Ball starters

[Arrowstorm]

Now, I have heard some of the hard-core traditionalists say that there was no such thing as a ball starter, some don't use them at all, and one fellow recently posted in a topic "..ball starters... should be left at home."

Now, I shoot .490 roundball with .018 pillowticking and i wonder... without my starter.. how in the world am I to get that ball down in that barrel?

 

[mmahlock]

I must first tell you that I'm not one for absolute PCness. I also use a short starter. The short answer for eliminating the short starter is to have be barrel conned. This involves having the lands filed or sanded back to the groves at the muzzle and tapering back to the original land height over an inch or two so that the ball slips down the barrel an inch or so before engaging the lands. From there you just use or rammer. In my mind this is not something done by amatures such as me. If I were you and wanted to do it, I'd take it to a muzzleloading gun smith or maker and have them do it they have the tools and the experience.

:v

 

[Arrowstorm]

so basically... then the very end of the muzzle is pretty much "flared" out from the remaining diameter of the barrel? Was this common? would that get in the way of accuracty at all?

 

[Halftail]

Now, I have heard some of the hard-core traditionalists say that there was no such thing as a ball starter, some don't use them at all, and one fellow recently posted in a topic "..ball starters... should be left at home."

Someone else posted....."Opinions are like certain Orifices ......everybody has one"

Some like short starters some don't. :v

 

[Swampman]

More than common, it was nearly universal. It doesn't affect accuracy. With the correct patch and ball combination, a short starter isn't needed even without coning the muzzle.

 

[LRB]

If you shoot target competition, use your tight load and starter. If you just shoot for fun and hunting you may want your muzzle coned. The majority of 18th C. rifles were coned. This practice was not normally used by target shooters of the 19th C. It comes down to what you want. Off the shoulder, you probably would never see a difference.

 

[Swampman]

Off the bench you will never see a difference either.

 

[longfowler]

I just finnished coning 4 of my 50cal guns. a friend of mine loaned me the tool & sandpaper. it's so easy, I did 2 barrels each nite while watching the tube. I havn't shot them yet, but his guns seem accurate enough to make me jealous. It sure does seem like they will load much better now, I can thumb start the ball. even if it doesn't improve the accuracy, it seems like it would be worth it just to make the loading process simpler. I'm sure I'll have more to say about it when I get back from the range.

 

[Stumpkiller]

My barrel is not coned. I can load a 0.022" patch and a .530" ball in my .54 L.C. Rice barrel with just the rammer gripped 6" from the end (it is tapered and this gives added purchase). Now, granted, this patch size I have to wipe every third shot or so. Not so with a 0.018" or smaller. LC put a medium radius crown on mine and it makes loading MUCH easier without getting into the rifling like coning does. He also swages his barrels with a carbide die and they are glass smooth.

Are you using Natural Lube/Bore Butter or Moose Snot? These lubes really do make loading easier.

 

[Swampman]

You should buy the coning tool for $38.00. It's well worth the money.

 

[mmahlock]

so basically... then the very end of the muzzle is pretty much "flared" out from the remaining diameter of the barrel? Was this common? would that get in the way of accuracty at all?

To answer your question, the barrel is not flared. the rifling lands are just reduced in height from their designed height to 0 or near 0 at the muzzle over an inch or two right before the muzzle. What your are essentially doing is making your barrel shorter by the amout of the coneing. This converts the last inch or so of the barrel at the muzzle into a loading funnel. Hope this answers your question.

 

[roundball]

"...and one fellow recently posted in a topic "ball starters"...should be left at home..."

:rotf:...Don't you just love it !

FWIW, every load I make is done with a short starter...don't care if they were "PC" or were not "PC"...or if they once were and now are not...or never were then became accepted...or if anyone else approved of it in the past, or approves of it now or in the future...I approve of it for me and that's all that counts.

I can't / don't want to / won't thumb start 50 shots every Saturday morning, so I use a short starter for all my practice...and I hunt like I practice..........ergo...............

:thumbsup:

 

[DrTimboone]

My muzzle is coned. I thumb start them all very easily. Best thing for me is that I have to carry and juggle one less thing in the field.

 

[longfowler]

Just got back from the range this afternoon, used one of the guns I coned. shot a six shot, 2-1/2 inch group at 20 yds offhand. loaded them from a block with just the ramrod. nice to not have to worry about the short starter, especially with that accuracy!

 

[bnail]

FWIW, every load I make is done with a short starter...don't care if they were "PC" or were not "PC"...or if they once were and now are not...or never were then became accepted...or if anyone else approved of it in the past, or approves of it now or in the future...I approve of it for me and that's all that counts.

I can't / don't want to / won't thumb start 50 shots every Saturday morning, so I use a short starter for all my practice...and I hunt like I practice..........ergo...............

Roundball, don't hold it in, tell me how you really feel, :rotf: :rotf: :rotf:
Seriously though, you make some great points. IMO, much of what is considered "PC" is more "Period Chic" than "Period Correct," and I believe short starters fall into this category. Too much of what reenactors do revolves around trends. granted, many times these "trends" reflect the most current documentation and research, but all too often, a guru will espouse his beliefs, and the others will follow suit without corroborating with independent reading.
I'd say the short-starters are such a personal accessory, that one should be able to carry it without comment or justification; Just don't make up a history to it without documentation.
Others should take a page from your book RB :thumbsup:

 

[Arrowstorm]

well... seeing as how there aren't any gunsmiths around here that mess with flintlock that I know of, and therefore, I won't be able to get my muzzle coned, I'll be sticking with my short starter. In fact, I kinda like bopping that round ball with a quick rap. Of course, if they're not "PC", at least mine is made of wood, not plastic. Wouldn't THINK of using plastic, you know.Lol.

 

[paulvallandigham]

arrowstorm: Just buy the tapered reamer from Joe Wood over in Texas, and do it yourself. If you can drive a bolt into a stock recess and into a gun, you can cone your own barrel. IF you have ever cut new threads with a tap and tapwrench, you will be using the same skills. More important, you will have the satisfaction of doing the work yourself, and not being dependent on some gunsmith for this minor work. It is not more difficult than sharening an pencil, and considering the taper is so much more gradual, it is actually easier to do it right.

 

[Zonie]

I wonder...how many of the old original barrels which have had their muzzles worn away due to 230 years of improper cleaning with a unguided, dirty shafted ramrod have suddenly become "coned"?

I'm not saying these old "worn out" muzzles were not "coned" but I don't recall reading about "intentionally coned" muzzles in anything which was written before 1950.

This brings up the question;
" If a muzzle is "worn out" in a uniform manner from negligent cleaning with a unguided fiberglass ramrod, how is that different from a coned muzzle aside from the fact that the fiberglass ramrod didn't cost $38?" :hmm: :hmm:

 

[paulvallandigham]

Zonie: My brother bought an old gun several years ago. He thought it might be .36 cal, but the muzzle seemed to be oval, rather than round. When we got home, a .36 cal. rod would not go down the barrel. He eventually had the breechplug pulled, and found a bore obstruction about 5 inches in front of the chamber, which still held some black powder! The bore was so pitted, it had to be rebored and rerifled. It is now .42 caliber. The barrel had been coned, but it also showed wear in the last 1/2 inch from years of ramrod use. The barrel dates to the early 1800's or late 1790's, as best as all the experts who have examined it. He is happy to have restored it to use.

For our purpose, the likelihood of a shooter wearing a muzzle evenly over 30-50 years of shooting and cleaning is remote, if even a possibility. With today's steels, it would take 4 times that long to wear out the muzzle. This old barrel is iron, and much softer. You can see the hammer forging marks on the bottom of the barrel, as only the top 5 flats are draw filed to shape. This barrel was taken from a flintlock long rifle, shortened, and rebreeched, and made into a half stock percussion gun in the 1870's or '80's. We didn't know what coning was, until after the barrel came back from the man who rebored and re-rifled the thing. It shoots very well, although the patent breech has had to be redone on it, since he got it.

 

[roundball]

Roundball, don't hold it in, tell me how you really feel, :rotf: :rotf: :rotf:

:rotf: :rotf: