double balls in rifle

[bob in the woods]

I just read through some of the hunting stories from Flintriflesmith"s site. Mention is made of shooting a deer with a .50 cal rifle with 2 .490 balls. Has anyone else used a double ball for hunting? Would you patch them both, or only the last one down the barrel?  Comments?

[SCLoyalist]

In general, don't do it.   Sam Fadala's Black Powder Handbook shows a photo of 2 balls being fired from a single barrel.  The ball that was next to the powder is deformed where it banged up against the other ball (looks like a reversed capital 'D') and the ball leaving the barrel first has a flattened base.   Accuracy is very questionable in that situation.    If you want to make multiple holes in a deer, use a shotgun.

Also, if those balls, carried afield, ever got separated, creating an air gap, there would be a significant possibility of a ringed barrel.

SCL

[Scott Semmel]

Why would you put two balls in a rifle for hunting? Seems all you would get would be more recoil and poor accuacy. In roundball hunting shot placement is critical, having a second ball doesn't seem prudent to me.
Something makes me think I have seen high speed photos of two roundballs leaving the muzzle of a rifle with both balls having a flat side where they touched, but then my memory is not all that reliable.

[longcruise]

Bob, I experimentd with double balls quite a bit back in the late '70's.  As far as safety goes, the only real issue is making certain that the second ball is seated up against the first.  I have heard warnings of the second ball compressing air in between balls and then being forced out after seating.  Never happened to me and don't think it would be an issue.   The compressed air is going to gradually leak away.  Our patched balls do not seal all that well!  If compressed air is going to force a ball back up the barrel it is going to happen immediately upon seating it and you are going to be able to feel the difficultiy of seating the ball as well.

My double ball loads printed one above the other about 4 inches apart at 50 yards.  They printed low compared to a single ball POI.


I patched both balls.  Never used it for hunting but did use it in a stake shoot once.  The extra time needed to load seemed to offset any advantage of two balls at once on the stake.

[doug]

     much like Longcruise, I experimented briefly with double balls.  Patched both balls (separately) and held the second one in place until the air between had leaked out so that one ball was on top of the second.  I also found the two balls  (.54 cal and roughly 50 gr of 3F) printed about 2 - 4" apart and as I recall about 4 - 6" low at 50 yards.  Can't remember why I tried it unless it had to do with reports of mountain men or similar double balling their guns.
     Biggiest problem would be making accurate shots with the added drop.

cheers Doug

[Dphariss]

I just read through some of the hunting stories from Flintriflesmith"s site. Mention is made of shooting a deer with a .50 cal rifle with 2 .490 balls. Has anyone else used a double ball for hunting? Would you patch them both, or only the last one down the barrel?  Comments?

Since a single ball will shoot through deer side ways to 140 yards of perhaps even 200 there is little point inb double balling. All it will do is reduce accuracy and increase recoil. If shooting something large hairy and dangerous at 20 yards the extra ball might be an aid. Other wise forget it.
If you need more power you need a bigger bore.

Dan

[Longknife]

In  Illinois only a "single projectile" can be used for hunting deer---check your laws!!!! Ed

[Daryl]

I'd stick with 1 ball and learn to hit with it.  Trusting to 'dodges' is never a good idea and the possibility of having the top ball move up off the bottom one is real and potentially a disaster. When a barrel goes, it is extremely violent with metal flying in any direction - taking off your hand or someone elses.  the potential for trouble outweighs any perceived benefit.  Double balling reduces velocity by a lot, increases trajectory dramatically as well as increasing recoil - there are no plusses I can see.

[hanshi]

I've never seen any reason or advantage to double balling.  That being the case, I've never tried it.  I honestly can't see why anyone would want to take such a load into the woods.  One shot, one hit; that's a good motto for a muzzleloader shooter as far as I'm concerned.

[Leatherbelly]

 I've only done it by accident,that's one charge,two patched balls. Also, have stacked a double load by accident. Both were BIG in the recoil department. Distractions while loading,too much chatter,LOL!

[J.D.]

Those maxi-hunters & maxi-balls have been used by deer hunters for decades...

Ah, yes, but a single round balls have been in use by deer hunters for centuries.   

[Daryl]

You are right- two small balls weigh very little.   Of course I was thinking in terms of my own hunting rifle - two balls for it would weigh 968grains.

[bob in the woods]

Just to be clear, I don't plan on double balling. I just was interested after reading the account; although that story being related was some time ago. Back in the "early" days. I had never heard of it before.
Personally, if a .50 isn't enough, I use my .54  or .62 or a 10 bore NE fowler!  
What is interesting is that I saw a mold a while ago that cast what looked like two balls ,but fuzed together.
Almost like a modern double ball mold, but with the cut outs touching, or slightly overlapping.
There isn't much we can think of that hasn't been tried before, I'll bet.

[bs2]

I have never tried it, but remember it is where the term LOADED for BEAR came from.
When the eastern folks moved west, they felt underpowered with there smaller calibers, when confronting the big bears........or something like that!

No-BS

AND.........................I am already shooting  a 550 grain round ball, you don't need two......................my thoughts........ are..............if you need two balls, get a bigger gun! If it ain't over 400 grains, it's just buckshot!

[J.D.]

Those maxi-hunters & maxi-balls have been used by deer hunters for decades...

Ah, yes, but a single round balls have been in use by deer hunters for centuries.   

A completely different point of course...the conext was about recoil.

And the recoil of a single round ball is considerably less than the recoil of a maxi, of the same caliber. IMHO, the effectiveness of a single round ball, combined with less recoil negates the need for a maxie, saboted pistol bullet, et al.

God bless

[Dphariss]

There is a mould marked "Gumpf" in Whiskers book of Lancaster county.
It has 3 cavities, a RB, a pointed picket and a elongated bullet that is round on both ends.
The picket is hard enough to load, trying the patch the other thing I don't know about.
But its there just the same. The mould surely dates from the 1830s or later. I suspect the 40s-50s but?
Dan

[northmn]

There used to be references to "double charging" in the books which is likely that of using a load made up of 2 powder measures.  Some claim the early measures did not hold all that much powder.  However it may also have referred to double balled loads.  There were instances where they might have wanted something extra for up close agains something "big mean and Hairy" as Dan put it.  It would be easier to add another ball than unload a rifle and reload again with a heavier charge.  While it might make sense for up close shooting in my 40 for deer hunting, I find the 54 more satisfactory.  I did see a double ball load used at a stake shoot and was in a position to see the chips fly.  It was impressive. 

DP

[G-Man]

One of the most famous references to a rifle loaded with two balls regards the famous Kentucky frontiersman, William Whitley, and the great Shawnee leader Tecumseh, at the Battle of the Thames/Moraviantown in 1813. Whitley reportedly made it known that he loaded his rifle with two balls - perhaps for the extra stopping power at close range as you guys have described.  At 64 and a veteran of dozens of battles with Native Americans, I would suspect it was something he had had been used to doing for a long time.   

William Whitley's rifle by Jacob Young is on display at his home in Crab Orchard, Kentucky, and has also been shown at the CLA.  It is a high 40's caliber (I think) with a heavy barrel, probably made around 1800-1810 in the Cumberland plateau area of Tennessee or possibly Kentucky.  It is the one with the wrist repair shown on Mel Hankla's website:

http://americanhistoricservices.com/html/jacob_young.html

It is pretty well documented to have been Whitley's. The family history indicates it was the one he carried when he marched off with Harrison, at age 64, to invade Canada in the War of 1812.  He was killled at the Battle of the Thames (Moraviantown) in 1813. 

There are many accounts of the battle - and you have to take into account that some of the accounts were colored by politics between supporters and opponents of Richard Mentor Johnston, who was Harrison's running mate in the 1840 election, and who was an officer at that battle as well.  But -  it is known that Whitley and the famous Shawnee leader Tecumseh were both fighting on the same part of the field, and both were killed. 

Whitley was killed in the Kentuckians' advance guard move forward which was done to draw the Indians out from cover and reveal their positions.  One seemingly credible account that was presented in the 1800s states that a rifleman named David King from Tennessee retrieved Whitley's rifle after Whitley fell (King had forgotten to load powder in his and was sort of desperate as the Indians were charging).  Whitley's rifle had not been fired yet - King told his officer about his predicament and the officer reportedly pointed to Whitley's body which was laying out in front of their line, and said something like, "Whitley has a fine rifle if you can get it" - so King crawled forward and retrieved it and the shot pouch just in time to fire at an Indian who was charging at their position.  The Indian fell.  They later inspected the body and found two wounds several inches apart on the chest/side, and this is believed by many to have been Tecumseh.

Guy

[Mike R]

I don't do it, but I also have read period accounts where it was done--especially in shooting bear up close--two holes being better than one?  Studies show that size of wound channel is a key factor in "stopping" game or humans --so maybe two wound channels = one large channel?

[J.D.]

I seem to remember reading an article about wound characteristics, that mentioned the effect of multiple wounds is compounded rather than doubled.  Though I don't remember the statistics, a double wound, for example might produce the effects of six or eight single wounds. the effects of double ball would certainly be bad juju for someone or something on the receiving end.

God bless

[northmn]

Supposidly fine shot is better than heavier shot in a shotgun as the effect of hits is "squared"  ie 2 hits is 4X more deadly than one.  Yes and no.  My experience supports the use of heavier shot as it penetrates deeper and breaks bones better.  Where this came from I do not know but it used to be preached pretty heavy by shotgun enthusiasts.  The writer Don Zutz never knew where it came from either.  To say that 2 40's are more effective than one 50 may depend on the critter and the need for a greater penetration.  Also 2 ball will be moving slower than one whcih also may make a difference.  Might be better for up close and tense, as in the example of Tecumseh, where an individual is coming at you with a tomahawk.  Bear over bait in Minnesota where the ranges are about 15-20 yards might be another place if one had a lighter caliber rifle.

DP

[J.D.]

I believe that you are right. The effects of multiple hits are the square of the number of hits. I don't remember the origin of this stat either. I seem to remember the data I saw was from a report in one of the peer reviewed journals. Don't remember which one, or where I read it.

I read too much, but have such a short memory that I don't often remember the details.

God bless