starting ball without short starter

[Swampman]

"What was the distance for the smoothbore shooters?"

Out to 75 yards. Everyone shot the same distances.

I don't think I want any plastic patching, or sabots.

 

[Little Wattsy]

sounds like a tc "QLA" barrel! quick load assist.

You gave that an "!" Why? Ive never heard of QLA....Fill me in?

 

[bwhoffman]

I think I recall (maybe not corrctly?) that for a time, tc was producing some barrels in the 1990's that were essentially coned. allowing easier starting of conical type bullets in the1:48 twist barrels. nothing wrong with them that I have heard of,just sort of explains why yours might be easy starting!

If Roundball reads this, he may ring in on it,as he seems to have a lot of insight on the tc line.

 

[Little Wattsy]

THANK YOU!

 

[roundball]

THANK YOU!

QLA = Quick Load Accurizer...introduced on standard 1:48" barrels in 1995, essentially a permanent integrated false muzzle to aid in the alignment of conicals to the axis of the bore.

No benefit for a round ball at all of course...FWIW I personally don't happen to like them for shooting RBs and got rid of the one QLA barrel I ever had after the first trip to the range.

I found if I wasn't careful, when placing a ball on a patch across the large QLA mouth, one side of the patch would give way letting the ball fall into the false muzzle by itself...had to stop, upend the barrel to let the ball roll out without letting the powder slide out, etc.

The QLA takes away the ability to thumbstart a ball...can't reach down in there to press the ball into the ends of the rifling...must use a short starter or ramrod;

And, 1.25" of rifling is lost to the QLA device.

Nobody ever had problems properly aligning conicals in TC's barrels...I'm convinced it was just a desperation "stem the tide" marketing gimmick to try and save a few remaining customers, as they had been flocking away from TC to their competitors in the early 90's to buy inlines, because TC had not yet entered the inline market...and it was a simple step to add to the barrel manufacturing line...just bore out the rifling on the last 1.25" and market it as the "Quick Load Accurizer"...from posts I've read, apparently a lot of people have them cut off and the front sight dovetail recut/repositioned.

 

[fallaloosa]

I'd like to see the documentation on those. Short starters and loading blocks were not used by the 18th century rifleman. Smaller balls and patches are the answer.

 

[Dphar]

IF ONE ASSUMES that 18th century riflemen didn’t use short starters or loading blocks, and cut their patches at the muzzle, how did they seat the ball into position to cut the patch? Were their barrels coned so they could thumb-start the ball over the patch? Or were their ball/patch combos loose enough in the barrel to allow a thumb-start? Or is there some other option?

Don

I just proved a barrel and shot the rifle a few times. Its a 50 cal GM that I put about 1/2" of relief on the lands with a "funneling tool" that used wet or dry paper. Lands are about 1/2 height at the muzzle now. It will load a 490 ball and a thick patch with Sperm Whale oil easily with just the rod. I am sure this was typical of the 18th century. But I am just as sure there were "variations" in this from shooter to shooter.
Did not get any actual accuracy testing done but did get the rear sight cut down so its now dead on at about 155 yards (lasered). A little more work on the rear sight and it will be good.
Will need to try .495s too. I shot 75 gr fffg Swiss. Patches were very good. Tried 50 gr and it gas cut the patch in 3 places.
If the rifle is significantly coned it will notbe possible to cut at the muzzle as the ball may be too loose at the depth needed to cut the patch properly.

Dan