Hot loads ? Or Mild loads ? Accuracy

[Marcruger]

I never really thought of the term "Sweet Spot", but it is an apt description.  I was just told it was the point of best accuracy. Sweet Spot = Best Accuracy.

My teacher was an engineering professor who hauls 7 or 8 guns to Friendship each year for individual matches, and often returns with medals.  He is very good at the analysis and "whys" or loading and shooting muzzleloaders.  His advice has always proven sound in my testing.

Some points he shared:

A slow twist (roundball twist) may need more powder to get an accuracy load, but the "Sweet Spot" is wider in terms of powder charges.

A fast twist (bullet twist) will often have its "Sweet Spot" at a lower powder charge, but the "Sweet Spot" will be narrow.

Start with a charge equal to the ball diameter (40 grains in a .40 for example), and go up 5 grains at a time looking for the "Sweet Spot".  You will know that you are approaching the accuracy load when the sound changes from "boom" to "CRACK!"  That has proven true for me. 

My experience has been that I have never found an accurate load below the Sweet Spot. 

I have never found a Sweet Spot accuracy load below a mid-level charge.  All three .50s here shoot small groups at 50 yards with 70 to 75 grains of 2f.  Just worked out that way. 

Within the limits of my eyes and open sights, I don't think 75 grains of 2f in a .50 would have any trouble taking a black bear or deer.  I don't think it would be ethical for me to shoot much past 50 yards here in the SE.  Maybe there is another accurate load way up the ladder of charges somewhere, but why would I need it? 

Some barrels have a much wider Sweet Spot than others.  Green Mountain barrels are very prevalent at Friendship, and in my experience have a very wide Sweet Spot.  My Bergmann .50 Hawken is especially this way.  I have another .50 with a well-known maker's barrel that only has a very narrow Sweet Spot, and only then if I use wet lube.  You'd think it was a very fast twist bullet barrel (it is not), but it has the same Sweet Spot charge of 72 grains of 2f.

I do wonder what folks are using as patching that doesn't blow up with huge charges?   

In my brain, the only hunting load worth considering is the accuracy load.  This is for me personally.  I don't live out west where shots are long for a muzzleloader.  I think I owe it to an animal, and the accuracy gives me a confidence edge.  I did a lot of hunting on grey squirrels, often with an air rifle mostly due to noise.  There is no margin for error with an 800fps .177 pellet, so accuracy is essential.   

Just thinking out loud here and I am sure others have loads they use that work for them. 

I also realize what I think of as accuracy others may differ on.   I am always striving for shots touching at 50 yards.  I have run into folks who say, "I can hit a paper plate, good enough."

The photos below show groups I shot at 50 yards from Green Mountain barrels.  The top one is the first three-shot group from the Hawken after I bought it (yes I changed that rear sight).  The lower photo is a five-shot group from another rifle with a GM barrel.  The shot to low right is the first shot out of the barrel, the next four in one hole.  The first shot outlier may have been the monkey on the crank too.  The rifles may do better than these groups, but my eyes cannot see any better than that.  Yes I consider these "cheater" targets, and no I could not produce these groups on a squirrel in a tree with my current eyes.  Not enough contrast.   

God Bless and best wishes,   Marc
 

[Cosmo]

I load 65 gr 3F in my .54 (38" Rice barrel, .535 ball) and on my best day the holes will be touching and in the center of the target at 50-yards. Using that same load, the rounds drop ~ 4" at 100 yards. 75 gr of 3F brings the point of impact back up to center and the holes are still touching.

[Daryl]

Indeed, that rifle was my moose rifle for a number of years and it never failed to stagger a moose, I'm talking side stepping on impact. My work buddy Keith's rifle, a .75 English gun, just sacked 'em, no stagger & exits. Taylor also made that rifle.
That's the difference between my charge with a .682", 480gr. ball with 165gr. 2F and his of a .735", 600gr. ball with 185gr. of 2F. Bigger counts, however, mine is big enough, I guess.
The picture is of me shooting an ALR 200yard postal match, using a mere 140gr. of 2F, as I found the POI to "on" at 200yards, while the 165gr. load is now on at 200 meters (219yds). That load used to be spot on at 200yards. The powder appears to have changed some, in 20 years. I won that match, BTW.
We, Taylor and I use the loads that are the most accurate in our rifles with the ball and patch we are using. We don't pick a arbitrary load and call that THE load for that rifle. We actually bench-test the rifle to find the BEST load for it.
Lighter charges do give adequate accuracy at close range.  That's a fact. If that is all you shoot, so be it, use the light charge as it is suitable to your 'play style'.  When I am shooting long range, I use the .69 as I know the loads for it, for shooting those ranges. My sights are set for 50 and 100yards with the light 85gr. charge, and the same sights are on at 100 and 150yards with the 140gr. charge. My sights thus, with the heavy load, are 100, 150 and 200yards, or 100, 150 and 200 meters with the 165gr. charge, which I don't use any more, but, I do have a powder measure, brass tube with wooden plug, that holds 140gr. of 2F GOEX. That was my new hunting charge, with GOEX. Now that I can't get GOEX any more, the experimentation starts anew.

[hanshi]

While I mostly use only one load in rifles there are a couple that have a "normal" load and a light load.  In truth I've found that in most of mine a good range of powder charges are very accurate anywhere along that line.

I shoot 60 grains in my .54 and anywhere from 60 to 75 grains in .45, .50, .54 and .62.  But my .50 is one that has two loads, 70 grns at the top and 30 grns for small game.  But I've always preferred a small rifle for small game.  This covers the .32 & .36 with 20 grns to 30 grns for accurate, shortrange shots.  Seventy grains of 3F is the standard load for the .45 and .50.  For the .62 it's 60 grns for the light load and 70 or 75 grns for deer. 

[Bob Roller]

Bill Large's 54 and some 58 caliber barrels like a heavy load.My 54 liked 125 grains of DuPont 3fg and a tight .535 soft lead vakk.
The 58 was a light hunting rifle with a 1 in 44 twist and accuracy at 100 yards was fine with a 575 soft lead ball and 65 grains if the same DUPont 3fg.The 54 had a 1in60  twist that accomodated the 125 grain loads.
  The old guns I have examined with the original measures did NOT show any extreme loads,I think it was Herb that mentioned a measure for perhaps the Bridger Hawken that held 50 grains when level full.Also doubt if a ball that was tight when patched was used..
   Here is another odd comparison.In the late 1960's,Tom Dawson guilt a very close replica of a J&S Hawken that was marked Hoffman&Campbell.t was a .50 caliber  like the antique with a Bill Large barrel. Tests using a chronograph and weighed powder charges
showed the antique barrel gave higher velocities than Bill's new one.Ball for each from the same mould,Has anyone else ever trued a test like this??.The chronogaph gave the advantage to the old barrel by a small margin.A bit of trivia to think about and I will close with that.
Bob Roller

[Daryl]

When loading, the amount of pressure applied to the ball when seating on the powder, can result in a vel. of 100fps (my .40 and .45 bls.) increased over a load merely pressed onto the powder.
When loading, I always place the hole in the short starter knob onto the rod resting on the ball & give the knob a smack with my palm. The same EVERY time. Not only does this give an increase in vel. but also a closer shot to shot velocity string variation, which usually gives a positive result to the accuracy of a given load.
I've been using chronographs since 1977 and these are results I have seen.
The smoother a barrel is (or the slipperier the lube), the higher the velocity will be for a given load, as well.
Seems to me, the twist in the Large barrel Taylor used on my Hawken had a 60" RoT.
In thinking this over, for a while, it might have been 56" as Don Getz used to cut, I think.

[Pukka Bundook]

As someone said earlier, a  good patch is required for heavy loads.
My patching was an old Irish linen pillow case. couldn't see through it when held up to the sun. Good stuff.
I wonder how many heavy charges were dismissed for poor accuracy when it was a patch problem.
Not saying I believe in real heavy charges, but when I shot a .54 'hawken" type, I used 60 grs 2F for target, and a double charge for hunting.
at 100 yards, the double charge printed  nearly two inches higher, but just as good a group as the 60 grain.

When I shifted to a Mark Silver (Chambers) .58, I use the same 70 grain 2F charge for everything, but if I decided to ty it on elk, I would try a heavier charge and see how he liked it!

[Daryl]

As well Richard, there is a big difference in patch requirements between 3F and 2F I found with my .69, that even though I was using a 12 ounce denim patch with .682" RB's, I could not use more than 95gr. of 3F or the patches would burn.  I could, however, use up to 200gr. 2F without any patch burning. I surmise that this phenomenon occurred merely do to the speed
at which the pressure built up inside the bore.
Years later, when chronographing this .69 calibre rifle, I found that 2F actually gave higher velocity than the same charge in 3F. GOEX was the brand of powder used. THIS strange event
happened with charges right down to the GOEX "plinking" load of 85gr.
31" bl. length.

[Justin Urbantas]

I had a .62 rifle years back that I was working on a load for. I tried 120 gr ffg and it wasn't that great, and was ruining patches. I put a 20 ga card wad over the powder before I loaded the ball, and my groups were cut in half.

[Jeff Murray]

Regarding Daryl's "strange" events with 2F and a large caliber ball, it may be possible that the difference in burn characteristics produced that result.  For an equal volume, 3F has more surface area than 2f which allows it to burn faster.  The pressure curve for equal loads will show that 3F produces a higher pressure peak in less time than 2F.  The 2F will burn longer than 3F.  If you consider the amount of energy (aka gas expansion) it takes to move a large ball from a dead stop to1200-1500 fps, then the longer, slower burn is likely more efficient with very heavy, large caliber balls.  The faster, higher pressure burn of 3F would be more effective with smaller, lighter weight round balls.  This info and $6 will get you a cup of coffee at most any woohoo coffee joint.

[Daryl]

Well explained, Jeff. My point exactly as appeared to have happened in my rifle.

[Sharpsman]

I’ve never gotten good accuracy with sissy loads! I get great accuracy with 100 grains FF BP in .54 cal.!

[Jeff Murray]

Daryl, I have a sword.  If you have a spear, maybe we could team up on a hog to test your theory.   That way you would know if a solo hunt might be survivable.  Hunted hogs last winter with my best friend and his son.  The "kid" wanted to take a hog with his longknife.  He hesitated when he realized his cowboy boots were going to be submerged in mud while sneaking up on a hog sleeping in a wallow.  Got busted while hesitating.  Fun to watch though.

[HighUintas]

Where's that resident rocket scientist forum member when you need him? I bet Dave might have some good insight on the reason for Daryl's 2F vs 3f velocity anomaly. I agree it likely has something to do with ball size and burn efficiency, but also think barrel length is a key factor in the results of that ball size and powder grade combination. 

[Daryl]

If barrel length was decisive, one might presume the short 31" bl. might prefer 3F over the slower to peak, 2F.

[JHeath]

One testing method is the "ladder", where you shoot once with a heavy load, then reduce two grains or four grains or such for the next shot, then another two grains etc all the way down to a modest load. Assuming the heavy loads are higher velocity and print higher, you should find a cluster of holes at some point in a long vertical string of shots. Count downward from the top and you discover where the most consistent charge weight centers.

[smylee grouch]

I have never heard of that method before, but I have never had a modest load shoot as good as a full power load in my rifles.

[Daryl]

Same here, SmyleeG. The "best, most accurate" load has always been the best,  regardless of the range.

[JHeath]

I have never heard of that method before, but I have never had a modest load shoot as good as a full power load in my rifles.

"Full power" is relative with black powder. If you have a .54 and start with 120gr then ladder down to 80gr, you might find a cluster centered in the middle, or six grains above the middle, or the shots might be equally spaced from there up meaning 106gr to 120gr shoots about the same. It's just a method used to give a "graphic display" of the sweet spot.

[Dphariss]

The load in the Kibler was an error. I forgot I had glued a plug in the horn measure so it was 20 gr less than previously stated. And it shoots really well. But the trajectory is not what I want and for some reason it fouls in the breech. Just on front of the ball seat.  I need to find a faster load but its either been really windy or cold and snowing. I also need to try a different patch lube. Which is all set to go but the weather in a PITA.

[Dphariss]

As well Richard, there is a big difference in patch requirements between 3F and 2F I found with my .69, that even though I was using a 12 ounce denim patch with .682" RB's, I could not use more than 95gr. of 3F or the patches would burn.  I could, however, use up to 200gr. 2F without any patch burning. I surmise that this phenomenon occurred merely do to the speed
at which the pressure built up inside the bore.
Years later, when chronographing this .69 calibre rifle, I found that 2F actually gave higher velocity than the same charge in 3F. GOEX was the brand of powder used. THIS strange event
happened with charges right down to the GOEX "plinking" load of 85gr.
31" bl. length.

It could be the FF burning just a tad slower forms a “wad” during initial acceleration.
I ran my .67 caliber .662 ball (16 to the pound) to over 140 but found that above 140 the gain in velocity per grain of powder fell off. So I settled on 140. Its close to Forsythe’s stated load for his rifle which used a 15 to the pound ball. And he stated, as you likely know, that 137 1/2 gr of “Halls #2” would drive a hardened ball through an indian elephants head from side to side. He was using a shooter barrel than mine and percussion. 
MY question has always been. What granulation is that? I think its something akin to FFF based on the current European numbering system.