More Important Than Biden, Trump, Ukraine, Ballistol and Pietta Combined.....Muzzle Coning.

[64Springer]

Let's argue about something so important that it may very well impact the longevity of America as we know her.

Let's argue about Muzzle Coning and the benefits or detriments of muzzle coning.

Personally speaking, I would never ever grind an angle at the muzzle of a rifle that would eliminate some of the rifling. Never. Ever.

I think a bore/muzzle/projectile should be as tight as a tick. I want no clearance/air space between projectile and bore. I want that projectile out of the bore and gone before the gases behind it even have a chance to think about exiting the muzzle.

When a muzzle is coned, you're giving a ton of hot gases a chance to pass over the projectile and create a possible disturbance in its flight path as the projectile is exiting the bore. The gap between the projectile and bore is tiny but it's still a gap.

I fully understand the desire to have a patch and ball below the muzzle for easier ramming. But at what cost?

Ready.....GO!

 

[sussexmuzllodr]

Me thinks the physics behind it is the gas and pressure are going to remain behind the projectile as a constant until the second it leaves the Barrel. Me thinks the very small surface area left by coning will have very little effect on the entire process. We are talking mere thousandths of an inch in comparison to that ball and charge running the full length of the barrel from the point of ignition. JMHO. Others may weigh in with different opinions.SM

 

[Campbell]

Are there any high-speed videos which show a projectile leaving the muzzle BEFORE any other ejecta? Curious.

 

[64Springer]

Are there any high-speed videos which show a projectile leaving the muzzle BEFORE any other ejecta? Curious.

Word of the day: Ejecta.

 

[Flint62Smoothie]

STOP ... if you took but 2-minutes to utilize the Site's search feature, you'd see it has been (back to the days of Claude and Zonie) and is still being hashed out here - in other posts - ad nauseum.

Go add your input there, LOL!

 

[Dave Marsh]

 

[russellshaffer]

Are false muzzles coned? Just wondering.

 

[chorizo]

Only if you use the right lube which is:

 

[Bushfire]

It's impressive that you've churned out 1200 posts in 3 months here but @flint62is right. This has been talked about almost as much as how to remove a stuck ball. Dig through old threads there's plenty of discussion.

 

[Dale Allen Raby]

Got a T/C Hawken .50bwith QLA muzzle... their version of coning. It shoots conicals and unmentionables OK, but not PRB. Conigng voids the warranty for some custom barrels. Don't think I would do it.

 

[2 shots]

hey 58 cal2, if there is any popcorn left please get me a large

 

[Uncle Miltie]

Are false muzzles coned? Just wondering.

Coning is a way for modern folks to use a tight ball and patch combination without the use of a short starter. In the old days tight ball/patch combinations weren't used as they are today: they are a product of gamesmanship at Friendship (how 'bout that?) But anyway in the old days bores of good target rifles were almost always choked because they shot better that way. So were the loading muzzles used with them coned? Sort of, but tapered would be more like it. Loading muzzles started with a larger diameter which tapered to match the choke of the bore. Loading muzzles and barrels were rifled together so the patched bullet would engage the rifling as it was inserted into the bore of the barrel: it was not something done to the barrel after rifling. Loading (false) muzzles were not used on roundball guns 'til the Friendship boys started modifying the bores of original target rifles for use with roundball and building new barrels that used false muzzles.

 

[kansas_volunteer]

Real bullets with a rebatted base were designed to get the thing out the muzzle with minimum effect from the passing gas. Perhaps putting rebatted bases on round balls would solve the problem of much debate.

 

[jmull4609]

Let's argue about something so important that it may very well impact the longevity of America as we know her.

Let's argue about Muzzle Coning and the benefits or detriments of muzzle coning.

Personally speaking, I would never ever grind an angle at the muzzle of a rifle that would eliminate some of the rifling. Never. Ever.

I think a bore/muzzle/projectile should be as tight as a tick. I want no clearance/air space between projectile and bore. I want that projectile out of the bore and gone before the gases behind it even have a chance to think about exiting the muzzle.

When a muzzle is coned, you're giving a ton of hot gases a chance to pass over the projectile and create a possible disturbance in its flight path as the projectile is exiting the bore. The gap between the projectile and bore is tiny but it's still a gap.

I fully understand the desire to have a patch and ball below the muzzle for easier ramming. But at what cost?

Ready.....GO!

Absolutely false.

 

[64Springer]

It's impressive that you've churned out 1200 posts in 3 months here but @flint62is right. This has been talked about almost as much as how to remove a stuck ball. Dig through old threads there's plenty of discussion.

1,218

 

[hawkeye2]

Real bullets with a rebatted base were designed to get the thing out the muzzle with minimum effect from the passing gas. Perhaps putting rebatted bases on round balls would solve the problem of much debate.

I like that idea. I'll bet I could set up my Lubrisizer to swage the base of the balls (the side opposite the sprue) just a little. Would I need a special lube for the modified balls and would they be easier to pull if I dryballed?

 

[zimmerstutzen]

I am currently building a rifle that will have a coned muzzle that will not affect accuracy, even off a bench. (Because it has a false muzzle that comes off before firing)

I suppose for some one that only cares about hunting, doesn't care about a small loss in fine match accuracy. All they care about is minute of deer.

Someone asked above about pictures of a ball leaving the muzzle. I know I have seen some and there is often some small amount of flame, etc preceding it, but whether that is due to muzzle wear or crowning, I can't say. Whether the patch material was enough to seal the gasses in that bore, we also do not know. There were pictures of a minnie ball leaving the muzzle of a musket barrel in the Lyman Black Powder Handbook first edition, with no powder or smoke evident in the pictures. What I do know is a small nick or out of round at the muzzle affects accuracy. So unless coning is done with absolute alignment to the bore and near perfect centering, more powder will escape past one side of the ball than the other, and that will affect accuracy.

Lastly, I pay for a rifle barrel with a choke at the muzzle. I sure as heck am not going to scrape that choke out after paying for it.

For those who claim it has no effect, well maybe for you and your type of shooting. Shoot 300 shots from the bench as best you can and keep track of the groups. Then cone your muzzle and shoot another 300 shots as best you can. If you have done this and have proof that the groups did not open up even a half of a percent, then I believe you. Fine target bench matches are won often enough by 50's and number of "x's" if there is a statistical likelihood of throwing a ball out another half of a percent (and I seriously doubt it is that low) then you have caused your own loss.

 

[tenngun]

Let's argue about something so important that it may very well impact the longevity of America as we know her.

Let's argue about Muzzle Coning and the benefits or detriments of muzzle coning.

Personally speaking, I would never ever grind an angle at the muzzle of a rifle that would eliminate some of the rifling. Never. Ever.

I think a bore/muzzle/projectile should be as tight as a tick. I want no clearance/air space between projectile and bore. I want that projectile out of the bore and gone before the gases behind it even have a chance to think about exiting the muzzle.

When a muzzle is coned, you're giving a ton of hot gases a chance to pass over the projectile and create a possible disturbance in its flight path as the projectile is exiting the bore. The gap between the projectile and bore is tiny but it's still a gap.

I fully understand the desire to have a patch and ball below the muzzle for easier ramming. But at what cost?

Ready.....GO!

 

[The Crisco Kid]

Darn I wished I would have save my target from the last match! But I didn't so you'll have to take my word for it. 40 yards offhand I shot a 97 5X at a 4" bullseye. This was with a .440 ball in an old Douglas barrel which isn't supposed to work either, they say it takes a .445 ball to work. I did this with a coned muzzle using the tool supplied by the forum member and I took all the rifling out at the muzzle. It loaded with ease with no short starter. Y'all can do what works for you but I'll stick with my coned muzzle any day, especially since my rifles are built for hunting. If you want to just shoot targets at long distance then you might want something else but I have yet to see any reference to a long hunter or a mountain man carrying anything like a false muzzle or anything else to squeeze the best accuracy out of his Kentucky or his Hawken.

 

[mkabe]

It's impressive that you've churned out 1200 posts in 3 months here but @flint62is right. This has been talked about almost as much as how to remove a stuck ball. Dig through old threads there's plenty of discussion.

I’m new here and enjoy the discussions whether they have been brought up before or not. I appreciate the new questions and opinions.
If I lose interest there’s no one forcing me to stay.