24:1 paper patch bullet test

[paulab]

Greetings...here is a 200 yard,15 shot group I shot this week with my Pedersoli Gibbs. 540 grain paper patch bullet cast at 24:1, no over powder wad, 90 grains of 1 1/2 Swiss, RWS caps. Accuracy with 24:1 P.P. and G.G. bullets is excellent using NO over powder wad. Doesn't this fly in the face of "accepted" muzzleloading knowledge concerning soft lead and O.P. wads? cheers Paul http://i817.photobucket.com/albums/zz94/paulbehe/Picture324.jpg

 

[Brent]

Looks good. I don't think it violates any accepted wisdom about wads but try some and see what happens.

Also, check your patches for evidence of burn-through. Seems unlikely given your accuracy but can't hurt to check.

I'd try harder lead - 20:1 at least and 16:1 is my standby for target shooting.

Brent

 

[Dphar]

Greetings...here is a 200 yard,15 shot group I shot this week with my Pedersoli Gibbs. 540 grain paper patch bullet cast at 24:1, no over powder wad, 90 grains of 1 1/2 Swiss, RWS caps. Accuracy with 24:1 P.P. and G.G. bullets is excellent using NO over powder wad. Doesn't this fly in the face of "accepted" muzzleloading knowledge concerning soft lead and O.P. wads? cheers Paul http://i817.photobucket.com/albums/zz94/paulbehe/Picture324.jpg[/quote]

Good shooting.

It would be more informative if you had shot a group with a wad in the load column as well. I think that you will find that the wad will be more accurate if you do enough testing. It will average better. What if, for example, using a wad removed the two widest shots? This may require a lot of shooting to really know. It require multiple groups to eliminate shooter errors.

Shot without wads it is invariably found that the bullet base is significantly dimpled by the powder grains.
Rough bullet bases are not good for accuracy. Since no two are going to be dimpled identically it can be a variable and eliminating variables is part of finding accuracy.

And there are almost always exceptions to every rule.

The Irish team used wads to clean the bore between shots and eliminate wiping in the matches against the Americans. But they lost, though it was very close.

Dan

 

[Jason Lewis]

Greetings...here is a 200 yard,15 shot group I shot this week with my Pedersoli Gibbs. 540 grain paper patch bullet cast at 24:1, no over powder wad, 90 grains of 1 1/2 Swiss, RWS caps. Accuracy with 24:1 P.P. and G.G. bullets is excellent using NO over powder wad. Doesn't this fly in the face of "accepted" muzzleloading knowledge concerning soft lead and O.P. wads? cheers Paul http://i817.photobucket.com/albums/zz94/paulbehe/Picture324.jpg[/quote]

no that doesn't fly in the face of any practice for LRML. there are quite a few PP shooters who just drop powder and then the bullet without an OP wad. however, you should probably try some groups, with an OP wad just too test for differance.

 

[CoyoteJoe]

The Irish team used wads to clean the bore between shots and eliminate wiping in the matches against the Americans. But they lost, though it was very close.

Dan

Very close indeed Dan! It would have gone the other way but for the fact that one member of the Irish team fired a bullseye on the wrong target.
Oh for the days when shooting matches were the national sport with results telegraphed coast to coast and published in every newspaper.

 

[paulab]

All....I actually started out using 50:1 and O.P. wads since everybody said that was the way to go. 3-4 flyers were a common occurance in every 10 shot group. One day I cast up some 30:1 from the b.p. silhouette lead. Shwing! Smaller groups and fewer [and not as wide] flyers. Then one day I forgot to replace the wads in my shooting kit. Dang! Got to shoot without them. Too far to go home and get them. Shwing again! Smaller groups....real small...like 11-14 shots in 3 inches at 200 yards. like the group shown. The wide shots now are usually due to brain f-rt or lack of concentration or 60 year old eyes...or all 3! The 24:1 test was to see if accuracy would improve on the 30:1 alloy. It didn't. That's OK. 30:1 is cheaper and it's what is in the silhouette pot. Life is good! cheers Paul

 

[Jason Lewis]

now go compete!

 

[nkbj]

Very nice. Looks like a fine varmint load. Do yall have anything like prairie dogs over your way?

 

[paulab]

Goodcheer.....no prairie here but we have dogs. If a dog is on the prairie is it a prairie dog? :rotf:

 

[Dphar]

The Irish team used wads to clean the bore between shots and eliminate wiping in the matches against the Americans. But they lost, though it was very close.

Dan

Very close indeed Dan! It would have gone the other way but for the fact that one member of the Irish team fired a bullseye on the wrong target.
Oh for the days when shooting matches were the national sport with results telegraphed coast to coast and published in every newspaper.

Yeah the Irish team member had to be pretty despondent. They were the pros, probably the best in the world. Everyone knew the ML was far more accurate. Then the upstart Americans with their breechloaders, protoype LR rifles, beat them and not just once.

Schuetzen matches where the winner hired a boy to help him carry the prize money to the train station since it was in gold coin.
Grudge matches in the 1870s for 500 or a 1000 dollars. This was a LOT OF MONEY.
Warner special built a 69 caliber ML slug gun for a match with Perry, can't recall the bet, but he won. This heavy bench gun shot so well he really never used it much since nobody would shoot against it.
This from the "Warner-Lowe Papers"
======
One time there was t be a turkey shoot for smooth bores. Kendall had a gun all ready for rifling. He put it gun in rifling machine and laid the surface with course emery. The gun was almost equal to a rifle for say a hundred shots.
The upshot of it was that Mr. Smith & Kendall shot all the turkeys the man was willing to put up.
======
I am sure this was Nicanor Kendall who was part of the Robbins and Lawrence brain trust that basically invented modern machine tools in the 1840s-50s.

Most people don't understand the "my gun will outshoot yours" attitude.
They had rifle matches every where regardless of the financial situation. Sometimes they simply shot for the lead in the tree used for a back stop.
We have lost a lot of that tradition. Mostly through apathy and laziness.

Dan

 

[ezyed]

Paul Would the paper patch act like soft lead and being that it also covers the base of the bullet it would also act as a wad???? I would think that a few raps of paper would protect the bore and you could use any hard metal for a bullet. I imagin that I will be run off of the forum for thinking like that.
Ed

 

[Dphar]

Paul Would the paper patch act like soft lead and being that it also covers the base of the bullet it would also act as a wad???? I would think that a few raps of paper would protect the bore and you could use any hard metal for a bullet. I imagin that I will be run off of the forum for thinking like that.
Ed

For a ML the bullet must expand to fill the bore.
Original PP bullets for BPCR 40-70 45-100 etc are tapered so they too upset. Coupled with the fact that the bores in the 1870s "varied" many original 45 caliber Sharps have. 460-.464 grooves and the original nominal bullet is .451"

So hard metal will not work well here either.

The paper is not thick enough to perform well as a wad. Wads need to be about .030" thick to be really effective.

Dan

 

[paulab]

Ed...the paper patch as I understand, is simply to prevent leading, which it does. The bullet I use has a flat base. The P.P. barely folds over the base of the bullet so it can't act as a wad. People who use wads can choose from poly, card or felt. cheers Paul