Powder loads for smoothie

[11th corps]

Mike B on duelist 1954 has a theory on increasing accuracy of smoothbore loads. He believes that 110 grains of 2F creates a cone of gas that stabilizes the ball as it flies to the target as opposed to lighter charges.
I shot my Trade Gun today and while I didn't get to that hot a load I did increase from 60, then 70 and finally 80 grains of 3F behind by .600 round balls. It did seem to give me an increase in target accuracy.
Do you smooth bore shooters believe this to be the case?

 

[Brokennock]

I have my most accurate loads from my 20 gauge guns at 65 and 80 grains 3f for one gun, and around 75 grains 2f for the other (development still in progress) depending on if I'm using cards and lubed felt wads, tow wads, or a patched ball.

These heavy charges are mostly seen with a completely bare ball,,,, no wadding or patching of any kind. It would seem that with nothing else to controlling the ball,,, higher velocity and thus higher powder charges are needed.

I'm sorry, I don't buy this "cone of gas" nonsense. There is a guy on the ALR forum that spouts this all the time,,,, but has yet to explain how a fuel that is both as wide across the leading surface as the bore is wide, and most like doesn't have an even surface, or depth from surface to breach face, can create a "cone" of any kind. A cone pushing a ball would be narrower at the source end and wider at the ball,,, with the point of the cone centered,,,,, not possible.
How is one going to get this <● from this |● inside the bore?

I'm not denying that for a ball being shot just sitting naked on the powder much higher powder charges become needed. But the cone doesn't make sense, and, one doesn't have to do that to get accuracy from a smoothbore.

Load for target on left in last pic was rejected

It takes time, powder, and lead.

 

[Comfortably_Numb]

Those that shoot national records at Friendship use patched balls and reasonable charges.

 

[11th corps]

The Mike B video I was referring to shows loading bare ball. He says there is no documentation of pioneers or native Americans patching rb in a smoothbore.

 

[waksupi]

The Mike B video I was referring to shows loading bare ball. He says there is no documentation of pioneers or native Americans patching rb in a smoothbore.

I seem to recall reading an account of a battle with the Blackfeet, commenting on the patches cut from blanketing being used by the natives.

 

[tenngun]

I seem to recall reading an account of a battle with the Blackfeet, commenting on the patches cut from blanketing being used by the natives.

I’m think they said blanket wads
Patching a ball was referenced in 1847, as if it was common
Smooth rifles were made almost as soon as American rifles were being built here.
We have nothing to indicate patching was done with these guns.
However I just THINK that if you had a smooth rifle, and folks around you were patching ball, you too would patch.
And we have ample times we know a frontiersman lost his rifle and had to shoot a smoothbore. Already used to patching I would THINK he would patch. In terms of use it’s easier to patch then wad
However what I THINK is meaningless
I shoot both and if I’m talking in an historic setting I will only reference wadding.
As far as Dualist 54 vid, I would opine that large charge would go faster and have less time to deviate from line of sight.
The expanding pressure wave behind the ball would exert pressure all around the ball equally, so I would THINK it would keep the ball in the center of the bore. Not letting it ‘bounce’. But I don’t understand why a low charge would have less of an effect then a big charge

 

[Brokennock]

The Mike B video I was referring to shows loading bare ball. He says there is no documentation of pioneers or native Americans patching rb in a smoothbore.

Patches no, not until much later,,,, at least not in a trade gun or fowling piece.
But wads, yes. Tow is referenced as is "saddle pierce."

Wasp or hornet nest is not.

Ask yourself this, would you, or do you think they would, want to walk around the woods and fields with nothing holding that ball down on the powder?

 

[Billy-by-gosh]

I’m think they said blanket wads
Patching a ball was referenced in 1847, as if it was common
Smooth rifles were made almost as soon as American rifles were being built here.
We have nothing to indicate patching was done with these guns.
However I just THINK that if you had a smooth rifle, and folks around you were patching ball, you too would patch.
And we have ample times we know a frontiersman lost his rifle and had to shoot a smoothbore. Already used to patching I would THINK he would patch. In terms of use it’s easier to patch then wad
However what I THINK is meaningless
I shoot both and if I’m talking in an historic setting I will only reference wadding.
As far as Dualist 54 vid, I would opine that large charge would go faster and have less time to deviate from line of sight.
The expanding pressure wave behind the ball would exert pressure all around the ball equally, so I would THINK it would keep the ball in the center of the bore. Not letting it ‘bounce’. But I don’t understand why a low charge would have less of an effect then a big charge

“The expanding pressure wave behind the ball would exert pressure all around the ball equally, so I would THINK it would keep the ball in the center of the bore. Not letting it ‘bounce’. But I don’t understand why a low charge would have less of an effect then a big charge”

In addition, higher powder charges allow the ball to travel supersonic with a leading bow wave to help move the air resistance aside...that is, until the ball does slow down. Once it enters the transition to subsonic speed, it encounters a good bit deal of disturbance as the ball is buffeted by direct air resistance. This may be part of the reason for the increased accuracy with large charges (over longer ranges).

Conversely, using a lower charge that produces subsonic velocity will avoid altogether the change in resistance and often is quite accurate, though the ball will drop much more quickly.

 

[hanshi]

While the "cone of fire" myth seems half baked, smoothbores do IMO have a range of charges that will work for prb and bare ball loads. In my 20 ga. a bare ball, as I load it, isn't all that far behind the patched ball loads I generally shoot. Starting at around 60 grns of 3F on up to 75 grns, 50 yard groups aren't all that different between prb and bare ball loads as I load them.
A photo of two targets (50 yds) with the left being a bare ball load and on the right a prb load. The bare ball load is under three inches and the prb load under 2". There's not a great deal of difference between them and both are more than accurate enough for deer at 50 yds and even a little farther than that. I prefer prb load in my smoothbore but would feel just as comfortable with a bare ball loaded.

 

[Cruzatte]

Mike B on duelist 1954 has a theory on increasing accuracy of smoothbore loads. He believes that 110 grains of 2F creates a cone of gas that stabilizes the ball as it flies to the target as opposed to lighter charges.
I shot my Trade Gun today and while I didn't get to that hot a load I did increase from 60, then 70 and finally 80 grains of 3F behind by .600 round balls. It did seem to give me an increase in target accuracy.
Do you smooth bore shooters believe this to be the case?

I got up to 105 grains of 2fg. And I just couldn't stand the recoil. So in my experience such a charge was just out of the question.

 

[Comfortably_Numb]

Powder wasn't cheap back then either.

 

[Billy-by-gosh]

I got up to 105 grains of 2fg. And I just couldn't stand the recoil. So in my experience such a charge was just out of the question.

Yes, the big powder charges are punishing. Especially in the bores larger than .56 or 28 gauge. I am like-minded about recoil in my senior years - hate to pull the trigger on anything heavyweight now! Am contemplating building a smoothie of 28 gauge (55 or 56 caliber). That should allow me to use punched-out 9/16" card wads and enjoy shooting more. A .530 ball weighs only 224 grains (1/2 ounce) while a ball measuring .600 is 25 percent heavier at 324 grains. Moving upward, a.690 ball is 493 grains, more than double the weight of a .530!

 

[DuncNZ]

I used to shoot my Charleville against a guy who also shot one , he was constantly trying different loads and wads in all sorts of combinations .
He always won the New Zealand champs military smooth bore shoot . I only shot against him at one championship and beat him fair and square , I had asked about his loads and he wouldn't tell me and got all secret squirrel about the whole thing . I picked up some of his wads which were made of precisely cut 5 ply wood , he had cut about 30 grooves ,about 1/16" deep, in the wad all the way around the circumference . The idea that the gas could pass through the grooves and float the ball down the barrel , it made no difference for a lot of work .
The old smooth bore firearms tended to have a lot of windage , ie variations in bore and ball size which badly affected accuracy .
Now days barrels are ,or at least should be, perfectly made and the balls can be patched to give a tight seal between ball and barrel and various wads and cards used giving way better accuracy than 200 years ago .

 

[tenngun]

Fifty yards patch vs wad, a deer wouldn’t know the difference, probably a woods walk wouldn’t either.
And these were from rest, off hand I bet they would be much closer, or farther apart as it were.

 

[Stantheman86]

I shoot my .69's with 100 grains of 1,2,or 3 f. They shoot very well with the Service loads

The grain doesn't seem to matter, 1F is just dirtier .

 

[Stantheman86]

Loading with .65 balls in a paper cartridge, loading loose with wadding on top, or a .675 ball and a .010 patch make no real difference at realistic ranges

 

[jackpine54]

My 20 gauge fusil de chasse shoots great with 110gr FFg + .015 patch + .595 ball.
It also shoots just as great with either 90gr FFg or 85gr FFFg + over powder wad + .015 patch + .595 ball
However if I take the op was out it's not good.
After a lot of experiments and Chrono tests I finally figured out that these were all very similar velocity. So in my simple mind I have decided that my gun shoots a certain velocity the most accurately regardless of how it gets there. I may not be right, but everyone has to believe something.

 

[Brokennock]

I have decided that my gun shoots a certain velocity the most accurately regardless of how it gets there.

Yeah, I think you are closer to truth than the mystical "cone of gas" theory.

 

[Maven]

My Green River Forge 20 ga. (.618" -.619" bore) does better with lower charges of BP, 65 - 75 gr. FFg, at closer ranges with a patched RB. What I've discovered is that a RB between .597" (Lee & Tanner moulds) and .600 x .603" (out of round Lyman mould) is quite accurate with a patch between .014" and .018". Bore sized RB's are a work in progress, but a hard OP wad + greased felt wad + thin OS wad and 75 - 80gr. FFFg were almost as accurate as the patched RB @ 25 yd. At 50 yd., I wouldn't hesitate to boost the charge to 90gr. FFg.

The images below were fired @ 25 yd. with the Lee RB's on the left and the Lymans on the right: