Ultimate effect of how hard a charge/projectile is rammed?

[Billnpatti]

Pletch, you do such interesting tests that I am envious. I wish I lived nearer so I could take part in your studies. :thumbsup:

 

[Larry Pletcher]

Pletch, you do such interesting tests that I am envious. I wish I lived nearer so I could take part in your studies. :thumbsup:

I would welcome that!
Regards,
Pletch

 

[Billnpatti]

Well, as the lady said to her gentlerman friend "Sir, I am not prone to argue." It has long been known that when it comes to shooting muzzleloading rifles, consistancy is vital to good accuracy. I accept that an established fact. Dutch told me that when he ran his tests, he found no significant differences when he used various amounts of pressure to seat the ball on the powder. I hold Dutch in high regard and accept what he told me as being correct for his tests. I agree that the results seem to be at odds with accepted truth of being consistant in all things. He saw no measurable difference in accuracy with regard to seating pressure, yet, I choose to be consistant in how I seat my ball on the powder. If you find this to be strange, perhaps you need to contact Dutch and discuss his findings with him. He is a very friendly man and I am sure that he will be quite happy to tell you all about his findings. I did not run his tests, I am only the messenger.....please don't shoot the messenger. :surrender:

BTW, you left out the rest of what I said in that posting.

"I've never done any testing on my own so I have no data to support an argument in either direction. I completely respect Dutch's expertise and if he says it makes no measurable difference, that is good enough for me. However, I do believe that being consistant in how much pressure you use can make a difference. It's not so much how much pressure with which you seat the ball, it is being consistant in how you seat the ball that is important. I don't have any idea what the exact pressure is with which I seat my balls on the powder, I just do it by feel and try to use the same pressure every time. "

 

[coloradoclyde]

:rotf: Thanks for the laughs buddy, you never disappoint in that regard. :thumbsup:

 

[Len Graves]

At the risk of stirring up everyone's dander. I think we may have left out another factor. When using different rod pressures are we not also deforming the ball to different degrees? Isn't this enough to change breech pressures? While this might not be a noticeable difference at short ranges. Could this not effect velocities which would certainly be noticeable at long ranges? All this is good in a controlled clinical study. How many of us could maintain consistency to that degree on the range? Still an interesting question.

 

[coloradoclyde]

At the risk of stirring up everyone's dander. I think we may have left out another factor. When using different rod pressures are we not also deforming the ball to different degrees? Isn't this enough to change breech pressures? While this might not be a noticeable difference at short ranges. Could this not effect velocities which would certainly be noticeable at long ranges? All this is good in a controlled clinical study. How many of us could maintain consistency to that degree on the range? Still an interesting question.

Exactly right.
compressing the load doesn't separate out the variables because you are compressing the entire load. So determining which factor affects what becomes difficult. is it the powder, ball, or patch that is being compressed? and which is the contributing factor?

All this is good in a controlled clinical study. How many of us could maintain consistency to that degree on the range?

Also correct. Small increases is velocity have no practical measurable affect on down range accuracy for a muzzleloader because of its limited range.
Consistency on the other hand is quite apparent.
:thumbsup:

 

[Dr5x]

I was always consistent in seating the patched ball. There were folks saying that there would be a perceptible difference if I then applied additional pressure.
So I did apply additional pressure and noticed no extra movement. I also noticed no visible difference in the accuracy of the rifle.
Just in case there was something to this I began seating the ball with about half my weight added to the downward pressure Still no differences noted.

If you find that your loading results in satisfactory groups, continue to load in that same way.

When you start changing things you start affecting your groups.

If you are still experimenting, Change only one thing at a time and give that experiment a chance by shooting at least 4 additional shots to see if there was a change in the pattern of hits. I always gave it 5 shots just to be certain.

Dutch

 

[Dr5x]

After seating the ball in the same way each time as I had always done before, I then added the same amount of additional pressure. This additional compression, if any, seemed to make no difference in groups.

The additional pressure didn't seem to add any extra compression on the powder.



Dutch

 

[Len Graves]

I humbly agree. Consistency is the primary concern. Even we do most every thing wrong in loading we should have some kind of group IF we have consistency. My variable comes from the loose wing nut behind the butt plate, but that is a whole nuther subject.

 

[Larry Pletcher]

After seating the ball in the same way each time as I had always done before, I then added the same amount of additional pressure. This additional compression, if any, seemed to make no difference in groups.

The additional pressure didn't seem to add any extra compression on the powder.
Dutch

Hi Dutch,
A couple years after doing the "Load Compression and Accuracy" experiment, I had a statistician on another forum express interest in my data. I sent him all my material, including the targets with the shots numbered and with velocities noted on them. A few weeks later he got back to me with a 7 page report of data analysis.

His summary is much as your testing said to you:

. . . . . I don’t think many people could tell the difference with iron sights, even with a bench rest.

The final conclusion then, is that we want to have the ball seated firmly on the powder charge as a matter of safety, but beyond that, we can all quit agonizing over trying to use the exact same amount of force to seat the ball. It simply does not make a detectable difference.

When Steve and I finished the tests, we felt that both percussion and flint responded well to compression. Did not feel as some did that extra compression of flint loads was detrimental.

I thought you would be interested in the statistician's opinion.
Regards,
Pletch

 

[Billnpatti]

Okay, I'm satisfied that the amount of force you use to seat the ball makes no difference in accuracy. We have the word of Pletch and Dutch that it makes no difference. Like they say "It don't get no better than that." Of couse we must heed the caveat that Pletch included in his posting "...we want to have the ball seated firmly on the powder charge as a matter of safety,..." So, I can just keep seating my ball as I have always done and I will be good to go.

 

[coloradoclyde]

I tried to explain to some but they would not listen.
Over the last 40 years I have tried seating a ball every way imaginable.

Some guys think that it is the method of seating they use that makes a difference not realizing that it is their devotion ...their consistency to their method that is making a difference.

Seating pressure is so insignificant that it is only a factor when taken to an extreme,.. as I stated in my first post.

Whenever I say something to the contrary that is beyond someone else's understanding they are quick to go into attack mode instead of asking questions.

Great posts Pletch and Dutch! :thumbsup: :hatsoff:

 

[longcruise]

I'm going to be our contrarian just for the sake of discussion.

The jury is still out! We can all agree that consistency is conducive to consistent accuracy. We can also agree that, at least for safety sake, we should seat our balls firmly on the powder charge. But, I contend that we are not able to get the degree of powder compression that might be conducive to improved accuracy with a loading rod alone.

My guess is, for example, with a .50 cal and 70 to 90 gr charges that it might take a 1/4 to 3/4 inch of powder compression to see any changes in results. Be they good or bad.

 

[Larry Pletcher]

My take on all this is a bit different. Before I did this test, I liked firm consistent compression on the ball. After the test I still like firm consistent pressure.

That said, I really do not comment to take sides. I enjoy experimenting and developing a conclusion. What I do not like is to polarize. I would much rather supply data, a basic conclusion, and let the discussion go from there.

For me flintlock science is fun: arguing is not.

Regards,
Pletch

 

[roundball]

:thumbsup:

 

[coloradoclyde]

:thumbsup: x2

 

[bpd303]

:thumbsup: x3

 

[Grumpa]

:thumbsup: X4...This could get exponential!

With you, there is no :bull: You use well thought out procedures to achieve repeatable results, not necessarily the ones expected, let the chips fall where they may.

You are well respected.

 

[azmntman]

I'm going to be our contrarian just for the sake of discussion.

The jury is still out! We can all agree that consistency is conducive to consistent accuracy. We can also agree that, at least for safety sake, we should seat our balls firmly on the powder charge. But, I contend that we are not able to get the degree of powder compression that might be conducive to improved accuracy with a loading rod alone.

My guess is, for example, with a .50 cal and 70 to 90 gr charges that it might take a 1/4 to 3/4 inch of powder compression to see any changes in results. Be they good or bad.

With 3/4" compression one would think said compression would change to 3f to 4f or the 2f to 3f, BUT on a "consistent" level? Perhaps the powder should be compressed before introducing the ball? Of course I don't condone that as it could be dangerous? I recall Fess Parker seem to "pack his powder" on TV, or his balls :idunno:

I will just keep on seating my balls while trying not to sit on....er I will just keep doing it like I been as per above posts I cant believe I would see a difference and as I shoot to please myself I see no point. I'm betting Dutch n' Pletch could do better testing than me anyway. :idunno:

 

[coloradoclyde]

Perhaps the powder should be compressed before introducing the ball?

Done it...it's another colossal waste of time.

But I'm sure someone will form a hypothesis to the contrary comparing it to sliced bread.