• This community needs YOUR help today. We rely 100% on Supporting Memberships to fund our efforts. With the ever increasing fees of everything, we need help. We need more Supporting Members, today. Please invest back into this community. I will ship a few decals too in addition to all the account perks you get.



    Sign up here: https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/account/upgrades

NO LOGIC AT ALL. I THINK

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
My sentiments exactly Dutch.
Dave
Well TEST IT. If you can. I don't see how. In a CLEAN DRY barrel its going to fall to the breech. I a barrel with dry fouling, its most likely to fall to the breech. If the fouling is DAMP as it often will be if blowing through the bore to soften to allow loading some will stick to the fouling. So what will be encountered is wiping. Either to remove to fouling or to get the powder all down. Personally I think this is the silliest thing I have seen yet. A few grains weight, or even granules of powder is not going to effect accuracy in the slightest. Uniform compression of the powder is more important. If you doubt it try shooting a 10 shot string from a rest varying the pressure on the powder from shot to shot. It has been know for a VERY long time that this is more important than having the EXACT same powder weight.
 
I'm surprised....as the man suggests, don't conjecture..... test it. Or perhaps find somebody else who has, or what they observed. ????

Ned Roberts comments on the idea, but his book is discussing target shooting at 40 rods (220 yards), with patent breech caplock rifles and false muzzles. How many of us are concerned with that?

"When I was a boy, many of the most expert shots with the muzzle-loading cap lock target rifles always used a tin or brass tube a little smaller diameter than the bore of the rifle and about an inch longer than the barrel, with one end funnel shaped through which the powder was poured down the barrel of the rifle. After careful wiping of the bore after each shot, this long tube was inserted in the bore nearly to the breech and held with one hand while pouring the powder into it with the other hand. In this way, no grains of powder adhered to the side of the bore, but the entire charge was deposited into the cone of the patent breech and base of the bore so that none of the grains were crushed in seating the bullet. This tube was then withdrawn and the bullet loaded through the false muzzle with the bullet starter as usual. These men firmly believed that by loading the powder through this long tube in this way they secured finer accuracy and made somewhat smaller groups at all ranges. Uncle Alvaro and many other experts call this "an old maid's idea", said that it did not improve accuracy, and only caused so much more work in loading and so much more equipment to carry around. Be that as it may, we noticed that these men who used these long loading tubes very seldom made any smaller groups, or won any more matches, than the riflemen who did not use them in loading. Of course, it is possible that these advocates of the long loading tubes did not have as super-accurate rifles as the others even though their rifles were by the best makers..., However, it is a hint worth trying, especially if you are in the habit of leaving the bore of the rifle somewhat damp after cleaning for each shot." The Muzzle-Loading Cap Lock Rifle

What I find interesting is neither according to comments now, or apparently back then..., while the fellows following this practice did not win any more matches than the competitors who did not, nobody seems to consider that with that particular rifle, the practice might be needed to have a group accurate enough to contend for a winning score.

Simply because my rifle shows no improvement in accuracy when using a tube, does not mean that my fellow competitor's rifle will not show a marked improvement from using such a tube.

I noted neither Mr. Roberts, nor his "Uncle Alvaro", ever checked the rifles where the tube was used to see if omitting that part of the procedure caused a group from that particular rifle, to worsen.

LD
 
Last edited:
Actually, historically, graphite was used to make a cheap powder look like it was properly polished. Back in the day, for example, the British Military would not accept powder coated with "black lead". It adds to fouling since its a form of carbon that will not combust at BP temperatures. The test for cheap powder used to be rubbing it on the palm. If it made a black mark it was coated and not properly made. Swiss has no graphite. Its impossible to ignite BP with static. The sparks will simply move the grains away at high voltage levels. The high carbon content (charcoal) makes the powder immune to static. And back in the day tin coated or plain steel measures were used. Lots of plastic used with propellant powders of all kinds.
'
I personally know of one black powder explosion caused by static . It cost my pap his sight for the last 25 or so years of his life . Other than that I agree with what you said .

Eddie
 
I'm surprised....as the man suggests, don't conjecture..... test it. Or perhaps find somebody else who has, or what they observed. ????

Ned Roberts comments on the idea, but his book is discussing target shooting at 40 rods (220 yards), with patent breech caplock rifles and false muzzles. How many of us are concerned with that?

"When I was a boy, many of the most expert shots with the muzzle-loading cap lock target rifles always used a tin or brass tube a little smaller diameter than the bore of the rifle and about an inch longer than the barrel, with one end funnel shaped through which the powder was poured down the barrel of the rifle. After careful wiping of the bore after each shot, this long tube was inserted in the bore nearly to the breech and held with one hand while pouring the powder into it with the other hand. In this way, no grains of powder adhered to the side of the bore, but the entire charge was deposited into the cone of the patent breech and base of the bore so that none of the grains were crushed in seating the bullet. This tube was then withdrawn and the bullet loaded through the false muzzle with the bullet starter as usual. These men firmly believed that by loading the powder through this long tube in this way they secured finer accuracy and made somewhat smaller groups at all ranges. Uncle Alvaro and many other experts call this "an old maid's idea", said that it did not improve accuracy, and only caused so much more work in loading and so much more equipment to carry around. Be that as it may, we noticed that these men who used these long loading tubes very seldom made any smaller groups, or won any more matches, than the riflemen who did not use them in loading. Of course, it is possible that these advocates of the long loading tubes did not have as super-accurate rifles as the others even though their rifles were by the best makers..., However, it is a hint worth trying, especially if you are in the habit of leaving the bore of the rifle somewhat damp after cleaning for each shot." The Muzzle-Loading Cap Lock Rifle

What I find interesting is neither according to comments now, or apparently back then..., while the fellows following this practice did not win any more matches than the competitors who did not, nobody seems to consider that with that particular rifle, the practice might be needed to have a group accurate enough to contend for a winning score.

Simply because my rifle shows no improvement in accuracy when using a tube, does not mean that my fellow competitor's rifle will not show a marked improvement from using such a tube.

I noted neither Mr. Roberts, nor his "Uncle Alvaro", ever checked the rifles where the tube was used to see if omitting that part of the procedure caused a group from that particular rifle, to worsen.

LD
The barrel serves as a drop tube. The target shooters shooting over about 60 yards were using BULLETS not round balls, either cloth patched pickets or much longer PP bullets. And its apples and oranges, RBs do not need guide starters and/or false muzzles to shoot accurately. A picket bullet without a guide starter is essentially useless.
AND Ned Roberts accounts of some things, like shooting pickets do not match modern experience.
 
Interesting read. I find it incredulous the things that some people get their panties in a twist over. Who cares what method one uses to load their rifle? Why work so hard to disprove what someone else likes to do or believe? I don't think I need to go through the extra effort to increase accuracy, but obviously there are some who think they need every edge they can get.
 

To me this only means that 99% of the time static will not ignite loose black powder . The powder that went off from static was wrapped in Kyser Foil ( Tin Foil from the 60's ) to be used as charges for a cannon . He was wearing a wool sweater and rubbed his sweaty hands on it right before reaching for a charge . Witnesses said there was a pop followed by an explosion. The charges were stacked in several old wooden artillery cartridge boxes . Old saying is " Never say Never " .
 
Grew up in New Mexico and we had a lot of irrigation ditches there. Would fish on the San Juan river near an area that was head of a ditch.
Hiking back to the truck I took a ‘last cast’ in to the ditch. Bam, hit a good sized trout.
The next week same thing. Missed it the next weekend but got one on the forth. I never maxed out in my life with any game. So I always left the river with room on my string. I never failed to take a last cast... and every now and then took a fish on it.
Only other guys have silly superstitions.
 
Grew up in New Mexico and we had a lot of irrigation ditches there. Would fish on the San Juan river near an area that was head of a ditch.
Hiking back to the truck I took a ‘last cast’ in to the ditch. Bam, hit a good sized trout.
The next week same thing. Missed it the next weekend but got one on the forth. I never maxed out in my life with any game. So I always left the river with room on my string. I never failed to take a last cast... and every now and then took a fish on it.
Only other guys have silly superstitions.

Every time I go fishing, I take a last cast. It's almost always on the last cast. :ghostly:
 
Are drop tubes HC/PC?

Not as much so as a piece of wood with a hole in it I bet.... just sayin’.
 
I read about them in a book about ml published in the 1950s.
I might venture 1890s long range benchrest shooting was kicking off as a big sport.
The Creedmore long range (1010 yards) matches were "big deal" as early as the 1870's and 1880's. Long Range shooting matches were a "big sport" long before the 1890's
(admittedly bench rests were not as common or as popular as some of the more ... ummm ... "contorted" ... shooting positions used in the early years.)
 
Both steel and copper conduct electricity so static can't build up.
Static can and does build up in steel.
Powder Flasks and measures are made of brass and copper (and I suppose if you're rich enough Sterling Silver or Gold) all of which conduct electricity, or some plastic that does not conduct electricity. (some flasks are made of leather, and some measures from horn/antler or bone, which are also non-conductive)
Powder flasks and measures are NOT made of carbon steel or "stainless" steel, which can (and do) spark, given the right (or perhaps "wrong"?) circumstances or conditions.

Whether or not something conducts electricity or not, is irrelevant when it comes to suitability for use around gun powder. Both are used.
What matters is whether it holds that static charge and sparks when/if it comes into contact with an electrical ground. On your a firearm or "gun" the barrel has more mass and acts as an electrical ground to the powder measure.
A steel powder measure coming into contact with the barrel can and will spark when you start to pour the powder down tbe bore, resulting in a "not nice" and "unpleasant" experiance.

Come to think of it, not so long ago, black powder came in tin or steel 1 pound containers. Today, it only comes in non-conductive plastic containers, so far as I can find.
 
Last edited:
The Creedmore long range (1010 yards) matches were "big deal" as early as the 1870's and 1880's. Long Range shooting matches were a "big sport" long before the 1890's
(admittedly bench rests were not as common or as popular as some of the more ... ummm ... "contorted" ... shooting positions used in the early years.)
We know of big international matches at two and three hundred yards from early sixteenth century.
I think creedmoore matches were with breechloaders and off hand. I think it was the 1890s that saw the rebirth of the big ml bench guns fitted with the false muzzles sand built in sprite levels and such. It may have been earlier, but I’m thinking it became a thing in the 90s
 
Back
Top