.32 load help

[Slinginslugs]

I have been shooting a traditions deerhunter in .32 for awhile. My load is a hornady .310 rb with a .010 wonderlubed patch over 15grns fff bp. I have tried 10grns and 20 grns. 15grns seems to be best but only for 2 shots. If I try to push a 3rd shot without cleaning it wont hit within 2" at 20 yards. Any suggestions?

 

[doubleset]

I think your patches need to be a bit thicker. The usual recommendation for those .310" balls is a 0.015" patch. Some use a 0.018" patch, but I have found that to be too much.

I've been experimenting with a Traditions Crockett .32 rifle for several months now, using the .310 rb. I've tried a number of patches (from 0.010" through 0.018") and have settled on the 0.015"-ish thickness. I started with the Wonderlubed patches, but don't like them because they do seem to result in more fouling and they do leave the deposit in the barrel that many complain about. I'd suggest using 0.015" patches. Try dry ones just with spit, or with Ballistol, or several other possibilities you can see by searching this and other forums.

At the moment I'm using patch material that's 0.015"-0.016" thick that resembles pillow ticking and that I bought from a local Walmart. I cut it into 3/4" squares. Currently I'm using olive oil as the lube, but it's possible I'll change that at some point. Still too early to tell. I did lap my barrel because it felt a bit tight and somewhat "grabby", and that seemed to improve loading and cleaning a bit, but I'm not sure it was really necessary.

My impression from all this experimentation is that (1) my rifle is quite sensitive to the tightness of the ball/patch combination in terms of the fouling it creates and the difficulty in loading follow-up shots, (2) I suspect (with no other experience) that this may be true of all these smallbore BP rifles, (3) my bore is quite tight and seems not to like a very tight ball/patch combo in terms of the fouling and loading, and (4) you don't need a really tight ball/patch for good accuracy. I also suspect that these smaller bore guns are more idiosyncratic than the larger bores, and you can just expect more individual variation among them. This seems to be supported by the variety of things people say about the "best" balls, patches, and lube in a variety of forums.

So my recommendation would be to stop with the Wonderlube patches and try 0.015" either dry with spit, or with some other lube.

 

[Slinginslugs]

I think your patches need to be a bit thicker. The usual recommendation for those .310" balls is a 0.015" patch. Some use a 0.018" patch, but I have found that to be too much.

I've been experimenting with a Traditions Crockett .32 rifle for several months now, using the .310 rb. I've tried a number of patches (from 0.010" through 0.018") and have settled on the 0.015"-ish thickness. I started with the Wonderlubed patches, but don't like them because they do seem to result in more fouling and they do leave the deposit in the barrel that many complain about. I'd suggest using 0.015" patches. Try dry ones just with spit, or with Ballistol, or several other possibilities you can see by searching this and other forums.

At the moment I'm using patch material that's 0.015"-0.016" thick that resembles pillow ticking and that I bought from a local Walmart. I cut it into 3/4" squares. Currently I'm using olive oil as the lube, but it's possible I'll change that at some point. Still too early to tell. I did lap my barrel because it felt a bit tight and somewhat "grabby", and that seemed to improve loading and cleaning a bit, but I'm not sure it was really necessary.

My impression from all this experimentation is that (1) my rifle is quite sensitive to the tightness of the ball/patch combination in terms of the fouling it creates and the difficulty in loading follow-up shots, (2) I suspect (with no other experience) that this may be true of all these smallbore BP rifles, (3) my bore is quite tight and seems not to like a very tight ball/patch combo in terms of the fouling and loading, and (4) you don't need a really tight ball/patch for good accuracy. I also suspect that these smaller bore guns are more idiosyncratic than the larger bores, and you can just expect more individual variation among them. This seems to be supported by the variety of things people say about the "best" balls, patches, and lube in a variety of forums.

So my recommendation would be to stop with the Wonderlube patches and try 0.015" either dry with spit, or with some other lube.

Thanks doubleset. I will definitely try that tomorrow. I have some thicker patches i can try. In your opinion is the .010 a good patch for a .315 rb?

 

[Jim K]

Thanks doubleset. I will definitely try that tomorrow. I have some thicker patches i can try. In your opinion is the .010 a good patch for a .315 rb?

I use .315 balls and .010 patches in my Cherokee. I also swab between shots. Even when squirrel hunting.

 

[TreeMan]

I use a .310 ball In my 32s and a .010 patch. My observations are that a super tight ball patch combo is unnecessary in a small bore. I don’t clean between shots but I use a spit lubed patch. While I’m measuring and loading powder I put the patch in my mouth. Make it wet but not dripping. The wet patch cleans the bore as you load. I can shoot many rounds without cleaning. Accuracy does not change. With a small bore it’s very easy to push that fouling into your breech and cause misfire issues when swabbing between shots. Any good lube like mink oil will work as well as spit.

 

[doubleset]

I use a .310 ball In my 32s and a .010 patch. My observations are that a super tight ball patch combo is unnecessary in a small bore.

I agree, and I'm going to experiment with this as well. Also, there is some dependency on what powder you're shooting (true black powder vs. one of the substitutes), and depth of the rifling. Some powders will just foul more than others. My .50 GPR seems to be much more forgiving in these matters.

But a 0.001" difference in a .32 bore is a bigger (percentage) difference than in a .50 bore. And it's easy to imagine that degree of difference occurring not just between two brands/models of a .32, but within the same model -- just as a matter of tooling differences and wear. And if you're down to 0.001" differences in patch thickness, you're probably going to see that (and more) difference between your individual patches as you lube and use them. So I think that particularly for the small bore guns, more experimentation and trial and error is required. I wish it was possible to get "trial packs" of different patches and balls -- instead of having to buy them in quantities of 100. But no one seems to offer that, and at this point I'm well past that step.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

But a 0.001" difference in a .32 bore is a bigger (percentage) difference than in a .50 bore. And it's easy to imagine that degree of difference occurring not just between two brands/models of a .32, but within the same model -- just as a matter of tooling differences and wear. And if you're down to 0.001" differences in patch thickness, you're probably going to see that (and more) difference between your individual patches as you lube and use them.

Exactly, AND you're dealing with a thinner rammer if you are using a wooden one, and must be cautious about stressing that thin rod of wood.

LD

 

[CapPopper]

I just wipe I can't even get the third shot loaded with the wooden rod on the gun without wiping. If I wipe it'll drop them one after another in the same hole at 25 and if I don't I can't hit anything with it.

 

[Grimord]

Of my 4 .32 rifles, 2 like a .310 ball with a .015 mink oil lubed patch, one likes a .315 ball with a .015 mink oil lubed patch, and my heir loom .32 likes a .320 ball with a .015 Hoppes BP lubed patch. All will shoot quarter sized groups at 25 yards from the bench with those loads and around 1.5" at 50 yards, the limit of my eyes for small target shooting.

 

[doubleset]

Of my 4 .32 rifles, ... All will shoot quarter sized groups at 25 yards from the bench with those loads and around 1.5" at 50 yards, the limit of my eyes for small target shooting.

Yes, these are some additional good points. People tend to think that a .32 caliber rifle is a .32 caliber rifle. Well, in one sense, that's just an instance of a law of logic. But what's CALLED a ".32 caliber rifle" may be a .31 caliber rifle or a .32x caliber rifle, and barrels may differ significantly in terms of the depth and shape of their rifling grooves. I think this is especially true in the black powder realm. But it's not restricted to that.

I have a wonderful CZ 455 .22 heavy barrel rifle that I use in precision small bore shooting. Except you can't actually get a .22 cleaning rod in it! One of the ways the accuracy is squeezed out of it is that the bore is actually .21-ish. So when I use a cleaning rod in it (which I don't often do), I need to use a .20 caliber rod. The same was true of the CZ 452 that preceded it (and which I wish I still had).

And another thing to consider with regard to accuracy is the sights -- especially for those of us "of a certain age". After my "cataract" surgery my eyes are much improved (in fact, I haven't seen this well since I was 12 years old!), but sights and sighting picture are still very important. I found the Crockett rifle standard sights to be VERY accurate -- IF I could focus on them to get the correct sight picture consistently. But with the small (square notch) rear and the tiny front, this was difficult and irritating to sustain. I replaced the rear with a full buckhorn (with a square notch in the base) and a taller and more visible front (silver) blade, both from TOW, and it is now much more comfortable to shoot and to shoot consistently. This sight set-up is also much better for the 25/50/100 yd matches I typically shoot since it gives me more visible, distinct, and consistent sight pictures for the different distances. I've "slightly modified" the buckhorn for this purpose (adding some index marks to it).

Finally, I find that for repeatable accuracy I need to be very careful not to cant the rifle as I'm sighting/firing. It's easy to do this and somewhat difficult to detect, even if you're sensitive to it. But it can really open up groups, particularly at longer distances. On my CZ, there's a Vortex level attached to the 6-24x scope, but (even if I could figure out how to do it) I don't think I'd like that on a muzzle loader.

 

[Billy Boy]

I have been shooting a traditions deerhunter in .32 for awhile. My load is a hornady .310 rb with a .010 wonderlubed patch over 15grns fff bp. I have tried 10grns and 20 grns. 15grns seems to be best but only for 2 shots. If I try to push a 3rd shot without cleaning it wont hit within 2" at 20 yards. Any suggestions?

Try a thicker patch and a little more lube

 

[dave951]

The small bores seem to be more sensitive to fouling than the larger ones and to me that makes sense cuz they're using smaller charges.

You may have to resign yourself to wiping between every shot for max accuracy.

 

[mooman76]

The small bores seem to be more sensitive to fouling than the larger ones and to me that makes sense cuz they're using smaller charges.

You may have to resign yourself to wiping between every shot for max accuracy.

What dave951 says. I have a Deerhunter 32 also. I need to swab every 3 shots of accuracy goes south. You might try a different lube. My 32 is the only one of my more than a dz guns I need to swab. I use Bore Butter by the way and when not I use spit patch.

 

[doubleset]

I think this is another illustration of individual differences and idiosyncracies of these rifles. Some people swear by Bore Butter or Wonderlube, and some people swear at them. You can spend hours (maybe days) reading those debates in the forums, and there is good information to be had in them; but all it may mean is that people get different results with different guns, different powders, different goals, and different shooting styles. There are significant differences between real and synthetic black powders in terms of fouling (and cleaning!), and real differences between different brands/varieties of black powders (some are known to be "dirtier" -- hence more fouling -- than others) and different brands/types of the synthetics.

I'm afraid that the only road to satisfaction is to listen to everyone's individual experiences and then try the various combinations of components until you find the best for you and your particular gun -- or just get tired at some point and settle for "good enough". But for me, that's actually a big part of the fun. Maybe not for others. At one point in the past my wife remarked that I seemed to be happier "improving" my motorcycles rather than actually running them on the street or track, whereas she wasn't particularly interested in "fixing a perfectly good motorcycle" and preferred to spend her time on the track. It takes all kinds.

 

[Christophero]

Back when I hunted squirrels with the T/C Cherokee in 32 I was green as grass and just used old wife beater t shirt material, crisco and round balls with head shooting accuracy. I want to say the balls were .312, but been too long since I had those around. I would shoot a number of times with no issues. But, with 50 cals individual barrels would dictate how many shots could be fired before swabbing.

I have .310 and .315 balls in the stash now and someday I'll have to play with those to see what they can do. Hope you find your pet load without too much trouble.

 

[Grimord]

Yes, these are some additional good points. People tend to think that a .32 caliber rifle is a .32 caliber rifle. Well, in one sense, that's just an instance of a law of logic. But what's CALLED a ".32 caliber rifle" may be a .31 caliber rifle or a .32x caliber rifle, and barrels may differ significantly in terms of the depth and shape of their rifling grooves. I think this is especially true in the black powder realm. But it's not restricted to that.

I have a wonderful CZ 455 .22 heavy barrel rifle that I use in precision small bore shooting. Except you can't actually get a .22 cleaning rod in it! One of the ways the accuracy is squeezed out of it is that the bore is actually .21-ish. So when I use a cleaning rod in it (which I don't often do), I need to use a .20 caliber rod. The same was true of the CZ 452 that preceded it (and which I wish I still had).

And another thing to consider with regard to accuracy is the sights -- especially for those of us "of a certain age". After my "cataract" surgery my eyes are much improved (in fact, I haven't seen this well since I was 12 years old!), but sights and sighting picture are still very important. I found the Crockett rifle standard sights to be VERY accurate -- IF I could focus on them to get the correct sight picture consistently. But with the small (square notch) rear and the tiny front, this was difficult and irritating to sustain. I replaced the rear with a full buckhorn (with a square notch in the base) and a taller and more visible front (silver) blade, both from TOW, and it is now much more comfortable to shoot and to shoot consistently. This sight set-up is also much better for the 25/50/100 yd matches I typically shoot since it gives me more visible, distinct, and consistent sight pictures for the different distances. I've "slightly modified" the buckhorn for this purpose (adding some index marks to it).

Finally, I find that for repeatable accuracy I need to be very careful not to cant the rifle as I'm sighting/firing. It's easy to do this and somewhat difficult to detect, even if you're sensitive to it. But it can really open up groups, particularly at longer distances. On my CZ, there's a Vortex level attached to the 6-24x scope, but (even if I could figure out how to do it) I don't think I'd like that on a muzzle loader.

Most of my black powder fire arms now sport some sort of peep sight, be it a receiver type, barrel mounted or tang mounted. I shoot much better with the peeps.

 

[doubleset]

Yeah, I put a Marble's buckhorn rear sight on my Lyman GPR, though filling the base down on that was quite a pain.

 

[Slinginslugs]

Thank you everyone for the input. I dug around and I have found some .015 pillow lubed and unlubed and some unlubed .018. Fixing to head out back and see what happens...

 

[doubleset]

You have a ball puller? May need it if you stuff a .018-patched ball in far enough. In my bore they are VERY tight with the .310 balls.

 

[Slinginslugs]

Didn't try the .018. The .015 lubed worked well. Swabbed with spit patch after every shot. The .018 were .45 patch size. Didn't want cut. Shot two 1" three shot groups off the table at 25 yards and a freehand 2" group of 5 at 20 yards. I have Lyman sights installed ( white bead front and folding leaf rear ) good enough for close range squirrel and rabbit. Will post pics of my first hunt soon!