round ball fit for smooth bores

People who have taken samples from old French cartridges believe it looks like a blend of 3f and 4f. But that doesn't mean anything , the composition could be entirely different .

I forget the exact amount but the Service Charge for the Brown Bess musket was listed in this source as some absurdly high charge like 240 gr of "Musket Powder" which is insane. That might equate to 130 gr of modern, quality controlled and consistent 2f. I would stress to anyone to never follow really old load data.

I found this on a long dead forum post on another forum, from like 2004 or something. I was Googling "military musket powder charge" and I found it.

The Honourable East India Company charge for a percussion musket (i.e. much as a Brown Bess but with percussion) was 125 grains. The powder was probably similar to a middling modern powder. The size of the charge depends upon the quality of the powder so varied between 4 1/2 to 8 drams. In modern powder don't go above 4 1/2 drams and a coarse powder stresses the barrel less. Note drams not drachms. 4 1/2 drachms is 270 grains which would be a bad idea in modern powder. People today tend to compare modern powder with the finest sporting powders of the late 19th century. In the 18th century armies were pouring powder down their muskets that would disgrace a cheap firework. Hence the grossly large charges quoted at the time. Also period powder was often measured in charges from a pound of powder which gets complicated when the Apothecary Pound gets used instead of the Avoirdupois Pound. Complicating it further is non British measure users had their own pounds, which could vary not only from country to country but sometimes by region. The 125 grains I gave above comes from an impeccable source who used a known (avoirdupois) system and a rigorous methodology. For those unfamiliar with 'avoirdupois', it is the pound weight as still used by primitive Americans and Burma. No wait: Burma now uses world SI units.... For the normal world I refer to an 8 gram load.

I will never adopt metric. I was quite happy with pounds shillings & pence so long as I had enough of them . Your assessment of military powder may well have been true enough once but after the sterling efforts of Major Congrieve the quality of all British powder improuved remarkably . And civilian powder much improuved as old flask chargers will mutely attest . Ballistic tests done by a noted modern author found the old powders gave better performance than modern powders . Surprised me but I have no reason to doubt him . All of this being a spirited defence of powder that cant really matter , But I thought Ide stand up for it anyway .And fye on the common market . Regards Rudyard

I think we are saying the same thing Maurice. The military powder used to be rubbish so the government bought their own factory and Congreve (and others) worked hard to raise the standard until it was the best military powder. Hence the charge dropped massively for the same performance.

On the European Union we will agree to disagree; as Gentlemen should. My views on Europe can be read by anyone familiar with Cornish via my avatar and signature, or as my Bulgarian cousins might say, Перда на британския изход (pause for quick burst of 'Ode to Joy').

I was brought up on pounds, shillings and pence, pecks and bushels, chains and furlongs etc. Metric is sooo much easier. However, each to their own. If poteen is 2 3/4d per gill how much change will you have from a guinea if you order 1 1/2 dozen? Express your answer in the Troy weight of silver coinage of the realm...............

Dear Raedwald Re Powder we agree fine . RE EU sell out we don't . I apposed the common market as it was just a contrived sell out of the Colonies who supported the old Lion through three wars. But then Ted Bloody Heath . Goes with some.' Rule by accountancy " We are better of with the Continentals' and bubbles to our kith & kin" .Causeing them great concerne and disadvantage .While Ted Bloody Heath gets his thirty piece of silver Yuaght . Ive a Sister in Spain she dosnt see it the same way . Rudyard

Speaking as "Brother Jonathan" or 'Murica, it is my understanding that the U.S. service charge started out for a flintlock .69 at approx. 120grains of powder. Some was tipped out of the cartridge to prime the pan, the remaining 110-100 grains went down the barrel as the main charge. With the percussion musket, the charge weight went down to 110 grains. The .69 Minié/Burton ball used 80 grains. The .58 60 grains, although it apparently climbed back to 65 during the great bloodletting of the 1860s. I have it, perhaps incorrectly, that the Confederate army had about 70 grains in a charge.

Just an idea, standing in line, heart rate pounding through you chest, cold sweat in your eyes, maybe a bit of your mess mate blood on you, how much powder do you reckon you would spill?
Maybe cartridges were made bigger to make them easier to handle and still get a good charge from nervous hands???

Accuracy wasn't a priority plus powder quality varied......also you want to make sure job #1 is getting the Ball/ Minie out to a range of 300+ yards with the energy to kill.

Better to make it a little more.

I use 60 gr of 2f with a .575 bullet religiously for .58 Minies and for almost 20 years off being off and on with shooting muzzleloading military repros, I've always been able to hit man sized targets at the range.

Now, being newer to smoothbore shooting I love 100 gr of 2f for my .69's. It feels stout, it throws that ball out with punch and closely matches the original charges .

Now I have to work up a load for my .660 shotgun slugs AKA Nessler Balls since that info doesn't seem to exist.

I use 3f with Miniés. 2f with smooth bores.

FlinterNick said:

In my Charleville muskets I shoot a .685 ball with almost any type of batching. I found that using coffee filters for wadding is perfect when using a bare ball.

For paper cartridges I use a .66 ball, paper I use for the cartridges is cooking parchment because is doesn't stick to fouling or grease.

In my .77 Bess I use a .732 patched round ball, it gives the best accuracy in a large bore.

Click to expand...

I have a Pedersoli 1766 Charleville and the bore is exactly .689 and I have difficulty getting a .010" lubed patch .675 ball down the barrel. You use any thickness patch with a .685 ball?

I've found that TOW .662 ball with a .015 patch works best and keeps fouling down. That gives .012" of play and also found that .020 thick patch with a .662 doesn't give it anymore accuracy. Just harder to ram it down.

These guys will make you any size you want. I have one of their brass molds and it is top quality. They are in England but it only took seven days from placing my order until it arrived at my door in Virginia.
https://www.ballmoulds.com/

I have a .720 bore double barrel Coach 12Ga. I’d like to try to shoot round balls with a card or wad over it. After a few shots it seems more constricted. Any suggestions on a ball size that will work after some shooting?

Rfp10000 said:

I have a .720 bore double barrel Coach 12Ga. I’d like to try to shoot round balls with a card or wad over it. After a few shots it seems more constricted. Any suggestions on a ball size that will work after some shooting?

Click to expand...

A thick lubed patch, ball small enough to easily go down the fouled bore while the patch cleans it.

Geez, looking at post #49 I realize I've been waiting since 2019 for this valuable information. Time flies.

I have a TFC .62 and shoot a ,600 regularly. I got some .575 balls for paper cartridges and they shot cery wdll

RC61 said:

I have a Pedersoli 1766 Charleville and the bore is exactly .689 and I have difficulty getting a .010" lubed patch .675 ball down the barrel. You use any thickness patch with a .685 ball?

Click to expand...

My Charleville was reamed out to .72 caliber by Bobby Hoyt from its previous owner.

Takes a .687 ball with a .010 patch with no problem.

The pedersoli current production makes their barrels heavier.

FlinterNick said:

My Charleville was reamed out to .72 caliber by Bobby Hoyt from its previous owner.

Takes a .687 ball with a .010 patch with no problem.

The pedersoli current production makes their barrels heavier.

Click to expand...

Thanks

Troyfairweather said:

I'd like to hunt so a 6'' group at 50 would be nice. Lee makes a .600 or .610 ball can't remember. Would th at be to small for my .677 bore.

Click to expand...

I have a .62 cal. .620 .Smooth bore. I shoot patched round ball in .590 or .595 size. Fits snug and patterned great at 50 yds.

What is the proper fit for a round ball, I guess it does matter if it's patched or just waded. I am looking for a ball for my 15ga it's bore is .677. ...Troyfairweather

Troy, I'm not sure there's a simple answer to your question, since the method of loading, e.g., "bare ball" (card stock and/or tow wads) v. patched RB bbl. quality, and perhaps even powder granulation as some have reported great success with 1F as well as 2F powders.

As an example, I have a 20ga. trade gun whose bore measures .619". I've tried a bore diameter RB with tow wads fore and aft, card stock wads fore and aft, and roughened between 2 coarse files then dipped in melted beeswax and olive oil. None of those methods resulted in 6" or smaller groups at 50 yd., but all required stout charges of FFg. OTOH, patched .597" - .600"RB (different moulds) will generally outshoot it at 25 yd. and sometimes at 50. Given my bore diameter and the RB I use for "accurate" shooting (no rear sight), the difference is .019" - .022". Here are two targets using a patched .598" RB, the concentric circle one was at 25 yd., the other was at 50. Hope this helps!