-
Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.
We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.
Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103
Fowler/Trade Gun or Proper Shotgun?
- Thread starter Nuthatch
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
Wildrangeringreen
40 Cal
Referencing Reply #16
"Now see I don't buy this notion of looking on a box of shotgun cartridges for the dram equivalent. No way will a muzzleloader with its vented breech match the performance of a sealed breech via a cartridge.
To get a muzzleloader to match a cartridge you have to add much more powder and much more shot to which I have no issue in doing other than cost."
-They said the same thing about gas operated self-loading unmentionables for decades, with their gas ports in the barrel; but the difference between a manual loading and self-loading unmentionable is usually only 25-75fps. If your vent isn't shot out, and is thereby giving you consistent velocities, you will be very close to standard loads. Also, the "dram equivalency" is in reference to the similarity of the velocity between the modern smokeless charge and the traditional BP charge with that particular payload in that bore size.
"I here this thing about muzzleloadrs are 25 yard guns with cylinder bores but it simply is not so. Just put more shot in it, stop using anything courser than 3f and stop using thick wads."
-Obviously, most of the shot is going to be able to go beyond 25 yards, but your pattern gets excessively large quickly (especially so with shot smaller than lead BB). The ONLY solution in a cylinder bore is therefore to increase the number of pieces of shot (and some more powder to keep the trajectory similar), in order to "fill in" the big gaps in the pattern (and you get a nice extra helping of recoil to go with it). Kinda wasteful (if there are other options), if you ask me, but to each their own; would much rather use 1/2 oz of shot and 55gr of powder in a choked barrel than use 7/8 oz and 75 grains of powder to kill the same bird lol. Not going to comment on powder granulations, there's several schools of thought on that. Having a nice cushion under the shot tends to reduce deformation somewhat, but some people use thick wadding over the shot as well for some reason; the issue with that is it can interfere with the separation of the shot and wadding at the muzzle (quite a few early breechloading rifle designs had issues with that (like the Westley Richards Monkey Tail).
"Another thing I don't get is how it is believed that a larger bore is better because the shot string is shorter. Not so. If that were true all the popular 20g or .62" muzzleloafers would be useless! My .45 certainly has proved itself!
-Larger bores with the same payload have a shorter shot column in the barrel, this reduces the difference in inertia between the rear of the column and the front. This reduces deformation of the shot, and tends to pattern better. Besides, I'm not sure anyone has claimed that smaller bores are not effective; just that they are less capable than the larger ones (I believe that the Brits came up with a .40-something shotgun chambering for use as a garden gun at some point, but IDK). The reality is that you can fit more pieces of shot (and larger shot) and more powder in a larger bore, and get it to pattern well.
"Does not choking lengthen the shot string to achieve a tighter pattern?"
-it can with very tight chokes (like, extra-extra-full turkey chokes). Shot traveling down a barrel isn't a solid slug of lead, and a choke forces the spaced out pieces of shot into a more dense mass of shot (generally by reducing the shot column in both in length and circumference). Choke restrictions do not have to be very much to be effective (a few degrees is all it takes), and excessively tight restrictions will cause excessive pressures and shot deformation.
"Is not therefore a smaller bore already matching a choked bore of a larger gauge somewhat with a like for like load?"
-not exactly, reference the points I made above about large vs small bore shotguns.
"Is not a smaller bore going to have higher pressure and henceforth higher velocity compared to a larger gauge with like for like load?
Its all myths and bluster!"
-Yes, velocity will generally be slightly higher out of the small bore. My general recommendation is that if you are primarily going to be shooting light loads in whatever bore you are thinking about, that you opt to go down in bore size and use a "more stout" loading in the smaller bore (smaller, lighter guns, and you can download it further than the larger bore, meaning more shots per pound, which is a good thing). Smaller bores are more efficient/economical on powder and shot, no need using more than you need. I like 20, 28 bore and .40" shotguns with chokes for that reason.
"As I said earlier, they all work and better than some think, especially when you think out the box!"
-Absolutely correct.
Unless it's a repro-musket (of which, I haven't owned any for a while), I personally won't keep a smoothbore that isn't choked, or capable of taking tubes, in at least one barrel. I'm a hunter and shooter, not a reenactor; and anything I keep needs to be focused on usability, more than appearing exactly historically correct. Proper, purpose-built shotguns are going to be better shotguns than a multi-purpose gun will be.
"Now see I don't buy this notion of looking on a box of shotgun cartridges for the dram equivalent. No way will a muzzleloader with its vented breech match the performance of a sealed breech via a cartridge.
To get a muzzleloader to match a cartridge you have to add much more powder and much more shot to which I have no issue in doing other than cost."
-They said the same thing about gas operated self-loading unmentionables for decades, with their gas ports in the barrel; but the difference between a manual loading and self-loading unmentionable is usually only 25-75fps. If your vent isn't shot out, and is thereby giving you consistent velocities, you will be very close to standard loads. Also, the "dram equivalency" is in reference to the similarity of the velocity between the modern smokeless charge and the traditional BP charge with that particular payload in that bore size.
"I here this thing about muzzleloadrs are 25 yard guns with cylinder bores but it simply is not so. Just put more shot in it, stop using anything courser than 3f and stop using thick wads."
-Obviously, most of the shot is going to be able to go beyond 25 yards, but your pattern gets excessively large quickly (especially so with shot smaller than lead BB). The ONLY solution in a cylinder bore is therefore to increase the number of pieces of shot (and some more powder to keep the trajectory similar), in order to "fill in" the big gaps in the pattern (and you get a nice extra helping of recoil to go with it). Kinda wasteful (if there are other options), if you ask me, but to each their own; would much rather use 1/2 oz of shot and 55gr of powder in a choked barrel than use 7/8 oz and 75 grains of powder to kill the same bird lol. Not going to comment on powder granulations, there's several schools of thought on that. Having a nice cushion under the shot tends to reduce deformation somewhat, but some people use thick wadding over the shot as well for some reason; the issue with that is it can interfere with the separation of the shot and wadding at the muzzle (quite a few early breechloading rifle designs had issues with that (like the Westley Richards Monkey Tail).
"Another thing I don't get is how it is believed that a larger bore is better because the shot string is shorter. Not so. If that were true all the popular 20g or .62" muzzleloafers would be useless! My .45 certainly has proved itself!
-Larger bores with the same payload have a shorter shot column in the barrel, this reduces the difference in inertia between the rear of the column and the front. This reduces deformation of the shot, and tends to pattern better. Besides, I'm not sure anyone has claimed that smaller bores are not effective; just that they are less capable than the larger ones (I believe that the Brits came up with a .40-something shotgun chambering for use as a garden gun at some point, but IDK). The reality is that you can fit more pieces of shot (and larger shot) and more powder in a larger bore, and get it to pattern well.
"Does not choking lengthen the shot string to achieve a tighter pattern?"
-it can with very tight chokes (like, extra-extra-full turkey chokes). Shot traveling down a barrel isn't a solid slug of lead, and a choke forces the spaced out pieces of shot into a more dense mass of shot (generally by reducing the shot column in both in length and circumference). Choke restrictions do not have to be very much to be effective (a few degrees is all it takes), and excessively tight restrictions will cause excessive pressures and shot deformation.
"Is not therefore a smaller bore already matching a choked bore of a larger gauge somewhat with a like for like load?"
-not exactly, reference the points I made above about large vs small bore shotguns.
"Is not a smaller bore going to have higher pressure and henceforth higher velocity compared to a larger gauge with like for like load?
Its all myths and bluster!"
-Yes, velocity will generally be slightly higher out of the small bore. My general recommendation is that if you are primarily going to be shooting light loads in whatever bore you are thinking about, that you opt to go down in bore size and use a "more stout" loading in the smaller bore (smaller, lighter guns, and you can download it further than the larger bore, meaning more shots per pound, which is a good thing). Smaller bores are more efficient/economical on powder and shot, no need using more than you need. I like 20, 28 bore and .40" shotguns with chokes for that reason.
"As I said earlier, they all work and better than some think, especially when you think out the box!"
-Absolutely correct.
Unless it's a repro-musket (of which, I haven't owned any for a while), I personally won't keep a smoothbore that isn't choked, or capable of taking tubes, in at least one barrel. I'm a hunter and shooter, not a reenactor; and anything I keep needs to be focused on usability, more than appearing exactly historically correct. Proper, purpose-built shotguns are going to be better shotguns than a multi-purpose gun will be.
Last edited:
Brokennock
Cannon
Sometimes I can't help but wonder why some people bother with muzzleloaders.
What with the constant attempts to compare performance to, and achieve the performance of, modern cartridge arms.
What with the constant attempts to compare performance to, and achieve the performance of, modern cartridge arms.
megasupermagnum
45 Cal.
No, choke does not increase shot string, it does the opposite. A full choke produces a shorter shot string than a cylinder bore.
No, a smaller cylinder bore does not approximate a choked larger bore for patterns.
While a smaller bore with an identical load will produce higher pressures, it does not mean it will produce higher velocity. For example we will compare a 45 caliber to a 78 caliber. Lets assume identical loads in each produces 20,000 psi in the 45 caliber, and 10,000 psi in the 78 caliber. The force applied to a 45 caliber at 20,000 psi is 3181 lb ft. The force applied to a 78 caliber at 10,000 psi is 4717 lb ft. So right off the bat, the 10 gauge is providing more force to the load than the 45 caliber despite half the pressure. There's a lot more to it, but the notion that the same load in different guns, that the higher pressure gun will provide a higher velocity is not true.
I'm assuming nothing in order to come to try and achieve a definitive conclusion. Sorry.
I wasn't asking for an explanation.
However, you certainly aided my convictions.
There is a large volume of blah blah blah on the subject.
The old classic chestnut about shot deformation via long shot columns.
Not so, if it were such a terrible issue there would be no 3" or longer cartridges available today. And if anything a muzzleloader is much more gentle on shot anyway.
Another chestnut, cushion wads.
. Utter nonsense. Marketing clap trap the self appointed experts have fallen for!Myths and bluster sorry.
Expert speak.
Really, I'm gonna take some convincing on that one friend!
If larger gauges are better, how come we are not all using 8g, 6g and 4g?
Surely if a short shot string is best why have we stopped? To follow the notion should a barrel 3' wide loaded with 1oz not throw a perfect pattern?
Good luck with that one.
I'll just stick to what I know works and leave the thinking to them that like to
Surely if a short shot string is best why have we stopped? To follow the notion should a barrel 3' wide loaded with 1oz not throw a perfect pattern?
Good luck with that one.
I'll just stick to what I know works and leave the thinking to them that like to
DuncNZ
54 Cal.
A dram is 16th of an ounce ,= 27.344 grains for some reason loads for muzzle loading shotguns were often measured in Drams .All of my old shotgun powder flasks and measures are graduated in drams .
When the World changed to smokeless , shooters wanted to know how the new loads compared with the old. Chronographs were virtually unknown in those days and shooters generally had no idea how fast their loads were going , but they did know the 3 dram 1 1/8 oz load they had always used was "hard hitting " .
Hence ammo companies started putting Dram equivalents on ammo packets , this quaint custom still lingers to this day but has no real use any more . It applied to sealed breach guns not muzzle loading guns . Using a packet of ammo to determine how much powder you should put in your ML shotgun seems a little bizarre to me .
12 Gauge Dram Equivalent Chart
Remember these velocities apply to sealed breach 12 ga cartridge firearms and will be less in a ML ,caliber , Powder type and make will also make a difference .
When the World changed to smokeless , shooters wanted to know how the new loads compared with the old. Chronographs were virtually unknown in those days and shooters generally had no idea how fast their loads were going , but they did know the 3 dram 1 1/8 oz load they had always used was "hard hitting " .
Hence ammo companies started putting Dram equivalents on ammo packets , this quaint custom still lingers to this day but has no real use any more . It applied to sealed breach guns not muzzle loading guns . Using a packet of ammo to determine how much powder you should put in your ML shotgun seems a little bizarre to me .
12 Gauge Dram Equivalent Chart
| Shot Weight (oz) | 5/8 | 3/4 | 7/8 | 1 | 1-1/8 | 1-1/4 | 1-3/8 | 1-1/2 | 1-5/8 | 1-3/4 | 1-7/8 | 2 | 2-1/8 | 2-1/4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dram Equivalent | Load Vel. (fps) | LV | LV | LV | LV | LV | LV | LV | LV | LV | LV | LV | LV | LV |
| 2 | 1120 | 1085 | 1050 | 1015 | 980 | 945 | 910 | 875 | 840 | 805 | 770 | 735 | 700 | 665 |
| 2-1/4 | 1175 | 1140 | 1105 | 1070 | 1035 | 1000 | 965 | 930 | 895 | 860 | 825 | 790 | 755 | 720 |
| 2-1/2 | 1230 | 1195 | 1160 | 1125 | 1090 | 1055 | 1020 | 985 | 950 | 915 | 880 | 845 | 810 | 775 |
| 2-3/4 | 1285 | 1250 | 1215 | 1180 | 1145 | 1110 | 1075 | 1040 | 1005 | 970 | 935 | 900 | 865 | 830 |
| 3 | 1340 | 1305 | 1270 | 1235 | 1200 | 1165 | 1130 | 1095 | 1060 | 1025 | 990 | 955 | 920 | 885 |
| 3-1/4 | 1395 | 1360 | 1325 | 1290 | 1255 | 1220 | 1185 | 1150 | 1115 | 1080 | 1045 | 1010 | 975 | 940 |
| 3-1/2 | 1450 | 1415 | 1380 | 1345 | 1310 | 1275 | 1240 | 1205 | 1170 | 1135 | 1100 | 1065 | 1030 | 995 |
| 3-3/4 | 1505 | 1470 | 1435 | 1400 | 1365 | 1330 | 1295 | 1260 | 1225 | 1190 | 1155 | 1120 | 1085 | 1050 |
| 4 | 1560 | 1525 | 1490 | 1455 | 1420 | 1385 | 1350 | 1315 | 1280 | 1245 | 1210 | 1175 | 1140 | 1105 |
| 4-1/4 | 1615 | 1580 | 1545 | 1510 | 1475 | 1440 | 1405 | 1370 | 1335 | 1300 | 1265 | 1230 | 1195 | 1160 |
| 4-1/2 | 1670 | 1635 | 1600 | 1565 | 1530 | 1495 | 1460 | 1425 | 1390 | 1355 | 1320 | 1285 | 1250 | 1215 |
| 4-3/4 | 1725 | 1690 | 1655 | 1620 | 1585 | 1550 | 1515 | 1480 | 1445 | 1410 | 1375 | 1340 | 1305 | 1270 |
| 5 | 1780 | 1745 | 1710 | 1675 | 1640 | 1605 | 1570 | 1535 | 1500 | 1465 | 1430 | 1395 | 1360 | 1325 |
Absolutely spot on
Absolutely spot on
DuncNZ
54 Cal.
Most people now days think a dram is a shot of Scotch Whiskey 
Wildrangeringreen
40 Cal
remember how I said that more shot being put in the barrel just "fills in the gaps" in the pattern... yah, that's what the long shells are for. They often do not pattern as good at closer ranges, but when you are looking to extend your range, or use steel/stainless/nickel plated steel shot for migratory birds in the US (or about anything in Britain lol, those poor guys); you need more shot, and that shot takes up volume.I wasn't asking for an explanation.
However, you certainly aided my convictions.
There is a large volume of blah blah blah on the subject.
The old classic chestnut about shot deformation via long shot columns.
Not so, if it were such a terrible issue there would be no 3" or longer cartridges available today. And if anything a muzzleloader is much more gentle on shot anyway.
Another chestnut, cushion wads.
Myths and bluster sorry.
Expert speak.
Cushioning wadding is a thing, it spreads out the initial impulse of the powder burning over a longer time, and just like having a reasonable shot column length, and protecting the shot from the bore; it sets the loading up to deform the shot as little as possible. Out of round, round shot doesn't fly consistently, and loses velocity much faster. The reason Bismuth polygonal prisms shoot halfway decent is because the faces have increased air resistance, and like a golf ball, that rotates the shot piece around enough that the effects of it not being round are mostly mitigated. Do you use felt wadding under your shot? How about tow or cotton? Wadded up paper? If you do, you are using cushioning wadding; just because it isn't plastic with an accordion-esque section doesn't make it not cushioning.
The reason most of us aren't using 10 and 8 bores is because, when loaded moderately or heavily, they are overkill for almost all applications (exceptions: using steel shot, commercial waterfowl hunting) like I said earlier, If you are going to primarily be loading the larger bore lightly, you might as well go with a smaller one and load it up lol.
What's next, trying to convince the world that the round ball is the best projectile ever invented (proceeds to duck head for incoming fire)? lol
Commenting on another post- The reason most of us mess with these obsolete weapons is because they're fun. The reason they get compared to modern arms as much as they do is because of non-stop claims by people (both "in" and "out" of the know) that they are substantially less capable than modern arms... and that's not realistic. The biggest developments in firearms over the last 150 years have been in the form of ammunition packaging (self contained metal/polymer cased cartridges), self-loading mechanisms, and component mfg techniques; NOT in the terminal effectiveness of firearms. For most practical purposes, all the extra velocity (read: usable range) of smokeless magnums is wasted on the fact that it's still a human behind the gun. I think too many people get too hung up on "what's PC/HC" and the reenacting side of things that they miss that part of muzzle loading. The "fun" for them comes from recreating something from the past, rather than just enjoying shooting a particular style of gun. Nothing wrong with it, it's just a different angle to enjoy muzzle loading.
The shops who's whole selling point is that you can match or supersede smokeless magnum performance are mostly shops that make smokeless ML's out of Rem700's (and now CVA with the Paramount); in a market where everyone is basically doing the same thing, the easiest thing to market are numbers, rather than the joy that can come from using a ML. The "trad" market isn't much better, except instead of numbers they market, mfg's often market how good of a museum-grade forgery they produce (nothing wrong with repros, but there's more to ML'ing than just copying someone else).
I got into ML back as a teenager because I loved shooting and hunting, and flintlock rifles looked like fun, not because I was trying to emulate a historical person or era. Maybe that's why I butt heads with some of the guys on the forum as much as I do. A gun's a gun, doesn't matter if it's a matchlock or a super-mall-ninja-AR, it's that some guns are just more enjoyable to use.
Last edited:
Nope and nope.
I just use a few thin cards.
I think you will find all types of wad used in cartridge manufacturing. Be it made of whatever is to primarily take up the room in a standardised cartridge case length originally designed around a larger volumetric dose of black powder.
As for extra time to discourage deformation, utter nonsense!
Tell me please, what is the time difference please between getting deformed shot and avoiding deformed shot? Is it one nanosecond or two
Smoothbore beliefs are like denominations in religions. It’s what works for individuals and not necessarily based on more than their personal experiences. And they are convinced everyone else has it wrong. No sense reasoning or discussing it.
Wildrangeringreen
40 Cal
Shot that isn't cushioned, especially in the long shot columns you seem to like, get deformed the same way a ball or bullet does when its upset into rifling. Difference in inertia between the front and back of the payload causes the column to shorten somewhat and is squashed wider to take up the bore. The gentler that happens, the less damage the shot is going to take. The shot column starts moving almost immediately, the cushion buys time so the front of it gets moving before the back causes a lot of deformation.Nope and nope.
I just use a few thin cards.
I think you will find all types of wad used in cartridge manufacturing. Be it made of whatever is to primarily take up the room in a standardised cartridge case length originally designed around a larger volumetric dose of black powder.
As for extra time to discourage deformation, utter nonsense!
Tell me please, what is the time difference please between getting deformed shot and avoiding deformed shot? Is it one nanosecond or two
Or maybe I'm wrong, and the last 150 years of shotgun improvements are complete fabrications developed by a grand conspiracy by virtually all major ammunition mfgs of the day... to this day lol; and what's it for? To get you to pay an extra $0.01 for wadding that you didn't need (which the company had to pay to have made, and raises its operating costs)... it's the man, man!
I am gonna have to agree with rich pierce on this one, but I'll expand it a bit: Muzzle loading beliefs for a lot of people approach dogma-status, makes it hard to have a productive discussion lol
Last edited:
megasupermagnum
45 Cal.
The amazing thing is you can provide chronograph, pressure testing, and highspeed footage, and most still won't even give it a second thought.
How much time does a so called cushion wad buy the shot so it is deformed less. Your words! How many nanoseconds are bought that makes the difference?
Why do shot makers add antimony if they just needed a so called cushion wad?
How come when I pull shot from game that has not struck bone but been fired from a breech loader that is using a so called cushion wad it has deformation?
How come when I pull shot from game that has been shot with a muzzleloader that is using just thin cards for a wad I see less deformation?
The past 150 years of shotgun improvements actually amount to very little advancement at all!
Most of it is sales pitch. The use of choice words to whip up the imagination of hopefully purchasers! Like......cushion wad
.I once had an argument with another expert whome said I can't use toilet paper in a cartridge for wadding. So I went and did just that and videoed the results for him.
Should of developed it and sold them. With a catchy logo on the box like, "good for a flush" or "the turdimator ". Some dang fool would buy it
Last edited:
To the contrary, I always ask for evidence to sweeping comments, assumptions and statements of fact but very little if any appear!
Like you very own words regarding shotgun barrel chokes. You said they do not lengthen a shot column as the shot passes through it.
Any evidence?
Snydly
54 Cal.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2012
- Messages
- 405
- Reaction score
- 669
Match the load on a box of modern shot shells and then shoot through a chronograph. The difference between them is very small. Have done this since the 80s. Works very well in my 12ga. SxS and my 20ga SxS. Chronograph's are your friend.
