Ball size in 12bore

Inside dia. .726 been using .690 ball and .015 patch. You can push it in with your thumb. I,m thinking of trying .700 and maybe .715 for accurracy. For hunting the easy start is a plus with cold shakey hands. Anybody try the .715 ball?? Allso because of the slower ffg burn time than the fffg ,I,m wondering if it will shoot a tad higher,because its riding the barrel afew more milliseconds. Anyway next time out I,ll experiment on the following. Just wondered what you found in your 12bore fowler.

 

[RussB]

Inside dia. .726 been using .690 ball and .015 patch. You can push it in with your thumb. I,m thinking of trying .700 and maybe .715 for accurracy. For hunting the easy start is a plus with cold shakey hands. Anybody try the .715 ball?? Allso because of the slower ffg burn time than the fffg ,I,m wondering if it will shoot a tad higher,because its riding the barrel afew more milliseconds. Anyway next time out I,ll experiment on the following. Just wondered what you found in your 12bore fowler.

Well sir, I don't have a 12 bore, but I do have a 16 bore, and I have found that what your saying is true. At least in my gun. I have shot Fg, FFg, and FFFg, and they seem to act just like you describe. My bore is .666 and I'm shooting a .648 RB with .010 patch....kinda tight, but can be thumb started easily enough.
I've only had the gun a short time and I never gave a though to the "cold shaky hands" you mentioned. Guess I should be considering this! Thinner patch?........maybe?
Respectfully, Russ

 

I,m big fan of the 16ga. in modern guns and I have had 20,11,10,12 in muzzleloading shotguns,but my mind is set on a 16ga. someday. Maybe a Early English Wilson Style in 16ga. I came close to buying a English Richards,( 1850-1860 era) caplock double in 16ga. But did not buy it,some day I would like to stock a 16ga. English Flint Double before I meet my maker. What style is your 16ga. Fowler???? Any pics????

 

[tg]

I use a .705 ball with .017 patch it's a snug but not a tight combo and it does well to 50 yds, I just don't use it much as I really don't need such a large cal. for deer.

 

[musketman]

In my Brown Bess I run a .715 or a .735 ball, depending on my patch thickness at the time, but I found that the FFFg burns through the lubed pillow tick patch, whereas the Fg and FFg do not...

FFFg yields higher pressure when burned and this is what caused the patch to fail, the same lubed patches over FFg did not fail and all was fine...

FFFg burns cleaner than the other two, but it's also hotter... (IMO) The reason FFFg shot higher is because it gives off more pressure then FFg and Fg, given the same volume to volume measurement of the three grade granulation's...

If a powder measurer is set for 90 grains, you should per 90 grains of powder in it, right?

Not always true, I believe I read that they are calibrated for FFg black powder, so Fg will have less than 90 grains in it because the granulation's are larger, this means more air space between them...

On the other side, FFFg has smaller granulation's and will pack in tighter with less air space between the grains, so a measurer that is set to 90 grains will hold more than 90 grains of FFFg than FFg...

But we measure by volume, so you may have to measure 95 grains of FFg to get the same results of 90 grains of FFFg...

This is also why the ball hits higher betwixt the three grain sizes...

 

[Leonredbeard]

I sold my 12 bore flinter two years ago, but still remember the load data. I always used the .690 ball and patched it with pillow ticking for a thumb start fit. One time I ran out of my balls with a shot to go in a paper match. A Bess shooter gave me a .715 ball to finish. I could not get it started any way I tried it with any patch. Even thin cotton muzlin would not let it start. So I dropped the ball down the bore and fired the last shot. It didn't matter anyway that It didn't go where I wanted it, as not many of the .690's went where I wanted them either. A .700 or .705 might let you use a thin patch, but I have never tried them.
God bless.
volatpluvia

 

My standard rule of thumb in about any rifle bore size is to use a patch that's .018" to .022" and a ball .005 to .010 giving compression on the sides when loaded. With a smoothbore, the ball usually has to be around .025 less than bore size to allow a thick enough patch to hold sufficient lubrication to allow repeated shots without having to swab the bore. You need a short starter to load my standard load in any gun, including the smoothbore. I will be trying my new .75 Bess this morning with a variety of patches and .715 balls due to those being the only ones I have cast.
: I would suggest the .690 to .700 ball and .018" to .020" patch. This will give easy loading, but will also allow lots of lube to keep the fouling soft.
: I will have to cast some .735's with my brothers mould, as well as in the .725" Tanner mould IF it ever arrives. It's been 2 weeks now since it was mailed to me.
: Presently my brother is using a .735 in his 10 bore Bess with a .030" patch. This load shoots well in his bess, and loads easily although it measures .795 with .060"(2X.030") of patch in his .77 cal bore. No load burns the patch, but then he would never consider using anything by 2F or 1F in his Bess. Even 2F is a smaller granulation than what was originally used, however our 2F is probably comparable to pre 1900 or maybe even pre 1800 single in pressure and velocity.
: The issue load in paper ctgs. for the .69 US Muskets before 1820 or 1830 was 165gr. Musket grade powder. Part of this charge was used for priming for the pan. After 1820 or 1830( or whenever the change was made due to improved powder) this ctg. charge was reduced to 130gr. The velocity expected from the muskets was expected to be 1,700fps plus, however we know today, that isn't possible in such a large bore without using well over 200gr. (265gr. 2F GOEX in my 30" English rifled gun with 480gr. ball)

 

So far I have been using the .690 ,.015 patch fffg measure set at 11/8 .oz with fiberwad overpowder first. I haveonly shot about 20 so far and I,m geetting 3" at 25 yards. I,ll try the .020 patch and then buy some .700 balls too and of course the ffg powder. Thanks for the input.

 

Keep us informed of success or failure. I'm sure the FFG will help out with the accuracy and be much more gentle on the patch. It will take a bit more to get the same velocity, but the pressure will be considerably less at that velocity when using FFG.
; I expect your 12 bore, if not choked, has a .725 to .729" bore - that being standard prior to our modern back-boring and relief boring.
; I had one set of barrels that made of Whitworth Fluid Steel that were a tight .725 in the bore, however the norm is .727" or .729".
; If .729, a patch tickness of .020" will allow 1/4 thou per side of compression, which might not be enough to prevent burn-out without an over-powder wad to protect it.
; Personally, I would be happier with .005" total compression or .0025"(half that) per side.
: In order to shoot WW balls in the smoothbore, a patch/ball combination that just barely makes a snug fit, along with another patch or wad between it and the powder, will generally shoot well. Becasue thee is absolutely no obturation of the harder ball with these low pressures, the extra protecton may be necessary.

 

[Stumpkiller]

I use a .690 w/0.017" cloth patch and a .715 w/paper patch (cartridge) in my single barrel 12 ga. Neither seems to have an accuracy edge Both are abourt 6" at 50 yards (occasionally better when I have 'center-fliers'). I never tried the .715 with a cloth patch, as I've always thought the .690 was tight enough. I don't get blow-by with that combination. I'm not sure the extra loading effort would be rewarded with extra accuracy. I'll be interested, too, in your results.

 

Tight loading is more difficult with a smoothbore, that's for certain. As long as you aren't getting gas cutting of the patches, your combinaton is probalby as tight as possible & the only way to improve accuracy would be to try different powder charges and/or powder mfg'r.
: I was very pleased with the loading ease I was getting, but actually need a slighty thicker patch, but only a couple thou. Time to go to the yard goods store with the michrometer - again.

 

[RussB]

I,m big fan of the 16ga. in modern guns and I have had 20,11,10,12 in muzzleloading shotguns,but my mind is set on a 16ga. someday. Maybe a Early English Wilson Style in 16ga. I came close to buying a English Richards,( 1850-1860 era) caplock double in 16ga. But did not buy it,some day I would like to stock a 16ga. English Flint Double before I meet my maker. What style is your 16ga. Fowler???? Any pics????

Fowler...I realy don't think my 16ga. has a "style". I refer to it as "Gun with no name". It is truly a congromulation of parts and pieces....that actualy shoots pretty good. It has a T/C adjustable sight. Of this I am sure. But that's about where it ends. It has a 33" oct/to round barrel, a fairly nice fitting stock of "Cherry" I "think", and a patch box...of all things. The lock is of the "Ohio" style, again I "think". Supposingly it came from DGW back around 1970 when Kirkland Turner, or Turner Kirkland (can't remember the right name) was offering these things at less than $150. Oh, it has made in Japan on the bottom of the barrel and an (M) in a circle, It is stamped Black Powder Only, and that's the only markings on it. I do have a couple of pictures although I have to get some better ones made up.
Perhaps You, or someone, could help me identify the thing, or at least the lock.
I will try a couple of the pictures I do have.
Russ

The above picture is me with the gun,

The above picture is the lock. Can't tell a lot about it by the picture! I will get better pictures.

The next picture is it's place in my den. Although it is a "cheapie".... by any standard, it is a keeper IMHO. Not only was it my first smoothie, it does quite well with both shot, and roundball. I WILL be hunting THIS year with THIS gun. Maybe someday I can own a nice "custom", but until then I am perfectly content playing with this one.
Note; You can also make out the Patch Box in this picture.
Sooo, WHAT DO I GOT?????

 

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/twocents.gif1st of all, it appears to have a curly maple stock, with a readdish stain. Secondly, if it is indeed a gun that Turner Kirkland imported back in the 70's, it is just as you've described it- a no-name 16 bore fowler.
; I do hope it works well for you and I'm certain it will - if - the barel is one piece. Back then there was an outfit in Japan was making large bore barrels out of two pieces of steel, threaded together, just up from the breech about where the wedding bands are. Although threading two pieces together for a barrel is bad enough, :nono: it was a sloppy thead with a major gap between the end of one piece and the start of the other, grabbing patches and having a .020" wall at that spot. Now, .020" was a very common pistol barrel wall in the early to late 1700's, it is deemed to be insufficient today, especially in a musket, shotgun or rifle. The name just came to me- Ultra-High. Your gun does not appear to be one from the pictures, but the pictures are't very definitive. Perhaps one of you holding the gun out for a broadside shot - then closeups of the lock, wrist/butt area, wedding band area, etc.
; Other than those awfull, gross, ugly, modern butt-ugly sights, it looks just fine.

 

[RussB]

Hi Daryl...I kinda fgured you'd be the one to nail it right down to the year they were imported, might be a lost cause trying to put a name on "Old No Name".

Yes, Yes, Yes...it is butt ugly! Not just the sights, but the patch box...although well made, it's looks like it was put on as an after thought...or, perhaps that was a "marketing gimmick" to sell a few more in the days it was being sold. No clue myself.

The barrel is one piece and shows little wear. It has most likely spent it's life as a wall hanger, because the frizzen is/was in excellent shape.

Shot 20 "cartouches" today, with #6 shot. (Capachee has been something of a mentor in my learning this.) From all appearances it seems, at least at this point, that I better keep my day job as my "cartridge" making is getting worse, instead of better. There is still a few things I haven't tried, and I will be trying something new again tomorrow. I am determined to whup this dog!

Thanks for the help on trying to ID this thing. It sure ain't much, but it has been "a hoot to shoot".
Respectfully, Russ

 

it has been "a hoot to shoot".

And that statement says it all.
; My Ugly declaration only pertains to the sights on it- the gun looks just fine. Most shotguns of the 1780's to the 1830's even, were plain single guns with round or 1/2 round, 1/2 octagon barrels and pinned stocks of either 1/2 stock or full stock persuasion. By the 1830's most were indeed 1/2 stocked but not all.

 

[B.Habermehl]

When I had a 12 bore I used a .715 rb. It did require a thin patch to load easily though. .700 might load easier and allow a thicker patchGood luck BJH

 

[eat moose meat]

Now that i have B.HAbermehl's 12 ga I use a .690 roundball and a piece of blue jeans for a patch. The lead B.J gave me was to hard to load I kept hitting myself in the head with the ram rod. He thought it was funny. I thought it hurt. :cry:

 

Yes depends on bore size and patch thickness too. In my Getz .690 and .015 patch is a easy starter. I may try .700 and same patch. Some 12 bores can use the .715 ball. I don,t want to use a ball starter,but I want accuracy for deer hunting and easy starting in cold weather. A Little of each would be order.

 

[musketman]

I use a .690 roundball and a piece of blue jeans for a patch. The lead B.J gave me was to hard to load

Try blue jeans patched taken from the knee area of an old pair, the material will be thinner there because of wear...

 

[eat moose meat]

I use the material from the seat of my blue jeans. For some reason that seems to be the thinnest. :crackup: