Too hard to load!

[JJasper]

I have a well-worn question to ask, but it has a special wrinkle to it that I believe makes it worth asking. Sorry about the length of this post, but the details seem important.

My 54 cal. flintlock (EuroArms 1803) is an absolute bear to load and I usually resort to a rawhide mallet to load a .530 ball with a .016 pillow ticking patch. The patches are soaked in 1 to 6 Ballistol/water mixture and allowed to dry most of the way. I also clean briefly in between shots. I'm a strong guy, but even the slightest amount of fouling makes it impossible to load this thing without using the mallet, and that includes having to start the ball by whacking the short starter with the mallet. I have slugged the bore twice, and also made a Cerosafe cast of the bore about 4 inches down the muzzle. These slugs show that my bore is .545 and the groove diameter is barely .552. If my slugs are accurate...my grooves are only .003 deep. The rifle has a 1 in 72 rate of twist with 8 lands and 8 grooves. I can often shoot 50 yard groups that are around, or slightly smaller, than 1.5 inches. I'm now using a felt overpowder wad and that has helped handle the 90 grs of 3f that has proven to be the most accurate load.

I've seated and pulled balls with my present ball/patch combination and it appears my patch is still not being forced into the grooves. (I don't see the pattern of the fabric impressed onto the ball except where the lands were). I've also wrapped my .016 patch around the ball and measured it with medium pressure and it shows I'm .003 short of filling the groove diameter. I'm wondering if my oversized bore (.545 instead of .540) is not displacing patch that would ordinarily be going into the grooves of most other 54 caliber rifles. By the book...it appears I need to increase my patch thickness even though I already have a very difficult time loading it with a .016 patch!

I'm just wondering if there is any chance that going to a .535 ball with a thinner patch would make it easier to load, without sacrificing any accuracy. Including the cost of shipping, it will cost me $24.00 for 100 .535 balls and there is no place I can buy them off the shelf. I've read that a barrel with very shallow grooves is hard to load, presumably because you are pushing hard against a lot of groove surface area, instead of land surface area. This rifle initially had sharp lands near the breech that frequently cut patches, and even left deep cuts on a very tight-fitting, brass ball seating spin jag. I recently gave the barrel 50 round trips with a maroon Scotch Brite pad and now the spin jag that I beleive is approx .525 dia now passes much more easily. I haven't shot it since I used the Scotch Brite, but I hope this will solve the patch cutting problem, and maybe even make it load more easily.



Loading with a mallet is not the end of the world I guess, as I get good accuracy. I've made sure that the concaves on my short starter, and on my ramrod seating jag fit the contour of my ball perfectly, so my use of the mallet never deforms the ball. It would be nice to load this thing without a mallet though. Some guys laugh when you get out a hammer!

 

[rafterob]

A thinner patch should help you out. The patch material will not imprint on the ball where the grooves are. You would have to have a very tight ball for that to occur (and I'm still not sure you could get that much pressure against the groove without tearing the patch). That is pretty shallow rifling so I'm thinking a Muslin material would do the trick.

 

[BrownBear]

I can only guess about your gun, but in mine loading is eased a bunch when I use grease-type lubes rather than dry lubes. And if .016/.530 is tight, you might find that .010/.535 is even tighter. If your goal is easier loading, I'd put .010/.530 on your list of experiments. Can't say if the patches would hold up along with accuracy, but it would certainly ease the loading.

 

[David W.]

I would try the smaller diameter ball with the same thickness patching first. Are you washing the sizing out of the patch material?

By the sounds of it, you do have some trouble with sharp edges on the lands.

 

[BrownBear]

Are you washing the sizing out of the patch material?

That's a real good question. I tried loading my usual .018/.530 combo once without first washing out the sizing, and I couldn't even get it started.

 

[Josh Smith]

Hello,

I had the same problem with my New Englander and .490" balls.

Figured out the lube was most of the problem.

If you would like to shoot me a PM, I'll mail you some of the lube I made up, some of the pillow ticking I use, and instructions on how I apply the lube. I've found out that I can impregnate the pillow ticking better if I use a method in addition to dipping.

Josh

 

[JJasper]

Yes, I do forget now and then that my "dry" patch method doesn't help my situation. I think I went away from using grease type lubes because I was intially using too much "Bore Butter" and I beleive this was causing a lot of extra fouling that made it even harder to load.

 

[JJasper]

Yep, I did wash my patch material first. I just put it through one hot water cycle in the washing machine though, and used plenty of detergent.

 

[JJasper]

I have also wondered about the wisdom behind the theory that a proper patch should leave a pronounced imprint of the fabric all the way around a ball that you have seated, and then pulled to examine. I read it someplace, and took it to be the final word on determining correct patch thickness.

It could be that this in not so much a rule...as it is a "guideline."

 

[BrownBear]

You're on course now, I think. And yup "rules" are usually written by folks with more experience at the keyboard than at the trigger. "Guidelines" or "starting points" are lots more useful because no two guns are alike and they help you find the reality for your own gun.

In addition to bore butter and dry Ballistol, have you tried wet lubes as basic as spit, olive oil and such? There's probably a good reason lots of match shooters use one or the other on their patches, whether or not it has anything to do with ease of loading.

 

[David W.]

I have also wondered about the wisdom behind the theory that a proper patch should leave a pronounced imprint of the fabric all the way around a ball that you have seated, and then pulled to examine. I read it someplace, and took it to be the final word on determining correct patch thickness.

It could be that this in not so much a rule...as it is a "guideline."

It's not as important as one thinks to have fabric imprints on the ball. I like my ball/patch to start just with a little POP from the hand to short starter, no tighter. If I have to use a mallet, it's too tight for me.

 

[paulvallandigham]

You also need to remember that all fabrics have a slick, and a coarse side. Mattress, and Pillow ticking have these, and are easily seen, and felt. The dyed stripes are on the slick side.

When you lube a patch with a wax/oil lube, lube the slick side. AND, its the slick side that is placed down on the muzzle, so that the coarse side of the fabric GRABS the lead ball. You want the slick, smooth surface against the lands and grooves.

I think you misunderstood the comment about having fabric weave showing all around the lead ball. The author was speaking of every LAND in the barrel leaving an impression of the fabric weave in the lead. Unless you use an over bore sized LB in your gun( and you definitely need a mallet to seat these in the MUZZLE!), its physically impossible to have the Grooves( square cut) mark the fabric weave pattern on the lead ball. [That is different with some round-bottomed rifled barrels, BTW.]

With a .54 cal. barrel, you may find that you will be burning the patch, or blowing it apart, if you go down to a .010" patch, using any powder charge much more than 60 grains of 3Fg. You can either use a .012" or thicker patch, or use either a filler, or an OP wad as a firewall to prevent your patch from burning or tearing.

Like others, I think you need to use more Lube in those patches, so they will Stretch better at the muzzle. Also, polish that muzzle crown slick to help the patch and ball ease into the bore better. How about trying a 1:4 oil/water formula first, and see if that doesn't improve matters noticably? :hmm: :thumbsup:

 

[Bill Hall]

I'm thinking what others have touched on already, a slightly thinner patch and some slicker lube should help a bunch. You can do a quick trouble shooting check by loading up a really wet spit patch, using your current ball and patch material, and see if it's easier to load. If you like the way it loads, keep going in that direction. Try Stumpy's moose snot recipe (I think that's what he calls it) AND a thinner patch.

If it loads ok after these changes, but accuracy suffers, you might try using fffg, or even 777. The higher pressures of these powders sometimes help expand the ball in the breech, swelling the ball into the shallow rifling and giving a better seal. Lots of little things, but they make a difference. Bill

 

[Josh Smith]

Yep, I did wash my patch material first. I just put it through one hot water cycle in the washing machine though, and used plenty of detergent.

I found that washing twice in cold water and drying on no heat works better for me.

Otherwise, it shrinks too much and thickens up to the point where it does get difficult to load.

These gents were right on when they recommended pillow ticking patches to me. I was the one who messed up by washing it in hot water then drying it on high. This left the stuff too thick with not much compression -- just as if I'd not washed it at all.

Now it holds lube to the point that the patch feels dry until I compress it when loading. I really like the setup this way. I can feel it being tight enough to grab the rifling, but not so tight as to need a mallet (which I was doing, as well!)

Josh

 

[JJasper]

I think I will definitely use a higher concentration of Ballistol to water, and maybe even go with a very slightly damp patch, and dry the bore after I seat the ball. I've found I need a rather dry bore to make this thing shoot accurately, hence my reluctance to go to a heavier, grease type lubricant. I never thought about fabric having one side that is more slippery than the other. That might help some.

I've included a picture from the "Lyman Users Guide" that mentions the importance of seeing "cloth marks completely around the ball." The whole article is at this web address: http://stevespages.com/pdf/lyman_blackpowder.pdf?vm=r

I'm now sure I could never accomplish this with my rifle unless I continue to load with a mallet. I've experimented seating and pulling a ball patched with 11.5 oz denim (.023 thick), and it does show light fabric imprints where the grooves were. It would probably be a very accurate load, but I'm trying to get rid of the hammer, not make it so I have to buy a bigger one. :wink:

 

[Zonie]

I didn't see anything about where you got your lead balls.

If you bought them pre cast from someone there is a good chance that they were cast out of alloyed lead which would explain the lack of patch marks and your need to pound the patched balls into the muzzle.

Hard lead alloys will not deform easily or show marks from the patch.

 

[rabjr]

Damn, what does the barrel mic? I built a 1803 using Colerains barrel and I regularly shoot .018 patch (bear greased) with a .530 ball. Same ball with a greased .015 patch I can load no problem with just the ramrod.

 

[JJasper]

"I didn't see anything about where you got your lead balls."

I use Hornady swagged balls and they are at least advertised as pure lead.

 

[JJasper]

Damn, what does the barrel mic? I built a 1803 using Colerains barrel and I regularly shoot .018 patch (bear greased) with a .530 ball. Same ball with a greased .015 patch I can load no problem with just the ramrod.

My bore is .545 and the groove dia. is .552...which makes it all the more strange that it is so difficult to stuff. I know .005 of an inch over and above .540 is not much, but I have not heard others say that their bore dimension are off that much in their 54 caliber muzzle loader.

Everyone has given me some excellent ideas so I think I'm on the right track. No one has mentioned the possibility that it would profit from some very careful fire lapping. When I look down the bore...I see tons of tool marks that are at a right angle to the rifling. I know some are strongly opposed to this procedure, but...

 

[David W.]

Damn, what does the barrel mic? I built a 1803 using Colerains barrel and I regularly shoot .018 patch (bear greased) with a .530 ball. Same ball with a greased .015 patch I can load no problem with just the ramrod.

My bore is .545 and the groove dia. is .552...which makes it all the more strange that it is so difficult to stuff. I know .005 of an inch over and above .540 is not much, but I have not heard others say that their bore dimension are off that much in their 54 caliber muzzle loader.

Everyone has given me some excellent ideas so I think I'm on the right track. No one has mentioned the possibility that it would profit from some very careful fire lapping. When I look down the bore...I see tons of tool marks that are at a right angle to the rifling. I know some are strongly opposed to this procedure, but...

Well, I didn't exactly suggest fire lapping, but I did mention sharp edges on your lands. You may try JP paste and see if that helps. :grin: