Author Topic: very light accuracy load  (Read 5588 times)

caliber45

  • Guest
very light accuracy load
« on: January 22, 2009, 03:11:15 AM »
OK, guys, I was so encouraged by the fact that nobody bad-mouthed my 5-gallon-bucket lead retrieval method, I'm going to send one for conserving powder -- but only if you'll all promise not to let Daryl see it. Reason: it involves a 21-inch barrel "carbine"; percussion; "make-believe" (Triple 7 - 3F) powder; and an unbelieveably light load. If Daryl sees it, I will hear his guffawing all the way from Canada to Tucson. I was sighting in (shoot, file; shoot, file; etc.) a new .40-cal. carbine with straight-wall GM barrel in .40 caliber. I start low and work up five grains at a time, usually with 35 grains to start. Had a new powder measure and misread it. (Mis)loaded 25 grains of Triple 7 3F behind a .395 home-cast ball of soft lead and a pillow ticking (usual fabric shop stuff with blue stripes), soaked with a copious amount of personal spit. Shooting at 25 yards for the sight-in, so I don't have to walk too far. I shoot three-shot groups for sighting-in. Went forward and found a cloverleaf of three holes, half-inch center-to-center. Went back to check the load and was stunned to see I had loaded only 25 grains. I was surprised -- and pleased! Went on up through 55 grains of the same combo, and got similar results with 50 grains, and starting to spread at 55. So, my conclusions: short barrels ain't necessarily inaccurate barrels, as I've said before on this forum.  If you're just punching paper and not trying to bring down a moose at 500 yards, try 25 grains in that .40-cal. GM barrel. It might fall six or seven inches out at 50 yards; didn't try that. But if you're trying to conserve (artificial) powder and you're paper-punching for fun, it's worth a try. I plan to use it any time I'm paper-punching with the .40 ("Ol' Rattler" since I managed to "extend" the ramrod channel out the side of the forend . . . *sigh*). The repair looks like a rattlesnake. 'S'all I got to say. Don't giggle Daryl; I'll hear you. Sound travels a good distance down here where it's 80 degrees in late January . . . Gad, I hate these winter sunburns . . . - paulallen

Offline Roger Fisher

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6805
Re: very light accuracy load
« Reply #1 on: January 22, 2009, 03:55:24 AM »
So, your hearing ol Daryl up there in his frozen 'toe' cabin already 'heh'!! :)

I can hear him already "Should cut the same hole at 25 yd rest 'without' a d      patch! ;D ::)

Let us know how she shoots at 50 yds etc. that tells the tale!  Hmmm maybe a different rifle for longer shots/shoots???  That'l work!

Daryl

  • Guest
Re: very light accuracy load
« Reply #2 on: January 22, 2009, 04:07:10 AM »
HAHAHAHAHEHEHEHE - Just kidding. Shorter barrels generally will allow less powder - that's a fact.  My 21" .50 Canoe Rifle did OK with 90gr. 3f, but failed dismally with 50gr.- go figure!  Of course, I was shooting at 50 yards. 

That little load of 25gr. might do just fine for shooting squirrels and rabbits in close, miserly on powder and all, but might not hold the bacon at 50 yards, just as Roger indicated.  It's time to test it.

That 1 1/8" hole (.525" on centres) we made with LB's 20 bore smoothie at 25 yards off the bench kinda renders close range groups as a non-event in my MOST humble opinion, of course- come to think of it, it's just my opinion, nothing humble about it. One other thing, I just finished testing my 16 bore Husky SxS with the straight rifled right hand tube - 1st 5 shots offhand at 28 yards (that's where the target stand was) went into 1 1/2" on centers. I was kinda tickled with that - with a light load, yet, (for me that is) 3 dram 3F with a .684" ball.

If it's fine with you, Caliber45, that little load is just great with me.
« Last Edit: January 23, 2009, 07:28:07 PM by Daryl »

Offline Curt J

  • member 2
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1521
Re: very light accuracy load
« Reply #3 on: January 22, 2009, 06:16:14 AM »
I used to win 25 yard matches at our local ML club with 20 grains of fffg in a .45 caliber Numrich barrel. It was deadly accurate and never required wiping between shots. I sometimes got some odd looks from other shooters, because the report was not the usual "crack" you get with heavier loads, but it still got the job done. I could up the charge to 30 grains and shoot 50 yard matches with no problem. The same gun required 75 grains to shoot accurately at 100 yards. I never made any sight adjustment, as it shot dead on at these different distances  simply by changing the powder charge.

northmn

  • Guest
Re: very light accuracy load
« Reply #4 on: January 22, 2009, 03:16:00 PM »
I used to use lighter charges up close.  It seemed to me though that flinters shot a little cleaner and kept the touch hole cleaner with a little heavier charge, like about 40-45 grains in a 45.  No reason and could have been one of those idiosyncrasies we pick up when shooting.  I use a 45 ACP case as a powder measure for my 40 which is somewhere around 30 grains and it works on squirrels.

DP

BrownBear

  • Guest
Re: very light accuracy load
« Reply #5 on: January 22, 2009, 08:21:00 PM »
Light loads really shoot in my experience.  I'm currently using 20 grains of Goex 3f or Pyrodex P in both 32 and 36 caliber cappers for showshoe hare, and thinking about dropping it to 15 grains for a little less meat destruction when I err on a shot.  Haven't tried 15 grains yet, but in both rifles 20 grains pretty consistently yields the same kind of cloverleafs you describe at 25 yards.  Try it at 50 yards.  You might be real surprised there, too.  In my rifles anyway, trajectory is just fine for head shooting out that far, and the accuracy is sustained.

BTW-  I'm also using Lyman GPR's in both 50 and 54 caliber for head shooting snowshoes.  In both calibers 35 grains of Goex 3f or Pyrodex P produce cloverleafs at 25 yards, too, along with suitable trajectory for small game shots out to 50 yards.  Admittedly the cloverleafs are bigger overall, but the light loads let you shoot your big bores in the field a long time after the big game season has closed.

northmn

  • Guest
Re: very light accuracy load
« Reply #6 on: January 22, 2009, 11:29:50 PM »
I think I probably shot about as many squirrels with a 45 as anything.  The 30 grain charge in the 40 really did not do any more damage than a 32.  Personally I think using the bigger bores with lighter charges is OK.  They seem a little drastic but they work.  About the only advantage of using a small bore is that of a light rifle and cheaper shooting.  Whether the smaller bore will pay for itself with cheaper ball and powder charge is doubtful if one looks at the cost of building one.  Shooting a squirrel in the head beyond 25 yards in the woods can be a bit of a challenge anyway.

DP

Daryl

  • Guest
Re: very light accuracy load
« Reply #7 on: January 23, 2009, 07:36:16 PM »
Hate to admit it, but yes- I've used light charges on snowshoe hares.  My .69 worked OK at close ranges with 30gr. 3f as did my hunting buddie's .75 - think he upped the charge to 40gr. though - neeedlessly powerful! ;D  Standing off to one side, you could see those big balls fly - then smash the bunnies little mellons when they hit with a crunch - most fun I had shooting hares.

 After she got tired, my little springer would try to ride on the tails of my missery slippers - go to take a step and find the back of the snowshoe anchored to the snow - dumped me a few times - all in fun. We were walking on top, but she sunk to her belly in the snow - she was great for pulling crips out of the willow snags. There was about 7' of snow on the ground with the bunnies running to hide down inside blowdowns and willows covered with snow - what fun - good friend - great dog - what memories!

northmn

  • Guest
Re: very light accuracy load
« Reply #8 on: January 23, 2009, 07:59:18 PM »
Speaking old memories I have had my dogs dump me in the same fashion on snowshoes.  I don't know if it is a downswing or the coyotes, but shooting a snowshoe hare in my area would feel like I had just eradicated the species.  I used to bone them and mix them with beef and beef buillion in a stew.  They never were what I called overly tasty.

DP

BrownBear

  • Guest
Re: very light accuracy load
« Reply #9 on: January 23, 2009, 10:30:48 PM »
They never were what I called overly tasty.

Makes me wonder two things.  Were you getting them late in the season when they'd been feeding a lot on conifers?  That makes them pretty strong here too.  Not a problem if you soak them overnight in salted water.  In fact we do it with them year round, no matter what they've been feeding on.

Soaking pales the meat a bit and the flavor isn't far off from thigh meat on a turkey.  A little browner than white meat, with a little more flavor to go with it.  I have friends who don't like domestic rabbit or white meat on chickes or turkey either, but they love snowshoes and thigh meat on chickens and turkeys.    Makes me think snowshoe hare is just a preference thing from one person to the next.  We use it in almost any meat dish you can name.
« Last Edit: January 23, 2009, 10:31:14 PM by BrownBear »

Daryl

  • Guest
Re: very light accuracy load
« Reply #10 on: January 24, 2009, 01:56:37 AM »
Taylor used to make up a sweet and sour bunny stew (snowshoe hares) with about 35 to 40 of our ML dispatched bunnies, bones and all (no guts or pieces of heads  :D).  He used a pot similar to a good sized cauldron for this stew and this was one of the game meat presentations for the Wild Game banquet at the gun club.  His stew was the first thing to be cleaned up at that dinner - long before any other plates were empty, people would be up scraping the gravy out of the pot with chunks of home made bread - such is a feast. Bunch a animals - hey - I resemble that remark!
« Last Edit: January 24, 2009, 01:57:01 AM by Daryl »