How tight to patch a ball

[deerstalkert]

When you guys say natural mink oil, do you mean the real stuff, or commertial liquid leather conditioner sold as mink oil?

Living in Central Texas, I'm not likely to stumble across any bears or a minks. Plenty of wild pigs though, will melted bacon grease work?

bacon grease will work fine, after all a bear is just a hairy pig!
just make sure it is unsalted. not sure as to the curing process of store bought bacon so i would wonder about the salt content.
salt in your barrel is your enemy.

 

[Urban Coyote]

I've only been doing this for awhile, since about 1976. I've had the opportunity to experiment with, own, quite a few muzzleloaders. Most have been percussion model including a mix of custom, semi-production and production guns. I shoot patched round balls over 99% of the time. My lube is mainly good old spit. That's my profile .

Anyway, I've seen people patch round balls loads so tight they used a mallet to start things down the bore. I've shot in matches where folks wipe between shots to ease loading and improve accuracy. I've hunted when I wanted the ability to load at least 5 successive shots with relative ease in the field. I guess the first question is, what are you trying to achieve?

Okay but is a tight load always best? I'm going to use T/C models having 1 in 48" twists as an example. If you read the instruction manual that came with the gun you'll likely find the maker's load data for round ball loads calls for a T/C .010 patch and a .490 round ball. After much experimentation I think that load data is spot on, this after shooting several diffent guns and models. I've also owned and followed load data recommendations from Green River Rifleworks for those guns I've shot, again spot on.

So, what does "spot on" mean too me? Well, my requirements have mainly been a load that works in the field. I may adjust my loading in a match, but not by much. As for loading so tight a mallet is needed to start a load? It's not my thing. It might be if the particular barrel I was loading in a match environment truly shot better that way.

My bet is most shooter are looking for a patch fit should try thinner patches with shallow groove rifling like most T/C models and leave thicker patches to barrels cut specially for round ball shooting.

I'm outta steam.

 

[Greenjoytj]

How tight to patch the round ball?
That depends on whether you want easy loading for convenience and are wiling to potentially sacrifice some group size.
Or experiment with a tighter fitting PRB combination to see if your groups tighten up, mine did.
I increased my ball size 5 thou and reduced my patch thickness slightly. It’s harder for propellant gases blow past lead than cloth.
Using the slide hammer technique mention in post #24, I got my PRB combination to produce a belt of heavy and light weave pattern embossed all around the equator of the ball. Yes it does require a firm hit with the bottom of my balled fist on the short starter to get the ball started and another to push the ball down the next 5”.
After that it’s hand over hand on the ramrod to seat the ball.
Side benefit is good scouring action to push down soften fouling.
I also use a pre-lubed felt over powder wad because I don’t get enough fouling softening from just an oiled patch.

 

[Sam squanch]

Your felt over powder wad may contribute more to better accuracy than a very tight patched ball. If you pound a flat spot in the lead ball, it will not fly true. Even a radius cut in the ramrod tip - short starter will mar the ball a little. I use a looser ball patch combination, with a wad /plug of cream of wheat. I get just as good groups instead of fighting a tight patched ball, which can lead to all kind of problems and even an injury. But your rifle may be different. But the ball with patch can’t be TOO loose! Need to find that happy medium!

 

[david_1]

When you guys say natural mink oil, do you mean the real stuff, or commertial liquid leather conditioner sold as mink oil?

Living in Central Texas, I'm not likely to stumble across any bears or a minks. Plenty of wild pigs though, will melted bacon grease work?

I've used mink oil from Track of the Wolf for a few years now. Use it for both target shooting and hunting.

 

[mtsage]

No! Should I be? The micrometer has a built in torque to the thumb dial, so pressure is always consistent on the item being measured. Otherwise the measurement will vary, depending upon the amount of compression. It is enough pressure that you can hold it by the patch, and it will support the weight of the micrometer rather than easily slipping out. I used this feature, should I not have?

If you get a chance to purchase or a chance to read this short book I think it might explain some thoughts on patch compression and lube. I purchased the book on Ebay from the authors. I has helped me with getting my flinter to work with me better. I guess you could call it working up a load but with some details. Worth the read for me. Happy Thanksgiving
Marlowe

 

[Salty Cracker]

I have always thought, based on tons of internet information, that a tightly patched ball will provide more accuracy and velocity. I guess I've been lucky in a sense. I started with .018 patches and a ball .010 less than bore. Several .54's with .530 ball and .018 patch are accurate and have a good velocity that I expect. I have one .50, and the same applies - a .490 with .018 patch is accurate with good velocity. This includes caplocks and flintlocks.

I've got two items that are newer additions that this does not apply to. A .58 caliber rifle using .570 ball and .018 patch is hard to load. The accuracy is just "on the paper" at closer range and non-existent at long range. The other is a .45 single shot with the same story. A .440 with .018 is hard to load with poor accuracy and dismal velocity.

Finally the stubbornness wore off and I started with different patches. In the .58 rifle, I used a .015. It was somewhat easier to load and the accuracy and velocity increased. Dropping down to a .010 patch, the accuracy and velocity increased yet again. The high velocity out of a string was still a bit higher with the tighter patch but the SD went down to single digits with the .010 and the average loss was only 54 FPS.

I did the same with the .45 and found the .015 were much easier to load. Accuracy increased exponentially and velocity stayed the same. Dropping to a .010 patch, the accuracy increased to a one-ragged-hole group and the velocity is still the same average.

All the patches had the same lube. For my experimenting I used the same powder and charge that for all the combos.

So, while some of you already know this, for me I debunked what was apparently a myth that I fell for. Each rifle needs a ball/patch combo that it likes. The tighter patched ball does not always increase velocity or accuracy! I hope at least one person having a similar experience reads this and tries a thinner patch. My intent is to save you frustration that I put up with for so long.

Interesting !

 

[bpd303]

I found Dutch Schoultz's book as a free down load. It's a very good book and I follow a lot of his teachings in it. A lot of whats in it was taught to me by my grandfather. Dutch was a long time contributor here, sadly he passed away last year (I think last year). Dr5x was his log on.
I think this is the thread where Dutch advised about the free download.
https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/threads/just-bought-the-dutch-schoultz-system.86405/

 

[morehops52]

Internet advice? Worth every penny you pay for it.

 

[ETipp]

If you can start the ball using just your thumb alone, then most of the material I've been using must be way too thick.

JD, all I can say to that is, with my .32 Crockett Squirrel Rifle I can start the patch/ball using my thumb IF its .015" ticking from October Country. I use TOTW Mink Oil for lube. Its a bit tight of a fit and it takes a little bit of thumb pressure to do so, but its done quite a few times per week lately while out squirrel hunting.

JFG one day I tried .018" ticking with Mink Oil. It was very difficult to get the patch/ball started so, if memory serves me correctly, I used a short starter. The reasons why I did not stick with the tighter patch/ball was three fold.

1. No appreciable difference in accuracy was detected.

2. The patch/ball was too tight for thumb starting and I do not like using a short starter in the woods.

3. The patch/ball was a tight fit all the way down until seated against the powder charge. That sealed the deal for this ole boy. If it took that much pressure to seat the patch/ball with a clean bore, I knew a second shot would be very difficult to do out in the woods.

To be clear, I am quite certain there are ML out there that requires a short starter to get the patch/ball started in the muzzle. Other than ordering a Woods coning tool to ease such a situation, I must use a short starter for my .54 GPR with the load I have worked up for it.

However, had found any reason to stick with a tighter patch/ball combination in my squirrel rifle I would have done so.

 

[French Colonial]

If you get a chance to purchase or a chance to read this short book I think it might explain some thoughts on patch compression and lube. I purchased the book on Ebay from the authors. I has helped me with getting my flinter to work with me better. I guess you could call it working up a load but with some details. Worth the read for me. Happy Thanksgiving
Marlowe
View attachment 271560

This will be blasphemy for some.

This book is okay if you're a bench shooter, but if you're a load from the pouch without a short starter and no wiping kind of guy you are not going to get anything out of it.

I have played a little bit with wiping between shots recently but in the end I will drop it as it is just not needed at offhand matches.

 

[Greenjoytj]

If you pound a flat spot in the lead ball, it will not fly true. Even a radius cut in the ramrod tip - short starter will mar the ball a little.

Every ball dropped from my LEE mold has a flat spot that's made when the spru is cut off.
Every ball dropped from my Lyman mold has a cylindrical collar projecting from the top of the ball where the spru was cut off.

My biggest problem in muzzleloading was to create a load that would carry enough lube to keep the powder fouling soft. A simple lubed patch could not supply enough lube to dampen the enormous quantity of restate inside a 54 cal bore contaminated with a thick coat of powder fouling.
Testing a larger 58 caliber mink oil lubed felt wad was the greatest contributor to an increase lube supply and greater fouling wetting. Further improvement to the wetting action of the lube was to not dry patch lube, rather to wet patch with increased lube on the patch. Also reducing the powder charge a little, so there was less fouling to wet after firing.
If the fouling is wet enough it is easy to push it down to sit on the fresh powder charge. Oil carbon is just more fuel for the fire. Being able to push down the previous shots fouling provided the same effect as damp wiping between shots as advocated by Dutch Schoultz in his book.
I bought his book and tried his method. It works but I didn't like the time consuming wiping between shots.
It felt like I was loading the rifle twice for every shot. So I reversed his dry lube theme opposite to get a vastly wetter load to keep the fouling soft enough to be able to push the crud down durning each subsequent loading there by creating a load that I can shoot all day with out damp wiping between shots because the loading does the wiping.

 

[Kmcmichael]

I tried the Shultz method for a year. I shot lots of paper and killed A deer. I went to a standard .018 mink oil patch with my .50 and saw no difference. I shot some great groups at 50 yards but the 100 meter performance was sporadic. I try to do all my testing at 75 meters(82 yards). Wind is a bigger problem here as opposed to patches.
I am tried using .010 patches in my .40. They burned through. Currently using .015 as the .018 seem more difficult using .389 balls.

 

[Maven]

Back to the original topic, patch thickness/ease of loading , etc. Several years ago on a woods walk I discovered the RB (.492" in fact) and patch combination (.018" pillow ticking) was much too tight for the bore of my .50cal. Lyman GPR. I mean so tight that I had to bang the steel range rod against a tree to seat the ball. Rather than hold up the line (and save my palm!), I substituted my 100% cotton felt cleaning patches, llubed with saliva, and cut at the muzzle. They worked: Easy seating and accurate shooting (at least for woods walk targets). Just sayin'....

 

[Sam squanch]

Every ball dropped from my LEE mold has a flat spot that's made when the spru is cut off.
Every ball dropped from my Lyman mold has a cylindrical collar projecting from the top of the ball where the spru was cut off.

My biggest problem in muzzleloading was to create a load that would carry enough lube to keep the powder fouling soft. A simple lubed patch could not supply enough lube to dampen the enormous quantity of restate inside a 54 cal bore contaminated with a thick coat of powder fouling.
Testing a larger 58 caliber mink oil lubed felt wad was the greatest contributor to an increase lube supply and greater fouling wetting. Further improvement to the wetting action of the lube was to not dry patch lube, rather to wet patch with increased lube on the patch. Also reducing the powder charge a little, so there was less fouling to wet after firing.
If the fouling is wet enough it is easy to push it down to sit on the fresh powder charge. Oil carbon is just more fuel for the fire. Being able to push down the previous shots fouling provided the same effect as damp wiping between shots as advocated by Dutch Schoultz in his book.
I bought his book and tried his method. It works but I didn't like the time consuming wiping between shots.
It felt like I was loading the rifle twice for every shot. So I reversed his dry lube theme opposite to get a vastly wetter load to keep the fouling soft enough to be able to push the crud down durning each subsequent loading there by creating a load that I can shoot all day with out damp wiping between shots because the loading does the wiping.

I meant really pounding the ball down hard. A tiny flat spot may not make any difference. A big one will at a long shooting distance.

 

[mtfishn]

When you guys say natural mink oil, do you mean the real stuff, or commertial liquid leather conditioner sold as mink oil?

Living in Central Texas, I'm not likely to stumble across any bears or a minks. Plenty of wild pigs though, will melted bacon grease work?

Hmmmm.....pig fat? probably!.....bacon no, as it has a bunch of salt in it! HA!

 

[JDBraddy]

Ok guys, shot a match last weekend, was doing OK, till one of the other shooters saw me using a cleaning patch to load, and gave me a strip of his patch material to try, when I tried it, the next three shots where stacked into a single elongated hole!

I took second in B-class. I Remember his face, but not his name, and didn't get to talk to him, but saved a piece, took it home, and miked it. It was a very soft pillow ticking. O18" very lightly lubed, with an oil, don't know what, but it wasn't greasy or slick at all. This prompted me to experiment, but had to limit the experimentation as I am running low on caps and can't find any to buy.

Am using a TC Hawken with GM 1:66" barrell. Rifling is .010-.012 as best I can measure. I have some .490 Speer swaged balls, and some .495 cast balls. I had some red pillow ticking that measures. 014" thick, and some blue ticking that measures. 022" thick. Lightly lubed each with 50/50 beeswax/olive oil. Fired five shot groups from the bench with sandbags at 50 yds using 50gr charge with each combo, here's the result:

It definitely shoots better tight. Help me understand why.

Calibre is 0.5" rifling is 0.01" on either side, so bore would be .500" land to land and0.520" groove to groove.

So:
(0.490" + 0.028")- 0.52" = -.002" loads easy with light thumb pressure, contact made with lands, not with grooves.

(0.495" + 0.028")-0.520 = 0.003" loads with stiff thumb pressure, only 0.003" compression against grooves.

(0.490 + 0.044)-0.520"= 0.014" required use of a short starter. 0.014" compression against the grooves

(0.495 + 0.044)-0.520" = 0.019" Required stiff hit on short starter, 0.019" compression against grooves.

Am currently searching for some ticking that Mike's an honest 0.018". And #11 caps!

Also noticed that each group has at least one flier at 01:00 O-clock.

 

[wiscoaster]

...

It definitely shoots better tight. Help me understand why.

....

Thanks for compiling the data and posting the results. As for an answer to your question, I'm no expert, but a logical although completely unscientific guess is that the tighter patch and ball grab the rifling tighter and the patch grabs the ball tighter, both of which result in better spinup, and also there's less gas "leaking" around patch and ball, so more pressure behind the ball and less likely some to the side to deflect it.

 

[JDBraddy]

Well, the 0.490 ball and thin patch material would by math, have a .001" gap around the patched ball in the bottom of the grooves, but am sure as the rifling lands compress the patched ball, there must be some flow of the lead into the area of the grooves, but how much, I don't know how to measure that. The question becomes "at what point does it become enough to create that seal"? am sure the lube effects this equation as well, probably by filling the microscopic spaces between the compressed cotton fibers.

I postulate that as pressure increases, at some point, the flow of lead would create the seal, fill the grooves, and begin to flow before and aft, elongating the ball into a cylindrical shape. How will this affect accuracy?

Am sure there is a point at which there are diminished returns with respect to increased accuracy. That point would likely be the ideal balace between accuracy and ease of loading, so finding that point seems to be the goal.

Don't know how to do that other than through trial and error with repeated experimentation.

I suspect that point is likely somewhere in the neighborhood of the patch material I was given during the match, combined with the 0.495 cast ball I used with it.
(0.495" + 0.036") -0.520" = 0.011" compression against the grooves. I just need to find a supply of pillow ticking that mikes an honest 0.018" and a supply of #11 caps to test my theory.

 

[wiscoaster]

No, I don't think a round ball in a rifled bore is ever responsible for the gas seal, but just opinion based on what little I've learned so. It's my understanding it's the patch responsible for the seal, but I could be wrong. Some people shoot bare balls, but I don't remember offhand whether they were shooting rifles or smoothbores. so I suppose it's one of those "it depends".