working up a load

[Melnic]

Question, when working up a load, how much variation in group size do you notice?
For example, lets say, 50 cal patched round ball.
With one particular load of about 65 grains, I know the best ball size and patch combo that I can get a tight group with @ 50 yards. Now, If I go back and say start working up a load, what is a typical change in consistent group size from worse to best group shooting off sand bags i would expect to see (typical?) Am I looking at say a 1"-4" best/worse type of span?
Or is the "optimum load" going to maybe bring in the groups say 1/2"? I'm looking for some general idea because so far, I have noticed more variation in group size by the ball/patch/lube combo I've tried than when I originally was "working up a load"

Made me think after my limited experience that with a new ML, I'd just pick a mid level powder charge and first experiment with the ball/patch/lube combo first before working up a load. where as when I initially on my first Sidelock, tried different loads with the same bullet and pre-lubed patches, I did not see much change @ 50 yards.

thx

 

[BrownBear]

In my experience with 50 cal and larger, the change with powder charge is pretty gradual. In a first "run" of charge tests I'll go in 10 grain jumps between loads. With small cals like my 30, 32 and 36's, I go in 5 grain jumps.

Once I see a big change, say in going from 80 to 90 grains with a 54, I'll go back and shoot 85 and 95 grains.

When it comes to balls, patches and lubes, I generally see bigger results with small changes so I go slow and only change one thing at a time.

Then I "blend" the two. If 85 grains did best in the powder tests and switching to a .018 patch lubed with tallow and .530 ball further tightened the group, then I'll go back and reshoot a range of powder charges, usually in 5-grain increments around that initial 85. Might continue to dingle around with the ball/patch/lube combo and might just quit while I'm ahead.

It's best to only change one thing at a time. Change two or three at once, and you have no idea which one made the difference.

I'm a hunter and field shooter and not a range rat or match shooter. Once things get "good enuff" for my needs I quick messing with it. A guy seeking the absolute smallest groups possible will refine things a lot further and probably go about it differently than I do. But in my case, if max accuracy requires swabbing between shots and using a mallet to start a really tight ball/patch combo, the heck with max accuracy.

 

[Spikebuck]

I know the best ball size and patch combo that I can get a tight group with @ 50 yards. Now, If I go back and say start working up a load,

To me, "Working up a Load" includes all those variables. I don't "work up a load" after finding a ball/patch/lube combo...it's all part of the same process.

I think that Brown Bear hit it right in that after a certain combination is working "better" he may go back and change any one of the load components by small amounts on either side, not just powder charge.

I'm sure there's no one answer, but I have seen the type and volume of patch lube alone create group sizes from 6"+ to one ragged hole at 50 yards. I'd also agree with Brown Bear that, at least in my experience, powder charge increments seem to create less variability (within a reasonable grain range) than patch/lube/ball.

I'm also a hunter first and I will forego some level of accuracy if the ultimate load meant using a mallet or not being able to load at least three consecutive shots without swabbing. I will still generally swab between shots at the range, but I do perform testing on three-shot groups with no swabbing to be sure.

 

[crockett]

Well, every rifle is unique for there are no clear "rules" but let's say on your 50 caliber that 65 grains gives you the best accuracy. If you up the charge to 90 grains the group opens up say another inch. Most hunters will figure that is okay, the higher velocity is worth more than slightly better accuracy.
As already said, a gradual difference.

 

[BrownBear]

I will still generally swab between shots at the range, but I do perform testing on three-shot groups with no swabbing to be sure.

I do much the same, but kinda "backward" to that. I'm interested in group size with a dirty bore, but I really want to know where the first shot hits from a clean bore.

Therefore the "backwards" part of my routine is to shoot the groups without sighting in, to find what groups best starting with a clean bore for the first shot, followed by the dirty bore shots.

Once I have that load ginned out, I fire only "one-shot groups" for sight in. By that, I mean I'll clean the bore well between shots, still shooting a group of 3 in case of operator error. But I'm only adjusting my sights based upon where the clean bore shots are hitting.

And of course, once I'm pretty sure I'm sighted in that way, I'll go back and shoot my usual groups without swabbing to make sure.

I simply can't abide clean bore shots hitting someplace different than dirty bore shots.

Edit- It's not universal, but in most of my experiences if the clean-bore shot is going to land different, it will hit a little lower than the following dirty-bore shots. I'm walking way out on a limb here, but I interpret that as a sign I'm using too much lube. Might or might not be true, but my first step is to shoot again from a clean bore but with less lube.

 

[Col. Batguano]

do you find that different patch / lube / ball combinations give you different "best" results with different powder charges?

For instance;
50 gr Goex FFFg / .015 / spit / .490 ball = 1" group
80 gr Goex FFFg / .015 / mink oil / .490 ball = 1.25" group
100 gr Goex FFFg / .010 / ox yoke pre-lubed / .495 ball = 2" group

 

[hankfannin]

Melnic,

I've posted this same question before and basically I got as many different answers as responses. The reason is, I believe anyway, and I've been chasing this "dream load" for many years, is that there just is not one answer. There are way too many variables. No two guns shoot alike, powder charges vary no matter how careful you are, patch lubes can't possibly be exactly the same each and every time, ball weight is a big factor. If your rifle barrel is warm or cold it makes a difference, etc., etc. You're on the right track. You've got to just keep playing with it until you are happy. (for me that will be when I can put them all through the same hole), I've been using Dutch's System for a number of years and that will get you pretty damn close. Even using his system it will take a lot of balls down range and a lot of burnt powder. There really aren't any short cuts. I'm headed to the shooting range AGAIN tomorrow to work on improving my load in a 45 cal. Hawken. Seems to me like it's a never ending process and I'm finally excepting the fact it's just part of the fun of shooting these smokepoles. Want to know the positive and fun side to this? It's when I'm at the local public shooting range shooting what to me are barely acceptable groups and the modern gun shooters with big ass scopes can't shoot a smaller group.

Greyhawk

 

[Vaino]

First off, the "purpose" of the load determines the starting point asre powder charge.

If the "purpose" of the load is target shooting then a lighter starting load is appropriate and if it's going to be a big game hunting load, then a much heavier powder charge is the way to go.

Naturally target shooting demands the best accuracy that the riflke is capable of, whereas a big game hunting load doesn't......Fred

 

[hankfannin]

In those three loads you listed each has a different powder charge, a different patch and lube. I'd say without any reservations that each one of those will give you a different size group and probably even hit in a different spot on the target every single time. Are you trying to work up a load that way? Just curious.

 

[necchi]

"working up a load"

:hmm:
Well that's actually a code term for "experimenting".
And if we're going to experiment, we should do it right, huh?

Let's just consider it takes at least 5 shots to show a "pattern or group".
So you pick your variables;
*Ball size
*Patch thickness
*Patch lube
*Powder charge
And you shoot 5 times, starting with a clean barrel.
Each shot changes the clean barrel to a dirty barrel (unless you do something to keep the barrel the same each time).

If you do nothing to the barrel when you change just one variable (let's say powder charge up 5grns),, then the next 5 shots after that change doesn't have the same chance to prove itself as the first five with a clean barrel,,

Get where I'm going with this?
If you do I'll share some more,,

 

[Col. Batguano]

I should have been more specific in my hypotheticals.

What I was posing as the question was; is it possible that each powder charge after futzing around with a whole bunch of options, would give you a different lube or patch thickness as your best combination for that powder charge (assuming you experimented with a bunch of them).

Or, do you typically find that the same patch thickness / lube / ball will give you the best accuracy for each powder charge you use?

The purpose of the varying charges would be either range or application. E.g. a hunting situation (heavy charge) or target range. Yes, I know that one of those charges will probably be more accurate (usually around 1 1/2x bore diameter) than the others, and they will all have different points of impact. And ambient temperature, humidity, etc. will affect things too. I was just trying not to inject TOO many variables in to this.

 

[nkbj]

Selecting the power level and then figuring out how to make it shoot accurately enough to do the job is my way. Otherwise I'm fiddling around 'cause it's fun.

 

[Zonie]

IMO, changing any one thing in a load will have some effect on the final combination of other things that go into making up the "best load".

If there are 2 different size balls that can be used and 3 different patch thicknesses along with 4 different lubes and 8 different powder charges, that would amount to about 192 different combinations.

Firing each combination 5 times to see what each one does would take 960 shots.

That's why its a good idea to decide what the load is going to be used for. Target or Hunting?

Knowing this can reduce the number of powder loads down to around 4.

Deciding on just one ball size and possibly 2 patch thicknesses based on what others on the forum have found will reduce the number of shots.

Also, reducing the type of lube to just 2 will speed things up so there are only 16 different combinations making only 80 shots to go thru all of the combinations.

Knowing that the powder load usually has the most effect on a shot, further reductions of variables like the lube and patch thickness will reduce the number of shots needed.

 

[joe sebia]

Try not to make this harder than needs be. I have found the following to be the quickest way to finding an accurate and consistant load using minimal materials and no grief.

1. Select a powder for your application, ie 50 cal let say FF.

2. Select a patch that allows you to snuggly push ball down the muzzle. Too loose and you get blow by and lack of RB rotation. Too tight and you get stuck balls. Here is where you will have your troubles. As a guide I go by the following Patch Thickness = Bore Diameter - Ball diameter +0.005

ie PT = 0.50-0.490 + 0.005 = 0.015

3. Set six targets at 50 yards (assuming you are at least on paper)

4. You are testing 6 loads today. 50,55,60,65,70, 75. Powder is measured volumetrically. Most measures are in 5 grain increment and accurate to +/- 2.5 grains.

5. Shoot round robin 1 shot at each target with each load (you will have 6 targets with one shot each)when done with round one. In between shots do a light bore swab with your favorite cleaner. For instance 1 spit patch down and out followed by a dry patch. (you can use whatever you like- moose milk , windex, spit, water just maintain consistancy of technique).

6. Repeat for round 2

7. Repeat for round 3

8. You will now have 6 targets with 3 shots each (18 total shots) a 50 gr target, a 55, a 60 and so on.

9.You should notice a few things. One --your groups will be trending tighter or looser. And Secondly point of impact of each group on the paper will be moving. If inconclusive or erratic redo test with tighter patches. (some times looser but 90% of time a tighter patch is needed)

8. Clean your gun and repeat tomorrow with 6 more targets this time start at 80 and go to 105 grains. For a 50 cal that is a pretty stout load and you shouldn't need more than that for general hunting.

9. Compare targets. Did the groups show a preference for a range of powder say 65-80 grains.

10. Were there 3 or more target where the point of impact of the groups was the same? again say 65-80 grains

11. The 3 sequential targets that are impacting at the same point is a sweet spot

12. Go back and shoot 6 targets with 2.5 grain increments to find the mid point.


You have now found your load with < 50 shots, broke in your rifle and did not spend a fortune on a bunch of stuff you will never use again. The load will be tolerant over a range of conditions and consistent.

 

[Melnic]

Ahh, the OCW method, Yup.

I think my thing is that On my first ML, I started working up a load and I had patch issues. My ML was cutting patches. Seems to me that job #1 is to make sure I have a good ball and patch (as you mention), Many seasoned ML shootings I have talked to don't mention this as job #1 cause I think they are so experienced with it, they don't go through the newbie steps. Or they already have a patch lube they like and don't suggest anything else. Same thing with swab method. I noticed yesterday, my TC likes a certain amount of liquid on the swab or the POI raises up noticably. No swab gave me a rise of 3" @ 50 yards (bench rest, no hand on forestock). Swabbing brought it right back. Too dry a swab and it was up an inch or two. I'm thinking my shooting technique for ML load development should be different than for centerfire for one thing. Hold the ML just like I do offhand, but just rest the forward hand on the bag. Up until yesterday, I'd rest the forestock on the bag right at the rear most wedge and then hold the butstock and rear bag with my free hand.

 

[BrownBear]

I'm thinking my shooting technique for ML load development should be different than for centerfire for one thing. Hold the ML just like I do offhand, but just rest the forward hand on the bag.

Bingo.

 

[joe sebia]

As for resting off the bags here are words of advice for Chuck Dixon. Paraphrased of course.

ML are different than CF rifles. On a CF rifle the firing pin is parralel to the barrel vs a flint.

When the flint strikes the frizzen there is a downward force on the rear of the gun. Therefore you should rest the rifle near the muzzle (yes I was a little take by this too) to counteract that force. Also why ML are "front heavy"

If you notice alot of the oldtime buffalo hunters and sharp shooters rested their rifles on cross sticks out near the muzzle. Now you know why.

This came up in a discussion with him about a year ago and I have found it definately improved my bench shooting.

:hatsoff: Mr Dixon

 

[joe sebia]

"I noticed yesterday, my TC likes a certain amount of liquid on the swab or the POI raises up noticably. No swab gave me a rise of 3" @ 50 yards (bench rest, no hand on forestock). Swabbing brought it right back. Too dry a swab and it was up an inch or two."

I should mention these types of issues are indicative of "too loose" patch / ball combo.

You are getting inconsistant pressures and rotation and may also be contributing to patch deterioration. try a slightly bigger ball or tighter patch

 

[Col. Batguano]

If you are shooting off a bench to sight in for offhand shooting, you should support the rifle the as similarly as you can to the actual way you support the gun during offhand. The barrel harmonics are going to be different with each way the gun is supported.

With a free floated barrel the way most centerfire and smallbore match rifles are made, the issue is less critical, though I do notice a very slight difference in my prone points of impact (usually a click or two) when I'm torqued in to position with a sling vs. the point of impact off of an immobile machine rest with my match .22. With a 4' long barrel, and relatively long lock time and barrel dwell time of the projectile in a ML'er, the differences will be even more pronounced.