture. “Works for me so it must work for you or you’re doing it wrong” may not always be true.
The best way for anyone to answer their questions about whether recoil is going to be a problem is to shoot a similar gun. If one belongs to a club this can often be arranged.
Also some “Hawken” buttplates are just wrong and not like what was on originals. Pitch matters a lot in felt recoil.
-
The rifle I posted pictures of is a .54 as are most of my muzzleloaders. If the heavy crescent was such a good idea why did Christian Sharps put a very slightly curved butt on his big long range rifles with heavier barrels than the Hawken's or "plains" rifles? Just asking? Again he was asking about felt recoil on a .54 caliber. Just trying to help out a new member get off on the right foot, but I guess he will first have to decide what era of rifle he wants. We can probably all agree on that.
Because long-range rifles aren't usually shot off-hand. When you hunker down behind one, it's more difficult to manage a deep crescent. But my 54 with a TN crescent is no big deal-at all when held properly.
-
Both schools of thought are correct here as to deep crescent vs. flat butt plates. Before I started shooting longrifles I shot Hawken types with the deep crescent butt plate. Shot correctly as described by OldMountainMan the recoil is not bad at all, plus the deep crescent will help anchor the rifle for offhand shooting. The fault i find is that it's a little slower to get the rifle in that "just right position" than a flatter butt.
The flatter butt has even less recoil as long as correct form is maintained. And it is very quick to shoulder the rifle and get that "just right position". However it does a poor job of anchoring the rifle for a precise shot. Mine will tend to slip upwards a little from the weight of the barrel if I don't concentrate on how I anchor the rifle.
My favorite butt has a little crescent shape however I think just a little deeper would be better. But for now I want my rifles to have a butt like this one.
(https://image.ibb.co/hA5wUK/54-on-bench.jpg)
-
Hello. I want to get a .54. It will be a Jim Chambers flintlock. It going to be either a Christian spring's or English Gentleman's. What I like to know, with loads being equal. Which has less felt recoil?
****************edit************************
sorry, I screwed up the subject of this thread. i have no problem with recoil. my problem is choosing between the two. i keep going back and forth. I figure that felt recoil will be the deciding factoring. that why i wanted your input.
emphasis added
I wondered why this thread was kicked back open and we're talking about recoil again. It is because the title wasn't written to reflect the real issues of the OP and that no one re-reads the OP before replying. Everyone is replying to the title. The fellow was simply trying to choose between two kit guns from Mr. Chambers.
-
I pointed that out in my post.
-
Perhaps the OP could simply calculate the surface area of each butt plate to determine which is larger. Then compare weights of each gun. From this, you at least have some data points instead of subjective opinions.
Ez
-
Not a lick of difference. But we are just talking among ourselves.
-
True, Rich. The best answer it probably........buy the one you like the most.
-
to Old-Mtn-Man:
Good answer most of us have varying tastes. If you choose the one you like best you will probably be very happy (especially if it is a fine Chambers rifle).
-
In case you are curious. I have made my decision and have put in my order with Chambers and Co. It will be a .54 caliber English Sporting rifle. No patch box, but an upgrade in walnut stock.
-
If Mr. Chambers has anything to do with it you will be more than happy. Post us some pictures when it's done and ready to fire.
-
I think you will be very pleased. I had one of those when the parts kit was offered by Miller and Getz back in the 90's. It was probably the best hunting rifle I ever owned. Light and maneuverable in the woods and the .54 never failed with one shot on a deer. I was enticed by a friend about 4 years ago to trade it to him and I regret it to this day. I've been thinking about ordering one from Jim in a .58. I replaced the short rifle with a Virginia style rifle in .58 with a 38 inch barrel. It is awesome, but not a friendly to use as the English rifle. But being 73 years old I'm not sure the investment in a new rifle is a good move. I need to use the ones I have more as opposed to building a new rifle to set in the safe with the others. Recoil is not a problem with that rifle. I normally shot 100 grains 2F and the recoil was very manageable and not a problem.
-
If Mr. Chambers has anything to do with it you will be more than happy. Post us some pictures when it's done and ready to fire.
I'm sure it will be great. I ask to have one of their Little Fella's rifle in .40 built for me a couple of years ago. It came out beautifully. I've gotten many compliments at the public range.
They tell me 2 guns are ahead of me with their maker. I prefer plain rifles, but may ask for a shell, or what ever it's called, carved below the barrel tang, nothing too elaborate or showy.
If you are curious, I did asked how much it would cost to have one built just like the one they have pictured on their website out of curiosity, they quoted 7000 to 9000 dollars.
-
I was concerned about recoil when I was buying my kit from Jim Chambers. Because I wanted to hunt deer, he recommended either a 50 or 54 caliber and he said the 54 caliber barrel is lighter (presumably because more metal is removed from the bore). That convinced me to go with 54 because I'd be carrying the rifle around in the woods.
You can see my post about my shooting below... I built an Isaac Haines kit and when I shoot off bags, I just get the butt properly seated in the joint of my shoulder and I don't even put my front hand on the stock. It kicks and you can feel it but without a scope, you have no worry of hitting yourself in the eye. When I did shoot it once, I had my face pretty buried in the cheek rest and it kind of knocked me a bit in the face but wasn't so bad.
I shoot a lot of sporting clays with my 20 gauge and I honestly didn't find it much different.
-
Daryl makes a very good point...I agree that the traditional later period rifles were not comfortable to shoot with heavier loads in larger bore sizes.
The earlier American guns designs that followed even earlier German Designs were the best of the American's for handling recoil.
The flattish wide butts helps distribute recoil and the straight stock shapes also helped with less rise and move backwards movement.
The Christians Spring gun is heavier and the recoil is well distributed. The English Gentleman's is almost a Zephyr weight and will probably kick a little more. Fifty Four Caliber is a comfortable one, but will add some weight to either Chambers Kit. I am a big fan of the mid-century giuns because of intense interest in the F&IW, especially up in Lake George. The references to the hunters at Edward and William Henry imply heavy and clumsy but deadly accurate guns. The Rangers were apparently assigned patrol to escort these hunters periodically.
Go for it and good luck.
-
Is there a way to change the subject line?
-
Is there a way to change the subject line?
Go back to your first post. Look for the “modify” button. Change the title and save. It will not change the titles of subsequent posts however. As the original poster you also have the option of deleting the whole thing by deleting your first post.
-
Is there a way to change the subject line?
Go back to your first post. Look for the “modify” button. Change the title and save. It will not change the titles of subsequent posts however. As the original poster you also have the option of deleting the whole thing by deleting your first post.
Thank you. I should had asked previously when I discovered my Subject line wasn't clear.
-
Thanks for editing your Subject.
It makes searching much more effective when searching "titles only" and "titles only" searching works GREAT when folks use good (properly spelled) Subject lines.
...
-
Target loads would be 55-60 grains. Hunting load 70 grains. Recoil will be mild. If you feel the need run her up to 100 grains, punch your shoulde and slap your face. I've killed bear, deer and moose with 50 to 70 grains of bp. None of those animals complained that I didn't use enough powder!
Nit Wit
I agree. Find the sweet spot where it shoots accurately and put a ball where it counts. I see guys I hunt with in late flintlock season shooting 100 grains or more. If you go to where they shot it looks like someone dumped a pepper shaker all over the snow, not all that powder is burning up. So you have the weight of the ball and all the payload of powder going out too.