Has anyone Chrongraphed Loads

[Dean2]

I read a lot of different recommendations on loads for anything from 32 caliber on up. There are folks recommending as little as 20 grains in a 45 caliber rifle.

Patched round balls won't be quite as velocity sensitive as most other types of projectiles, but I was wondering if anyone had tried chronographing a sequence of loads from say 20 to 100 grains going up 5 or ten grains at a time. If you have I would love to see the results. Thanks

 

[roundball]

Here's one example:

T/C .45cal 15/16” x 32” Flint barrel
1:66” round ball twist
.018" T/C NL1000 pillow ticking
Hornady .440 balls
Wiped the bore after every shot
Pact Pro MK5 Chronograph at 15 feet
Goex 3F powder charges
Average velocity rounded off to nearest 5 fps

30grns = 1155 fps
40grns = 1290 fps
50grns = 1435 fps
60grns = 1560 fps
70grns = 1635 fps
80grns = 1720 fps
90grns = 1805 fps
100grns = 1870 fps

 

[ebiggs1]

My lord, when will you ever learn? The maximum amount of powder you can shoot from a 45 cal is 54.831 grs, of anything you want, with the rest just being thrown out of the barrel unburnt. This can easily be seen by just waiting for a layer of new fallen snow. Simply shoot the rifle over the snow and get on your hands and knees and look for the obvious unburnt powder on the ground. :bow:

 

[roundball]

I know, I know...I'm just one of those die-hards who stays hung up on facts
:idunno:

 

[Rifleman1776]

I know, I know...I'm just one of those die-hards who stays hung up on facts
:idunno:

Amen. You said it much more politer than I was about to do. :wink:
BTW, thanks for those chrono figures. Interesting.

 

[Billnpatti]

While many, if not most, folks discredit the Davenport formula, it has proven true in this data. If you were to plot the velocities VS the powder charges, you would see a break in the curve between 50 and 60 grains. Now, if you were to calculate the maximum effective load using the Davenport formula, it would give you a number of 58.5 grains. Pretty close agreement for an old and often discredited formula, wouldn't you agree? Just an interesting observation. :stir:

 

[BrownBear]

Yawn.

 

[roundball]

Just an interesting observation.

It's of zero interest...just pointless, meaningless, irrelevant, keyboard blather having no value / applicability in the real world of shooting muzzleloders.
The MLF should add a Fantasy Section for such formulas.

 

[ebiggs1]

”¦ wouldn't you agree? ”¦

No! I wouldn't.

 

[Billnpatti]

I didn't say it was going to make your day, I was just playing with the data and saw an interesting correlation. I don't use the Davenport formula for anything, I just know if its existance and noticed that the data did, in fact,in this instance, square pretty well with the Davenport formula. I know it is of little use in the real world but it is of historical interest. Gosh, why does the mear mention of the Davenport formula rile folks so. Easy there, folks. Just settle down. It was only an observation. Useful or not, it was just an observation.

 

[roundball]

Yawn.

:grin:
Yeah, it's as meaningful to real world muzzleloading as the statement:
On my way to get the oil & filter changed, I drove past some trees.

 

[Rifleman1776]

rile folks so. Easy there, folks. Just settle down

It is more fun to get riled. :rotf:
Can we now put Davenport in the same category as Wal-Mart, WD-40 and Ebay for starting hysterical arguments with the mere mention of their names? :wink:

As far as charges over a certain amount are concered, I like to say, "Only the "X's" know."
The proof is on the dinner plate or in the winners circle.

 

[ebiggs1]

I didn't make mention to the Davenport Formula!?

I made up that amount of powder to poke fun at roundball. He is a man that keeps incredibly detailed specs of his shooting experiences. It was intended to make light if that. I am sure he is very well aware of my intention. :grin:

 

[crockett]

We all shoot through a crony set a few feet away from the muzzle but with a PRB that loses velocity quickly that is a poor test IMHO. What we need is velocity at various ranges- 50 yards, 75 yards, 100 yards. I once read that years ago a set of paper targets were set up- say 5 -10 yards apart- at the desired ranges (50 yards/100 yards/etc) and a level was used to set the two targets even. Then the bullet drop between the two sheets enabled one to estimate the velocity. NOW I'm probably wrong on some of the details- but that was sort of the nuts and bolts of it.

 

[paulvallandigham]

Mr. Biggs and his fans always FAIL to mention that the Davenport Formula( 11.5 grains per cubic inch of more)is for Match Target shooters, NOT PLINKERS, nor HUNTERS. It was developed by match shooters at Friendship, Ind.( NMLRA) to squeeze the maximum accuracy from rifles.

Plinkers rarely need such level of accuracy, while Hunters are more than willing to give up some accuracy in favor of flatter trajectory.

Using a chronograph to develop loads is only part of the equation. Accuracy depends on actual shooting of groups with the gun, under range conditions, off a rest, to eliminate as many human variables as possible. Loads which may appear to be "Accurate" at short yardage, often will fail at longer yardage because of poor loading techniques, or poor choices of components. :shocked2: :hmm: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

 

[jerrywh]

You left out the phraze, [ for maximum efficiency]

 

[roundball]

We all shoot through a crony set a few feet away from the muzzle but with a PRB that loses velocity quickly that is a poor test IMHO. What we need is velocity at various ranges- 50 yards, 75 yards, 100 yards. I once read that years ago a set of paper targets were set up- say 5 -10 yards apart- at the desired ranges (50 yards/100 yards/etc) and a level was used to set the two targets even. Then the bullet drop between the two sheets enabled one to estimate the velocity. NOW I'm probably wrong on some of the details- but that was sort of the nuts and bolts of it.

That would be best for sure.
My worry would be an unexpected hang fire / muzzle wander and end up shooting a screen...have to shoot from sandbags to be sure the rifle doesn't move.

Also wondered if the little devices had enough power to handle 25 and 50 yard cables which would have to be fabricated...or set up the whole affair out there at distance, off to the side, and walk back and forth after every shot.

 

[roundball]

I was wondering if anyone had tried chronographing a sequence of loads from say 20 to 100 grains going up 5 or ten grains at a time.

Here's another chronograph test:

T/C Hawken 15/16” x 32” x .50cal Flint barrel
1:66” round ball twist
.018" T/C NL1000 pillow ticking
Hornady .490” / 180grn lead balls
Wiped the bore after every shot
Pact Pro MK5 Chronograph at 15 feet
Goex powder charges
Average velocity rounded off to nearest 5 fps

30grns 3F = 980 fps
40grns 3F = 1120 fps (+140)
50grns 3F = 1260 fps (+140)
60grns 3F = 1360 fps (+100)
70grns 3F = 1440 fps (+80)
80grns 3F = 1525 fps (+85)
90grns 3F = 1600 fps (+75)
100grns 3F = 1685 fps (+85)

NOTE: 100grns Goex 2F (FFg) = 1565 fps (120 fps slower than 100grns 3F)

 

[Zoar]

Here's one example:

T/C .45cal 15/16” x 32” Flint barrel
1:66” round ball twist
.018" T/C NL1000 pillow ticking
Hornady .440 balls
Wiped the bore after every shot
Pact Pro MK5 Chronograph at 15 feet
Goex 3F powder charges
Average velocity rounded off to nearest 5 fps

30grns = 1155 fps
40grns = 1290 fps
50grns = 1435 fps
60grns = 1560 fps
70grns = 1635 fps
80grns = 1720 fps
90grns = 1805 fps
100grns = 1870 fps

Yes I can clearly see that between 50 and 60 grains the velocity goes utterly FLAT and there is absolutely zero increase in velocity above about 55 grains. Zero. See 1435-to-1560 fps is exactly the same as 1870 fps. No Difference. Same same.

:wink:

 

[roundball]

And oddly, the .50cal chronograph tests I just posted also exhibit that same strange phenomenon...

:hmm: