1 in 48????

[Lead ball 54]

Hello all I'm getting back into smoke poles I used to go to the shoots with my dad then got my own they have all ways been TC Renagades and some inlines sprinkled in but I got rid of those didn't seem to fit I couldn't see a difference in accuracy between the 1 in 48 and the 1 in 28 but I hear that the slower twist can't shoot the heavier conical bullet why do they say that when I have all ways had really good results with the 1 in 48 thanks

[OldMtnMan]

Not sure who says that, but I wouldn't listen to them. 1-48 is fine for a PRB and a heavy conical.

It was the twist of the original Hawken Bros rifle.

[Mauser06]

There's no absolutes.

But the general rule is the slower the twist the shorter the projectile the rifling will properly stabilize.

Not set in stone. Experimentation and testing your actual gun will tell you what it likes.

[D. Taylor Sapergia]

Why don't you do a test yourself and report back here.  Take the slugs you would shoot out of one of your 1:28" twist rifles and shoot them in a deep groove 1:48" twist rifle...at 100 yards.  Then take round balls of pure lead, a patch of .020" thick cotton that are .005" to .010" smaller than the bore, a slobbery wet patch, and shoot another group, again at 100 yards.  You will answer your own question.

[Daryl]

Much depends on what one might call heavy per calibre bullet. 

What is "heavier" to some, might not be "heavier" to someone else.

48" has been a standard round ball twist from before 1800.

[OldMtnMan]

I don't believe the TC is a deep groove rifling. They shoot conicals well, and for some reason still shoot a PRB well too. I think if you got into really heavy powder loads the PRB would start to fail.

[Mike Brooks]

Much depends on what one might call heavy per calibre bullet. 

What is "heavier" to some, might not be "heavier" to someone else.

48" has been a standard round ball twist from before 1800.

Yep, I have found most antique American longrifles to be 1:48. Most all Germanic jeagers were 1 in the length of the barrel....which is pert near what was going on in American long rifles.

[Bigmon]

??  If most old originals were 1 turn in 48" or so and were mostly for round balls, then why are barrels made today in in 66", or there abouts?
I was under the impression that rb were slower twist and bullets faster twist.
Then I sort of learned that slow twist likes more powder and fast bitch less, no matter the projectile.
So again, when did all these slow twist barrels develop?

[OldMtnMan]

I only mentioned the Hawken and they had their reasons for that twist. I always assumed the long rifles had a slower twist.

[Lead ball 54]

I would test the two twist rates but as I said I got rid of the inlines and I am working on getting a smoke pole I have a few I'm looking at I missed a round ball twist Renagade on this site a few days ago my mistake

[OldMtnMan]

Yeah, the RB twist Renegade is rare. If you want a better copy of a Hawken and a RB twist get the Lyman Great Plains Rifle. Not authentic compared to good copies of the Hawken, but not bad for a production gun and they're accurate.

[Bob Roller]

Not sure who says that, but I wouldn't listen to them. 1-48 is fine for a PRB and a heavy conical.

It was the twist of the original Hawken Bros rifle.

The most accurate round ball barrel I ever owned was a 1-44 in 58 caliber.
The heavy conical hollow base bullets of the 58 caliber Civil War were fired
from a 1-72 with 3 grooves.
Bob Roller

[OldMtnMan]

Bob......Which just goes to show we don't know what will shoot good until we shoot it.

[hanshi]

I've offered this thought before but feel compelled, with all due respect, to offer it again.  The "thought" - maybe even a fact - is that for prb, there is too much importance put on the "rot".  The main consideration is groove depth with rot coming in second.  A fast twist will stabilize a prb if the grooves are deep enough; but there is a limit to the rot, obviously.  In general, conicals do not like deep grooves and work best in bores that have shallow grooves.  In shallow groove bores combined with faster rot, a prb will "skip" the rifling with anything other than powderpuff charges.  But conicals, on the other hand, can easily bump up to ride the shallow grooves for good accuracy.  For a prb to do well in barrels with shallow grooves, the prb needs to be rather tight, either by using a larger ball or perhaps a thicker patch.  This is just my observation over the decades; I am not, even remotely, an authority.

[Mike Brooks]

I believe the old timers were shooting much less powder than we do.

[Elnathan]

I believe the old timers were shooting much less powder than we do.

Hanger claimed that for ordinary purposes the American riflemen of his day used no more than the volume of a woman's thimble. In war, they would increase the amount of powder until the rifle began kicking, or a bit over half the weight of the ball.

Anybody know how big a woman's thimble was in 1780?

[OldMtnMan]

No idea about the thimble. They don't look very big. However, half the weight of the ball is a decent load and more than I use. It would be 115gr of powder for a .54. If that is 3F it will have a bit of poke

[Elnathan]

No idea about the thimble. They don't look very big. However, half the weight of the ball is a decent load and more than I use. It would be 115gr of powder for a .54. If that is 3F it will have a bit of poke

Probably 2F, maybe 1 1/2F or 1F. I think 3F would have been considered a pistol powder at the time. That is a different discussion, though.

Hanger also says the bores never got bigger than .51 or so, so the load he is thinking of is probably more like 90 grains of 2F in a .50.

Most of the 18th century thimble measurements I've found online give a height of approximately one inch.

[Bigmon]

I built a flintlock hunting rifle in 58 cal using a North South skirmish barrel.
It shoots .562PRB over 60 gr2F and will cut the same hole all day as well as I can see for range.
After what I read here it is sloooow twist.
It is a 40" +/- barrel three equal lands and grooves, pretty ahallow.
Shoots big old minie balls near as good

[Fubarracin]

i agree that it depends on what you consider heavy, iv not seen a 1 in 48 that will shoot my 600grain conicals that my 1 in 24s shoot. at the same time though i haven't tried it but i doubt my 1 in 14 would throw a round ball worth a darn, the 1 in 24s will throw them ok at 25 grains tho.

[Standing Bear]

I've offered this thought before but feel compelled, with all due respect, to offer it again.  The "thought" - maybe even a fact - is that for prb, there is too much importance put on the "rot".  The main consideration is groove depth with rot coming in second.  A fast twist will stabilize a prb if the grooves are deep enough; but there is a limit to the rot, obviously.  In general, conicals do not like deep grooves and work best in bores that have shallow grooves.  In shallow groove bores combined with faster rot, a prb will "skip" the rifling with anything other than powderpuff charges.  But conicals, on the other hand, can easily bump up to ride the shallow grooves for good accuracy.  For a prb to do well in barrels with shallow grooves, the prb needs to be rather tight, either by using a larger ball or perhaps a thicker patch.  This is just my observation over the decades; I am not, even remotely, an authority.

My experience also, Hanshi.

[Longknife]

Hello all I'm getting back into smoke poles I used to go to the shoots with my dad then got my own they have all ways been TC Renagades and some inlines sprinkled in but I got rid of those didn't seem to fit I couldn't see a difference in accuracy between the 1 in 48 and the 1 in 28 but I hear that the slower twist can't shoot the heavier conical bullet why do they say that when I have all ways had really good results with the 1 in 48 thanks

Lead Ball, If you really want to get in to "traditional" smoke poles ditch the heavier conical bullet idea and go with a slow twist round ball barrel!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[WadePatton]

... half the weight of the ball is a decent load and more than I use. It would be 115gr of powder for a .54. If that is 3F it will have a bit of poke

I can vouch for that. I double charged once without knowing it.  Never having been recoil shy, it didn't register fully at the shot.  But then I found my heavy denim patch burned clean through, and thought,

"Oh yeah my hand did go past my face rather quickly on that one, maybe there was some extra kick".

Then I dug out my charger and found that two brass measures had "joined" in my pocket and that'd I'd dropped about 120 FF down the pipe. Don't load distracted. 

[OldMtnMan]

... half the weight of the ball is a decent load and more than I use. It would be 115gr of powder for a .54. If that is 3F it will have a bit of poke

I can vouch for that. I double charged once without knowing it.  Never having been recoil shy, it didn't register fully at the shot.  But then I found my heavy denim patch burned clean through, and thought,

"Oh yeah my hand did go past my face rather quickly on that one, maybe there was some extra kick".

Then I dug out my charger and found that two brass measures had "joined" in my pocket and that'd I'd dropped about 120 FF down the pipe. Don't load distracted. 

Wade.......I don't understand the heavy loads. I use 80gr with a .54 PRB for elk. My max distance is 75yds because of vision with open sights, not from the load. I suppose if you're hunting for bison or moose a bit more might be good, but most guys are hunting for deer that use the heavy loads.

 My thought is I want penetration to go through both lungs, but still want expansion. What I don't want is too much expansion happening to quick. That would prevent penetration. I feel the 80gr is just about right for that, so that's what I use. It would be less for deer.

 Some guys use a lot of powder so it shoots flatter. The problem is it will over-expand. Terminal performance is more important than a flat shooting load. Learn hold over and you don't need a flat shooting load. Flat shooting is good for target shooting. Not so good for hunting.

 This is not pointed at you Wade, but more a general post to anybody who will listen. Heavy loads cost more, have more fouling, more recoil, and aren't needed. $#*!, your gun will even last longer.

[Lead ball 54]

So if I go round ball only then I think maybe I need to be 54 cal and above cause it will be used for Elk and Moose if I ever draw a tag does anyone have experience hunting Elk with a round ball or would a 50 cal be okay