The sound of the shot.

[Paddlefoot]

Talking about shooting back in the 70s reminded me of how I was taught to work up a load. My mentor, Ray Taylor, used to say you could start by putting the ball in your hand and pouring powder over it to form a conical mound and that would generally be a fair starting load. Then after measuring that to see what you were starting with, you listened to the sound of the shot. If it was not a sharp crack, he described it as a "foom", you would increase by 5 grains until you got the crack sound. Then you were in the ballpark and could start fine tuning.
Any of this sound familiar to the veterans out there?

[Harnic]

I too have heard that "old wives tale" from several sources over the years.  Not sure if it has any validity, but I'm sure it's a safe place to start.  My rule of thumb for a starting load has often been the caliber x 1.5, eg: 50 cal times 1.5 = 75 grains.  It's always worked for me.

[ken]

I have heard of the same old tails and tried it with a known gun and load to my surprise it was very close . To think those old tmers knew what they were talking about

[hanshi]

The "crack" occurs when the ball exceeds the sound barrier - about 1100 fps depending on temp, altitude, etc.  That's not a good starting velocity for a ball under about .62 caliber.  I know my hearing is not sensitive enough to tell much about speed and I doubt most of us are are much different.  The weight = caliber is better, especially for .40 and up. 

[Roger Fisher]

A bit of a different take on "sound of the shot",   A punky sound at the shot indicates a possible squib load or short started ball or also a nipple or vent coming out.! It also gets the range officer's attention (at least ours)

[northmn]

Sometime measure the powder/ball/hand idea.  In a 50 it generally works out to about 50 grains or so whcih is a very popular target load.   There has been evidence that we tend to load heavier today than did GGGG grandad.  A ball used at or near the sound barrier is still rather potent.

DP

[Daryl]

Sometime measure the powder/ball/hand idea.  In a 50 it generally works out to about 50 grains or so whcih is a very popular target load.   There has been evidence that we tend to load heavier today than did GGGG grandad.  A ball used at or near the sound barrier is still rather potent.
DP

Granted a ball at the speed of sound, or even below will kill deer or even much larger game - within range - even the .44 cap and ball revolvers were popular for running buffalo (from horseback- point blank stuff) - how many today would go out to shoot buffalo with a .45RB let alone with 30 to 35gr. 3F. The Colt 1860 Army was one of the most popular for the sport - the H&A etc. .31 to .36 Pepperboxes and the M51 Navy Colt were found to be innadequate - imagine that - but the .44's and .45's were just fine & popular as were the dueling pistols. The .54cal. Martial Holster pistols were perfect for the job as long as metal wear and jarring didn't spill the priming from the pans. Side by side shotguns also had a following, as did Hall rifles and all manner of civilian guns. Few loaded heavy in those days, primarily only the Army.

What is actually accurate in a rifle is a far cry from what merely breaks the speed of sound - unless you are shooting an 18" twist in a .45 or 24" in a .50, maybe 30" in a .60- or only shooting at 25 yards where even a smoothbore with a single sight can shoot a 1" group.

 

[Paddlefoot]

I hear you Roger. I don't think Ray was talking about a squib or a bad load. More like what you hear in movies when they fire blanks....FaFoom. See they all think we can't make a proper touch hole so they give the public what they think is correct.

[roundball]

Never experimented with the "powder over ball in hand" thing.

But I've definitely experienced the accuracy improvement that can come with the incremental step which brings about the 'crack' sound...case in point this summer, working up a PRB deer load in my new .62cal smoothbore...stepping from 100grns Goex 2F to 110grns makes noticeable 'crack' sounds and tighter groups.

Tried 120grns 'just because' and got no further improvements, settled back to 110grns as an excellent, accurate deer load.

[Al Lapp]

theres also the one about shooting over snow. When you find unburned powder on the snow you have reached your maximum load. I think I tried it once, can't remember. I think I will stick to the loads most people on this forum are having success with.    Al

[SCLoyalist]

Keep in mind that the technique (i.e. listening for a 'crack' rather than a 'foom') was described as putting you in the ballpark where you could start fine-tuning,   and not how to know when you were done working up a load.

The acceptability of a load (or, how do you know you're done fine tuning the load) would depend on what you're going to do with it.   A load for target shooting paper targets is (or may be) different from the load you'd use hunting grizzly bears.  If the loads coincide, great, if not, you've got to make a tradeoff.

[Daryl]

Build a big bore rifle, and the target load is the same as the hunting load - paper, steel gongs, water buffalo, or elephant  -  your choice.

[omark]

Build a big bore rifle, and the target load is the same as the hunting load - paper, steel gongs, water buffalo, or elephant  -  your choice.

afraid ill have to disagree with ya, daryl.  i cant take shooting my hunting load repeatedly, just not man enough.         mark

[Daryl]

What I am saying with the big 'bore' rifles, is that the most accurate load for that rifle is also strong enough for the hunting load - for any game suitable for it's ball.  If one makes the decision to shoot a load of less accuracy, as I do for close range shooting to 50yards with the 14 bore, one must put up with that inferior accuracy. On our large gong targets, there is lots of room for error, the little pine squirrel in the hoop, being the anomaly - it's a toughie.

That gun is actually a good example.  It's light, close range load of 3 drams, ie: 82gr. 2F produces almost 1,200fps - speed of sound stuff.  It's accuracy at 50 yards is 2" and 4" at 100 shooting off bags.  It's accuracy load, also it's hunting load of 140gr. 2F, will put 5 consecutive shots under an inch at 50yards and 1" to 1 1/2" at 100 meters - again, single bag rest sitting at a bench & open sights. There are a lot of modern ctg. rifles out there won't do as well, even with a scope and handloads.  So - the best accuracy, ie; target accuracy, is what we find when we keep testing by adjusting charges and changing components, ie: patch thickness/weave/material, powder granulation sizes, 3F, 2F 1F or ball sizes - over bore size, bore size, .005" under, .010" under - perhaps even smaller for really deep grooves that require VERY thick material or leather to fill, like sail canvas or buck skin.  It's all in testing and not being satisfied with mediocre.

[northmn]

Accuracy is a very relative thing.  Most will accept a less accurate load for off hand than for a chunk gun.  Considering that chunk guns, X stick guns and bench guns are built too heavy for most to shoot offhand that is a given.  Also a trail gun may not be the same as a bullseye gun.  A big game hunting arm really only has to put the first shot or two into its target.  We are so set up on 5 shot groups that many miss the boat with the cold barrel issue, whcih is different than a tight 5 shot group with a slightly fouled barrel.  When I shot bulleyes I used to foul the barrel before the first shot and not thouroughly clean the gun until after the match.  My smooth rifle is contrary with the cold barrel issue.  Some rifles seem to want about 10% +or- to shoot cold.
Living with the inaccuracy is a necessity as very few weapons we use shoot into the same hole.  There is also the issue of shooter accuracy, which is often a matter of caliber as well.  I can shoot 50's on down better off hand than 50's on up.  I am convinced that there are thresholds of recoil taht can disconcert us.  Also one can concentrate a little better on the shot if not also mentally preparing for recoil.  Still I use a larger bore for hunting deer than needed.  My 25 squirrel rifle with round ball can be a real challenge for recoil

DP

[hanshi]

I'm pretty sure you'll never see unburned powder on the ground when the gun is fired.  Logic tells me if it doesn't burn in the bore, it will burn at the muzzle as a fireball.  As far as I know there's no experiment that's been done to prove this either way so I won't bet my life on it.  Still I see no way that powder wouldn't burn.

[Kermit]

Velocity. Mass. Energy.

My son-in-law bought a spring piston air rifle for his nephew for Christmas. The salesman hyped the high velocity characteristics of a particular gun, and he bought it. Dang thing's so loud the kid can't shoot it in his back yard because of the attention it draws. Noise is not always a blessing.

BTW, none of my target air guns even begin to approach the velocity of sound in air. They darn sure are more accurate than I am on my best day. My smaller caliber muzzleloaders tend to be the ones that crack. Not sure I want to feel the recoil of my .62 at the speed of sound.

I prefer to increase energy at the target, if it's game, with increased mass.