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

[Al Bently]

What is the ultimate effect of how hard a black powder charge/projectile is rammed? If the charge is more tightly compressed, will it cause greater pressure once ignited? Is the difference that great?

I know serious target shooters strive for equal tamping from shot to shot for the sake of consistency. Is this the reason why? Thanks.

 

[Jim C]

"What is the ultimate effect of how hard a black powder charge/projectile is rammed? If the charge is more tightly compressed, will it cause greater pressure once ignited? Is the difference that great?"

No expert here, but I would think that the looser the charge, the slower it will be in reaching it's max pressure curve, the tighter the faster.
I do know from plenty of experience that load to load consistency is conducive to consistent accuracy.

 

[BrownBear]

I've only really been able to document a difference in one case:

With flintlocks, I start having ignition problems if I seat a ball too hard. Best is just firm, enough so that I know the ball is resting on the charge. Any more than that and issues erupt.

 

[Billnpatti]

I have a device sitting here on my desk that Dutch Schoultz sent me. It is spring loaded and calibrated and designed to go onto the end of a ramrod to measure the amount of pressure with which you seat a ball. It is a pretty neat thing to look at and is well made but, according to Dutch, is totally worthless. He ran a series of tests using it to measure the different amounts of force he put on the ball when he seated it and, according to him, different amounts of force with which he seated the ball really made no difference in the accuracy.

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.

 

[Jim C]

That makes plenty of sense because with flint ignition the flame from the priming mixture is not forced/channeled directly into the powder charge versus the way it is with a cap lock.

 

[coloradoclyde]

Let's look at it from an extreme perspective...
Too loose, as in the ball sitting off the charge and you risk blowing the gun up.

Too tight, as in compressed like a model rocket engine and it burns very slowly.

 

[longcruise]

As far as accuracy is concerned, I can't say, but I did some chronograph tests comparing variations in seating pressure and found that increased seating pressure resulted in small increases in velocity. This was done with a cap gun and there was no discernible difference in ignition.

Powder compression in the loading of black powder cartridges shows a marked increase in velocities, a reduction in fouling and less extreme spread along with lower standard deviations. Cartridge loading allows more compression than can be achieved by hand with a loading rod.

In the 90's, you could find a variety of loading rod devices that provided leverage to compress the powder. I believe serious match shooters used them. Maybe they are still in common use, but I've never seen one used.

 

[Vaino]

I just push quite hard on the RR and have never had any problems. Black powder will explode in open air as opposed to smokeless which will just slowly burn in open air. Smokeless needs confinement to generate its much higher pressure.

Don't think that the degree of tamping has much effect on the speed of ignition or the pressure generated. Black powder is very forgiving in many respects and using it is simple and its use shouldn't be over thought....Fred

 

[Larry Pletcher]

Steve Chapman and I did a test comparing compression and accuracy. We felt both percussion and flint responded similarly.

Link

Regards,
Pletch

 

[coloradoclyde]

Consistency reduces the affects of variables and practice will make you more consistent.

 

[roundball]

Steve Chapman and I did a test comparing compression and accuracy. We felt both percussion and flint responded similarly.
Link
Regards,Pletch

Excellent work as usual Pletch...hands on experience eliminates the keyboard speculation.
As an FYI, I use strong brass ram / range rods, and my style is to seat a ball then lean my body down on the ramrod as hard as I can. Have done that with all caplocks and Flintlocks I've owned in an attempt to get consistent shot-to-shot loading pressure.
An interesting side effect of this approach has been a "squeaky crunch" sort of a sound that apparently travels back up the brass ram / range rods when the (Goex) powder is packed as hard as I can get it.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

Well to extrapolate a bit...it would matter if one was able to maintain the pressure, but I think there is only so much friction with a ball and a lubed patch...and greater pressure than that friction would cause the greater pressure to release until it reached the point where it was balanced with the patch friction...when the ramrod was removed...no?

Otherwise, if something was really tight...and took a lot of pressure to seat it....might you not be approaching an obstruction? :shocked2:

LD

 

[Al Bently]

I have a device sitting here on my desk that Dutch Schoultz sent me. It is spring loaded and calibrated and designed to go onto the end of a ramrod to measure the amount of pressure with which you seat a ball. It is a pretty neat thing to look at and is well made but, according to Dutch, is totally worthless. He ran a series of tests using it to measure the different amounts of force he put on the ball when he seated it and, according to him, different amounts of force with which he seated the ball really made no difference in the accuracy.

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.

How could consistency be an issue if ramming pressure is not?

 

[Al Bently]

Well to extrapolate a bit...it would matter if one was able to maintain the pressure, but I think there is only so much friction with a ball and a lubed patch...and greater pressure than that friction would cause the greater pressure to release until it reached the point where it was balanced with the patch friction...when the ramrod was removed...no?

Otherwise, if something was really tight...and took a lot of pressure to seat it....might you not be approaching an obstruction? :shocked2:

LD

When I ram home a load and projectile I don't believe the projectile "rebounds" (moves towards the muzzle) before the load is ignited.

 

[longcruise]

Dave, I read that through three times and still am not sure I understand what you are saying

Are you suggesting that there is a backpressure when the powder is compressed which would in turn tend to force the ball back up the bore?

 

[coloradoclyde]

Makes perfect sense to me... He's saying that even if you applied a 1000 lbs of pressure the ball and patch might only be capable of resisting 25 lbs.

The same thing happens with modern shotgun wads.

 

[longcruise]

Ok, but then what is the break point for the ball and patch? What is it that gives?

 

[coloradoclyde]

The amount of resistance offered by the patch and ball is going to vary with every gun.
It's all irrelevant IMO.....consistency is what matters and every gun has its own sweet spot.

Even if we eliminate all of the variables the largest accuracy factor still remains......the shooter.
Working on the things that will yield the greatest improvements in accuracy is the quickest way to get into the 10 ring.

That's practice, practice, practice, and consistency

 

[BrownBear]

I've always been concerned about simply using "effort" as a measure of ball seating consistency. If fouling is building up, it takes more effort to seat to the same depth. If going by effort alone, you could well be seating the ball shallower and shallower with successive loads. And raising cob with load consistency while you're at it.

Whether you swab between shots or use a lube that keeps fouling soft, you still have to watch the seating depth. That means marking your ramrod and seating to that depth, whether you can do it with the flick of a wrist or you need a sledgehammer to get it there.

 

[coloradoclyde]

fouling will decrease the "chamber" volume and raise the overall height of the load.