Reply to thread

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Message

I even brought the bore scope to look at [USER=60260]@DillyJamba[/USER]'s bore. The bore looked pretty good with only a little bit of pitting near the muzzle. The better measure was the calipers and ball gauge that I used to measure the land-to-land diameter of the bore. It was a tight 0.540 with one pair of lands being closer to 0.539. The 0.530" ball and the 0.018 cotton drill was too tight, and we had the results pictured above. I did have some 0.520" balls and 0.028" canvas. We loaded one of those balls in the thick patching. After pulling the ball we observed that we had good engagement of the patching on the ball at the lands and the patch was intact. We did the running of the 0000 steel wool and we saw considerable reduction in the cutting of the cotton drill patch. The firing tests using 0.527" balls and the 0.018" cotton drill patching with the Dawn and water patch lubricant resulted in patches with a couple of holes cut in the patch, but not the shredding. Dilly did slam one round down the barrel and that one did shred and flew out of the group. I think Dilly is well on the way to getting his rifle shooting with significantly improved accuracy on the target.

<blockquote data-quote="Grenadier1758" data-source="post: 2647508" data-attributes="member: 960"><p>I even brought the bore scope to look at [USER=60260]@DillyJamba[/USER]&#039;s bore.&nbsp; The bore looked pretty good with only a little bit of pitting near the muzzle.&nbsp; The better measure was the calipers and ball gauge that I used to measure the land-to-land diameter of the bore.&nbsp; It was a tight 0.540 with one pair of lands being closer to 0.539.&nbsp; The 0.530&quot; ball and the 0.018 cotton drill was too tight, and we had the results pictured above.&nbsp; I did have some 0.520&quot; balls and 0.028&quot; canvas.&nbsp; We loaded one of those balls in the thick patching.&nbsp; After pulling the ball we observed that we had good engagement of the patching on the ball at the lands and the patch was intact.&nbsp; We did the running of the 0000 steel wool and we saw considerable reduction in the cutting of the cotton drill patch.&nbsp; The firing tests using 0.527&quot; balls and the 0.018&quot; cotton drill patching with the Dawn and water patch lubricant resulted in patches with a couple of holes cut in the patch, but not the shredding.&nbsp; Dilly did slam one round down the barrel and that one did shred and flew out of the group.&nbsp; I think Dilly is well on the way to getting his rifle shooting with significantly improved accuracy on the target.</p></blockquote><p></p>

[QUOTE="Grenadier1758, post: 2647508, member: 960"] I even brought the bore scope to look at [USER=60260]@DillyJamba[/USER]'s bore. The bore looked pretty good with only a little bit of pitting near the muzzle. The better measure was the calipers and ball gauge that I used to measure the land-to-land diameter of the bore. It was a tight 0.540 with one pair of lands being closer to 0.539. The 0.530" ball and the 0.018 cotton drill was too tight, and we had the results pictured above. I did have some 0.520" balls and 0.028" canvas. We loaded one of those balls in the thick patching. After pulling the ball we observed that we had good engagement of the patching on the ball at the lands and the patch was intact. We did the running of the 0000 steel wool and we saw considerable reduction in the cutting of the cotton drill patch. The firing tests using 0.527" balls and the 0.018" cotton drill patching with the Dawn and water patch lubricant resulted in patches with a couple of holes cut in the patch, but not the shredding. Dilly did slam one round down the barrel and that one did shred and flew out of the group. I think Dilly is well on the way to getting his rifle shooting with significantly improved accuracy on the target. [/QUOTE]

Verification