First shot always a flyer problem...

[Casem4]

Originally I was going to but decided against it simply because I couldn't find a mold for them. I started with the intention to make my own.

 

[Rat]

Carb is right, there's another possibility. The REAL may work best in shallow groove rifles, they almost seem to be designed for those rifles, and work well in them. Or not. The REALs are very short for caliber, and I've always wondered if that wasn't because of the slow minne' rifle's twist.

On the other hand, any muzzle loading slug has to fill the grooves on firing, so it probably has nothing to do with it. On the other-other hand, trying a slug that was designed for the rifle can't be a bad idea.

Darn, I just melted down a whole bunch of .50", TC "Maxi Ball" type slugs. Could have sent you some.

 

[The Old Man]

So first off it finally happened. Took 5 years but finally downed a deer with the flintlock. Thanks for the advice that got me there. But now I have another issue I'm trying to resolve. I've made lots of adjustments so where I'm at now is 80grains of 2f with Lee real bullet 320 grain with a beeswax/crisco lube.

The problem is the first shot always seems to be low and who knows where it goes half the time. Soon as its dirty couple swabs in between shots and a pie plate at 50 yards looks like swiss cheese. But my first shot is typically the first shot on a deer with a clean rifle. So if anybody has ideas I would greatly appreciate the advice.

First, as has been mentioned there is a bit of a shortage of information to work with. Let' try.

That Lee 320 gr I also have the mould for, and never did get really good accuray from it. The 250 gr usually shoots better, but a .490 ball with an .015 patch is probably a better choice. The FFG is the normally recommended powder, but many guns seem to do better with FFFG, just drop the charge back to 70-75 grs for safety, and work up if needed.

The final thing which could be a problem is too much oil left in the bore during the fouling round. I usually Dry patch the bore prior to loading the initial round, then, once the powder in down bore, I put one more clean patch on the jag while the ball is pushed on the charge. NEVER PUT A DRY PATCH IN A FOULED BORE, it will hang up, get stuck, generally cause problems.

Well, good luck, hope I gave you something to start with.

 

[Britsmoothy]

First, as has been mentioned there is a bit of a shortage of information to work with. Let' try.

That Lee 320 gr I also have the mould for, and never did get really good accuray from it. The 250 gr usually shoots better, but a .490 ball with an .015 patch is probably a better choice. The FFG is the normally recommended powder, but many guns seem to do better with FFFG, just drop the charge back to 70-75 grs for safety, and work up if needed.

The final thing which could be a problem is too much oil left in the bore during the fouling round. I usually Dry patch the bore prior to loading the initial round, then, once the powder in down bore, I put one more clean patch on the jag while the ball is pushed on the charge. NEVER PUT A DRY PATCH IN A FOULED BORE, it will hang up, get stuck, generally cause problems.

Well, good luck, hope I gave you something to start with.

Ok. Just gotta try and get my head around this....drop from 80 gr 2f to 70-75 he 3f for safety!
Please, what scientific or instrumental data is this based on?

 

[The Old Man]

Let's try to get your head around it. What is the maximum recommended load for that particular rifle? Hmmmm.

If it's 80 grs FFG, then 80 grs FFFG weight would be too much. Then, rather than take a chance, it would be wise to reduce the charge.

Of course, your rifle has a recommended max chg wt of well beyond a hundred grains of FFG, right? So 80 grs of FFFG would not cause any chance of excessive pressures happening. You do know how finer granulations have a way of increasing pressures, right? THAT is the reason powder charges are reduced untill proven safe. Is that explaining it clearly enough?

 

[Britsmoothy]

Let's try to get your head around it. What is the maximum recommended load for that particular rifle? Hmmmm.

If it's 80 grs FFG, then 80 grs FFFG weight would be too much. Then, rather than take a chance, it would be wise to reduce the charge.

Of course, your rifle has a recommended max chg wt of well beyond a hundred grains of FFG, right? So 80 grs of FFFG would not cause any chance of excessive pressures happening. You do know how finer granulations have a way of increasing pressures, right? THAT is the reason powder charges are reduced untill proven safe. Is that explaining it clearly enough?

That explains it perfectly. You have no data to substantiate your recommendation. Also it's not my rifle.
If it was my rifle it would be running on 100 GRN charges instead of fooling with rabbit loads.




Pressure pressure pressure....everyone blathers on about pressure, even excessive pressure and they reduce a charge by 5-10 grns because everyone knows that's gonna make it much safer right? No, no it doesn't, it wasn't even remotely dangerous to start with!

When someone shows me a scientific test that by tipping a huge amount of black powder down a barrel will blow it up of any grade including 4f loaded normally bullet or shot then, and only then will I buy all this knee trembling nonsense.
Load the freaking rifle as God intended and stop wetting yourselves every time you set the powder measure!

 

[Bad Karma]

My question is... how do people “know” that the loads they’re shooting are safe? I hear people say “reduce the charge and then work your way up to a safe charge.” Other than blowing the hammer back to half or full **** or bursting the barrel entirely, what are the “signs of unsafe pressure” we’re supposed to be aware of? Are you marking and measuring your barrels, placing lead crushers in the anvil, or using strain gauges?
We don’t have any of the markers common to the cartridge firing crowd so all that’s left is historically safe loads and @Britsmoothy is right here, black powder muzzleloading arms have safe limits far beyond those imposed by the manufacturers lawyers.
There are many good reasons for using rabbit loads, fear of blowing up a muzzleloading rifle, well constructed of modern materials, (or even an ancient rifle, properly built and in good order)isn’t one of them.

 

[Grenadier1758]

Loads are generally going to be safe and we have the manufacturers' information to rely on.

For my use, I base my limits on load development. I start off with a light load and watch group size. When groups start to enlarge, I stop. More recoil than I am comfortable with, I stop.

When you have a custom build or a have bought a used custom firearm, I base my safe loads on similar manufacturing limits. I know this is quite conservative, but I am quite sure it is safe.

 

[The Old Man]

My question is... how do people “know” that the loads they’re shooting are safe? I hear people say “reduce the charge and then work your way up to a safe charge.” Other than blowing the hammer back to half or full **** or bursting the barrel entirely, what are the “signs of unsafe pressure” we’re supposed to be aware of? Are you marking and measuring your barrels, placing lead crushers in the anvil, or using strain gauges?
We don’t have any of the markers common to the cartridge firing crowd so all that’s left is historically safe loads and @Britsmoothy is right here, black powder muzzleloading arms have safe limits far beyond those imposed by the manufacturers lawyers.
There are many good reasons for using rabbit loads, fear of blowing up a muzzleloading rifle, well constructed of modern materials, (or even an ancient rifle, properly built and in good order)isn’t one of them.

First off, following the recommondations of the manufacturer is never a bad plan. Yes, I've seen caplocks go onto half **** with fouled barrels, and if you remember the Lyman recall on barrels? I had one, which likely would have burst a tube had I gone beyond the recommended load as both you and britsmoothy seem to believe is perfectly safe. And that wasn't a rabbit load either. Ever seen the photos on the web of those barrels destroyed? Unless you have some phycic ability to see defective/weak barrels you might own one.

I do not agree with throwing what everyone I am aware of reguards as reasonable safety procedures out the window. Perhaps the manufacturers err on the side of caution for legal reasons, perhaps not, but reguardless if it's a high end well made muzzleloader, or a cheap gun that never should be shot, the max loads were decided on for a reason.

In answer to your question of how does someone know they are using a safe load? YOU FOLLOW THE MANUFACTURERS INSTRUCTIONS....THAT'S WHY THEY ARE THERE!

 

[Griz44Mag]

All this talk of MAX loads.
I start with a charge equal to the ball.
Then start moving up until I get a good group.
No need to go farther unless you are using it for a hunting load.
Then I stick it into the Taylors index and make sure my load is deemed "lethal at distance" but is still accurate.

 

[Rat]

Hammer blowing back to half-**** can be caused by too big of a hole in the nipple, or a weak mainspring, not always a pressure sign.

 

[SDSmlf]

Let's try to get your head around it. What is the maximum recommended load for that particular rifle? Hmmmm.

If it's 80 grs FFG, then 80 grs FFFG weight would be too much. Then, rather than take a chance, it would be wise to reduce the charge.

Of course, your rifle has a recommended max chg wt of well beyond a hundred grains of FFG, right? So 80 grs of FFFG would not cause any chance of excessive pressures happening. You do know how finer granulations have a way of increasing pressures, right? THAT is the reason powder charges are reduced untill proven safe. Is that explaining it clearly enough?

For the last 40 Plus years have been told and personally observed that the reason for reducing load when going from ffg to fffg or heavens forbid, ffffg was to achieve the same velocity, never a safety concern. If a muzzleloader is that close to delivering shrapnel, we have a real problem industry wide. As far as published load data, Lyman, in their original black powder handbook listed ffffg loads for revolvers. Accuracy is only concern as far as I could tell. Does that set everyone’s hair on fire? Think not. Or at least it should not, at least in my opinion. Accuracy performance will tell you when you have the correct load.

 

[Britsmoothy]

All ways makes me giggle this one does.

Millions reload smokeless ammunition.
There are hundreds of different powders for smokeless. Documented accounts abound of mistakes in powder applications or charge weights that have caused firearm failures but to this day no one has shown me a muzzleloader loaded correctly with any amount and of any granulation of black powder and with no cavitation or blockage that has failed.

Some whip this fear of harm up with no real grounds for doing so. Why some will then go and reload some 38special with the tiniest amount of bullseye knowing full well double dosing a single case could destroy their revolver! But reducing black powder by 5-10 GRN because of granulation change....for safety....really!!

These people know nothing of the properties of black powder.
Black powder has a limit to the work it can yield. You can not keep doubling the charge and keep doubling the yield. Eventually some of the charge becomes projectile and once it is combusting adds little to yield and pressure.
The other aspect to black powder and arguably the most important one, as long as what ever you wish to move can move and as one with the powder, black powder, it will be perfectly safe.
So failing to go above a charge weight based on fear is a mute point. In fact you may be missing on the rifles sweet spot by such thinking.
It won't necessarily be the extra pressure that finds the sweet spot. It could be in fact the extra pressure is minimal. No it could simply be the change in gun dynamics and or harmonics caused by extra powder.
So what if a hammer is sent to half ****. Ooooo spooky voodoo. No not really. It must be an omen. No, not really. It's a sign, no, not really.

Again, we are all in far more danger driving an automobile than using a MUZZLELOADING firearm.

 

[Kestrel]

Couldn't copy the link, but on You Tube, there is a video titled - Smokeless Powder in a Muzzleloader ? These guys have a hell of a time blowing up your run of the mill gun. They finally get it done but not in anyway, shape or form that one of us would EVER try.

 

[Grenadier1758]

Britsmoothy, I agree that safety is not an issue when I recommend a 10% reduction in powder charge when going from 2fg to 3fg or GOEX to Swiss powder. My reason for reduction is to keep the performance similar. When we review the Lyman pressure data in the loading manuals we see affirmation of pressures well within the safety limits of our barrels and breeches. What is also evident are the differences in loading levels between powders that produce equivalent velocity.

There is a factor of conservative safety practice that sometimes can over shadow existing data. I will plan to err on the side of safety.

 

[Britsmoothy]

Couldn't copy the link, but on You Tube, there is a video titled - Smokeless Powder in a Muzzleloader ? These guys have a hell of a time blowing up your run of the mill gun. They finally get it done but not in anyway, shape or form that one of us would EVER try.

 

[Bad Karma]

Hammer blowing back to half-**** can be caused by too big of a hole in the nipple, or a weak mainspring, not always a pressure sign.

Was kind of my point. There’s no reliable way for you, me, or any other hobbyist to determine safe pressure in a muzzleloading firearm. As @Britsmoothy has so eloquently stated, any load will be safe. And as a few others have noted, accurate, powerful loads should be our goal. Some may trade power for accuracy, or vice versa but fear of grenading the gun is not a concern as long as there’s no bore obstruction.

 

[Bad Karma]

80 gr. H110 and all it did was bulge the barrel. I’m amazed.

 

[Zonie]

This video is a sticky on the General Muzzleloading area of the forum's index page.
The post explains that although it is showing In-Line guns, the message was deemed important enough to ignore that issue on the MLF.



For a link to the full MLF topic, follow this link

https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/threads/smokeless-powder-in-muzzleloaders.86652/#post-1097366

 

[Britsmoothy]

This video is a sticky on the General Muzzleloading area of the forum's index page.
The post explains that although it is showing In-Line guns, the message was deemed important enough to ignore that issue on the MLF.



For a link to the full MLF topic, follow this link

https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/threads/smokeless-powder-in-muzzleloaders.86652/#post-1097366

Good video, thanks for highlighting it zonie.