.54 charge workup

French Colonial said:

I am still not sure why you think coning ruined that barrel, most guys would be tickled with cloverleafs at 50 yards. I hope your new barrel shoots as well.

Click to expand...

I can’t say it did for sure, Im just guessing. I love the accuracy with 55 grains but Im worried it isn’t quite enough power for elk hunting or longer shots on deer/black bear. I could be wrong though.

My friend bought one and of course it is a wonderful kit that makes me jealous. Looking at the bore, it has deep rifling so I would say a .535 ball and .020" patch is what is needed. .530 is for those button rifled TC's.
I shoot an H&H barrel Hawken I built long ago and 100 gr with the combo will touch shots at 50 yards. I once hit 4 out of 5 chickens (IHMSA targets) at 200 meters offhand by upping to 120 gr.
Deer never take a step after hit with it.

"Button rifled TCs"...LOL

Wrong, my .54 caliber barrel built by Ed Rayle in the '80s does quite well with a .530 ball and .018 pillow ticking ....

Rangefogger said:

suppose I should have stated that checked the patches yesterday when I went back to the range, no tear through, also tried various charges, and patch/ball combos again but still have the same result as last time. I just want to see if there’s a difference in accuracy with a barrel that hasn’t been coned. Plus I can always use my current barrel for a new from plank build, after I have it re bored and rifled if possible or I may choose to make it a smooth bore.

Click to expand...

I do not feel your barrel is the problem. The twist on the Woods runner is slow so it should need a larger charge to spin the ball up. I bet the ball is too small.

nchawkeye said:

"Button rifled TCs"...LOL

Wrong, my .54 caliber barrel built by Ed Rayle in the '80s does quite well with a .530 ball and .018 pillow ticking ....

Click to expand...

My friend caught the bug and has built up many now in .50 cal. He just keeps them on paper mostly until I made him get some .495 balls and I gave him .020" denim to try. He also swore by small balls until I showed him a few threads of patch I found. He was shooting .020" linen with a .490 ball.
I drove a ball in with my palm and pulled it out to show he was not touching the bottom of the grooves. I did find one patch after about 50 shots that showed burn throughs at each groove.
Years ago Dan Kindig would measure my bores and tell me the ball size to use. My .45's and he told me a .450 ball but a .445 is easier to start.
My original TC also took a .495 ball and would make a ragged hole at 50 but I parted with it because the stock fit was not made for a man.
I have been in this game for near 68 years and discussions with Bill Large were very informative too.
I have gone to extremes and tried .360, .450, .500 and .540 balls with luck but I can't hit the starter like I did back then. Too tough to get the gun loaded again when hunting.

Rangefogger said:

Yeah, I want to get more power for longer shots. Worth a try, I think.

Click to expand...

I'm just so certain that the barrel is not a problem. If you were nearby we could work it out.

I wouldn't do the elk with the 55 grains for sure. We have pretty much settled on 80 grains over the years as a minimum. Less would probably work but why push your luck?

May I ask what tool you used for coning?
I have coned a couple of barrels and had no effect on accuracy.
Logic does point to a patch problem but those are pretty thick patches. The are still worth examining.

I have ordered a .54 Woodsrunner and will likely cone it before shooting.

Rangefogger said:

Thanks for the help, I think the problem could possibly be that I coned the muzzle. I thought I’d give it a try, but for me it seems to have been detrimental to the accuracy. I can’t say that for sure because I coned it upon completing the rifle, but I don’t think I’ll ever try it again. Time to buy a replacement barrel.

Click to expand...

Get a gun smith to help you find the cause of your problem. If some way you messed up coning the barrel the gunsmith can cut the coned portion of the barrel off and install a front sight. This will not cost you very much.

LME said:

Get a gun smith to help you find the cause of your problem. If some way you messed up coning the barrel the gunsmith can cut the coned portion of the barrel off and install a front sight. This will not cost you very much.

Click to expand...

I must respectfully comment that you must have some fine and reasonable gunsmiths in your area.
I have been quoted over $300 dollars to merely thread a barrel.
it is unlikely that any gunsmith in the Dallas area would understand coning. If this was done then the stock would need shortening.

I must add that I have never heard of accuracy being affected by coming a barrel when using patched round ball.

Was The Joe Wood tool used for this?

Kmcmichael said:

I must respectfully comment that you must have some fine and reasonable gunsmiths in your area.
I have been quoted over $300 dollars to merely thread a barrel.
it is unlikely that any gunsmith in the Dallas area would understand coning. If this was done then the stock would need shortening.

I must add that I have never heard of accuracy being affected by coming a barrel when using patched round ball.

Was The Joe Wood tool used for this?

Click to expand...

No respectable gun smith would charge anyone $300.00 to thread a barrel.

Why not find the MAX amount of power your barrel can burn, then work backwards for accuracy.
Its called the Davenport Formula and is a sticky somewhere ere.
Wasting powder is a terrible thing to do.

Using that formula I figured what the max burn was (74.5gr) and worked backwards to 54.5gr to find the best grouping. 2033fps = 74.5gr 1666fps 54.5gr 42 inch barrel, 45 cal.

LME said:

No respectable gun smith would charge anyone $300.00 to thread a barrel.

Click to expand...

Totally agree!

Rangefogger said:

I have a .54 woodsrunner that I just finished up recently, and decided yesterday would be the day I’d take it to the range to work up a good accurate charge and sight in, I was able to get cloverleafs at 50 yards after trying many different powder charges and ball patch combos. I found the most accurate charge to be

55 grains 2F Swiss
.530 RB
.020 patch

I tried charges from 55 grains to 100 grains in 5 grain increments but nothing could come even close to the 55 grain charge, so I left it at that and sighted in at 50 and 100 yards (100 yd with shoulders of rear sight at base of the front sight).

It only gives me about 1300 FPS average according to my chronograph, which I’m wondering if it’s adequate for deer and possibly black bear or elk. Does anyone else use this low of a charge in their 54?

Click to expand...

Thanks. This will be good information for when I finish my own .54 cal. Woodsrunner.

This may be a little off topic but when I took the NRA Muzzleloader Instructor class (had to take the student course first) we had to keep five shots within the center of a 9” paper plate @ 25 yards. I’ve also done it at longer distances.

The cool thing about paper plates is they’re cheap (42 for $1.25 @ Dollar Tree). The best part is they’re the approximate size of the “Kill Zone” on an animal.

55 grains sound fine for hunting paper. I’d prefer something a little higher for critters. If you can keep five shots on a paper plate with 70, 80, or 100 grains at normal hunting distances, you’re good to go!

Just my two cents.

Walt

Kmcmichael said:

I must respectfully comment that you must have some fine and reasonable gunsmiths in your area.
I have been quoted over $300 dollars to merely thread a barrel.
it is unlikely that any gunsmith in the Dallas area would understand coning. If this was done then the stock would need shortening.

I must add that I have never heard of accuracy being affected by coming a barrel when using patched round ball.

Was The Joe Wood tool used for this?

Click to expand...

I guess I just don't charge enough? I enjoy working on weapons of all sorts but charging $300.00 to thread a barrel is outrageous even at todays prices. If I charged someone like that I wouldn;t be able to sleep at night.

If coning a barrel has affected the accuracy,,, it was not done properly. Coning, done right never adversely affects accuracy.

Snydly said:

If coning a barrel has affected the accuracy,,, it was not done properly. Coning, done right never adversely affects accuracy.

Click to expand...

Maybe so. I don’t want to trash anyone who believes in coning, or anything like that. It just doesn’t make sense to me that it couldn’t possibly effect accuracy… maybe I’ll do a test with each barrel once I get the new one and post results. Like I said, I could be totally wrong, just want to give it a try and see what happens.

Rangefogger said:

Maybe so. I don’t want to trash anyone who believes in coning, or anything like that. It just doesn’t make sense to me that it couldn’t possibly effect accuracy… maybe I’ll do a test with each barrel once I get the new one and post results. Like I said, I could be totally wrong, just want to give it a try and see what happens.

Click to expand...

Number one
You did not test the existing barrel before coning, if you thought it would affect accuracy why did you do it?

Number two
Comparing it to a different barrel will prove nothing, every barrel is different and no two shoot exactly the same even if they came off the rifling machine subsequently.

Kmcmichael said:

May I ask what tool you used for coning?
I have coned a couple of barrels and had no effect on accuracy.
Logic does point to a patch problem but those are pretty thick patches. The are still worth examining.

I have ordered a .54 Woodsrunner and will likely cone it before shooting.

Click to expand...

Coning any rifled barrel is specifically for the ease of loading, and not necessarily for any improvement or change to accuracy. If coned too deeply; meaning, you sanded down past the rifling and into the lands (as can happen at the muzzle with shallow rifling), you could alter the bullets pathway if the tooling is leaned harder to one side when turning. An easy thing to do if coning on a drill press. Be patient and do it by hand. I do all coning completely by hand, and only to a depth on the lands when a test load can be started by thumb. Enough down into the bore that the rod snuggly starts the load down. About 2-1/2". Go slow, and change to fresh sand paper if necessary.

Rifling lands are the guide for controlled flight. Groove corners within the bore are for the grip on the ball thru the patching. Remember the patching is to stop the gases from escaping in an untimely manner. Only sand enough off those grooves in the bore to do it's job.

French Colonial said:

Number one
You did not test the existing barrel before coning, if you thought it would affect accuracy why did you do it?

Number two
Comparing it to a different barrel will prove nothing, every barrel is different and no two shoot exactly the same even if they came off the rifling machine subsequently.

Click to expand...

Answer one
I had read everywhere that coning does not effect accuracy, after trying it, I am doubting that opinion, and want to see for myself.

Answer two
I’ll consider it enough proof for myself personally if there’s a noticeable difference. Whether you do or not doesn’t really make a big difference to me, you can still cone away to your heart’s content if that’s what you like.