correction: want a new .54, but can't decide between Jim Chambers rifles

[Hungry Horse]

I didn’t see anybody ask about the rate of twist. That’s a very important question. The slower the twist the more powder it will take to stabilize the bullet, and the more recoil the gun will develop. A 1in66” would be my twist of choice, if recoil was a concern. Many .58’s are 1 in 72” which will take more powder to stabilize, and develop more felt recoil.

  Hungry Horse

[bob in the woods]

I have the Chamber's E. Marshall rifle in .62 cal   My bear and moose load is 120 gr FFg . Everything else, deer , target etc is 100 gr FFg.   This rifle is not unpleasant to shoot at all. The design of the butt plate and the stock are perfect for larger bores.  A .54 cal would be heavier and offer even less felt recoil. Get the rifle you like best of the two you mentioned, and you'll be fine. 

[Daryl]

About all ML barrels made today have good round ball twists. I have proven to my self, that a nice snug load in a .58 will shoot well from 48" twists
to 78" twists.  The 48" twist & 72" and 78" twist bl'd rifles were all military rifles.  The 66" twist was an inch and an eighth octagonal Hawken bl.
The 78" twist military bl. shot really well with 85gr. 2F, as did the two 48" twist mil. barrels. The 66" twist did not like less than 140gr. 2F, while the
72" twist military rifle preferred 120gr. 2F. This simply shows guns and barrels have their own rules.  There are general trends as Hungry-Horse and Bob
note. Usually the slower the twists, the more powder is required - but not always.  In my tests, the slowest twist I tested, shot best with the same powder
charge as the fastest twist.  It shot as well, with a LOT more powder, but that charging was not necessary.
How much powder you have to use depends on what you want from the rifle. In the days of testing those bls. I was interested in shooting 50yards for
sight adjustments, and 100yards for groups.
They all shot well at closer ranges - of course.

[OldMtnMan]

That's why I shoot game at 50yds. Even a blind man like me can put it center kill zone.

[Clark Badgett]

I'm with Daryl on this. I've never felt recoil in muxxleloaders until you get way up on charge on larger bores, even with pointy Hawken style butt plates.

[smylee grouch]

Every ones recoil tolerance and power requirements will vary. I like to shoot bigger balls fast just because IMHO I get a flatter trajectory which is good if you hunt open plains type country. Over the years I have built up some extra recoil tolerance by shooting bigger than average bore guns but that is decreasing now as I get on in years. I would guess this happens to most shooters. Just a fact of life so we deal with it best we can.

[Sharpsman]

IMO....blackpowder doesn't recoil.....it just pushes!!

[Daryl]

.69 with hunting load - 480-gr. round ball and 140gr. 2F.




.58 with a decent hunting load for deer/bear and moose. 285gr. round ball and 110gr. 2F. This rifle did not kick much at all with this load.

[varsity07840]

I owned an original Westley Richards 16 bore stalking rifle . It had a 10 groove tapered barrel that kept the weight at around 7 pounds. I consulted with Ross Seyfried who advised me that it was optimized for a relatively light charge of 70 grs. Off the bench, that rifle was brutal. Fortunately it didn't need much tweaking for a group or a zero. I never felt the recoil when shooting at a deer. My long winded point is recoil may be relative to what you want to do with the rifle.

[MuskratMike]

When I shot a .58 caliber full stocked "Hawken" rifle I did get pushed around quite a bit due to the horrible crescent butt those type of rifles used. Got smart and dumped it and now shoot a .54 caliber flintlock with a better designed butt. I can shoot it all day at the range or on monthly club shoots with absolutely no discomfort. Its all about stock geometry. Providing photos of what a proper rifle should look like if you want a comfortable shooting firearm.

[OldMtnMan]

I like the Hawken curved butt plates. It has a purpose. It helps hold up the heavy barrel but you have to shoulder it different than the straight butt plates. The gun should be shouldered across the body and not perpendicular like a modern gun. It should be between the shoulder and bicep.

When shouldered right it's very comfortable. I can shoot it all day with no discomfort.

[alacran]

I like shooting my .54 Hawken. Old Mtn Man is correct about how the crescent butt should be placed. My Hawken weighs 10.5 lbs, with the .54 barrel. Most shooting done with 60 grains of 2f. When hunting I use 110 grains of 2f.  Never notice recoil when shooting game.

[OldMtnMan]

I like shooting my .54 Hawken. Old Mtn Man is correct about how the crescent butt should be placed. My Hawken weighs 10.5 lbs, with the .54 barrel. Most shooting done with 60 grains of 2f. When hunting I use 110 grains of 2f.  Never notice recoil when shooting game.

We're pretty close with our loads. I use 60-70gr for fun shooting and i'm still working up a hunting load. I'm at 100gr of Goex 2F now and was thinking of 110gr.

I'm just hunting for bear now.

[MuskratMike]

I know how to hold a crescent butt rifle, have had several over the years and they are period correct for many rifles. However there is no comparison on comfort when you compare it to a slightly curved or "shotgun" butted rifle, and that is the concern of the person who posted this thread.

[OldMtnMan]

He also asked about a .54 and you told him about a .58 being horrible.

I don't know anyone who held a Hawken style gun correctly that complained about the recoil. Especially, with the weight they have that tames down the recoil.

The problem with straight butt plates is they don't offer any support for holding up heavy barrels.

Actually, with his edit, he's not worried about recoil. So, holding up the barrel might be more of a concern.

[MuskratMike]

The rifle I posted pictures of is a .54 as are most of my muzzleloaders. If the heavy crescent was such a good idea why did Christian Sharps put a very slightly curved butt on his big long range rifles with heavier barrels than the Hawken's or "plains" rifles? Just asking? Again he was asking about felt recoil on a .54 caliber. Just trying to help out a new member get off on the right foot, but I guess he will first have to decide what era of rifle he wants. We can probably all agree on that.

[rich pierce]

Recoil sensitivity varies a lot. Some folks are built differently and instinctively hold or have to hold a rifle differently to be comfortable and get a good sight picture.  “Works for me so it must work for you or you’re doing it wrong” may not always be true.

The best way for anyone to answer their questions about whether recoil is going to be a problem is to shoot a similar gun. If one belongs to a club this can often be arranged.

Also some “Hawken” buttplates are just wrong and not like what was on originals. Pitch matters a lot in felt recoil.

[WadePatton]

The rifle I posted pictures of is a .54 as are most of my muzzleloaders. If the heavy crescent was such a good idea why did Christian Sharps put a very slightly curved butt on his big long range rifles with heavier barrels than the Hawken's or "plains" rifles? Just asking? Again he was asking about felt recoil on a .54 caliber. Just trying to help out a new member get off on the right foot, but I guess he will first have to decide what era of rifle he wants. We can probably all agree on that.

Because long-range rifles aren't usually shot off-hand.  When you hunker down behind one, it's more difficult to manage a deep crescent.  But my 54 with a TN crescent is no big deal-at all when held properly.

[Darkhorse]

Both schools of thought are correct here as to deep crescent vs. flat butt plates. Before I started shooting longrifles I shot Hawken types with the deep crescent butt plate. Shot correctly as described by OldMountainMan the recoil is not bad at all, plus the deep crescent will help anchor the rifle for offhand shooting. The fault i find is that it's a little slower to get the rifle in that "just right position" than a flatter butt.
The flatter butt has even less recoil as long as correct form is maintained. And it is very quick to shoulder the rifle and get that "just right position". However it does a poor job of anchoring the rifle for a precise shot. Mine will tend to slip upwards a little from the weight of the barrel if I don't concentrate on how I anchor the rifle.
My favorite butt has a little crescent shape however I think just a little deeper would be better. But for now I want my rifles to have a butt like this one.

[WadePatton]

Hello.  I want to get a .54.  It will be a Jim Chambers flintlock. It going to be either a Christian spring's or English Gentleman's.  What I like to know, with loads being equal. Which has less felt recoil?

****************edit************************
sorry, I screwed up the subject of this thread. i have no problem with recoil. my problem is choosing between the two. i keep going back and forth.  I figure that felt recoil will be the deciding factoring.  that why i wanted your input.

emphasis added

I wondered why this thread was kicked back open and we're talking about recoil again.  It is because the title wasn't written to reflect the real issues of the OP and that no one re-reads the OP before replying.  Everyone is replying to the title.  The fellow was simply trying to choose between two kit guns from Mr. Chambers.

[OldMtnMan]

I pointed that out in my post.

[Ezra]

Perhaps the OP could simply calculate the surface area of each butt plate to determine which is larger.  Then compare weights of each gun.  From this, you at least have some data points instead of subjective opinions. 

Ez

[rich pierce]

Not a lick of difference. But we are just talking among ourselves.

[OldMtnMan]

True, Rich. The best answer it probably........buy the one you like the most.

[MuskratMike]

to Old-Mtn-Man:
Good answer most of us have varying tastes. If you choose the one you like best you will probably be very happy (especially if it is a fine Chambers rifle).