• Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

the use and benefit of wads ??

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

tippyguru

32 Cal.
Joined
Nov 20, 2006
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Hello, i have a GPR in 54 that is now shooting just under 2 " groups at 50 meters,70 gn 2 p + 018 patch or 45 gn 3 f + 014 / 018 is good too, will the use of a wad behind the prb be of benefit in reducing the group sizing?.
Is there a definite increase in ball velocity/ breech pressure?.
what type of wads and lube is the go; i read the old timers used wasp nest or other fillers as a sealant or is all this just another lolly for a black powder sucker :confused:
 
I doubt you'll see any benefit putting one under a patched round ball. But in my experience, they make a big difference under a conical. I've never heard anyone win the argument whether that's because it provides a better gas seal or whether it's just protection for the rear of the bullet. All I know is that it works for me.

I use commercially produced 54 cal felt wads prelubed with wonderlube. Others make their own.
 
I don't see a difference. I use one behind my hunting loads to keep the patch lube from leaching into the powder and "killing" it. Whan I shoot with and without it doesn't seem to make a difference. Newton will say it reduced your velocity because yyou are ejecting more mass with the same amoint of powder/energy - but not much.

Different story with flat based conicals. A vegetable fiber wad usually improves accuracy. Some will say because it protects the base from powder/pressure erosion and some that it reduces "impinging" of the powder into the base from the explosion hammering the powder that hasn't caught yet into the base. Don't know why, but it did help when I was in the conical mode.

I got past that. ;-)
 
Oddly enough, I have found that OP gasket wads open up my groups w/ conicals. I'm not sure why, but a plain slug (i.e. Maxi Hunter in my case) seems to hold a group tighter.
 
Well now therese a thing. In complete opposition to what the guys have just said, i found the only way i could get any accuracy at all from a 7/8 .50cal GM barrel in a pecatonica tennessee kit was to load the powder then a felt wad then corn meal then the patched ball. I went to the range for days on end getting to this and was on this website asking questions and digging info where i could. If i get 3 inch groups at 50yards off the bench im doing well. Yes it could be me thats at fault but i just dont think it is. If i reduced the load down to say 40grn then the groups would be ok so the deduction i came to was i had to reduce the sharp edges on the lands of the rifleing and protect the patch anyway i could. Makes loading a pain though.
Just some food for thought.
Dobson
 
Some people just use the wrong wad in their gun, and end up decrying all wads. Soft OP wads, like the Ox Yoke felt wool wads are great for lubrication the bore, but behind a RB, they bend and allow gas to blow by the wad and cut the ball and/or patch.

The hard, OP Wads, sold by Circle Fly that are 1/8" thick, hold their shape, will not bend, and are thick enough to keep gas from blowing past, assuming the correct diameter of wad is used. ANY wad that protects the base of a conical will improve its accuracy. The problem is that many people lube and load conicals differently, and many other have never measured the actual bore diameters of their barrels, and ordered the proper size conical mold, or bullets to use in the gun. All the wads in the world are not going to improve accuracy much if you have a slug that is several thousandths of an inch smaller than the bore diameter. Everyone wants to assume that whatever caliber the manufacturer places on the barrel is TRUE! As I have found out with at least three guns, " 'Tain't necessarily so!"

If you are using a good loose filler, like corn meal, you don't have to use both the filler, and an OP wad. The filler will both prevent the gases from blowing by, and protect the cloth patch from high temperatures.

With all conicals, the shooter has to recognize that the gun is going to produce greater " felt " recoil using a bullet over a RB. How you shoot a gun that recoils depends on your esperience with high powered rifles, and just how much recoil you generate with the load you use. After the Civil War, when Cartridge guns came into being, but Black Powder was still the powder used as the propellant, the .50-70 rifle became the most popular big game rifle in the American West, because the big, 50 caliber slug could bring down Buffalo, or Bear, and anything of lesser size. Buffalo Bill Cody, the famous Scout, Indian fighter, and Entrepreneur, used a Springfield .50-70 rifle to win hunting contests, and secured his right to use the name, Buffalo Bill, by shooting more buffalo in a given period of time than his opponent did. That cartridge shoots a 70 grain load of FFg BP, and a 550 grain lead bullet.

If you are loading more than 70 grains behind a conical, you should be asking yourself " Why am I using so much powder"? If you are insisting on shooting a heavier bullet than 550 grains, you should be asking yourself, " Why?"

If you are only hunting deer, a PRB is more than sufficient and is uniquely designed to kill thin skinned animals quite well. The RB will weigh less, kick less, and give you excellent accuracy.
 
I have just one BP rifle, a P-H Whitworth, and I shoot 595gr swaged hexagonal bullets in it. The 80gr FFg load is topped off with a thin card wad - also hexagonal, of course.

Shooting with this wad give me groups around 1.5" at 100m.

Shooting without a wad results in the group opening out to about 4-6 inches.

I don't know enough about internal ballistics to figure out why this happens.

All I know is that this is the way it has always been done, by much better shooters than me, and for almost 150 years.

tac
 
We don't all have the tools to accurately measure bore geometry, so we are pretty much at the mercy of the manufacturer's claimed specifications. I have .45, .50 and .54 caliber rifles (or so they claim), and use .440, .490 and .530 rb's with .010 patches in them. I have also used conicals specified for .45, .50 and .54 caliber rifles without measuring them. My conical results have not been as good as with the rbs; I've always assumed that was because the rifles were generally medium (1 in 48) to slow (1 in 60) twist. Perhaps not, however.

The problem is that many people lube and load conicals differently, and many other have never measured the actual bore diameters of their barrels, and ordered the proper size conical mold, or bullets to use in the gun. All the wads in the world are not going to improve accuracy much if you have a slug that is several thousandths of an inch smaller than the bore diameter. Everyone wants to assume that whatever caliber the manufacturer places on the barrel is TRUE! As I have found out with at least three guns, " 'Tain't necessarily so!"

I would appreciate knowing the following:

1) what tools do you use to measure your rifle bore geometry, and what are the tolerances on your measurements? Am I going to have to spend a couple of hundred dollars for a tool to measure the bore with sufficient accuracy?

2) there aren't a lot of choices as to rb or conical bullet diameters in the .50 and .54 caliber sizes, at least at retail. If I find my bore is oversize (or the conicals are undersize) by several thousandths it seems the only remedy is to add patching to a rb and use a thick fiberboard wad under a conical, correct? If so, it would seem the wad would have to be homemade, as the ones available at retail are sized for a correctly sized rifle bore; do I have that right?

3) what 3 rifles had bores that were not as specified, and how far off were they?
 
I use egg-shaped fishing sinkers and an old caliper I've had a long time for measuring bores. Tap the fishing sinker part way into the bore, then use the part that remains outside the bore for a "grip" and pull it back out. Measure lands and groves. measurements to .0001.

Lee makes molds for 2 diamters of conicals in 54. I don't know which diameters without looking it up. In 50 you have your choice of .490 and .495 and in 54 you have your choice of .530 and .535 in readily available commercial balls. I don't know about 45. I tried both in each caliber and ended up using .490 and pillow ticking (.018) in 50 and .535 and pillow ticking in my 54. Could just as well have been .495 and thinner commercial patches in the 50. For the 54 I use the .530 and ticking if I want something that loads fast, yet still shoots okay.

I don't worry about a few .001's in the wads because they moosh flat when you fire to fill up the gap.

I don't recall your third question clearly, but I remember not understanding what you were asking.
 
You can buy a dial caliper for about 20 dollars from several suppliers. The most I have seen them cost was about $35.00. That money will get you the battery required ' digital" read out caliper. The caliper measures both outside and Inside dimensions. It also has a stem that can be used to measure depth. I have an old vernier caliper I inherited from my father, and my own dial caliper. I haven't seen a need to buy the new digital models. I also have micrometers. If you run a slug through a barrel, you can measure the lands and grooves with a common micrometer, also available for less than $40.00. Use mikes are available at garage sales, and farm auctions for a couple of bucks, and work just as well. I have 3 or 4 micrometers from dad, including one that measures with click adjustments to 10 thousandths of an inch. ( Those cost a bit more). For this kind of work, measuring to a thousandth of an inch is all that you need.
 
I have a good set of dial calipers and mikes but I haven't had much success in getting reliable (as in repeatable) measurements directly from the bore with the calipers. 0.001 inches is not possible; it's more like 0.005. I guess I'll have to slug the barrel and use the mikes.

What about the guns you found to be "out of spec" - what were they and how much off?
 
The most recent gun out of spec was my custom made 20 gauge fouler. My gunmaker ordered the barrels from the same supplier who had just sent him a barrel that he used to build another fowler for himself. His gun used 20 gauge components, and shot well. our two barrels came in a .626-7 or about 19 gauge, instead of the smaller 20 gauge. He did not even bother to check the bore diameters when he built the guns, because he had no reason to suspect that the barrels would be out of spec. He was more disappointed and shocked at what we found than we were.

We have 3 Springfield Trapdoors in the family, and when we slugged them a number of years ago, we found that Dad's rifle- the oldest-- was a huge, .463" bore. Mine was about .459, the best of the three, and my brother, Peter's gun was about .460. We ordered separate lubrisizer dies for each of the calibers, but found that if we loaded the correct size bullet in dad's gun, the casing could not fit in the chamber, as the chamber was not wide enough to carry the fatter cartridge. Since our father's death 11 years ago, my brother has sent that gun out to Oregon where it had a new steel liner put in the barrel, and the bore is now .458". It also now has 6 lands and grooves, and a faster ROT, being 1:18 vs. 1:22" The faster twist will stabilize longer, heavier bullets. I have not decided whether I am going to have my barrel lined with the new steel liner, or not. I am thinking about it. My brother wants to work with Dad's gun a bit more before deciding to send his rifle off for a liner. You cannot see the seam where the liner and barrel meet. Looking down the barrel shows you the difference.

And, I had a Australian surplus Martini Single Shot rifle chambered for the small .30 caliber cartridge. I read somewhere that the gun would shoot the .32-20 cartridge if the barrel was rechambered. We had that done, but the bullets were all over the map. We slugged the barrel and found out that the bore diameter was way oversized, even for that cartridge, at something about .326" . I was shooting .311 sized bullets, and they were obviously rattling down the barrel. I measured some cast bullets out of the mold and found that if I used pretty pure lead I could cast bullets that would be about .318" Now, that was not nearly close enough, but it was a lot closer to the bore diameter than the .311 bullets. So, I hand lubricated soom of the new cast bullets, and didn't size them, and managed to get them into a .32-20 casing. I began getting five shot groups at 50 yards off the bench that were in the 3-4 inch size, which was respectable considering the poor military open sights, and the still too small bullet. I rebarreled and restocked that gun to .357 Magnum for my father, and inherited it on his death. It will shoot as well as you can hold the sights, iron, or scope, all day long.

I know there have been others that were out of spec, both pistols, rifles and shotguns, but those are the ones that came to mind. Its a lot more common problem than shooters suspect.

My brother's friend is just finishing up repairing a Remington 700 rifle chambered for 7mm-08, a fine cartridge. However, he found that the crown of the muzzle was 3 degrees of square to the bore. Now that he has it fixed, it shoots bullets into one hole, one on top of the other. He also pillar bedded the action, glassed bedded the tang, and recoil lug, otherwise free floated the barrel, cleaned up the trigger pull, and fixed some minor problems with the stock. That is an example of some of the problems that you can find with guns fresh from the factories today.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top