Accuracy?

[George]

Yes, Gus, I agree about the wads. I believe getting as good a seal as possible is very important, and the combination of a 1/8" hard card, a lubricated 1/2" cushion wad and a snuggly patched ball has been my most accurate combination for many years.

I do use the same cheek weld, and the gun fits me very well, which makes it easier to do that consistently.

I don't use anything specific, like the tang screw, at the breech to align the front sight, but it's critical for me to use exactly the same sight picture every shot. I've never had any luck with changing the sight picture for different distances. If I'm shooting at 100 yards, for instance, and know the trajectory puts the ball 4" low, I use the same sight picture, but aim 4" high.

Spence

 

[Artificer]

While I'm swimming upstream I might as well take a few more strokes...it has also never been my experience that BP guns of any type have only two accuracy loads, one heavy and one light.
I choose the power level I load for by the trajectory I want, and so far I've never had a problem getting good accuracy with whichever load that turns out to be, high, low or middlin'.

Spence

Spence,

For hunting mid/large size game animals, there is a larger killing zone on the animal than for small game. For deer it is about an 8 to 10 inch circle, at least that is what I have read over and over again for decades. So if one can keep their shots in that size diameter of a target, one can humanely kill the deer with one shot at whatever range they shoot, while still keeping inside that target diameter.

Back in the 80's I ran across the most well known and successful deer hunter in one county in Mid/Western PA. This guy was famous for getting his quota every year on deer. It so happened my then Father in Law was originally from that county and we were at a public range, getting some range time in for my Step Son. That famous deer hunter was shooting his aged lever action modern rifle at 100 yards for his annual "re-verification" of his sight adjustments. I was surprised his groups from a rest were around 6 to 7 inches in diameter. Now while that was plenty accurate enough for deer and his decades of success taking deer proved it, to me those were not accurate groups for a modern rifle gun.

Please don't think I am trying to be some kind of accuracy snob. It is just that I was used to building and shooting modern rifles with Iron Sights that shot under 1 1/2 inches at 100 yards and of course under 1 inch (and smaller groups) for target rifles.

So when I talk about group sizes opening up with larger black powder charges, some of those groups would still be considered "accurate" for hunting deer with the 8-10" diameter kill zone at 100 yards or more.

I know that I was confident of the accuracy of my Brown Bess Carbine for hunting deer, in that about 9 times out of 10, I could keep the first shot out of a cold barrel and two follow up shots inside the body of a one gallon milk jug at 100 yards from the offhand position. The Brown Bess was more accurate than that from a rest, though, but that was the best I could shoot that Bess offhand at the time. Of course, I would take some kind of rest at that distance if at all possible when actually hunting and have decided not to shoot at times I may have been able to hit a deer at that range. I just won't take a shot I am not confident I can kill the animal humanely.

Gus

 

[Artificer]

Yes, Gus, I agree about the wads. I believe getting as good a seal as possible is very important, and the combination of a 1/8" hard card, a lubricated 1/2" cushion wad and a snuggly patched ball has been my most accurate combination for many years.

I do use the same cheek weld, and the gun fits me very well, which makes it easier to do that consistently.

I don't use anything specific, like the tang screw, at the breech to align the front sight, but it's critical for me to use exactly the same sight picture every shot. I've never had any luck with changing the sight picture for different distances. If I'm shooting at 100 yards, for instance, and know the trajectory puts the ball 4" low, I use the same sight picture, but aim 4" high.

Spence

Spence,

I REALLY wish I had known about your tip of using the hard card and lubricated wad over the powder charge, before the PRB, when I shot competitively with my Brown Bess Carbine back in the 70's. What may be happening with that card and wad is the PRB is initially started down the barrel with more of a hard shove than a punch. (I realize I am not describing this well.) To me, I think this would have evened out the barrel harmonics better when that PRB ball first gets moving.

I wish more people did the things you mentioned in this post as they are the basics of good accuracy.

Gus

 

[BrownBear]

...using the hard card and lubricated wad over the powder charge, before the PRB....

I'm going to add speculation to the stack of ponders. Based on my shooting with shot, the hard card and lubed wad has always produced better patterns than the handful of over-shot cards so many people like.

My pondering speculation is based on the action of the hard card in scraping the bore as the wad lubes it. Lube aside, that "clean" bore falls within the broad range of Dutch's accuracy formula for rifled bores. But from what I'm seeing- with lube included- I'm firing every load of shot down a "clean and swabbed" bore, which along with the better seal results in more consistency.

Like I said, I'll see your ponder and raise you one speculation. I sure like the results.

 

[Artificer]

Actually I think the use of a wad before a load of shot (that will give you a better pattern than without a wad) ,demonstrates my admittedly poorly defined theory the wad helps soften the blow when the powder charge first begins pushing against the shot. The wad seems to cause less damage to the shot during that initial "shove."

Not sure if this is a check to your ponder or raise of a SWAG. :haha:

Gus

 

[George]

So if one can keep their shots in that size diameter of a target, one can humanely kill the deer with one shot at whatever range they shoot, while still keeping inside that target diameter.

Yes, I'm familiar with that idea. I demand more of my deer hunting guns than that, even the smoothbores. I found out early on they are capable of more, and I don't call one ready for hunting unless it's shooting at that level. And me with it. I consider it my personal obligation to the animal.

Spence

 

[Dr5x]

If the patching you using is too thin, causing some inaccuracy, a nice wad on top of the powder will complete the sea quite effectively. I always felt that getting the patching completely right was better than adding that extra step/

Some years ago there was a lot of positive talk about using wasp nest material squished on top go the powder as a substitute wad.

Lots of funny stories about using those nests that were not actually abandoned.

Dutch

 

[rdstrain49]

Don't have any wasp nest, do have some tow. I'll give it a try. I do think I have a good seal with just the patch and ball but never hurts to try something different.

 

[Canute Rex]

For a while I was using felt wads punched out of worn out felt boot liners. I soaked them in a mix of melted beeswax/olive oil. I noted a sharper "snap" as the bullet went downrange and a higher impact point. At the time I was using a large-ish ball and a thin patch and the use of the wad tended to shred the patch. I'm using a smaller ball and thicker patch now, so maybe I'll try the wads again.

The wads did clean out the bore - my cleaning time was cut in half.

 

[Dr5x]

RDstran.
If you have a good seal with patching alone , adding TOW or anything else would tend to complicate your loading procedure.
I ever tried wads, or other sealers but think they might cause fire hazards to your.
Experimenting is fun , for me at least/
Everyone should see what happens when you fire down range after sundown.
. You don't see it in daylight but at night you'll a long flame shoots out of the muzzle (about five or six feet from 73 grains of 2Æ’Æ’ on my .45's
Sure surprised me

Dutch

 

[rdstrain49]

Dutch, if the loading effort is any indicator, I have a very tight seal. I have experimented some with chewed ball no patch and wadding of all types intending to achieve an easy loading woods walk type load. I gave up on this due to substantially reduced accuracy. Now I'm back to square one, trying to extend my accurate range beyond 70 yards.

 

[Dr5x]

RDStrain,
If you are patient in getting all the variables involved in loading you can extend your accuracy beyond 70 yards
On lovely summer's day with no crosswinds I was able to get a quarter sized group at 100 yards rather insistently using rear aperture sights
If the cross winds are gusty, not a steady breeze, I would wait for the gust to die down and fire during that very brief lull before the next gust came along.

Learning your rifle and paying attention to what it likes and how it responds is what I enjoyed the most

I was able to get equal performance from a kit built T/C hawken and from an Ozark Mountain Arms Duplicate of an actual Hawken

I spent my last several years coaching others at the range and found that every rifle I worked with and some were rather beat up could all be markedly improved.

Dutch Schoultz

 

[Ray-Vigo]

I suppose that's the sort of work they were doing with their muskets, so the challenge matches it. I've heard the stories of different accuracy challenges in the 18th century, but that British challenge and the green award are new to me, so learned something new today. Nice.

 

[rdstrain49]

Dutch;

The wind is never calm here, and I've got no rear sight so it seems reasonable that I should adjust my goal accordingly. Hence forth I shall strive for quarter and a half groups at 100 yards.

Your encouraging words are as always appreciated.

RS

 

[kendrolet]

I'm having some accuracy issues. I have a .56 T/C smoothie. I have had a real hard time loading a .550 ball. Years ago I read that I should use a smaller ball and a little thicker patch for improved loading and accuracy. I finally bought some .535....I am using a spit patch (.018) and 90gr of ffg. The shots are all over the place. Any suggestions?

 

[Britsmoothy]

Use a fire wall between powder a ball combination.
Also, do check the barrel is not bearing down on the lock.

 

[Artificer]

I'm having some accuracy issues. I have a .56 T/C smoothie. I have had a real hard time loading a .550 ball. Years ago I read that I should use a smaller ball and a little thicker patch for improved loading and accuracy. I finally bought some .535....I am using a spit patch (.018) and 90gr of ffg. The shots are all over the place. Any suggestions?

Some time ago, I asked Forum Member George how he got such good hunting accuracy out of his smoothbore at 100 yards or more.

When I used my old Brown Bess Carbine in competition, the largest mold/ball size I could find was .735" for the .753" bore diameter. I used a lubricated and thick patch and got very good accuracy, but did not get as good accuracy as Spence reported.

I am not sure if he used a wad or a felt patch over the powder and before the ball, but what he mentioned was something I had not considered back in the 1970's. Maybe he will see this thread and post and explain more in detail or you could PM him?

Gus

 

[rdstrain49]

Ken, check your math. Your .535 ball and .018 patch gives you a loaded diameter of .571, might try a thinner patch. My TC 56 smoothie shoots best with a load that is just snug, not tight. It will clover leaf at 50 yards. As I remember, I use a .013 patch for a loaded diameter of .561.

 

[Stumpkiller]

I'm having some accuracy issues. I have a .56 T/C smoothie. I have had a real hard time loading a .550 ball. Years ago I read that I should use a smaller ball and a little thicker patch for improved loading and accuracy. I finally bought some .535....I am using a spit patch (.018) and 90gr of ffg. The shots are all over the place. Any suggestions?

At what range? I use a 0.017" parch and a 0.648" ball in my 0.662" bore and will do 5" on a good day at 60 yards (no rear sight). Past that it falls apart quickly.

Lately I mostly use a 0.650" ball and a paper cartridge with the ball end dipped in beeswax (2-1/2 wraps around the circumference) for a tight bore fit and that does about the same.

 

[smoothshooter]

That's a pretty darned good group for 100 yards.
I have gotten the occasional one that size at that distance, but not on demand.
For me with my best smoothbore, 8" - 10" or so at 100 yards is more the norm.