Patch lube for round ball shooting..........Lawdy.

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Never seen any reference to it in any period documents. If it is traditional please show some documentation regarding its use.

If they did not do it in colonial times why should I?

Never said wiping between shots to be traditional. Don’t recall any documentation stating that it was done. And, as you say, you have never seen any reference in period documents. Therefore, between the two of us we have never seen any reference either way.

With no historical reference it is pure speculation either way. However, you state that "If they did not do it in colonial times why should I?" So, like I said, "Not sure how wiping between shots is not traditional??". And I'm still not sure! I thought you might have some evidence of how it was done.

Maybe the choice in colonial times was as it is today with some being wipers and some not. Maybe it was one of those innocuous everyday things that the colonists did not think important enough to mention 🤔?
 
Longcruise, I bet that it was seen as such a common sense thing that there was no need to mention what was part and parcel of the operation.
just thinking out loud.
coupe
 
Longcruise, I bet that it was seen as such a common sense thing that there was no need to mention what was part and parcel of the operation.
just thinking out loud.
coupe
Russell's teapot.

There are lots of period descriptions of reloading, read Friedrich Gerstacker's "Wild sports in the far west" never mentioning wiping between shots.

People cling to what they believe with no evidence to support their contentions.
 
Russell's teapot.

There are lots of period descriptions of reloading, read Friedrich Gerstacker's "Wild sports in the far west" never mentioning wiping between shots.

People cling to what they believe with no evidence to support their contentions.

Looks like an interesting book. Thanks for bringing it up. But I still question what it does or doesn't say about the wiping question. Definitely not a colonial period document.
 
If it is your contention that they wiped between shots it is incumbent upon you to provide documentation, not on me to disprove it. (Russell's teapot again) I would suggest the Draper manuscripts, Kaskaskia manuscripts, Penicault's diary etc.

I would add that while Gerstacker's book was not written during the colonial period the art of the gun from the colonial period would have most certainly have carried through his time period.
 
So much about the practice depends on the where and the desired end result of the shooting experience.

I have talked to several of the long-time shooters that participated in Over the Log matches, chunk gun, table matches, and other matches where individuals are shooting multiple targets with the objective of having the ball impact closest to the X mark that is scribed on a plank. No one wrote muck of any thing down. Ned Roberts talks of these matches in his book and he is describing a very late in the traditional muzzle loading era shooting practice. The practitioners of these X Mark matches had time between shots. They would take care to wipe the fouling from their barrel with a damp patch and dry the bore before loading the next round. These rifles had traditional breeches and care was taken in the maintenance of their rifles between shots to have the bore in a consistent condition. After all money was on the line for each shot.

Sadly, the discussion of the Dieffenbach (? spelling) Match at Fort de Chartres between the hunter Dieffenbach and the British rifleman did not discuss the maintenance of the rifles during the match. It is known that many shots were fired (if I remember correctly about 60 to 100). Dieffenbach won handily. The target was the head of a keg at about 60 yards. We still shoot that match at the Fort de Chartres Trade Faire in April at a 6" plate. The longest consecutive number of hits is the winner. If you want to compete, wiping between shots is common among the top competitors.
 
If it is your contention that they wiped between shots it is incumbent upon you to provide documentation, not on me to disprove it. (Russell's teapot again)
You seem to have reversed our roles in the teapot analogy. I never contended that they wiped between shots but rather clearly stated that "we" don't know for sure what they did. I have nothing to prove or disprove. I make no claims to what they did or didn't do. I simply question the assumption that it was done a certain and one way during the colonial period.

"extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" Carl Sagan
 
If I don't use spit patch, I use Foggy Mountain's Bearguard leather dressing. All natural, made from bear fat and beeswax. You can also use it for a bullet lube. For patches, just pass the patch across the dressing or drag your patching strip across the surface. If you decide to try it, just make sure you buy the "Original" with no pigment as they do make it in brown and black.

View attachment 191726
The old mountain men used bear fat bet that works good
 
The old mountain men used bear fat bet that works good
It does. I kept seeing all these comments about using beeswax and other vegetable oils or fat, including bear oil and thought I'd try it. I even rub the edges of leather wads across the wax for use in smoothbores. I had a few cans left from when I sold it years ago and had forgot about. Some of these cans of Bearguard have to be at least 15 years old. No signs of spoilage or going rancid, looks like it was just packaged yesterday, and still has that that honey/beeswax smell.
 
I’ve used something similar for over two decades. Bumbling Bear grease. Basically bear fat and beeswax as well. For a wet lube, I’m down to my last two bottles of Lehigh Lube. When it’s gone, I’ll stick with bear grease. I do swab with Murphy’s, water, and alcohol between shots.
I use that lube from October Country. I swab every five shots with the same cleaner.

Walt
 
Last edited:
Went back through all the threads on this but never found out what is referred to as Russell's Teampot by French Colonial. Is this in another post or did I miss it?
 
So much about the practice depends on the where and the desired end result of the shooting experience.

I have talked to several of the long-time shooters that participated in Over the Log matches, chunk gun, table matches, and other matches where individuals are shooting multiple targets with the objective of having the ball impact closest to the X mark that is scribed on a plank. No one wrote muck of any thing down. Ned Roberts talks of these matches in his book and he is describing a very late in the traditional muzzle loading era shooting practice. The practitioners of these X Mark matches had time between shots. They would take care to wipe the fouling from their barrel with a damp patch and dry the bore before loading the next round. These rifles had traditional breeches and care was taken in the maintenance of their rifles between shots to have the bore in a consistent condition. After all money was on the line for each shot.

Sadly, the discussion of the Dieffenbach (? spelling) Match at Fort de Chartres between the hunter Dieffenbach and the British rifleman did not discuss the maintenance of the rifles during the match. It is known that many shots were fired (if I remember correctly about 60 to 100). Dieffenbach won handily. The target was the head of a keg at about 60 yards. We still shoot that match at the Fort de Chartres Trade Faire in April at a 6" plate. The longest consecutive number of hits is the winner. If you want to compete, wiping between shots is common among the top competitors.
I think this was Jacob Dieverbaugh
 

Latest posts

Back
Top