On a short barreled muzzleloader like the Traditions Deerhunter with 24" barrel, at what point do you begin wasting powder ? I've been using 70 gr. of 2F with round balls, but I got some T/C Maxi Hunters I'd like to try at 90 to 100 gr. Is 24" enough barrel to burn up all the powder without blowing out the muzzle ? -Thanks
Max loads for short barrels ?
- Thread starter kyron4
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
Phil Coffins
69 Cal.
Short barrels and max performance don’t go together in black powder, it’s a different world from modern guns. Try to rethink your approach.
Any time you miss your target it would seem one is wasting powder, correct? Or if you are not gaining velocity as you increase the powder charge?
In theory, the finer your powder, the faster it will burn. Either completely burn it in a long bore, or use a finer powder in a shorter bore. With a heavier projectile in front of the powder charge, a more complete burn will occur, all else being equal. More than one variable to consider. For now, will ignore twist rate and depth of rifling….
That said, understanding ‘at what point do you begin wasting powder’ with a particular barrel and projectile will require experimentation to understand. A chronograph and something like a sheet to catch unburnt powder would be useful in finding that point. Or if you want to think out of the ‘box’, maybe just go to the range and changing just one variable at a time find the combination of powder, projectile, patch and/or lubricant that gives you the most accurate load at your desired distance. I have found it easiest to figure it out for myself at the range with each particular gun, projectile and powder. I have some very accurate loads using 4F powder that will set many of the experts hair on fire just before their heads explode while causing the earth to fall off it’s axis if used, at least according to those experts. No point stating those load combinations. One more time, something best to figure out at the range with your gun. If you are unsure where to begin the journey, start with a charge equal to the diameter of your gun (50 grains for a 50 caliber), no matter the powder granulation or projectile and increment the powder charge up (or down) to find your best accuracy. Any shot that you take and learn something from is not wasting powder.
Johnny Tremain
Silversmith in training
The davenport formula shows the maximum powder that will burn in a length of barrel.
The reason barrels were long was to get the pill moving.
Even when the world moved to cartridges. The 45/70 begot the 47/90. 45/100, 45/120.
The only way to get range with black powder is to use more powder and have a longer barrel.
Thus the last of the black powder firearms where huge by todays standards.
The reason barrels were long was to get the pill moving.
Even when the world moved to cartridges. The 45/70 begot the 47/90. 45/100, 45/120.
The only way to get range with black powder is to use more powder and have a longer barrel.
Thus the last of the black powder firearms where huge by todays standards.
All of my rifles have relatively short barrels. 26 inches down to my 19 inch barrel carbine.
I mostly use 3f powder in all. My charges are from 70 to 80 grains by volume.
Round ball or conical bullets, depending on which one.
I don't think too much about wasting powder, I just load em up and shoot.
I mostly use 3f powder in all. My charges are from 70 to 80 grains by volume.
Round ball or conical bullets, depending on which one.
I don't think too much about wasting powder, I just load em up and shoot.
Uncle Miltie
50 Cal.
Actually in the late of target shooting they did. The most accurate muzzleloading rifles ever made had barrels under 30" in length.
BUT … the word in the original assertion was ‘performance’ and not ‘accuracy’. Accuracy is but one factor of ‘performance’.
As Johnny T reported, the reason why for example, the early French Fusil de Boucaniers were both of large caliber (> 70) and had barrel lengths to 60” or more was for ‘increased range’. ‘Range’ itself a performance factor, albeit one usually at the expense of inherent ‘accuracy’.
For shorter barrels, your most ‘efficient’ (See? … another performance factor) load would be when using 3Fg powder. This is well detailed in Lyman’s BP Handbook.
Uncle Miltie
50 Cal.
Well, they used bullets weighing over 500 grains at distances 500 yards and more, with powder charges of over 100 grains....
- Joined
- May 22, 2008
- Messages
- 621
- Reaction score
- 1,098
No such thing. Just look at the monster mortars of old'e.
More Powder = more Power (aka distance, energy, velocity etc.)....until the ball won't fit.
More Powder = more Power (aka distance, energy, velocity etc.)....until the ball won't fit.
All traditional ml shoot crappy projectiles. A ball is the worse stable thing you can shoot. No conical of the maxie or minnie design is much better. While those type will hold velocity better they lack anything resembling aerodynamics and keep velocities better just from Newtonian physics.
Yet both have put lots of meat on the table.
They do so by making big holes. When they hit they are already bigger then a modren high power bullet that is super aerodynamic.
Ml bullets are crappy in air but that same crappiness makes them excellent at transferring energy to Bambi.
The old test for shot is shooting a tuna can. If your shot can get through the can, it will kill small game, or destroy a turkey head.
The same type of test works well for deer.
Not a can but wood can be used.
Shoot a 2x6. If your ball can go through that it will kill a deer shot in the lights. Two 2x6 means it will do in Bulwinkle.
Shooting a magnum load doesn’t pay off down range. A 2200 fps MV ball will slow to 1100 fps at a hundred yards. While that same ball shot at an MV of 1100 fps will slow to 800 at a hundred yards. You may get a bigger bang but not a deadlier shot down range.
Higher MV can give you a flatter trajectory but not much
Shoot for accuracy in your load then make sure you have the umph at range, and stay in that range. I bet a 70-90 grain charge will be ‘bloody adequate’.
Uncle Miltie
50 Cal.
It took until the late 1890's and the refinement of smokeless powder for breech loading rifles to approach the accuracy of muzzleloaders shooting bullets.
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2021
- Messages
- 567
- Reaction score
- 1,040
You might be more successful just asking "What is your load for a Traditions Deerhunter (caliber?) with 24" barrel?"
Then you would get less advice on what you obliviously already know. And maybe more to the point of your question.
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2014
- Messages
- 485
- Reaction score
- 668
I'm guessing this is a 50 caliber rifle? If so I used to shoot 355 grain T/C Maxihunter conical slugs out of the 26" Renegade 50 caliber using 65 grains of FFFg, which was basically 80 grains of FFg in comparison. When we had a T/C White Mountain Carbine I expected the velocity to fall off noticeably due to the 20" barrel. It did not. The same T/C Maxihunter conical chronographed at the same fps as from the Renegade. I was stunned, but attributed it to the faster burning FFFg over FFg BP. I never tried it with FFg to know the difference. Unfortunately, the WMC would not group the Maxihunters well and we had to resort to the 320 grain Lee REAL Bullet for that rifle.
You might be surprised at your results. Though my guess is that FFFg will serve you better. It has me over the years.
You might be surprised at your results. Though my guess is that FFFg will serve you better. It has me over the years.
That was his original question. Only you can determine when the waste begins with your rifle. Go to the range and begin shooting starting with your regular charges then work up at about five grains increments. You will see on the targets when performance/accuracy drops off. More better, do it at night and watch the fireball from yer muzzle get bigger and bigger. Fuggit the numbers, draw yer own conclusion with yer rifle. BTW, wear hearing protection, those short barrels are real ear blasters.
When are you wasting powder? When you're reaching for greater performance than required or unburnt powder is wasted coming out of the barrel.
If you're happy with the energy and accuracy your gun produces, why reach higher? I would think that most hunters want the most power balanced with the desirable accuracy. Up to the point that 1000 ftlbs isn't required to take a squirrel or grouse. Target shooters likely want the best accuracy with enough power to deal with the target. Might well apply to small game as well.
I'm skeptical that shooting over a sheet or snow would truly reveal unburnt powder. I just believe that even if coming out of the barrel unburnt, it would be consumed in the air, before settling to the ground. It maybe that anything found is actually some fouling. My theory and short of actually burning such residue pretty hard to prove.
More accurate means to me is having the resources to measure muzzle velocity while working toward an acceptable accuracy. When you're adding more powder and not gaining in the power and/or accuracy you seek, you're wasting powder.
If you're happy with the energy and accuracy your gun produces, why reach higher? I would think that most hunters want the most power balanced with the desirable accuracy. Up to the point that 1000 ftlbs isn't required to take a squirrel or grouse. Target shooters likely want the best accuracy with enough power to deal with the target. Might well apply to small game as well.
I'm skeptical that shooting over a sheet or snow would truly reveal unburnt powder. I just believe that even if coming out of the barrel unburnt, it would be consumed in the air, before settling to the ground. It maybe that anything found is actually some fouling. My theory and short of actually burning such residue pretty hard to prove.
More accurate means to me is having the resources to measure muzzle velocity while working toward an acceptable accuracy. When you're adding more powder and not gaining in the power and/or accuracy you seek, you're wasting powder.
Does the Davenport formula have anything to do with predicting expected accuracy? To me accuracy is the holy grail. All I have found are references to maximum powder charge that’s efficiently consumed in a particular bore volume, though it’s not clear as to to the weight of the projectile relative to bore diameter (roundball vs conical for example). Honestly do not care about an efficient powder burn with a wildly inaccurate load. Are there limits to the accuracy of the formula based on caliber, say 32 caliber vs a 3-1/2” cannon? How does the powder granulation factor in? Or different manufacturers? What is the factor for Goex vs Swiss vs homemade blackpowder???? Seems to me that anyone with a thumb could come up with a similar rule or formula if no quantitative data is required. Or am I missing something?
I fail to understand how the Davenport can predict accuracy but perhaps it could somehow.
Conical being heavier weight for caliber than a round ball should require more powder to achieve the same velocity for at least two reasons. Greater inertia and longer bearing surface creating more friction. However other factors such as obturation can come into play.
Powder composition and construction affect how fast pressure is created and spikes. BP is a ball powder, basically max pressure is immediate, then drops off as burning surface decreases. If it was single perforated (think a stick powder with a single hole running through it), pressure builds and remains more constant because the burning surface remains consistent until fully consumed. Remember that as the outer surface gets smaller, the inner surface gets larger. In a multi-perforated, the pressure can actually continue to build. Same outer surface area getting smaller but multiple inner surfaces getting larger. The smaller the granule, the faster to total consumption, all other things being equal.
Different components or additives can create more power or decrease burning rate, affecting powder burn and pressure characteristics. It may be intentional or a side effect. I believe it would take considerable testing and calculations to come up with a reliable formula for different powders.
Probably most results at our level are based on observations of "I find this to be be the better in this manner". And a few variables that could cause differences between different guns with the same load. But the degree of difference could be so tiny as to be negligible to the average application.
Accuracy, as it applies to internal ballistics, is the visible reflection of how consistently the projectile leaves the barrel at the same point in barrel harmonics. The closer tolerances in each factor, the more consistent the results. Hence the "working up a load" which may not provide the exact same results from gun to gun but "close enough for government
work".
It does seem to almost be rocket science. I prefer to load, shoot, enjoy myself, repeat another day.
Conical being heavier weight for caliber than a round ball should require more powder to achieve the same velocity for at least two reasons. Greater inertia and longer bearing surface creating more friction. However other factors such as obturation can come into play.
Powder composition and construction affect how fast pressure is created and spikes. BP is a ball powder, basically max pressure is immediate, then drops off as burning surface decreases. If it was single perforated (think a stick powder with a single hole running through it), pressure builds and remains more constant because the burning surface remains consistent until fully consumed. Remember that as the outer surface gets smaller, the inner surface gets larger. In a multi-perforated, the pressure can actually continue to build. Same outer surface area getting smaller but multiple inner surfaces getting larger. The smaller the granule, the faster to total consumption, all other things being equal.
Different components or additives can create more power or decrease burning rate, affecting powder burn and pressure characteristics. It may be intentional or a side effect. I believe it would take considerable testing and calculations to come up with a reliable formula for different powders.
Probably most results at our level are based on observations of "I find this to be be the better in this manner". And a few variables that could cause differences between different guns with the same load. But the degree of difference could be so tiny as to be negligible to the average application.
Accuracy, as it applies to internal ballistics, is the visible reflection of how consistently the projectile leaves the barrel at the same point in barrel harmonics. The closer tolerances in each factor, the more consistent the results. Hence the "working up a load" which may not provide the exact same results from gun to gun but "close enough for government
work".
It does seem to almost be rocket science. I prefer to load, shoot, enjoy myself, repeat another day.
hanshi
Cannon
I never cared for so-called formulas as they are generally so different from real world results. Accuracy is very important but the one has to define accuracy. Your definition of accuracy may be greatly different than mine. I don't keep looking for 50 or 100 yard single hole 5-shot groups; but to others accuracy is just that. Having always been a hunter and informal fun shooter an accurate load is one that hits whatever is being shot at at any particular range. I know that's not a satisfactory yardstick for everybody but it works for my shooting.
Another weird belief is that powder blows the barrel and tests the efficiency of a load. Trust me, that huge ball of flame at the muzzle isn't going to let powder escape unscathed even with higher than needed charges. A chronograph is going to tell you more, much more, than any hearsay comments or formulas about efficiency of a load. High velocities are not needed in the bush or at the range. One can find a good load with speed equal to whatever target is fired at and one that fits one's idea of accuracy then he's got it pegged.
Another weird belief is that powder blows the barrel and tests the efficiency of a load. Trust me, that huge ball of flame at the muzzle isn't going to let powder escape unscathed even with higher than needed charges. A chronograph is going to tell you more, much more, than any hearsay comments or formulas about efficiency of a load. High velocities are not needed in the bush or at the range. One can find a good load with speed equal to whatever target is fired at and one that fits one's idea of accuracy then he's got it pegged.
Johnny Tremain
Silversmith in training
It ok to fear what you do not understand.
The davenport formula tell you the maximum powder that can be burnt in your length of barrel.
From there you work backwards to find the best groups charge.
My 45 cal, 42inch Rice barrel can not burn more than 74.5 grs the rest is wasted.
My most accurate groups are at 54.5 grain.
I use the 54.5 gr out to 100 yards, then use the max burn 74.5 grain for up to 150yardsm which is as far as I can see these days.
I was doubling the charge before 109gr, and wasting all the powder. That is what the Davenport Formula is for.
If you are blowing flame, you are wasting powder.
The davenport formula tell you the maximum powder that can be burnt in your length of barrel.
From there you work backwards to find the best groups charge.
My 45 cal, 42inch Rice barrel can not burn more than 74.5 grs the rest is wasted.
My most accurate groups are at 54.5 grain.
I use the 54.5 gr out to 100 yards, then use the max burn 74.5 grain for up to 150yardsm which is as far as I can see these days.
I was doubling the charge before 109gr, and wasting all the powder. That is what the Davenport Formula is for.
If you are blowing flame, you are wasting powder.
So the weight of the projectile is not a variable in the Davenport formula?
Similar threads
