square cut patches

[Flintlock]

To save time and ease I've been cutting my rifle patches square greasing them and carrying them in a tin. Do you think cutting them at the muzzle instead would improve accuraccy. What would be considerd fine accuracy at 100yds. with my .54 flinter. i'm getting 4.5 -5 inch groups strung horizontaly with a couple loads now, old eyes make seeing that far a pain in the rear.

 

[Bill Hall]

As far as patches go, there is a small handfull of shooters out there that believe cutting at the muzzle is best for accuracy. However most folks, myself included, believe accuracy doesn't depend on the shape of the patch, or how it is cut. I think the only way a patch can adversly affect accuracy is if the ball were oriented on the patch so far off center that the patch didn't cover one side where the ball contacts the barrel. That would make the ball fly willy nilly.

As far as 100 yard accuracy, I'll let others touch on that subject, since I never shoot that far. Bill

 

[Billnpatti]

Well, Walks With Gun, a man can't shoot any better than he can see. When the peepers don't let you see the target clearly, you can't be expected to shoot accurately. First, you are going to need to do something about your vision. You can put a peep sight on your rifle and that will clear up your vision a good bit. Another idea is to buy a device called a Merit Optical Device. It is a little device that sticks to your glasses lenses with a suction cup. It has a pin hole through which you sight. It significantly clears up your sights for you and deepens your field of view so that you can more easily see the front sight, rear sight and target. Lastly, you might consider mounting a scope on your rifle. I know, I know putting a scope on a muzzleloader is like putting sox on a rooster. But a man has to do what a man has to do. I'd rather see a man have a scope on his muzzleloader and shooting it rather than have period correct sights on a gun that sits in your closet because you cannot see the open sights any longer. Besides, you can buy 4X brass tube scopes that are, in fact, period correct for 1850 and later.

Okay, so much for the vision problems. The absolute best way, in my humble opinion, for a man to find the best load for his rifle is to buy a copy of Dutch Schultz' muzzleloading accuracy method. I think it is going for $20 now. Just Google "Dutch Schultz' muzzleloading accuracy" and you will get his website. I guarantee it will be the best $20 you will ever spend on muzzleloading. He goes over selection of ball, patch, black powder load, lubricant, etc. He takes a very methodical approach that will end up with you spending a lot of time on the range developing the absolutely most accurate load for your gun. A lot of time on the range......ya just gotta hate that ;>) :haha: But you do what Dutch tells you and you will get your gun to shooting as close to clover leaf holes in your target as it and you are capable. :thumbsup:

Pre-cutting patches VS cutting at the muzzle? I suppose cutting at the muzzle may have a slight margin over pre-cut patches but the question is whether you are a good enough shooter to tell the difference. The main thing is to get your ball centered pretty well on your patch before starting it down your bore. if you do that, the difference in accuracy will be so slight that you probably cannot tell the difference. Personally, I cannot shoot well enough to tell the difference. Square patches VS round patches? I think the same thing applies here. I do a lot of shooting with friends and so far have found no one who can show me that one had an advantage over the other. If you have an arch punch to cut round patches, then use round patches but don't go spend the money to buy an arch punch. Just cut square patches and use them. Carefullly center your ball on whichever style patch you want and you will do just fine. Just do waht Dutch Schultz tells you and don't worry too much about the cutting at the muzzle or pre-cutting. Do whatever is easiest for you and you will have more fun than you will if you are fussing with patches.

Just the opinion of an old fart.

 

[roundball]

To save time and ease I've been cutting my rifle patches square greasing them and carrying them in a tin. Do you think cutting them at the muzzle instead would improve accuraccy.

No

What would be considerd fine accuracy at 100yds. with my .54 flinter. i'm getting 4.5 -5 inch groups strung horizontaly with a couple loads now, old eyes make seeing that far a pain in the rear.

You didn't mention if benched or offhand.
If benched with primitive iron sights, on a Flintlock, with tired eyes, at 100 yards...that may be just fine and a lot of it depends on your purpose. It would be excellent for ringing a 6" gong at 100yds every time but for serious bullseye competition, not so much.
If offhand at 100yds then I'd say that's really, really fine :wink:

I always felt good if I could keep my 100yd shots on bright 3" aim point sticker at 100yds from a bench with a T/C Hawken 1:48" barrel using full power hunting loads.

IMO, there's absolutely no need whatsoever to pay money to anyone just to learn about the variables involved with loads and shooting...just ask questions on ML forums like this one

:thumbsup:

 

[ohio ramrod]

Dutch knows what he is talking about. The money spent could save you a lot of powder and lead. But then you would have less time shooting, so it is a trade off.Some people learn by doing it them selves, others gain more from the experience of others. Myself I like to play with my guns so expermenting is part of the game.

 

[fatboy]

I've used square patches they seem to work fine

 

[ebiggs1]

I, also, would put the $20 towards shooting and lean myself. You know the basics now go shoot!

 

[Flintlock]

I've been shooting and hunting with frontstuffers for over 30 years, just never did much 100yd bench shooting. Don't know what size groups I should be happy with. I want sub 1 inch groups but know thats probably not gonna happen.

 

[paulvallandigham]

I don't know of many RB guns that can produce consistent sub 1" groups at 100 yds.

It is done with " bullet" guns( ie. barrels with shallow grooves, and fast ROTs, intended to shoot conicals instead of round balls.) The guns used don't use iron sights, for the most part, however. They tend to be underhammer rifles, using scope sights, and false muzzles to load the bullets down the barrel uniformly. :thumbsup:

 

[ebiggs1]

I used to be able to shoot dime at 100 yards with my scope mounted Winchester Model 70 in 220 Swift and when I got my first muzzleloader, in the early 70's, a TC cap lock, I was really amazed at how well it shot being a black powder gun. Most people seem to think muzzleloaders aren’t very accurate but we all know better. I tried the 100-yard shots for a time with mixed results. One such outing I put a can on a wooden fence post out at 100 yards and shot at it. I hit the top strand of barbed wire an it went signing. We all laughed and said that could never happen again. Second shot, you guessed it, I hit the second strand down from the top. The can remained unharmed! I put the gun away for cleaning and got the wire stretcher and went to fixing the fence. Lately I have decided to limit my shooting to 50 yards especially now cause I could not even see a can at 100 yards.

 

[leslie]

There are so many other things that affect accuracy that the way you cut patches is really immaterial.I have shot square patches for years no problem.The thickness,weave and lube are way more important.

 

[curnla]

As bad as my eyes are getting, I would do as well without a patch.