Load Database

[Trimp]

I have been pondering this idea for sometime about creating some sort of central location on information for people's loads with various muzzleloaders. While every gun is different and exploration should be used to find that load your gun likes best, I think a compilation of accurate loads could serve as a good starting point for some. I know some less serious shooters will dump a pretty heavy amount of powder down their barrel and take it out hunting.

When I started shooting a lot and developing a load, I did searches on forums and saw guys being successful in terms of accuracy with similar loads. Usually the powder would vary 5-15 grains but the .015 patch was common between posts.

What're your thoughts on compiling a database for accounts of successful loads? I think it could be a fun project and may show some "preferences" on the different variables for production guns over the years.

 

[wiscoaster]

I think it's a great idea.

 

[The Crisco Kid]

It's a good idea that would take a lot of work to compile in a usable format. Another problem would be that one man's definition of a successful load is different than another man's definition. I don't mean to throw cold water on the idea but I do see some difficulties.

 

[Eterry]

Lyman did that with the 36, 40, 44, 45, 50, 54, 58 and 72 PRB, Minie Ball, and Conicals under a very controlled environment, with barrell lengths from 24" to 44". They also tested 31, 36, 44 and 45 CNB revolvers with prb and conicals. They even ran ballistics; ft/lbs & trajectory, out to 300 yards for rifles.

Only thing is it was quite some time back, and they only tested Goex and C&H powder.
But I think it gives a great starting point, I really enjoy my copy and browse it often.

One issue with Crowd Gathered Data is everyone has a different opinion of accuracy.
Our neighbor would buy a new deer rifle, hang a coke can on a limb at 50ish yards, and shoot offhand until he hit the can. He declared it fit to deer hunt out to 400 yards.

 

[Trimp]

It's a good idea that would take a lot of work to compile in a usable format. Another problem would be that one man's definition of a successful load is different than another man's definition. I don't mean to throw cold water on the idea but I do see some difficulties.

Yes that is true and I did think about that. Some people would be happy with hits in a pie plate at 50 yards and others want to their shots to be touching. I think some type of result is warranted for any given load. Sometimes there is a picture of a target along with the load information so that is some type of confirmation on results.

Definitely a good point and something to consider.