patent breeches and pellets?

[johnwm]

Awhile back I got my first TC Hawken, used at a gun show. When I emptied the patch box of the handy little assortment of gadgets stored inside, I found a musket nipple which screws right on in place of the #11 nipple. Thought nothing of it and put it aside.

Then yesterday I was browsing around on Rimfire Central and found they have a Black Powder forum . There's a thread there in which a poster says that he uses a musket nipple and caps on his sidelock CVA, and this allows the use of Pyrodex pellets..not loose powder, but pellets. He claims this is condoned by CVA in the manual for his gun.

I'm a computer klutz. I don't know how to provide a link to this other site, and I can't find the CVA literature he is talking about online. But from what I have learned here on this site, the "patent breech" design would mean that those pellets (he uses 2) would be sitting forward in the barrel itself. How could this ignite properly? And wouldn't it act as a bore obstruction, sort of like a conical bullet that isn't properly seated? Do CVA's not use the patent breech design?

I am curious, since I have a boatload of Pyrodex pellets I will never use otherwise. Can I do this in my TC safely?

 

[galamb]

Here's the word from Hodgdon who makes the pellets:

"Designed for use in 50 caliber in-line rifles. A single Pellet may be used for target or small game and two 50/50 Pellets may be used to create the 100 gr. equivalent for big game. Packed 100 Pellets to the box or 24 Pellets to the card. Easy clean-up, just like Triple Seven granular powder. Designed for use with 209 shotshelll primers only."

"The original Pyrodex Pellet designed for use in 50 caliber, in-line rifles. A single 50/50 pellet may be used for a light target or small game load while two 50/50 pellets may be combined to provide a potent 100 gr. equivalent load for big game. They are packed 100 pellets to the box and 24 pellets to the card. It may be used with standard caps, musket caps or 209 ignition systems."

Guys will put a bit of loose powder down the barrel first followed by pellets. In my opinion that is asking for potential trouble.

CVA's user manual is here CVA

T/C's manual is here T/C

I don't see anywhere where they say pellets is acceptable in side lock rifles with the exception of the Traditions PA Pellet flintlock which has a special breech designed to fire a pellet.

 

[mooman76]

Pellets weren't designed for sidelocks and they are very limiting and harder to set off. If I had them, I'd probably use them(fooling around) just so they wouldn't go to waist but I wouldn't expect much of them either.

 

[cynthialee]

you can use them only if you have put enough loose powder to fill the patent breach

Once that condition is met they should work fine. I wouldn't consider the use of them long term as an option, the chance of forgetting a breach filling charge is to much for this forgetful lady.

Besides they come in 50 grain pellets. What if your gun works best with say... 63 grains?

 

[William O.]

Pellets are not designed to work in traditional muzzle loaders and are for those types of rifles that remain unmentionable here on this forum. Throw them away or break them up and use them in your garden for fertilizer.

 

[Zonie]

Seems to me to be downright wasteful to destroy expensive propellents that can be used.

If some loose powder is loaded first, there's no reason the pellets wouldn't work in a sidelock.

I don't think I'd try to use them for accurate target shooting but for just having fun plinking they should work okay.

 

[Wes/Tex]

Have to agree. Don't see any reason they can't be used for plinking and defending yourself from vicious Budweiser cans!

 

[stinkyfeet]

how would they go off without a boost from loose powder under the pellets without a huge delay even with a musket cap. The pellets are made with a hole down the middle and lined with a accelerant to promote faster ignition. With a sidelock the cap would be trying to ignite the side of the pellets not the back or middle. :idunno: Sounds like horse dookie to me.

 

[Wes/Tex]

With a patent breach, the cap's flame is directed into the bottom rear of the chamber...sort of the old right hook idea!

 

[Zonie]

I agree.
The flame channel comes into the rear of the powder chamber and if the shooter didn't use a "starter powder charge" made of loose powder AND if he was real lucky, enough of the caps flame might get to the pellet that's sitting ahead of the breech plug.

It's the making of a, "I got mine to shoot after firing 5 caps." sort of comment that folks like to chime in with when the old timers say, "That's a dumb idea."

 

[johnwm]

Thanks to all for your input, and especially to galamb for those links. That CVA manual specifically recommends against the use of pellets.

I questioned the idea in the thread on Rimfire Central, and several other posters have come on and agreed with the concensus here. I did request the original poster to provide a link to the manual he cited...if he actually does so, I'll update here, for general interest if nothing else.

 

[Dphar]

Thanks to all for your input, and especially to galamb for those links. That CVA manual specifically recommends against the use of pellets.

I questioned the idea in the thread on Rimfire Central, and several other posters have come on and agreed with the concensus here. I did request the original poster to provide a link to the manual he cited...if he actually does so, I'll update here, for general interest if nothing else.

The ML world is full of... ahh.... not well thought out or understood techniques and advice. Including but not limited to, using tiny amounts of prime in a FL, sawn agate flints, various modern bullets, with and without plastic sabots, vented nipples, sugar based powders that would liquify in the horn and a host of safety related material, design and assembly "problems". The use of corrosive or non-corrosive substitute powders ranks pretty high on the list since it tends to create its own set of safety issues on at least a couple of "fronts". One being the fact that some are designed for use with MODERN PRIMERS and may not ignite properly or give uniform ballistics with traditional ignition sources. Some are designed for pressures beyond what a sidelock design is intended for, at least as most are produced today. The other is that the corrosive versions tend to eat holes from the inside out and cause "leaks". Yes its been predicted and HAS happened.

This whole "problem" is greatly simplified if one adheres to the ignition sources and propellants available when MLs were the standard firearm. But people keep falling for the "consumer market" hype associated with "new and improved" and apparently there is no cure for this. Its human failing.

Dan

 

[MacRob46]

Dan...I agree wholeheartedly. The basic design of traditional muzzleloaders as executed by modern gun builders is the same as it was from day one. Pellets were not used in these guns and IMHO should not be used with them now, loose powder loaded first or not. Pellets are for the in-line variety of gun which, while strictly speaking is a muzzleloader, is actually a modern design meant to use pellet type ammo (although loose powder will work too). As a traditionalist, I think the only reason for these guns is to extend the hunting season for what are probably mostly modern gun hunters. I am sure there will be some disagreement on that but it is only my opinion to which I, like everyone else, am entitled.

 

[Danny Ross]

Back when pellets first came out those unmentionable rifles used #11 caps. A buddy of mine back in those days and I were out target shooting me shooting my TC Renegade and him with his Knight unmentionable. He said try these, I had heard that pellets were not made to be used in sidelock guns. I was using a Hot Shot nipple on my Renegade, so I thought I'll try it. I loaded the pellets as recommended with the dark end going down the barrel first and I used 2 pellets and no loose powder. I had good ignition for the only 2 rounds I tried them. I must admit I did have some question in my mine when I did it on both rounds. I wouldn't recommend them to be used because I don't know if got lucky or not. They did work for me in my Renegade that day. I wouldn't try it with a Lyman patented breech because of its design which I believe is different from TC breech design. DANNY

 

[mjulihn]

Seems to me to be downright wasteful to destroy expensive propellents that can be used.

If some loose powder is loaded first, there's no reason the pellets wouldn't work in a sidelock.

I don't think I'd try to use them for accurate target shooting but for just having fun plinking they should work okay.

I tried two 30-grain Pyrodex pellets in my TC Hawken. After several FTFs I removed the nipple, poured in a tiny bit of loose powder, reinstalled the nipple and capped it. It fired with the next hammer drop. My recommendation is to find someone with a BP revolver and trade your pellets for something you need. :thumbsup:

 

[johnwm]

I can't in good conscience trade these pellets off to anyone...some of them are 10 years old, and for me at least, Pyrodex seems to get "iffy" inconsistent results if it sits around for more than a year or so.

But all is well. Today is sunny and reasonably warm. I went out back with 15 or so partially full boxes of pellets, a bag of .50cal balls and patches, and spent the morning shooting off the deck...patched round ball out of my one remaining stainless "unmentionable" propelled by one pellet. Not exactly precision shooting...most shots hit an eight-inch homemade gong at 50 yards...but fun. Several more sessions before I use up all this stuff.

Just for the record, the guy from Rimfire Central never did come back with a link to his "source", despite a couple of requests.