OP wad for PRB?

[longcruise]

I will agree that hot gases from " Smokeless" powder are more likely to melt the base of cast bullets, than Black Powder, but I have seen cast bullets fired from MLers and from BPC guns that show the bottom edge being cut by gases.

I think that may be more a matter of bullet fit. Especialy in ml guns where the bullet must bump up in order to obturate the bore. The Long Range Muzzle Loaders use op wads as well when shooting their .45 caliber heavyweights. You would have to ask them the "why" of it but OTOH, I've never known any of them to specifically state that they do so to prevent melting or softening of the bullet base.

Meanwhile, consider this; You can load a ml paper patched bullet without an op wad and if the slug is heavy enough to bump up and obturate the bore, the gasses will not even burn the paper patch!

 

[paulvallandigham]

I have always thought the non-burning of the paper was due either to lube seeping into the paper, or just the moisture that paper absorbs from the air protecting it from burning. There has been some charring of the paper from the base of the bullets on papers I have recovered down range. Paper patching also makes the contact between the lead bullet and shallow rifling slicker, so that there is a lower coefficient of friction when paper is used, as opposed to when soft lead is used alone.

I do know shooters who have fast twist barrels for their MLers, and shoot conicals, including some who are shooting paper patched bullets. Some are hollow based; others are flat based. The shooters indicate that the treat the wadded up paper ends at the back as a " wad ", and believe it protects the edges of the bases from gas cutting at minimum. If they don't lube the paper, there is evidence of charring, if not actual burning when the paper leaves the barrel.

 

[spud]

I use 1/8 thick ballistol wads in all my chunk/slug/bench guns .45 to .58 cal

 

[Little Wattsy]

In developing a cionical load i kept getting "zingers" that could be off the mark by as much as 10 incehes at 25 yards!! The BEST theory I heard was "gas burn". An Oxyoke OP wad has completely eliminated the issue allowing for 4"-ish groups at 100 yards.
I believe in OP wads.

 

[Jarikeen]

So do chunkgun shooters only shoot conicals, or do they have a division for PRB? Just wondering.

 

[longcruise]

I have always thought the non-burning of the paper was due either to lube seeping into the paper, or just the moisture that paper absorbs from the air protecting it from burning

Many shoot without lubing the paper using grooveless unlubricated bullets.

 

[ApprenticeBuilder]

I just read this entire thread and have a couple observations.

Being an individual that has spent copious amounts of time working up modern handloads I have used that skill in the muzzleloading that I do. I will be running some tests with the felt wads under PRB as well, with that said....

I see the OPW users circumventing the load developement aspect of muzzleloading, instead of working up the optimal load, load what they want and resort to the OPW as a way of improving a poor load. Each of the individual components must come together to create the ultimate combination.

I have more to add but its late an I'm tired.

 

[roundball]

I just read this entire thread and have a couple observations.

Being an individual that has spent copious amounts of time working up modern handloads I have used that skill in the muzzleloading that I do. I will be running some tests with the felt wads under PRB as well, with that said....

I see the OPW users circumventing the load developement aspect of muzzleloading, instead of working up the optimal load, load what they want and resort to the OPW as a way of improving a poor load. Each of the individual components must come together to create the ultimate combination.

I have more to add but its late an I'm tired.

Well, fortunately everyone has opinions...you've just offered yours, now I'll share mine:

First:
You've drawn incorrect conclusions and subsequently made incorrect statements;

Second:
I hope you'll rest up soon so you can come back and continue clarifying everything about muzzleloading for us;

:grin:

 

[paulvallandigham]

I have to agree with Roundball. I don't see one hint of the idea that you use an OP Wad to make up for a poor load, anywhere until this post above.

The whole idea about using any kind of filler or OP wad under a PRB is to FIRST, work up the best and most accurate( low SDV) with just the PRB, using the depth of the grooves to help you select the right thickness, and the bore diameter to help you choose the correctly sized ball for that gun.

Once you reach that point, NOW you can play around with OP wads and fillers to see what, if any improvement in SDV and group size these can add to the gun's accuracy.

I too can't wait for you to come back on the forum and tell us all what we are doing wrong. :hatsoff:

 

[brubincam]

-----how can an over powder wad work with a round ball--the wad with ignition, would wrap around the bottom half of the round ball,not riding on the rifling,so it won't seal the bore-----

 

[paulvallandigham]

Please read Roundball's comments above to understand the answer to your question. Thank you. :thumbsup:

 

[roundball]

"...how can an over powder wad work with a round ball-the wad with ignition, would wrap around the bottom half of the round ball,not riding on the rifling,so it won't seal the bore

I can see where someone might think that but based on actual performance differences, the wad doesn't appear to 'wrap around a ball' at all. Or...if in all our speculation a wad somehow does get some curve to it, apparently its not enough to negate the sealing benefits that are demonstrated when using a wad.

It may be possible that a wad is stretched out wider under combustion pressure and gets enough resistance from scrubbing the bore walls & rifling to keep from curving much or any. Take a close look at the next patched ball you start just flush with the muzzle then hold a wad next to the muzzle and try to visualize how much it might be possible for it to curve...they are a pretty thick stiff wad.

And, at the end of a hunting season when I empty out a few TC 4-N-1 pocket reloaders after they've been loaded for a couple months, I notice the center of the wad has a depression in it from where I first loaded them and compressed the PRB down tight against the wad. (When I load the components in the reloader tube, I then press it down against my workbench to compreess them all into the smallest component stack possible to keep everything tight inside the reloader). When I look at the component stack through the tube walls, the sides are not curved up and that very depression itself seems to have spread the wad snug up against the walls.

But regardless of what might be going on inside the bore after ignition, the bottom line is that performance improvements from increased gas sealing when using wads are measurable with a chronograph, measurable in group size reductions at the target, measurable in reduced leading from conicals, etc, etc.

 

[ApprenticeBuilder]

Headed out to the range this morning to run some round ball and overpowder wad tests, when I get back and get the photos arranged I will post the results in a new thread as it will be easier to follow.

 

[410-er]

IF I use a maxi instead of a RB,I'll use a wad to seal gasses and prevent any blowby on the maxi.IF my patches are burning on RB's and groups are open,then I look at RB size,patch thickness,and lube.When I hit a good combo with the RB,I don't need the wads.Just what I do.The wads are just something extra to carry and load.I don't shoot 200 yds.Most hunting shots are 25-75 yds.I work at getting all my muzzys shooting 1 1/2" or LESS at 50 yds. with RB's.

 

[longcruise]

I have to agree with Roundball. I don't see one hint of the idea that you use an OP Wad to make up for a poor load, anywhere until this post above

I don't particularly like to disagree with either you or roundball, since you both have some great ideas and contributions to be made to this board,...............but, read Roundball's quote below:

TC .45cal RB barrel”¦.018” TC precut/prelubed pillow ticking with a Hornady .440” could easily be thumb started”¦not a very tight PRB combo”¦and when using 90grns Goex 3F the patches would be burned / shredded. As soon as I started using Oxyoke prelubed wads over the powder charge to act as a firewall, the patches came out so new and still lubed they could be reused, and just for testing, I did.

You and Roundball will probably interepret the above statement differently but here is my analysis;

The load for the .45 that shreds and burns patches is too loose! While the OPW may mitigate that problem, it remains, IMO, to be the real problem and can be easily solved with a better patch/ball fit. Normally I would also point to the bore condition but my experience with TC button rifled barrels is that they don't present rough bore problems.

 

[paulvallandigham]

I think using a .440 ball in a .451 diameter barrel, with the .018" thick patching, is a normal procedure that renders good accuracy. I think anything more than 70 grains of 3Fg in a .45 is too much, frankly, and is likely to burn the patching. At least that was my experience shooting a .45 rifle for a number of years. Maybe the burning would end with a .445" diameter ball, instead, and a thinner patch material. I don't know. I didn't have any particular success with that diameter ball with patches of .005, .010, and .015" when I tried that in my .45. As shallow as the rifling tends to be on the T/C rifles, it doesn't come close to the " hint of rifling " I had in the Foreign made gun I shot.

So, I guess you are right. I do interpret Roundball's comments differently. He might try the larger diameter ball and see if that helps, but I know he likes to shoot for fun, usually shooting 50 rounds in a morning every Saturday. He is not a bench rest shooter, and isn't interested in using mallets to seat the ball in the muzzle. He prefers what he described, and that is a ball and patch combination that seats with thumb pressure. I don't blame him. For that Kind of accuracy, I think the OxYoke felt wads are just the ticket. And don't kid yourself: I am sure that if you were to hand Roundball a target gun with tight ball and patch combination, he could shoot with the best of them off-hand, and probably better than most. All that practice every week means something. :thumbsup:

 

[longcruise]

I think using a .440 ball in a .451 diameter barrel, with the .018" thick patching, is a normal procedure that renders good accuracy. I think anything more than 70 grains of 3Fg in a .45 is too much,

I shoot my .45 TC with JoAnns #40 drill and a .445 ball. I long ago quit measuring patch material but the shooters who also use that patching tell me it measures .017.

No mallet required

My range shooting is done using a metal range rod but on trail walks or when in the field I use the wood rod in the thimbles. I load several ways but all yield the same results. Sometimes it's a precut square patch and sometimes cut at the muzzle. Precut is easiest since I can lube the patch (water and dish soap or Hoppes bp solvent work equally well just depends on how long it will be left loaded)place patch on muzzle place ball on patch and using the long arm of a short starter, it goes down the bore about eight inches with one fairly easy push with the palm of my hand. From there, the wood ramrod easily pushes it the rest of the way down.

I agree with your thoughts on the 90 grains in the .45, but would bet whatever was in my wallet at the time that I could use my load method described above with 120 grains of powder and not shred or burn the patch. :shocked2:

 

[paulvallandigham]

I didn't have .017" patching available at the time I was shooting my .45. That is probably what was the problem! :blah: :rotf: And, I didn't know to use pocket drill, instead of pillow ticking, and store bought, pre-cut patches. :thumbsup: All I know is that when I used a .445 Ball and either the .015 or .020" patches, it hurt my hand to get that ball seated, no matter what lube I used. I don't think I have ever loaded a T/C. I fired one once, and it shot where I aimed. I have to believe that every gun is a bit different, and that is what makes this sport so interesting. :hmm: :wink: :thumbsup:

 

[longcruise]

I didn't have .017" patching available at the time I was shooting my .45. That is probably what was the problem! And, I didn't know to use pocket drill, instead of pillow ticking, and store bought, pre-cut patches. All I know is that when I used a .445 Ball and either the .015 or .020" patches, it hurt my hand to get that ball seated, no matter what lube I used.

Well, my post wasn't about your .45 experience, but rather your statement that the opw had not been mentioned in terms of dealing with an otherwise poorly performing load.

I have to believe that every gun is a bit different, and that is what makes this sport so interesting

That's why I compared my TC .45 load to Roundball's .45 TC load

I have a ".45" kentucky pistol that can be made to load with a .433 ball and a thin pillow ticking patch but it really requires a .431 and a thin patch. Have never slugged it and would never bother to do so, but it illustrates the futility of comparing "pet" loads and other load "data" for ml guns as the modern reloaders are prone to do. OTOH, TC barrels are pretty consistent in their bore sizes.

You should try the #40 drill. It's a very tight weave and quite "hard" or dense. IOW, it loads like a thicker but softer pillow ticking patch.

I have a bunch of patch material left over from various experiments and trials. In the end, the wal mart pillow ticking gets a "good" rating and the #40 gets a "very good".

The other one that gets a "very good" is unsized artists canvas. I buy it from a large local artists supply store. It comes in 7 (or maybe 8 ) oz, 10 oz and 12 oz. Going back to my patch measuring days, it seems like the 10 oz was about .020 and the 12 oz about .022. Don't remember the size of the lighter stuff.