ram rod interference?

[curly]

Does any one have any information of whether or not a patched round ball leaving the muzzle is affected by the ram rod, or in this case the jag, sticking out beyond the muzzel?

Curly

[hlary]

HAS NO EFFECT.....

[D. Taylor Sapergia]

I concur.

[t.caster]

Ramrod in it's groove-no effect.
Ramrod in barrel-

[smylee grouch]

I agree Tcaster, I've done the ramrod in the barrel thing and it was almost spiritual. Ouch!   

[Dphariss]

Test the rifle.
Some shoot better without the rod mounted on the gun, no matter its length.
More likely with 1/2 stocks than FS guns.
But its worth testing.

Dan

[heinz]

I note you asked about the ramrod sticking out beyond the barrel . Maybe like width a long cleaning jag attached to  normally flush rod tip?
I have never tested that but always avoided it   Mounting the bayonet on the M1 throws the impact off and widens the group.  That I do know from experience

[hlary]

I think a bayonet is slightly larger than most jags?

[heinz]

Brilliant observation.  Perhaps you can tell us how much smaller than a bayonet an object near the muzzle needs to be so it does not have an effect?
My point was I never tried shooting a muzzle loader with a jag protrusion versus without and that there is reason to suspect there might be an effect. But your scientific observation suggests it is not necessary

[hanshi]

Unless the rr tip is in line with the bore it doesn't matter.

[bgf]

I've shot a few woodswalks with a jag attached to the RR, sticking out beyond the muzzle (but below it), mainly because the length it added gave me more to grip.  I couldn't tell any difference, but it would be the type of thing that might only show up off the bench on a target.  It made me nervous (just sticking out there, asking to hang on something), so I usually shoot without the jag on the RR, anyway.  If your RR hole is short, however, and you don't have any choice, I'm pretty sure it will not RUIN accuracy, at least for woodswalk type shooting.  I've never thought about shooting without a ramrod in the pipes.  It might indeed be worth trying, just to see what happens.

One other note.  Some NMLRA matches require a ramrod or something that looks like a ramrod.  I don't know if the simple provision for a ramrod would suffice, although I can't see shooting the rifle with the ramrod absent would be an issue.

[heinz]

When a rifle fire a tremendous high velocity column of air is pushed out of the muzzle ahead of the bullet. The effect of deflecting that column of air by an object near the muzzle cannot be assumed to be nothing. I know it is not with a 30-06 and a bayonet. I have always avoided it on muzzle loaders for that reason. I would assume the load should be checked for the actual effect.
Has anyone actually tried it?  Or do you just know there is no problem?

[Habu]

From what I've seen, it tends to deflect the ball upwards.  I had a ramrod that would sometimes get stuck in the rifle, so I'd leave the (plain wood) end of the ramrod sticking out past the muzzle a couple inches--what could it hurt, right?   

I'd have to dig out my notes, but as I recall it moved the center of the group about 2-3" up and slightly left at 100 yards.   

I've never tried it on another rifle, figuring I'd learned my lesson. 

[heinz]

Thanks Habu

[bgf]

From what I've seen, it tends to deflect the ball upwards.  I had a ramrod that would sometimes get stuck in the rifle, so I'd leave the (plain wood) end of the ramrod sticking out past the muzzle a couple inches--what could it hurt, right?   

I'd have to dig out my notes, but as I recall it moved the center of the group about 2-3" up and slightly left at 100 yards.   

I've never tried it on another rifle, figuring I'd learned my lesson. 

Sounds like the beginning of a new product line -- a harmonic tuning system for MLers!  I imagine you could fine tune the group center by turning a slighly crooked ramrod, and elevation by amount of ramrod extension . 

Seriously, deflection UP does make sense as the pressure wave exiting the muzzle bounces off the end of the rod (or jag) and pushes the ball up a little.  I couldn't see the difference on a woodswalk (shooting offhand and where targets aren't that far away most of the time), but 100 yards is a lot more telling. Comparing the PRB to a .30-06, I would expect the ball's accuracy (group size) would be somewhat less degraded by the deflection than a long bullet that depends on spin to stabilize it -- any change in its attitude could cause precession.

[Dogshirt]

In Hanson's book on Plains Rifles he mentions examining double guns withthe muzzles
cut or filed at a slight angle from the outside of the muzzle in (side to side) and speculated
it was to counter the tendency to cross fire when loaded with RB. He thought about finding
one he could experiment with, but I've never seen anything further about it.

[hlary]

Brilliant observation.  Perhaps you can tell us how much smaller than a bayonet an object near the muzzle needs to be so it does not have an effect?
My point was I never tried shooting a muzzle loader with a jag protrusion versus without and that there is reason to suspect there might be an effect. But your scientific observation suggests it is not necessary

Thank you Mr Heinz, I can tell you are a very perceptive individual. To answer your question, I’d have to say…………..about the size of a jag. My point is that I HAVE shot both ways and can find from my own observation, no negligible effect. Although I personally  wouldn’t consider my observation “scientific”, it is however from actual experience. From the bench to the woods, I have never deduced a misplaced shot to be the result of the jag. There are a great number of variables that can affect the impact of a ball, the least of which I’d think would be the slight protrusion of the jag well below the bore line.  For clarity, all that I just mentioned pertains only to the rifles I hunt with. My dedicated chunk gun is another matter entirely.

[Habu]

In Hanson's book on Plains Rifles he mentions examining double guns withthe muzzles
cut or filed at a slight angle from the outside of the muzzle in (side to side) and speculated
it was to counter the tendency to cross fire when loaded with RB. He thought about finding
one he could experiment with, but I've never seen anything further about it.

I don't recall Hanson mentioning it, but I do know Baird did discuss that theory in Fifteen Years in the Hawken Lode.  Yes, filing the muzzles at an angle does (or can) counter the tendency for balls from a double to cross.  It takes some time to regulate the gun that way, but it works well most of the time.  Basically, it is nothing more than deliberately creating an out-of-round crown on the barrel. 

[George Sutton]

I believe that the jag sticking out beyond the muzzle does effect the flight of the ball depending on how close it parallels the bottom of the bore. If it is not too close to the bottom of the bore it has no effect.

I agree with HABU it deflects the ball upward.

Centershot

[greybeard]

Well Curly;   Looks like enough pro & con to get a body really confused.
On this particular subject I have no opinion.   Bob

[Dogshirt]

I would give it a definite MAYBE!

[hanshi]

Well, I can say with absolute certainty that it may or may not make a difference.