fine tuning your loads

[westerner]

My current 100 yard target load is 30 grains of powder by volume. 160 grain bore diameter bullet.  A CCI magnum cap.

Okay, I'm a weenee.  


                   Joe.

[D. Bowman]

Please understand I am not suggesting that anyone should shoot these huge charges.. I do find through time at the shooting bench that my best accuracy is found at what some concider a hot load.
70gr -in .45 cal
90gr-in .50 cal
100gr-in.54cal
I am not seeing any evidence of unburnt powder in any of these loads.
I can see a large blue tarp in my future to prove or disprove this powder thing.

[Glenn]

That's the same load I use in my .45; 70 grains of FFFg on a PRB with a .15 patch.  Right on at 75-100 yards.   

[zimmerstutzen]

And you wouldn't see any evidence of unburned powder, you are shooting loads just on the high side of moderate. Your 50 cal target load is within a few grains of the results calculated by the much despised Davenport formula.  

To see if you reached the point that significant powder is still burning after the ball exits the muzzle, you would have to exceed the 130-140 grains in your 42 inch 50 cal barrel.  But I guarantee if you were to stuff that kind of load in that traditions gun with the stubby little 50 cal 21 inch barrel, the results would be all over that tarp.  (And with that muzzle flash,you could light up the night sky with an after dark shot)  With that short stubby barrel, you would reach the point of diminshing returns between 80 and 90 grains of 2fg.  Anything exceeding that will just increase the powder spewed into muzzle flash.  Oh a small portion of it burns before the ball exists the muzzle, but not much.  I can understand that much of the powder spewed out after the ball exits the muzzle, burns in a flash, sort of like the clouds of dust that can explode at flour mills and grain silos.  (Brings back memories of the flour powered flame thrower we built in college.)  the question that many debate is whether any of those powder grains can fall to the ground unburned.

[zimmerstutzen]

gra   In my light bench gun, 45 caliber, my load is 75 grains of 3fg for a 42 inch barrel.   I think you will find that most rifle target competitors use loads between 60 and 80 in their 45's.  It depends alot on twist and barrel length. 

[roundball]

"...have found increases with velocity with increases in powder charges..."
 

Dave, that's the bottom line...Boone, et al, were lucky...they didn't have to put up with all the formulas propagated by armchair theorists.  This all started over on the MLF and after the membership in general rejected it and threads were routinely locked, I see it's now rearing it's ugly head over here.

As the ALR membership also knows, one of the attractions to Traditional Muzzleloading is it's simplicity with time honored proven results of total reliability...if you want a PRB to go faster, simply add more powder...it is not rocket science...deer / turkey fall from a Flintlock today just as efficiently and effectively as they did hundreds of years ago.

 

[zimmerstutzen]

Roundball, your armchair theories that velocity continues to increase with more powder is disproven by some of the tables in the Lyman Book.  Even for the figuress I posted above, the last additional 10 grains resulted in next to no incease.   after all 12 ft/sec is only a half of one percent velocity increase.

And roundball, if the other posters' target loads came so close to what that dreaded formula would calculate, doesn't that prove that it is more than arm chair?  They never heard of Davenport, but somehow magically, their target loads are coming in extremely close.  The coincidence alone strongly suggests that you are the arm chair theorist spouting views with no scientific or real life factual basis.    Yes muzzleloading can be very simplistic.  You can shoot targets quite well and never care about actual velocity, humidity, temperature or even care about rate of gravitational pull.   

Just like when shooting up hill or down hill, we can actually calculate how high the ball will fly as opposed to shooting on the level.  If there is a mathematical calculation for estimating the optimum target load, why do you get so bent out of shape about it.  It is a bit more scientific than shooting between the same grains as caliber for target and twice that for hunting.  It is no cure all unwaivering physical law.  Following it with an exceptionally large bore would be risky.    Why don't you run a test for us.  Load up your 54 caliber with 100 grains and shoot over your chronograph.  Then don't bother messing around, just shoot again adding 50 grain increments.  Let me know how much faster 400 grains is over 250 grains. After all according to you, velocity keeps increasing.  Just add more powder.   

[Daryl]

Gettin back into shootin, kind of quit in the mid 80s, thanks to the longbow.
When I quit with the smokers, I remember, that you didn't want alot of fire coming out of the end of your barrel. More fire, meant more powder being burned up outside of the barrel. In other words, wasting powder.
Now I'm reading about using 100-120 grains of powder for a 54 load.
I measured my old antler powder measurer, it would hold right at 75 grains, this was for my 54 Sharon.
So what I'm wonderin is why everybody is shooting those heavy powder charges?
Don't the same rules apply today, that we had back in the 80s?
The guns haven't gotten any newer. LOL
Jim

Back on track? - Not sure what you mean, Jim, about loads being low back then, ie: back in the 80's around here, guys shot 120gr. in their .54's for hunting and around 100gr. for plinking. Nowadays, perhaps due to powder costs, they might reduce that charge to 80 or 85gr. for target (targets are also generally closer).  yes- back in the 70's and 80's there were guys shooting, like you, 70gr. in .54's and even today, there are guys shooting 55gr. in a .54 - ie: Crispy (he's really cheap )  In the 80's, I had a .58 Hawken that had a Large barrel, which shot beautifully (2" at 100 yards) with 140gr. of more 2F and wouldn't stay in your hat at 100 yards with 100gr. It was a little rough, recoil wise and that's why I sold it- but I did test it up to 150gr. or more with 600gr. slugs before selling it.

Guys I shot with, did more shooting than typically done today and actually worked up loads for their rifles.  Those who did that, usually found charges in around the 100 to 120gr. shot the best. We rarely shot as close as 25 yards - spitting distance, we felt. Most shooting was beyond that.  25 yards was for ball splits and card cuts. Today, I can't see a card at that distance and need it a lot closer.

Over the years, I've seen an overall reduction in powder charges, not an increase.

Last fall, one of our guys asked me about the big sparks emitting from his smoothbore 20 and you could hear them landing on the wet leaves. His load was a mere 65gr. 2F & he was using a fairly snug load, lighter than what we use, though. He was questioning Taylor and I as we both use 85gr. in our 20 bore smoothies for plinking on the trail.  He had been told the sparks were burning powder outside the bore and any more powder was a waste of powder.  We told him his 42" 20 bore barrel was using all of his light powder charge and he should use even more for better accuracy at longer ranges. 

He still choses to use light loads - which is just fine - it's his choice.  He has never papered a gun, smooth or rifle, so has no idea what he should be using for best accuracy and doesn't really care - which is also fine - he's having fun & that is the whole idea, for many people. 

[Jim Curlee]

RB;
I never read anything about this on the MLF site.
This is a question I came up with, from reading other threads, on this forum.
The only thing I've ever read over there, is the classifieds!
I was curious why you guys, are using what to me seem like heavy loads, thats it.
I didn't mean to start an argument.
I'll just have to burn up some powder, and come up with my own conclusions.
One thing I do see with the data presented here, is that there will be a point of diminishing returns, and thats where I should stop pouring in more powder.

Thanks
Jim 

[zimmerstutzen]

Maybe part of the difference in charges comes from the purposes of shooting.  For hunting, most folks heavy up.  If somebody is just shooting tin cans off stumps, that is plinking.  Serious target shooters, who want to be able to hit a paper circle smaller than a soup can at 75 yards offhand all day, don't generally use heavy guns and don't want to beat themselves up with recoil.  Shooting 100 shots in a day, loading, breath control, holding, aiming, trying to maintain the utmost consistency, that's just not under the definition of plinking.     To me, 10 to 15 shots in an afternoon at an impromptu woodswalk is plinking.

I have an old disc blade hanging on a chain about 50 yds from the house.  For my daughter, hitting the disc is good.  For me repeatedly shooting through the 1.50 inch hole in the center is good.  She likes to hear the "ding"   I don't.  A ding means I missed the hole in the center. She likes to increase the powder to make it dance.  I keep the loads moderate to stay more accurate.  Different goals, methods and measures of success and it is all shooting with a muzzle loader.  

[Pete G.]

I am not seeing any evidence of unburnt powder in any of these loads.
I can see a large blue tarp in my future to prove or disprove this powder thing.

Why??? Just find a load that does what you need it to do and shoot it and shoot it a lot. Spend time at the range instead of figuring out how many angels can dance on the head of a pin and you will get a lot closer to the essense of the sport.

[Daryl]

I am not seeing any evidence of unburnt powder in any of these loads.
I can see a large blue tarp in my future to prove or disprove this powder thing.

Why??? Just find a load that does what you need it to do and shoot it and shoot it a lot. Spend time at the range instead of figuring out how many angels can dance on the head of a pin and you will get a lot closer to the essense of the sport.

Pete- exactly.

I use the powder charge that gives the best accuracy.  I can tell you right now, with a slippery oil patch, it is 65gr. 3F or 75gr. 2F in my .40, 75gr. 3F or 85gr. 2F in my .45.  My .32 seems to like 35gr. 3f regardless of spit or oil.

I use what works - I am not tied to squib loads as I shoot what is accurate, not what I think the gun might like. On any Sunday, we run 45 to 80 shots, sometimes more. It is a trail walk with steel targets and some novelty targets. Some, like the little bunny at over 100yards, requite an accurate load. Some use squib loads to save on powder. They don't hit the bunny very often.

My guns shoot very well indeed, without wiping, while the shooting is going on - whether it's 20 shots, 50 or 100 - the accuracy does not change as the interior of the bore does not change. The buildup in the breech does not seem to effect accuracy, according to the paper targets.

[zimmerstutzen]

Yes and in no case Daryl are you going more than twice the caliber in grains of charge.  You are staying with what many would call moderate loads.   Oddly enough, according to the Lyman tables for a 40 cal 43 inch barrel, you are also shooting loads that are under the point of diminishing returns.   Not sure what you mean by squib loads in that context.  It isn't like you are shooting those macho-magnum charges some brag about.

It isn't about denying what works, it is about how to arrive at what works.  If there is a direct way to estimate what works based on the work others have done, why reinvent the wheel.  Why spend hours shooting inaccurate combinations when you can get pretty close by spending 5 minutes looking at a ballistics table.

For many greybeards, just knowing the rifling, rate of twist, caliber and barrel length, will let them guesstimate a probable most accurate load, right off the top, and with uncanny accuracy.

Also as for the bunny at 100 yds.  Is it as small as a ten ring on a 100 yd paper target?  As small as the 8 ring?  Because there are folks who can keep them well inside the 8 ring., offhand.  That requires far more consistent accuracy.   I shot my share of 46's, 47's and 48's over the years.  It is a vastly different type of accuracy.  In a woodswalk you shoot varied unknown distances, maybe up hill and down.  Paper shooting is normally at a well defined level distance.  At a woodswalk, any hit anywhere on the tplate is a score.  But not so on the paper target.    A woodwalk is kind of a pass fail score and the paper is an A through f kind of score. 

[LynnC]

Zim
We all develope our most accurate loads at the range on paper and then we enjoy those accurate loads on a woods walk.  I really don't know what kind of a point your trying to make with your last comments.......

[D. Bowman]

Well said LynnC

[zimmerstutzen]

Lynn C, my point is that the accuracy is far different.    In a woodswalk a flatter trajectory gives a slight advantage even at the cost of opening the group slightly.  Loading is usually done from a pouch, meaning a horn to a measure.  I can get far more consistent loads with a powder can, drop valve and spout measure at a loading bench  than out of a horn standing in the woods.  Paper shooters don't worry about how much lower to hold because they are shooting up a steep hill.    And the distances don't vary beyond the standard 3 or 4.     You can pull a shot out of the ten and nine ring and still score a hit in a woods walk.  The reason many clubs here went to woodswalks is that it levels the playing field between great, good and fair shooters.  Hitting a 6 to 8 inch diameter circle at 110 yards only takes deer hunter accuracy.    Shooting a 47 out of 50 off hand at 100 yards requires better accuracy than hitting the 6 or 8 inch target at a woodswalk.   Last time I attended a woodswalk, a shooter scored at a target about 120 yds out, by hitting the ground in front and bouncing up into the sillywet.  Still counted.

And obtaining the best most pin point accuracy for a gun once doesn't necessarily mean it will stay that way.  Humitidy, heat, light contrast on sights, fouling, etc all make a difference.  What most shooters mean by  best, is "good enough."   for their purposes.  That is where bench shooters excell,   Because the object of their sport is to keep improving their best.   Same with paper shooters.   How does Lynn C know he has the most accurate load, unless he continues to try to improve on it.  I have been shooting the same barrel for over 30 years and I still aim to find a better result. 

[LynnC]

How does Lynn C Know..................

Because when he gets a new lot of powder (black) or new lot of patch material, he checks it at the bench and makes changes if need be.

Then he enjoys it.   

[ERH]

it sounds to me like he got his ass beat at the last woods walk he went to.

[chris laubach]

it sounds to me like he got his ass beat at the last woods walk he went to.

Who?? You?
Dam that wagon wheel!

[Daryl]

gentlemen

Zimm's got a point - there aren't many people like us, Lynn - who actually work up loads for their rifles. More common, is the shooter who burns less than 5 pounds of powder a year and shoots only a few times each year - usually at a rondy, or local shoot or informal get-to-gether. He picks a charge close to his calibre and shoots at 25 yards. When he shoots a good group right off the bat, he's finished testing- besides it took 2 hours to shoot 10 shots, wiping between shots as he was told you have to.

No Zimmer - my loads aren't excessive - but not many here shoot 85gr. 2f in a .45 - or 75g.r 3f for that matter. Too, not many shoot 75 of 2f or 65gr. 3F in a .40.  I know dang well, if they owned a .69, they'd probably not be shooting 140 to 165gr.either. I know a guy with a .54 smoothie who uses 55gr. in it and 75 in a 12 bore. My little 20 bore gets 82gr. for close targets and 100 for longer ones - not sure it's necesary, but I think it helps on the 100 yard targets - it flattens the trajectory a bit - that's eveident.  Again, not excessive, but more than many people shoot.

By squid loads, I am referring to a 45gr. charge in a .40 and 50gr. charge in a .45.  They are arbitrarily chosen charges most likely and never been paper tested past 25 yards, where just about everything including my choked 20 gauge fowler will put 5 shots into a rounded, 5 shot hole. I know guys who use 55gr. in a .54, and 55gr. in a .50 - along with one who uses 65gr. 2F in a .20 smoothie and wonders why his ball drops so much at 100yards - his gun goes fffooooomp when it goes off.  Those are squib loads.

Yep - the bunny's about the size of the 8 ring. A good shot can hit it every time - meet Taylor. Me?- maybe almost every time, but only if I'm using the .40, .58 DR or the .69 peeshooter. Since Taylor switched to neetsfoot oil and 68gr. 3F in his .40, he's about unbeatable on the trail now. My .40 turned in 2,250fps with 65gr. 3F and LHV.

I've only seen a few guys Ace our trail - 45 targets long. Come on up and try it out. Most complain it's the hardest trail in BC - I don't know, but I've never seen one more difficult.

And yes - paper punching, ie; getting wining scores on ringed targets is harder than hitting the 6 to 8" plates.  All our plates aren't 6" to 8". We've 2" gophers at 60 yards, 2" horizontal bar - it's only 43 yards away, got to be easy - some hit, many don't.  Card split - briquet must disintegrate completely, golf-balls, 2" X 2" pigs at 35 yards, 10" high fox at 92 yards - gotta be easy - looks like a coyote - amazing how many people miss with a rifle.  Full sized turkey at around 100 - and farm duck at 105 yards - all easy, but amazing how they can be missed.  Some rarely miss the long shots with a smoothbore, yet manage with a rifle.  

Getting a winning score on targets seems to be as difficult as it appears to get a winning score on plates, though.  The mixed up ranges can play on a person by the time he or she's fired 50 shots. It's more like shooting an aggregate of paper targets due to the volume of shooting.

Come on up, you can even shoot my most accurate rifle.
Some targets are challenging - the small angled log on the downrange left has about 6" of chain hanging down with an edge-on pig target  that's 3/8" wide - it's about 65yards down range  - chain is an inch - hit it and get a card punch -  close to a 10 ring, I guess. Taylor's never missed the dang plate, doesn't even shoot the chain.


Sometimes there's smoke for previous shots, just sitting in the still air - it's your turn - take your shot or take a miss.

[D. Bowman]

Daryl,
That woods walk sounds like a blast. wish BC wasn't so far.

[LynnC]

I had relatives in BC once upon a time (Chilliwak sp?) - all long passed now

I wish I could find the time to burn the powder y'all do - but I burn all I can as often as I can.

It seems I have to re-tame the flinch at the beginning of every outing before I can do any good

Need all the practice I can get............Hey, tomorrow IS Saturday.............Lynn