Author Topic: Source for teflon shooting patches  (Read 9460 times)

Offline Hungry Horse

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4187
Re: Source for teflon shooting patches
« Reply #25 on: November 29, 2013, 10:34:19 PM »
 Another lesson I learned back in the day is never assume its all the gun. I had a muzzleloader that had all the right parts in it, but wouldn't group the way it should. I tried everything imaginable to get it to shoot. One day at the range, one of the old timers, named Glen shot it.  He put three shots within an inch and a half of each other at a hundred yards. Glen then said, now you shoot it. So I did. He then said something odd. He said shoot it without setting the trigger. I did. I shot a group, that although was not as good as his, was much better than any of the previous groups.  He had been watching me very carefully as I shot. His conclusion was I was anticipating the set trigger, and correspondingly the recoil, and flinching the shot  off. By squeezing the single trigger, and concentrating, I had overcome the anticipation.  The gun now has a primitive trigger, and I shoot it quite well.

                      Hungry Horse

Offline gumboman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 254
    • Gumbocooking
Re: Source for teflon shooting patches
« Reply #26 on: November 30, 2013, 12:32:12 AM »
Good tip Hungry Horse. I have always been open to the idea that the problem is me. One of the reasons I have not named the barrel maker. Would not want to blame him unfairly.

On the other hand, I can take two of my guns to the range. This underhammer I am struggling with and one of my other guns. The underhammer is exasperatingly inaccurate and 5 minutes later my 58 Hawken groups beautifully. All from the same bench and rest and at the same target stand with me squeezing the trigger in the same fashion.

It is a conundrum.

Offline Dphariss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8592
  • Northern I Corps Kill a Commie for your Mommy
Re: Source for teflon shooting patches
« Reply #27 on: November 30, 2013, 04:57:21 AM »
Gumboman;

  I fear your barrel is too short to utilize the required powder charge needed to stabilize the ball. Most of these big charges, you are firing is going out on the ground.

                 Hungry Horse

This old wives tale is never going to die it seems.
The question would be: "Is the velocity increasing as the powder charge is increased? If so its burning the powder.
I would then point to the 1st Ed. of Lyman's BP loading manual. Note the charge weights for the PAINFULLY slow C&H basting powder grind powder they were using. 180 gr to 200 gr in 54 IIRC (not going to bother looking it up) and ti was still adding velocity.
I have shot 65 gr of FFF in a 32 caliber in a building over white sheets, no unburned powder. I submit that this is a longer powder charge in the barrel that 140 gr in a 62.

NOW with a wet shooting patch it IS possible to have some crud on the patch when its picked up and its possible that SOME contaminated powder grains might not burn.
There is always to possibility that this rifle in not properly constructed and the barrel is moving at the breech under recoil.
It could be with the heavy recoiling loads the shooting position is not EXACTLY the same each shot. All to common when its necessary get up, move around load the rifle etc.
The barrel may not shoot better than this.
The barrel may have a sweet spot that it needs to be rested at. I would try the front barrel key/pin location.
Not using a rear bag is a recipe for larger groups since it reduces stability.
Had the barrel been carefully slugged to assure its not tapered in the bore, tight at the breech and loose at the muzzle or tight-loose-tight as I found on a barrel a I waited over a year for? I would have been thrilled if this gas pipe had shot into 4" even once.
Once the the caliber/recoil level gets to a certain point it becomes a major factor in accuracy. The relatively long barrel time coupled with the heavy recoil impulse can cause pretty wild effects on the target.  While not a ML my 15 pound 32" barreled 45-100 Sharps (MV 1370) will throw a shot out several FEET at 500 yards if it recoils a little "off" from not having held the rifle quite right usually I can tell when the shot breaks it will be "off".
This is something people do not take into consideration when building a large bore rifle. Plus the typical Jeager FL and probably percussions as well might have rifling twists in the 17-32" range since "one turn in the barrel" was the common formula until at least the 1860s for European/English rifles over about 50 caliber anyway.
This means they would generally not allow a charge much greater, if as large, as a shotgun of similar bore. But when the twist is slowed the powder requirements may well go up significantly. Though I would expect a 20 bore (62) to shoot with 100-120gr of powder unless twisted very slow 96" or even slower. 72 is a very acceptable twist for this bore size.
Finally who made the scope? Look it over CAREFULLY in all respects. Old scopes often have problems loose screws for one and then...
Reproduction scopes made in China or with mounts made there are not all that reliable. I am going through this with a brass suppository gun with a Chinese reproduction scope but in this case I have little choice since the current price on the proper original scope is "high" IF one can be found and its needed to be "legal" for a class.

Dan
No, sir, I don't give 'em $#*!, I just tell the truth and they think it's $#*!. Harry S Truman

Offline Daryl

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7155
Re: Source for teflon shooting patches
« Reply #28 on: December 03, 2013, 03:12:58 AM »
My 66" twist GRRW barreled .69 gave nicely increased speeds, from 82gr. at 1,225 fps all the way to 200gr. 2Fwhere it managed 1,700fps. It's 'best load was 165gr.- that was with mid and late 1980's GOEX.

I accidentally charged it double- ie: using the 165gr. charger - helping a new BP shooter while I was loading, ie: 330gr. of 2F, with a single ball of 480gr.  That shot picked up up off the stool I was sitting on - and chronographed a whole 1,770fps - but still showed 70fps increase over the previously recorded 200gr. charge.

With today's GOEX 2F powder, I can match the regulation of my sights, using 140gr.  I do not know if the velocity is the same, ie: 1,550fps but seems to be from the impact.  Using 165gr. toady, gives me an impact 6" higher at 200yards than that load did previously.

140gr. is easier to shoot and is amazingly accurate in that rifle - as-is 165gr.

If heavier loads burn patches, you need thicker patches. A form of barrier-wadding might help, but I do not see it as being as accurate as a load that actually maintains it's integrity - no matter how much powder is used- merely an opinion.  My smaller bores lost accuracy if a barrier wad was used during experimentation, however the .69 was not effected at all when using a wad between powder and ball.

In it, I used a punched 14 bore card-board wad to separate the powder from the lubed patch when hunting. Upon ignition & gas building pressure, the wad must wrap around the rear of the ball, I'm sure, and thus, would not seal the powder gases from the patch. A softer or collapsible barrier, such as a cloth or paper barrier would continue to seal the gasses and flame behind the ball - IF the patching & wadding sealed to the bottom of the grooves.
Daryl

"a gun without hammers is like a spaniel without ears" King George V

Offline gumboman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 254
    • Gumbocooking
Re: Source for teflon shooting patches
« Reply #29 on: December 05, 2013, 02:48:34 PM »
Good stuff. Daryl. I just ordered and received some 19 gauge card wads to try. I did not think of the card wrapping around the ball. Now I can see that surely must happen.

Offline gumboman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 254
    • Gumbocooking
Re: Source for teflon shooting patches
« Reply #30 on: December 14, 2013, 08:27:50 PM »
Here is the latest on my 62 cal underhammer. Maybe this will help others.

A forum member was kind enough to send me a sample of teflon lubed patches in .018" and .020" thickness.

A recent trip to the range to try these out resulted in better groups and more important some consistency in groups. The teflon definitely produced smaller groups.

But I still got some flyers, out by 6-8 inches. It is exasperating, making me want to quit and give up on this very costly gun building project.

As a last effort, I tried something that Dutch Schultz advised a few months ago in an email to me. He recommended I start by using a 96 grn load. Also a forum member who sent me some teflon patches to try recommended I try lighter loads. At the time I did not accept this, as my project was intended to be a hunting weapon and I wanted at least 140 grn loads for accurate long range shooting. In my determination to make this gun shoot as I told the barrel maker I wanted, anything less than 135 grn load was not acceptable and I loaded at 135 grn as a minimum.

So in desperation I tried the lighter loads recommended. Lo and behold at 100 grns of 2f I got good and consistent groups at 100 yards using the teflon patches. At between 100 and 110 grns the gun gave me about 3.5" groups at 100 yards, using a .600" ball and .020" patch. At 125 yards she grouped at 6 inches. Up to that time at 125 yards I could not keep shots on the target face. A .610 ball with .018" patch was not quite as good but better than in the past.

So it appears my barrel is a pussy cat, only liking mild loads. I know this will take deer with no problem but it is not what i wanted. So this has been a lesson for me and maybe it can help others. My gun will not be the magnum muzzleloader I wanted but will be a capable weapon at short range I think.

I intend to continue refining the loads. Maybe I can get her up to120 grns with the teflon.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2013, 08:53:37 PM by gumboman »