Has anyone Chrongraphed Loads

[George]

Yes, that would be a slick outfit and fun to play with. My chronograph has gone a little way toward that. The brain and sensors have been separated, no chance of shooting the brain. And the sensing units are cheap, in case you shoot one of them, which is very unlikely.

Spence

 

[roundball]

Similar set up here...

 

[Leatherbark]

Yeah- that's why no one seems to put a crony out at 50 yards or 100 yards- a stray shot could trash the device. Terminal ballistics however seems to be what is really important, not what is happening at the muzzle.

In the Lyman Black Powder Handbook they set their screens at 100 yards and made a steel frame to protect the screens from errant shots.

Bob

 

[dml]

From what I read on the BPCR forum, black powder can cause errors if the screens are too close to the muzzle. Anyway, here's a chart of muzzle velocities for TC rifles. They were pulished by TC. I don't know how they were derived or how accurate they are.





Seneca, 36 caliber
Round ball loads (.350", 65 grains):
40 grains FFFg - 1894 FPS - 518 ft.lbs
50 grains FFFg - 2034 FPS - 597 ft.lbs
60 grains FFFg - 2150 FPS - 667 ft.lbs

Maxi-Ball loads (128 grains):
40 grains FFFg - 1761 FPS - 882 ft.lbs
50 grains FFFg - 1843 FPS - 965 ft.lbs
60 grains FFFg - 2001 FPS - 1138 ft.lbs

Seneca, 45 caliber
Round ball loads (.440", 127 grains):
50 grains FFg - 1584 FPS - 707 ft.lbs
60 grains FFg - 1701 FPS - 816 ft.lbs
70 grains FFg - 1800 FPS - 914 ft.lbs
80 grains FFg - 1904 FPS - 1022 ft.lbs
90 grains FFg - 1980 FPS - 1106 ft.lbs

Maxi-Ball loads (240 grains):
60 grains FFg - 1369 FPS - 915 ft.lbs
70 grains FFg - 1456 FPS - 1036 ft.lbs
80 grains FFg - 1541 FPS - 1160 ft.lbs

Hawken, 45 caliber
Round ball loads (.440", 127 grains):
50 grains FFg - 1605 FPS - 732 ft.lbs
60 grains FFg - 1720 FPS - 841 ft.lbs
70 grains FFg - 1825 FPS - 947 ft.lbs
80 grains FFg - 1929 FPS - 1054 ft.lbs
90 grains FFg - 2003 FPS - 1140 ft.lbs
100 grains FFg - 2081 FPS - 1231 ft.lbs
110 grains FFg - 2158 FPS - 1324 ft.lbs

Maxi-Ball loads (240 grains):
80 grains FFg - 1564 FPS - 1195 ft.lbs
90 grains FFg - 1659 FPS - 1345 ft.lbs
100 grains FFg - 1743 FPS - 1485 ft.lbs

Renegade & Hawken, 50 caliber
Round ball loads (.490", 175 grains):
50 grains FFg - 1357 FPS - 761 ft.lbs
60 grains FFg - 1434 FPS - 850 ft.lbs
70 grains FFg - 1643 FPS - 1115 ft.lbs
80 grains FFg - 1838 FPS - 1396 ft.lbs
90 grains FFg - 1950 FPS - 1571 ft.lbs
100 grains FFg - 2052 FPS - 1739 ft.lbs
110 grains FFg - 2135 FPS - 1883 ft.lbs

Maxi-Ball loads (370 grains):
80 grains FFg - 1271 FPS - 1328 ft.lbs
90 grains FFg - 1344 FPS - 1484 ft.lbs
100 grains FFg - 1418 FPS - 1652 ft.lbs

Renegade & Hawken, 54 caliber
Round ball loads (.530", 230 grains):
60 grains FFg - 1263 FPS - 815 ft.lbs
70 grains FFg - 1469 FPS - 1102 ft.lbs
80 grains FFg - 1654 FPS - 1397 ft.lbs
90 grains FFg - 1761 FPS - 1584 ft.lbs
100 grains FFg - 1855 FPS - 1758 ft.lbs
110 grains FFg - 1931 FPS - 1905 ft.lbs
120 grains FFg - 1983 FPS - 2009 ft.lbs

Maxi-Ball loads (430 grains):
90 grains FFg - 1263 FPS - 1523 ft.lbs
100 grains FFg - 1345 FPS - 1728 ft.lbs
110 grains FFg - 1428 FPS - 1948 ft.lbs
120 grains FFg - 1499 FPS - 2146 ft.lbs

 

[damron]

thanks.

George

 

[ebiggs1]

I would bet, no matter how many computer calculations or ballistic engineers you have, actual on site confirmation is probably a certainty. Calculations are fine to a point but ya gotta actually confirm they are correct. Sometimes funny things happen that even the best miss with just a slide rule!

 

[Dean2]

I would bet, no matter how many computer calculations or ballistic engineers you have, actual on site confirmation is probably a certainty. Calculations are fine to a point but ya gotta actually confirm they are correct. Sometimes funny things happen that even the best miss with just a slide rule!

Einstein managed to postulate E=MCsquared long before computers, but also with no ability to measure the end result. Many applications of this formula have lead to a great many new things, not a all of them good admittedly.

The same is true of the first calculations of the size of our universe, using only triangulated measurements of the passing of Venus across the sun. Those calculated values are still being used as no one yet has physically measured the ACTUAL distance from earth to the sun, though the measurements have been validated by radio wave transit times, satellites that flew past but close etc. It is amazing just how accurate the first measurements were.

The whole point of mathematics is that if you know enough of the values that affect the variables, you can calculate the values that are not known. Knowing the initial muzzle velocity, weight, sectional density, wind values and BC you CAN very accurately calculate velocity, time of flight etc at various distances down range. These can be refined by adding humidity, temperature and elevation, but their affects are far smaller than the major variables first mentioned.

If you want to measure the actual velocity at a set distance, to satisfy your curiosity or to see if you can slide a bullet accurately through that small an opening at 600 yards, be my guest. Personally I, I am more than happy to rely on math formulas and calculation structures that have been proven over many decades.


All that said, thanks to those who supplied actual Chrono or speed data as requested. That is what I needed to work with and it has done the job just great.

 

[crockett]

Well I need to do some looking for existing information. Most of us know the velocity of a PRB drops off pretty fast and since the Foot/Lbs of energy formula is highly favorable of veolicty, the ft/lbs of energy is going to start dropping pretty fast as well. I feel 75- 100 yards is about maximum for me when using open sights and the field evidence is that such ranges still kill large game animals but to be honest I really don't know how much energy there is at 70 yard compared to 100 yards or 125 yards on say a 54 caliber rifle with a PRB.

 

[hanshi]

Now I HAVE measured the distance from the earth to the sun. Of course I had to go at night for obvious reasons. :rotf:

but all seriousness aside, I've found the T/C and some other figures to be overly optimistic. True, the only accurate way to find the real world velocities is to chronograph them in your own rifle. I've done a lot of that and have found fps per grain increase is NOT always a straight line; sometimes there are major jumps and fizzles. If a forum member chronographs loads in his/her gun, then I'm more likely to take them seriously rather than industry published figures.

 

[roundball]

I've noticed that same trend with T/C's published load data.
I've never been able to use their published charges and achieve their published velocities...can't even achieve them using Goex 3F instead of their reference Goex 2F.
And I was even using their T/C Hawkens, both standard and round ball barrels, their patches, and their recommended Hornady balls...should have been almost a mirror image of their results...LOL.

I sometimes wonder if they recorded some shots at the bottom of the load data charts then just extrapolated the rest using some 'formula'...or used some sort of special test barrel / test environment that doesn't reflect John Doe's reality.

 

[George]

.... I really don't know how much energy there is at 70 yard compared to 100 yards or 125 yards on say a 54 caliber rifle with a PRB.

I can give you an example, don't know if it will help answer your question.

My Hawken .54, .535 roundball weighing 229.5 gr.
Calculations done by Gun Controller software.
MV measured by CED Millennium chronograph at 12 yards.

MV = 1750
Energy at muzzle =1578

Velocity at 75 yards = 1197
Energy at 75 yards = 731

Velocity at 100 yards = 1089
Energy at 100 yards = 606

Velocity at 125 yards = 1012
Energy at 125 = 523

Spence

 

[Stumpkiller]

Wasn't it Ptolemy who figured how far away the Sun was in the second century BC by observing a well and the shadows? The old folks were no dummies.

 

[ebiggs1]

You are not serious? :shocked2:
No one can actually say for certain until anything is physically measured. You can calculate all you want but somebody has to do the grunt work.
You don't think Einstein’s theory is tested and challenged everyday by someone? Even now it is fallen into dispute at sub atomic levels and extremely gigantic sizes , right? What ever that has to do with muzzle loading!the grunt work.

 

[illuveatar]

The physical measurements have been done, thousands of times. That's how the ballistics equations were developed in the first place. All that grunt work has been done.

I'm not saying that muzzle velocity isn't an important measurement (It's necessary to begin the ballistics equation). I'm referring to those who feel the need to check velocity at 50, 75 and 100 yds. I don't believe these are necessary measurements at all but if it satisfies others to do so that's fine with me.

Forget it, this isn't why I like muzzleloading either.

 

[George]

No one can actually say for certain until anything is physically measured. You can calculate all you want but somebody has to do the grunt work.

I agree that some measurements need to be done. But if you trust the math, it only needs to be enough to verify the results.

Using a chronograph, measure the MV.

Using a good ballistics program, calculate a trajectory for that ball using that MV.

Pick out any one spot along that calculated trajectory, shoot at that distance and see if the ball lands where predicted. If the ball lands where predicted at that distance, then you have verified your results and can be assured that all other spots on the trajectory are just as correct.

You can then also be assured that your original MV was measured correctly, or the trajectory calculated using it wouldn't have been correct.

Of course, this requires that you trust the math. Applied correctly, it won't let you down, but not everyone is comfortable with that idea.

Spence

 

[Greenjoytj]

George what powder and charge weight and barrel length did you use to get that 1750 fps MV in you 54 cal rifle?

I haven't chrono'd my GPR 54 yet as I still working up an accurate load that has a chance of hitting the target paper with out taking out my chrono.

It is always nice to read actual shooters chrono'd range data, as it helps to understand the wildly different velocities that are published by Lyman in their two muzzleloading reference books and several post above I see Thompson Center's published MV data that can't be duplicated using the same TC load recipe.

 

[Rodfac]

Here's some data that I chronographed yesterday from a 42" barreled, Davison .50 cal. flintlock: The load was 70 gr of Goex FFFg, with a .495 Hornady swagged ball, using .015" pillow ticking patch material. Bore Butter was the lube. The three shot average velocity, 15' from the muzzle was 1710 fps, with an extreme spread of 10 fps. In this particular rifle, this load combination will produce 3 shot cloverleafs, less than 1/2" center to center, at 27 yds from a seated "over the porch rail" rest.

BTW, Sierra's "Infinity" ballistic program shows this velocity/ball combination to be 1" high at 25 yds. 1-3/4" high at 50, 1" high at 75, and 1" low at 100. Wind drift was given as approximately 1" for each mph of wind at 100 yds, ie. a ten mph cross-wind drifts the ball, ten inches at 100, or 2.5" at 25 yds. Quartering winds are about half these amounts. This should be a pretty good deer load.

HTH's Rod

 

[Rodfac]

Here's some add'l data I gathered up yesterday. The rifle is a Davison .50 flinter with a 42" barrel. Hornady .495" swagged ball, .015" unbleached muslin patch, Bore Butter lube and 60 gr's of Goex FFFg powder. I fouled the barrel with two shots, wiped lightly between shots, then got an average velocity of 1634 fps for the next three shots; extreme spread was 32 fps. This load also cuts a three shot clover leaf at 25 yds for me from bench. HTH's Rod

 

[hanshi]

Interesting. That a little more velocity than I got in my .45 with 60grns 3F. This barrel, though, is 36".

 

[hanshi]

In his "Book of Five Rings", Myamoto Musashi goes into details about strategy and the finer points of fighting with the Katana. Then he stops and basically waves it all off and says, "Just cut the opponent". Good advice; it's too easy to over think details.