Seating the ball

[Newtire]

I'm going to have to try both sides & see which one works better. I have put some powder into the nipple & got a slight delay but putting the powder in from the other side might change things considerably. Only one way to find out-try it a few times. I don't believe in bouncing the ramrod myself but that's my opinion. One thing for sure is to mark the ramrod & get the ball up against the powder. I would think a bouncing action would dent the ball. I go on the fact to if you bang on the end of an axle stub with a lead or brass hammer, you're going to dent it. I've seen it done too many times! Thinking how lead is so much softer, you be the judge of that.

 

[Ketchakah]

Hatito friends,
And Happy Christmas to you all.

The misinformation of the "expert" at the gun club is the very reason i do not allow anyone to tell me what to do with my FL. But that is another thread.

However, In regards to the subject, Personally i have never needed to strike or tap my FL. Its my belief this practice came from the "self priming" technique we spoke of in the Touch hole thread. In such cases as with my reenactment gun, i will bounce the stock on the ground or give it a slap to send powder into the already closed pan. Thus self priming the lock.
With a regular FL, i have never needed to do either of these things. The proper touch hole size and a clean pan suffices just fine in my experience.
As with all things, each FL is unique and has its own personality, so anothers experience might be different.

If you are having this issue, i might suggest..
1. checking the size of your touch hole.
2. looking into a coned touch hole liner
3. coning the outside of the touch hole. (provided this does not compromise the pans ability to seal.
(coning the inside can be done too, and was done historically. It requires removing the breechplug and a special tool.)



These things unique to Rifles.

Short starters... I stopped using one 30 some years ago. Along with the priming horn.
Wood wipers... All i use. my loads are not tight enough to require a short starter or excessive pressure, plus my muzzle is coned which is incredibly helpful.
But like i've said i don't competition shoot. And i always use short strokes to seat the ball. Usually about 3 to 4 at least.

In the heat of battle, i may be tempted to not be quite so frugal, hence why many military arms have metal rammers. But it is my opinion, if they were that close, that i could not load properly, i would not be patching anyway, but loading as a musket. However, there is documentation for undersized ball (carry of two different sizes) for use in combat.

 

[Newtire]

A long time ago, in my beginning days of muzzleloader shooting, I was told to use a .495" and then even so tight as a .498" ball. I had a T/C "Hawken". It was extremely hard to load with the .495" but I got it down. Different guns use different sizes of course but I am finding that a .480" ball and a patch thickness to fit is what I now use. Whether it's as accurate as I was shooting with the tighter combination I couldn't say, as my vision is not like it used to be. I know it's much easier to load. I use nothing but a delrin rod and push the ball incrementally down by gripping the ramrod about 10-12" above the muzzle each time as that stuff tends to bend easily.I don't know how Davey and Georgie Russell were able to do it. Seriously though, I haven't been too lucky using wooden rods. I tried soaking the ramrod in kerosene but even then still kept breaking them. Where do you get the wooden rods you guys use? I like the look of those but can't figure out how to make the wood flexible enough. Anything smaller than a .50 caliber and my not-so-delicate touch is almost a guaranteed broken rod. I know that some do it but not me so far!

 

[Rockvillerich]

Merry Christmas everybody. I've found there is a world of difference loading a high end barrel like a Rice, Getz, or Hoyt compared to production barrels. If the bore is true, and the lead soft I've loaded .54 cal balls in a .50 without any trouble once they're started. As for everything else, staying consistent is the most important thing to keep in mind. That's a very cool tool Mike posted for coning the inside of the touch hole. Never saw one of those before. We always made our own liners out of fine threaded stainless and a football shaped cutter, leaving about .010" between the pan and the inside of the cone.

 

[tenngun]

IMHO, We as historically "educated" interpreters must refrain from using terminology that the uneducated public has adopted as common. To do so perpetuates the inaccuracy and to persons who know better, makes us look foolish.
We should strive to whenever possible educate people to the differences. Which was the point of my inquiry so as to become better educated in something i do not have experience with.

I think often we get our selves caught in an elitist trap, where we seek to prove we have the esoteric knowledge and use the proper terminology. Musket started out as a large two man matchlock. It was used before the bayonet. It changed over the years. Today it’s come to mean muzzleloader.
Ship, once had a meaning not to be confused with brig, sloop, ketch, snow, schooner, ect. And that ment something different in 1800 then 1600, or 900. We still call submarines ‘boats’ even though in USN or RN they get the designation USS or HMS. U-boats and I-boats just went by numbers, at a time when we floated USS Bowfish or Haddo. I don’t know that we do our hobby much good when we say ‘that’s a fusil, that’s a musket,and that’s a rifle. Sounds like saying “Well any one can see that’s a B17 F and not a G.

 

[Gowacky]

Well said Ten Gun

 

[Ketchakah]

LOL Yes Tenn You are probably right.
I like to use the terminology of the time period i am comfortable with. It can cause some confusion as so much has changed, but i'm not sure that's an excuse. But i suppose context and audience is the determining factor.
I do not like the term "musket" when used for any muzzle loader. Perhaps its a personal thing. The "Key" i believe is to not get that elitist attitude you speak of. Sometimes its hard, most of us have done it at some point. Usually, that sort of stuff tends to shut down communication as opposed to furthering education. I try to avoid it, i have failed at times.

As far as wood rods... Quality is king. Many factory rods can be inferior, especially those that are newer. However, I still have and use the wiper that came with my Petersoli in 1975. I personally have not broken a wood rod, but i know those that have.
Like Newtire was saying, i think many today load much tighter then they used to in the old days. Of course, i have no idea as there really is not a way to accurately judge the theory. I do know what works for me.
Really IMHO the ball should slide down with nominal pressure. If you are having to force it, it may be a bit tight. Ive never measured, But i believe i grip about 10 inches from the muzzle.

You can find good dowel rods, but you have to be very selective and carefully look at the grain. That's what makes the difference. Ff you are making one, split the wood down, don't turn it or mill it. The strength is in the continuity of the grain.

Oil them well, but i don't know they need to be real flexible, we are not doing a whole lot of bending. Its more about keeping them "alive". If they dry out, like any wood they can get brittle.
I've tried the coal oil (kerosine) idea, and not really seen any difference one way or another.
And like Rock said, A good barrel can make a huge difference too. Polishing the barrel may help a lot.

 

[Carbon 6]

If 20,000psi on the back of the ball don’t deform it upon fireing, bouncing the rod shouldn’t either I would think. .

Lead (pure lead) is very malleable and plastic. The minimum extrusion force for pure lead is 0.9tons/in2 , That's below 2000 psi This is how guys are able to easily size bullets in their home reloading presses.
Deformation can occur during loading and firing
Deforming a ball during loading is not necessarily a bad thing, deforming a bullet usually is.
It all boils down to how you deform it and how consistent you are.

 

[Rockvillerich]

I'm looking down, inside my T/C .50 black powder muzzle loading rifle and there appears to be a protruding ring just above the bottom of the barrel. I can feel it with my cleaning rod, too.
Question: Is this ring to prevent pushing the round ball down further onto the charge? It would allow the charge to remain below this constriction where the ball is resting on.
Is this a charge pocket?
Thank you.

Funny. I do remember a ring like you're describing in a barrel we rifled, and we threaded that end for the breach plug to keep the defect from interfering with the function, and made up a rifle with this "reject" barrel. It shot just fine, as did all of the cosmetic rejects we found various ways to deal with...shortened, re-reamed or whatever.

 

[Newtire]

I think often we get our selves caught in an elitist trap, where we seek to prove we have the esoteric knowledge and use the proper terminology. Musket started out as a large two man matchlock. It was used before the bayonet. It changed over the years. Today it’s come to mean muzzleloader.
Ship, once had a meaning not to be confused with brig, sloop, ketch, snow, schooner, ect. And that ment something different in 1800 then 1600, or 900. We still call submarines ‘boats’ even though in USN or RN they get the designation USS or HMS. U-boats and I-boats just went by numbers, at a time when we floated USS Bowfish or Haddo. I don’t know that we do our hobby much good when we say ‘that’s a fusil, that’s a musket,and that’s a rifle. Sounds like saying “Well any one can see that’s a B17 F and not a G.

Gotta agree with you tenngun. Getting too insistent on minute details right off might tend to push people away. Only because I served on a sub-tender, I know why the sailor calls those vessels made by "The Electric Boat Company" a boat.

 

[tenngun]

I was a submariner, USS Haddo SSN 604 TM3SS

 

[Smokey Plainsman]

More of a friendly pat really.
Guns with patent breeches, CVA side bolsters especially, benefit from being rotated towards the lock and given a gentle "slap" or two on the opposite side of the stock. (opposite of the lock). after the powder is poured down the barrel. This helps to ensure that powder makes it's way into the bolster, and settle the charge.

I’ve a Lyman’s hawkins rifle and can attest to this. Works.

 

[SDSmlf]

Couple of observations

• When evaluating lead for casting round balls we want it dead soft. It should thud with no ‘ring’ to it and not bounce when dropped on concrete as the tale goes. Yet we want to observe the bounce of a ramrod off the lead ball in the bottom of barrel.....
• Can not imagine the mass of a wooden ramrod is enough to move or seat a patched round ball by dropping it on the ball a couple of times being any better than simply pushing on the ramrod with your body weight.
• Tapping or shaking the gun probably helps settle some powder into the fire channel. A few loose grains of powder in the fire channel probably not a bad thing, but a clean and dry fire channel is most important. Think about a powder measure filled with powder - tap it a few times and the powder settles down in it. Don’t know if it was mentioned in this or another topic, but wonder about removing the nipple and adding powder under it in the fire channel - wouldn’t that create the ‘fuse’ effect flint shooters worry about with too much powder in the pan?

And one final thought. A few years back in major hunting magazine in article on muzzleloaders (inline) by a renown writer and hunting guide (the name of magazine and author escapes me at the moment) one of the major points he made was to bounce the ramrod multiple times off the bullet by throwing the ramrod down the barrel. He stated all his hunting clients had to do this before leaving camp. For get what ‘problem’ it solved. Maybe we leave the practice to the inline crowd?

 

[Carbon 6]

Couple of observations

• When evaluating lead for casting round balls we want it dead soft. It should thud with no ‘ring’ to it and not bounce when dropped on concrete as the tale goes. Yet we want to observe the bounce of a ramrod off the lead ball in the bottom of barrel.....?

A wooden ramrod bouncing on a lead ball is not related to a chunk of lead bouncing on concrete.

Couple of observations
• Can not imagine the mass of a wooden ramrod is enough to move or seat a patched round ball by dropping it on the ball a couple of times being any better than simply pushing on the ramrod with your body weight. ?

Done incorrectly, it is hard to imagine anything being better.

Couple of observations
• Tapping or shaking the gun probably helps settle some powder into the fire channel. A few loose grains of powder in the fire channel probably not a bad thing, but a clean and dry fire channel is most important. Think about a powder measure filled with powder - tap it a few times and the powder settles down in it.?

I would not equate a clean or dirty barrel with a patent breech, to a powder measure.

Couple of observations
Don’t know if it was mentioned in this or another topic, but wonder about removing the nipple and adding powder under it in the fire channel - wouldn’t that create the ‘fuse’ effect flint shooters worry about with too much powder in the pan??

Two completely different ignition sources.

Couple of observations
And one final thought. A few years back in major hunting magazine in article on muzzleloaders (inline) by a renown writer and hunting guide (the name of magazine and author escapes me at the moment) one of the major points he made was to bounce the ramrod multiple times off the bullet by throwing the ramrod down the barrel. He stated all his hunting clients had to do this before leaving camp. For get what ‘problem’ it solved. Maybe we leave the practice to the inline crowd?

I won't even comment directly on this last one since it is forbidden but, I will suggest that we compile our thoughts for quality rather than quantity. It makes it easier for everyone.

 

[azmntman]

SEAT THAT BALL TILL IT SOUNDS EXPENSIVE! push...push it real good....

 

[Ketchakah]

One thing i did not consider is those "Patent" breech critters. Perhaps that's where the slap came from.
Ive always disliked the idea of the patent breech, seemed it would be hard to fully clean. But like anything, i suppose its what you are used to.

Ive not seen a ring engineered into a ML barrel, most rings were the result of damage. I would be concerned if i was not able to fully seat the ball because of an internal stop. Are you sure this barrel was not made for a breechloader ? This would be a common thing for those.

Honestly, the "bounce the rammer" concept was what i was taught when i started as well, and one i do teach new shooters until they get the feel of loading. I myself, stopped doing that at some point, probably when i started using a looser ball load. But I don't think ya really can go wrong with it, its just probably not necessary and time consuming.

Its possible this concept was a offshoot of the extremely tight ball load. The bouncing using the inertia to seat the ball, and make sure it was fully seated. Just a guess however.

 

[Carbon 6]

I've gotten a projectile stuck in a heavily fouled barrel (just off the charge)....No amount of pushing would make it go down.
Situation like that in the field and you'll become a ramrod bouncer or a barrel ringer.

 

[azmntman]

I seriously doubt that after PUSHING the RB down onto the powder that bouncing the ram rod will move it any measurable amount at all. At least with my loads yer PUSHING it onto the powder. After I have leaned into the ramrod PUSHING the ball onto the powder the force of a ramrod thrown, dropped, bounced etc. isn't gonna have any affect AT ALL. Just MHO and I wont be bouncing any time soon.

 

[Ketchakah]

Yes Carbon I can imagine And i do agree with you AZ

 

[Carbon 6]

I seriously doubt that after PUSHING the RB down onto the powder that bouncing the ram rod will move it any measurable amount at all. At least with my loads yer PUSHING it onto the powder. After I have leaned into the ramrod PUSHING the ball onto the powder the force of a ramrod thrown, dropped, bounced etc. isn't gonna have any affect AT ALL. Just MHO and I wont be bouncing any time soon.

True fact AZ, I'm talking about trying to push it bare handed, not using a mallet. Consider the multitude of shooting conditions, Substitute powders, humidity, grease lube or no lube at all etc...

How hard can you push on a 3/8 diameter rod with one hand? It can be thrown with much more force.
That's why we swing a hammer to drive nails in, rather than pushing it, and yes you can drive nails with a wooden hammer.