NorthStar Canoe Gun

[hanshi]

I've killed oodles of deer with a 24" barrel .50. When I chronographed it I found it was indeed slower than longer barrels but not as much as you might think. With a prb velocity is not what kills because you can't get much velocity in the first place. In the second place prb velocity drops off very rapidly enough that when it hits the target most of that higher velocity advantage is gone. You won't be able to burn as much powder in a short barrel as you can in a longer barrel. I wouldn't hesitate taking deer with, say, a 16" barrel!

 

[matt denison]

I've taken a lot of deer with a 16" barrel too - it was hooked to a lever action at the rear end.

Velocity is limited by how much powder you want to burn and how much recoil you can deal with. 80 gr. of FFg HURTS in my 5 lb 24 gage Canoe Gun. I reduced to 65 gr and still have point of aim accuracy out to 40+ yards. That's better than a modern .22 long rifle. Sorry for the nonPC reference but the point is that you give up very little when looked at in a practical sense.

I have pictures and testimonials from guys that have killed everything from turkey, deer and even a buffalo with one. You don't need to magnum everythig to death, just put it down humanely with careful aim and mostly practice.

 

[nkbj]

Hi Happyhunter.
Sorry to say that my chronograph stopped working reliably ten years ago so I cannot quote any data. Nowadays I go by penetration tests. Mostly I use stacked soaking wet superceded revisions of drawings and specifications.

 

[Extranero]

You don't need to magnum everything to death, just put it down humanely with careful aim and mostly practice.

Matt,

That's a nice thought to hear on here although it may border on sacrilege. Every guy who asks what caliber of gun to use on elk gets a raft of answers saying they wouldn't use anything smaller than a .58 or .62 or bigger with giant conicals, burning well upwards of a hundred grains of powder. Funny how my scrawny little .54 with 70 or 80 grains of 3f and a PRB seems to do just fine and puts the elk in the freezer.

Sean

 

[paulvallandigham]

I chronograph my RB load of 75 grains of Goex FFg powder behind a .600" 20 ga. ball, in my 30 inch Fowler barrel. I got 1020 fps.

I have not cut the barrel to tell you how much loss in velocity you will get for shorter barrels, but I doubt the loss is much more than 50 fps per inch. I would expect it to be closer to 20 fps per inch.

I am not going to sacrifice my barrel to find out, however. And, testing two different barrels of different lengths is not going to give you meaningful information either. Sorry.

I do intend to try different powder charges, different ball diameters, different patch thicknesses, and perhaps different lubes in my gun, and I will chronograph those, too.

Someone here( FFFg is his pseudonym) published his velocities for his 20 ga. smoothbore, back in Jan. 24, 2008. I don't have recorded his gun's barrel length, which means he probably didn't give it. I can say his Patch/ball combination must be tighter than mine, as he is getting better velocities than I have so far.

70 grains FFg, -- 1191 fps. MV
80 grains FFg, -- 1291 fps. MV
90 grains FFg, -- 1348 fps. MV
100 grains FFg, - 1424 fps. MV
110 grains FFg, - 1475 fps. Mv.

I HOPE THIS ENLIGHTENS YOU SOME WHAT. You should also rely on the Davenport formula to estimate how much powder your barrel will burn efficiently; That is: 11.5 grains per cubic Inch of bore. To help you do this easily, multiply the length of your barrel times 3.4719 to get the max. eff. powder charge to use in your barrel. A short, 20 inch barrel in 20 gauge will burn 70 grains of powder. A 36 inch barrel will burn 125 grains of powder! Those 42 inch barrels will burn 145 grains of powder.

You can stuff more powder in those barrel lengths, and get more velocity. But my observations on my chronograph is that the SDV opens up considerably with heavier powder charges, and accuracy falls off.

A round ball loses velocity quickly in the air, and even faster when it leaves the muzzle at velocities over the Speed of Sound. At 100 yds, you can expect a .62 caliber ball to retain about 60% of its muzzle velocity, which is way better than a .45 cal. RB. ( about 45%) I don't consider the 62 smoothbore shooting RB to be a good 100 yd gun, even tho its quite capable of killing deer at even twice that distance. Because of the drop in trajectory, the poor iron sights, and then environmental factors affecting any hunt, I consider it a good 50-60 yd. deer gun. 75 yards is a stretch. But all my deer have been taken at under 50 yds.

 

[happyhunter]

GoodCheer,
I too have used penetration to test diff loads as I do not get along with chronos (pretty bad for an EE to not like an electronic device). I used old 2x4s to test handgun ammo. (BTW hard cast bullets penetrate much more than hollowpoints.) Do you have any comparisons of short or long barrels?

Paul,
Yes you would need several barrels of short/long length to get a meaningful comparison. But so far we have no comparison (with numbers) of what a short and long can do. Yes a long barrel will burn more powder efficiently than a short will. But what is the end result when using the same charge? Of course the same argument can be made as to how long of a shot one can take and still have a good killing load. This gets very murky without numbers and admittedly it is even murky with numbers.

As a handgun nut I hear many misconceptions that rifle hunters/shooters come up with, when they never tried a handgun. They really don't know what they are talking about. I see many of you have tried short MLs. So, it is nice to hear you do know quite a bit more than I (because I have only shot my TC Renegade with 26 inch barrel, which quickly put down the deer with 50 PRB and 90 gr FF). But, I can't help but wonder if you have the opposite bias that I have... :blah:

I once read that there is an optimum length for a 22 LR. The bullet will move slower if you use a shorter or longer barrel. In the longer length the pressure starts to drop off and the friction between bullet and barrel begins to slow it down. My gut feeling is the 20 inch will be slower but not by much. How is that for vague? Numbers anyone???

 

[gizamo]

God I love this place... :grin:

giz

 

[DanChamberlain]

Sorry you don't approve. As there was plenty of sarcasm printed in the thread before I even posted. On the other hand, point out where I'm wrong, and perhaps your comment will have a valid :shake: point.

Regards

Dan

 

[wmjcarderyahoo.com]

I was having a similar discussion with a friend a month or so back. I am partial to longer barrels, while he was thinking something like the canoe gun might be the ticket. We were discussing something for more all-around use ”“ deer, elk, small game, turkey ”“ here in Colorado. I am sending him some of your arguments - both ways to avoid cherry picking. Good discussion, thanks!

 

[matt denison]

My favorite penetration test is shooting into the end of a block of wood. Fir works good. I stand on the tailgate of the Chevy and shoot straight down into the block of wood with various loads that I want to test, mark each hole, then I can split the wood to see how far they went side by side. The trick is to shoot straight into the end grain. Supriseingly soft lead balls don't vary much regardless of powder charge or caliber. Modern pistol loads are a different story, it is a very good way to get a visual of what your bullets are doing but can't discuss it on this forum.

According to Paul's information a 20" barrel will burn 70 gr of powder. Most reasonable people only load about that much in their gun regardless of the barrel length. Happy Hunter brought up the friction problem and he is right too. After the preasure drops off there is no more advantage to a longer barrel and in fact it can be a dissadvantage. There was an interesting article in American Rifleman some years ago where they started with a 30" .45-70 barrel and chopped successive one inch pieces off from the muzzle. Velocity actually increased for the first 4 inches. The bullet was achieving max. velocity in the barrel at approx. 26" and was then being slowed by friction. So now the theory is if you want to use a 42" barrel eficiently then you'll need to load 120+ gr. of powder in it. Ouch. I know that this will be found controversial especially by the guys that like to shoot the ultra long barrel guns. Long barrels do have advantagess in sight plane and particularly ballance and weight of the gun. I have long barrel guns too and enjoy them very much.

 

[DanChamberlain]

Based on some arguments (not yours), one would have to conclude the blunderbuss is incapable of lethiality, never mind accuracy.

A canoe gun has perfectly logical applications that have nothing to do with canoes. Of course it has no all-around application. It's specialized.

For some to argue against generally demonstrates a personal prejudice that simply has no merit. No, it's not going to be a 100 yard precision piece, but then few smoothbores are. But at bow range, it would be a fool's errand to suggest it lacks either the power or accuracy to fell big game.

One might point out that the muzzle velocity of the Springfield .58 that killed so many in the Civil War was in the range of 900fps.

Dan

 

[paulvallandigham]

The VERY slight loss of velocity of a long barreled fowler, using less powder than the Davenport formula describes as its "Max. Efficient powder charge" is no loss to accuracy, or patterns. In fact, Davenport would tell folks to start around 90% of the max load to find the "sweet spot" in their particular barrel for the best groups.

There is also a good argument that a small drop in pressure lessens the barrel vibrations in the final inches of the barrel, allowing for a more consistent release of the PRB from the muzzle, or better release of a shot load at the muzzle. Without the acceleration at the muzzle that comes with higher pressure loads, you get less disturbance caused by gases pushing the PRB, or Shot, into the air.

Evidence? Look at the frayed edges on your fabric patches after they leave the muzzle. The Faster the velocity at the muzzle( acceleration), the more the edges are frayed. Don't go too far with this: even cloth patches that leave the muzzle at well under 1,000 fps. will have frayed edges. The thickness of the fabric, as well as the thread count, and cloth fibers used in the patch will contribute a lot on determining how much of the edges are frayed.

I learned about patch thickness, thread count, and choice of fabrics, shooting .010" cotton patches with a low thread count out of my .45 rifle, years ago. When I reduced the diameter of the ball I was shooting, and increase patch thickness to .015", the fraying was much shorter around the patch. Later I tried linen patch material, and then found some very tightly woven, high thread count cotton patches, and both frayed less than cotton patches I had been using with the same loads. I didn't have my chronograph at the time, so I need to someday do some testing of different fabrics, and thicknesses to see what effect velocities have on the fraying, and what correlation exists between the degree of fraying and velocity at the muzzle. I am wanting to finish a .35 cal. rifle this Winter, and have it ready to find a load next spring. Maybe that can be my excuse to do some of this testing.

 

Sorry you don't approve. As there was plenty of sarcasm printed in the thread before I even posted.

I see, so previous sarcasm justifies yours. Ah, a child's, "he did it first" defense. :haha:

On the other hand, point out where I'm wrong, and perhaps your comment will have a valid :shake: point.

I did point out where you were wrong - the uncalled for sarcasm. :hatsoff:

 

[DanChamberlain]

"Resurrecting a 6-month old discussion with sarcasm is what makes this forum great"

Your post is in itself using sarcasm. So, you must feel it justified for some reason. Could it be you were simply using it to make a point? How is it justified in your case, and not in others?

Carl, you can't lecture from both sides of your mouth.

I apologize for hijacking this thread away from the discussion at hand with this post. However, I don't apologize for making a "valid" point with sarcasm.

Russ T all but called the originator of this thread an idiot! By saying that he "can not comprehend" he is violating basic rules of civility. No one called him on it, least of all you, so don't lecture me on your failings.

When a poster comes along and states his successes with the very style of firearm the thread originator is speculating about, Russ T attacks the thread originator for finding that information satisfying. Again, you are absent in commenting on that.

Forgive me if your point is lost on me. Now, if you want to be consistent, perhaps we can come to some understanding.

Regards

Dan

 

[Mike Brooks]

After the preasure drops off there is no more advantage to a longer barrel and in fact it can be a dissadvantage.

You don't let the pressure drop off in a long barreled gun, you add more powder and shot and take advantage of the length, hence the long barreled , large bored wild fowling guns of the 18th century. Those long barrels weren't just for looks you know, those 18th century hunters and gunmakers weren't just a bunch of clueless duffusses, they made those long barrels for a reason, not some uneducated romantic notion.

 

[matt denison]

"..you add more powder and shot and take advantage of the length,..."

Aye, Lad. Thanks for helping me make my point. There were environmental and cultural things going on 150-200 years ago that followed through and included the "Long Tom" modern shotguns of my youth with 36" barrels. With the types of powder in use etc. they needed those long barrels to get 'em to work. They also kicked like a mule.

Here's a theory that I've read about and practice. (maybe this should be in a separate thread) Paul is partially right about preassure dropping off but it doesn't concern vibrations especially with shot charges. The theory is this: An ideal shot load will exit the muzzle at the instant that it reaches max. velocity with zero preasure behind it and before it loses any velocity from friction. I believe this is the single most imortant thing in getting a good consistent pattern. Adding a bunch of wads and cups etc. are simply compensating for (usually) overloading powder and shot. A longer barreled gun can get faster velocity but has to be loaded for that purpose. Vis a vis a shorter barrel needs to be loaded accordingly too. I can go on if anyone is interested but don't know if this the place or time.

One more thing. I don't hold anything against long barrels. I love them for their historic significence, they're graceful and beautiful and if I could fit a 50 incher in my lathe I'd have one. At the same time I love my 30" trade gun for what it is and what it will do when I load it right. The 20" Canoe Gun is a ton of fun to shoot and I love raising eyebrows when I can keep up with the big boys with it. Many guy's first reaction when they see it is that it is a toy; I assure you it isn't.

 

[Mike Brooks]

Aye, Lad. Thanks for helping me make my point.

Thanks, it's been some time since I've been described as a Lad. :haha:
The subject of long barrels has always been one of my favorites. Many people have a cartridge mind set when it comes to performance in shot guns. With long barrels in muzzleloaders you aren't restricted to what you can stuff into a shell. The sky is the limit as long as you have a barrel that is big enough in bore size, length and weight. Take a look at the fowlers in Glinslade's book, long, big bored and heavy. Just what somebody tossing big loads of shot would need to take flocks of ducks sitting on the water. Long barreled muzzle loading dynamics are why you don't see any 24" barrels on boat mounted punt guns for wild fowling.

 

[nkbj]

Hey Happyhunter.
Yep. Have the old Lymans black powder manual from the late 70's. It shows some data for different barrel length in various diameters. Send me a pm.

 

[Tajue17]

flintlock75 how did you ad a rear sight???

I have a jackie brown 62SB southern canoe gun and what a fun gun they are,, I load mine with Ball, #2's or #4's over 60gr of 3F and its a joy to shoot,, these canoe guns are very light too!

with the blade sight only my range is maybe 40max with a ball and thats maybe a 6" circle so I'd like to hear more about getting a rear sight on there.

I bought mine for small game and turkeys Using wrapped shot, or for in the thick scrubs oaks after deer--> plus they are cool looking too

 

[Le Grand]

Would there be any advantage to jug choking a Canoe gun?