Load Database

I have been pondering this idea for sometime about creating some sort of central location on information for people's loads with various muzzleloaders. While every gun is different and exploration should be used to find that load your gun likes best, I think a compilation of accurate loads could serve as a good starting point for some. I know some less serious shooters will dump a pretty heavy amount of powder down their barrel and take it out hunting.

When I started shooting a lot and developing a load, I did searches on forums and saw guys being successful in terms of accuracy with similar loads. Usually the powder would vary 5-15 grains but the .015 patch was common between posts.

What're your thoughts on compiling a database for accounts of successful loads? I think it could be a fun project and may show some "preferences" on the different variables for production guns over the years.

I think it's a great idea.

It's a good idea that would take a lot of work to compile in a usable format. Another problem would be that one man's definition of a successful load is different than another man's definition. I don't mean to throw cold water on the idea but I do see some difficulties.

Lyman did that with the 36, 40, 44, 45, 50, 54, 58 and 72 PRB, Minie Ball, and Conicals under a very controlled environment, with barrell lengths from 24" to 44". They also tested 31, 36, 44 and 45 CNB revolvers with prb and conicals. They even ran ballistics; ft/lbs & trajectory, out to 300 yards for rifles.

Only thing is it was quite some time back, and they only tested Goex and C&H powder.
But I think it gives a great starting point, I really enjoy my copy and browse it often.

One issue with Crowd Gathered Data is everyone has a different opinion of accuracy.
Our neighbor would buy a new deer rifle, hang a coke can on a limb at 50ish yards, and shoot offhand until he hit the can. He declared it fit to deer hunt out to 400 yards.

The Crisco Kid said:

It's a good idea that would take a lot of work to compile in a usable format. Another problem would be that one man's definition of a successful load is different than another man's definition. I don't mean to throw cold water on the idea but I do see some difficulties.

Click to expand...

Yes that is true and I did think about that. Some people would be happy with hits in a pie plate at 50 yards and others want to their shots to be touching. I think some type of result is warranted for any given load. Sometimes there is a picture of a target along with the load information so that is some type of confirmation on results.

Definitely a good point and something to consider.

As you point out no two barrels are exactly the same so I think you data base would turn into a book. I shot in competition so my idea of accuracy is different than many today. The rule of thumb back 45 plus years ago when I started was to start with a powder charge equal to the bore of the rifle and a ball slightly smaller with a .010 or ,015 patch. You then worked up or down changing different things one at a time to find the best group that you could repeatedly shoot. It doesn't matter if it is a target rifle or a hunting rifle For me accuracy is a one inch group at 50 yards. How many times do you see posts that someone is using X amount of powder with X patch and ball combo and they can't get it to group, Why could that possibly happen? I see people bragging about shooting an 8" group at 25 yards so now they are ready for hunting season. Too many today want instant gratification. Personally I love the time involved in sighting in a rifle.

There is more of what a gun likes for its accuracy besides loads. It could be it does not like the way it is being held, type of sights. I think there is more accurate firearms than there are shooters that can shoot them accurately.

A single topic on this forum could work if there is a basic adherence to nomenclature used in making entries individual posts. That way the topic could be adequately searchable for results without thumbing through it all once the entries became numerous to the point of being unwieldy.

Trimp said:

I have been pondering this idea for sometime about creating some sort of central location on information for people's loads with various muzzleloaders. While every gun is different and exploration should be used to find that load your gun likes best, I think a compilation of accurate loads could serve as a good starting point for some. I know some less serious shooters will dump a pretty heavy amount of powder down their barrel and take it out hunting.

When I started shooting a lot and developing a load, I did searches on forums and saw guys being successful in terms of accuracy with similar loads. Usually the powder would vary 5-15 grains but the .015 patch was common between posts.

What're your thoughts on compiling a database for accounts of successful loads? I think it could be a fun project and may show some "preferences" on the different variables for production guns over the years.

Click to expand...

Eterry said:

Lyman did that with the 36, 40, 44, 45, 50, 54, 58 and 72 PRB, Minie Ball, and Conicals under a very controlled environment, with barrell lengths from 24" to 44". They also tested 31, 36, 44 and 45 CNB revolvers with prb and conicals. They even ran ballistics; ft/lbs & trajectory, out to 300 yards for rifles.

Click to expand...

In addition to the often referenced Lyman book, maybe read The Gun Digest Black Powder Loading Manual by Sam Fadala published in the early 1990s. 120 different guns and 600 loads.

This can creep into the cartridge reloading mindset that does not travel the muzzle loading road very well. The idea that there is this ideal "pet load" that can be identified by making many many small changes is applicable at least to a degree with suppository guns doesn't really jive well with muzzle loaders.

I have two rifles that will shoot the same ball and patch with equal accuracy when powder charges are varied up and down the scale from light to heavy charges. Neither i nor the guns are extremely accurate but the key feature is they don't much care about powder charge. Not saying they stay on the same POI.

If you do it I'd be happy to kick data to you but don't want to wrestle it into a spreadsheet!

I have 3 50 cal rifles. Each one has a different load re ball diameter, patch thickness and powder charge. Stick to the Sam Fadala muzzle loading manuals for a pretty generic data set of loads and performance. Tracking all of our favorite loads would end up with a large data sheet and the observation that one needs to develope the specific load to get the desired performance from their rifle.

I maintain a database of load data for my own BP firearms in a spreadsheet. Make, model, caliber, ball, powder, patch, min load, max load, standard load.

Trimp said:

I think a compilation of accurate loads could serve as a good starting point for some. I know some less serious shooters will dump a pretty heavy amount of powder down their barrel and take it out hunting.

Click to expand...

That's a good idea...
If it can help at all:
I'm only a target shooter, so my charges are not heavy...
- Plain rifle Jukar, .45 cal, caplock, twist rate 1:66, 27'' : 36 grains of 3Fg (PNF1), round balls .440, patch cotton .013" --> 55 yards.
- Frontier (Blue Ridge) Pedersoli, flintlock, .45 cal, twist rate 1:48, 37" : 36 grains of 3Fg (PNF1), round balls .445, patch cotton .010" --> 55 yards.
- Pennsylvania Ardesa, flintlock, twist rate 1:66, 37" : 36 grains of 3Fg (PNF1), round balls .440, patch cotton .013" --> 55 yards.
- Hawken Investarm, .45 cal, twist rate 1:48, 27" : Minie (Hensel mould) 36 grains of 3Fg (PNF1), with round balls .445: 36 grains of 3Fg (PNF1), patch cotton .010" --> 55 yards.
- Tryon match Pedersoli N°1, .45 cal. , twist 1:21, 30" : Minie (Hensel mould) 240 grains .451" resized to .449", 36 grains of 3Fg --> 55 yards.
- Tryon Match Pedersoli N°2, 45 cal, Bullets 500 grains (Pedersoli mould) .451" resized to .450, 58 grains of 3 Fg --> 110 yards.

Those charges are very accurate and powerful enough to kill cardboard...

Trying to re-invent the wheel?

https://goexpowder.com/resources/load-charts/

I work in data management & coding for work. I could help in the technical aspect of compiling and cataloging data and making it easy for people to view

Trimp said:

I have been pondering this idea for sometime about creating some sort of central location on information for people's loads with various muzzleloaders. While every gun is different and exploration should be used to find that load your gun likes best, I think a compilation of accurate loads could serve as a good starting point for some. I know some less serious shooters will dump a pretty heavy amount of powder down their barrel and take it out hunting.

When I started shooting a lot and developing a load, I did searches on forums and saw guys being successful in terms of accuracy with similar loads. Usually the powder would vary 5-15 grains but the .015 patch was common between posts.

What're your thoughts on compiling a database for accounts of successful loads? I think it could be a fun project and may show some "preferences" on the different variables for production guns over the years.

Click to expand...

Haven’t heard anything on this post inna few days. I’d be happy to help with this, maybe after the holidays. I’ve done similar data collection before and it’d be fairly simple to set up.

Aggie1105 said:

Haven’t heard anything on this post inna few days. I’d be happy to help with this, maybe after the holidays. I’ve done similar data collection before and it’d be fairly simple to set up.Hunting season is the busiest time of year for me so my apologies on no update

Click to expand...

Aggie1105 said:

Haven’t heard anything on this post inna few days. I’d be happy to help with this, maybe after the holidays. I’ve done similar data collection before and it’d be fairly simple to set up.

Click to expand...

Happy to hear you'd be willing to assist. Hunting season is the busiest time of year for me so my apologies on no response

I am interested in the couple references shared above on similar subject matter to see what kind of organization and parameters are recorded.

Nonetheless I think it's worthwhile to try, even if it proves useful for only a single person I'd be happy

Trimp said:

I am interested in the couple references shared above on similar subject matter to see what kind of organization and parameters are recorded.

Click to expand...

There are many variables to consider. Some that won't even come to mind and therefore will be exerting influence but will not be known.

Just an example; I compared velocities of two 54 caliber rifles on the same day with exact same components in the loading. I even alternated the rifles as I shot them. So, all the parameters were the same for each rifle except for the barrels. One was a 28" and one a 32". Of course we "know" that the longer barrel will produce greatervelocities, right? Wrong! The 28" barrel averaged almost 100 fps faster than the 32".

The only variable that stood out clearly was that the 29" barrel was much tighter. Noticeably tighter when loading. I have my own thoughts on why but the next paragraph might help even though it would be jumping to conclusions to say it's a fact.

I had a 54 rifle that shot xxxx fps with xx grains of ff Goex. But the rifle consistently cut and wrecked the patches. So, I did my usual treatment for this problem. Namely firelapping. After firelapping fired patches were intact and in good condition. Now the same exact load components shot with slower average velocities. Another factor, it was now easier to load.

I'm not wanting to discourage the idea of a data collection. It would be interesting and would probably bring to light some factors and variables that have effects and maybe point out that there are some hidden variables to be found out.

Aggie1105 said:

Haven’t heard anything on this post inna few days. I’d be happy to help with this, maybe after the holidays. I’ve done similar data collection before and it’d be fairly simple to set up.

Click to expand...

I'd suggest dialoguing with the admin @Meriwether because there might be some forum functionality that can help with that.

wiscoaster said:

I'd suggest dialoguing with the admin @Meriwether because there might be some forum functionality that can help with that.

Click to expand...

Sounds good. It wouldn’t be too hard to develop a Google Form that users can use and record their data from prior experiences. It would require a measurement or estimate of accuracy such as MOA or overall group radius. It’s easy to move the data around on the backend and catalog it. Could even make some graphs and visualize it so everyone could see what loads are used most often.