.45

Discussion in 'General Muzzleloading' started by tenngun, Jan 4, 2020.

Help Support Muzzle Loading Forum by donating:

  1. Jan 4, 2020 #1

    tenngun

    tenngun

    tenngun

    Cannon

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    Messages:
    11,370
    Likes Received:
    1,731
    Location:
    Republic mo
    Just got a GR .45 barrel 7/8 x 42 1-66 twist. If’n you own this barrel where have you found your best loads. I expect to have it ready for smoke around 1 February
     
  2. Jan 8, 2020 #2

    Col. Batguano

    Col. Batguano

    Col. Batguano

    69 Cal.

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    3,675
    Likes Received:
    181
    That's a pretty slow twist for a 45. It will need stouter loads, and is a RB-only barrel. Is it square-bottom rifling or round bottom? Round bottom will be more finicky in coming up with the right load.
     
  3. Jan 8, 2020 #3

    Spence10

    Spence10

    Spence10

    Cannon

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2010
    Messages:
    7,429
    Likes Received:
    395
    Location:
    Kentucky
    I have a .40 with a Douglas barrel 13/16" x 42", 1/66 twist. It shoots very accurately with patched round ball using charges of 3F from 30 grains to 70 grains. I have checked it using 30, 35, 40, 55, 60, 65, 67 and 70 grains, no problem with any of them.

    Spence
     
  4. Jan 8, 2020 #4

    Pete G

    Pete G

    Pete G

    50 Cal.

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,491
    Likes Received:
    196
    Location:
    South Coast Mississippi
    I built a rifle with that exact barrel. I normally shoot 52 grains of FFF and a .445 ball for a target load. Shoots into one hole @25 yds.
     
    Tom Compton likes this.
  5. Jan 9, 2020 #5

    tenngun

    tenngun

    tenngun

    Cannon

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    Messages:
    11,370
    Likes Received:
    1,731
    Location:
    Republic mo
    Thanks all, just looking as starting area to play with. Been thirty years or more since I had a.45.
     
  6. Jan 10, 2020 #6

    cannonball1

    cannonball1

    cannonball1

    40 Cal.

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2014
    Messages:
    319
    Likes Received:
    32
    I made a 7 lb. Leman Trade rifle, 45 caliber, 13/16", "Green River barrel" with what I think was a 1-60" barrel several years ago for my son. Wouldn't shoot round balls worth a darn. That was very disappointing to me and the gun was put in the back of his gun cabinet. My wife drew to a premium muzzleloader deer hunt in Utah. I knew she couldn't hold up one of my 11 lb. Hawkens and a round ball was not enough weight in that 45 caliber Leman which wouldn't group anyway. So anyway my son, dusted off the cobwebs of the 45, we went to the range with a long conical bullet(which passed the bullet weight law required), and that ol' gun, drilled the center of the target shot after shot. Remember this, by all rights, is a round ball twist barrel. She practiced with that gun until the big day arrived and then shot a giant of a buck that made the prestigious "Muley Crazy" magazine.
     
    Blogman, Walkingeagle and poker like this.
  7. Jan 10, 2020 #7

    Loyalist Dave

    Loyalist Dave

    Loyalist Dave

    Cannon MLF Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2011
    Messages:
    8,723
    Likes Received:
    1,422
    Location:
    People's Republic of Maryland
    Part of our situation is that we have overlap from the time of hand rifled barrels, into the industrial age, and now into the 20th century when it comes to rifle barrels. So what you get are commonly applied "rules", which sometimes don't apply as are expected, but which were absolutes in previous centuries for coarser manufacturing methods.

    For instance the above quote and the results...., and add the fact that the CW Enfield "3 band 1853" rifles imported from England, were preferred by a lot of sharpshooters, who were using conical Minie ball bullets. Yet then, and in repros now, the twist rate is 1:78...which should not shoot the conical Minies well.

    Tenngun,
    If you don't have minimum powder requirements in your locality, then I'd start with the old grain-per-caliber method of finding a load, and go from there. So that's 45 grains of powder, and work upwards.

    LD
     
    tenngun likes this.
  8. Jan 10, 2020 #8

    Grenadier1758

    Grenadier1758

    Grenadier1758

    58 Cal.

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2004
    Messages:
    4,142
    Likes Received:
    930
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    I have seen in my 45 caliber 1 in 56" twist rifle that it prefers a charge of 65 to 70 grains of powder to begin to get tight groups. By the same token, I have come to observe that the tight twist / slow twist rules for patched round ball, conical bullets or minie' / Bruton bullets are old tales based on some individual experiences that just don't apply in all circumstances. Sometimes individual rifles have their own rules for accuracy.
     
    hanshi and tenngun like this.
  9. Jan 10, 2020 #9

    tenngun

    tenngun

    tenngun

    Cannon

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    Messages:
    11,370
    Likes Received:
    1,731
    Location:
    Republic mo
    I most likely will be plinking with this gun, maybe shoot a match or two. My smoothies are my huntin’guns.
    Of course as soon as I shoot a ball or two visions of venison may dance in my head:D
     
  10. Jan 14, 2020 #10

    Stophel

    Stophel

    Stophel

    75 Cal.

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    5,613
    Likes Received:
    247
    I'm interested in this too. I have a Rice .45 barrel coming to me, and it's listed at 1-66. From what I have been able to gather, this "slow" twist rate is good for any caliber for roundballs. Every gun barrel is different, of course, but it seems the faster the twist rate, the smaller (lower) the range of powder charges that will work well in it. I was actually concerned for a while, but now I'm fairly confident that 1-66" is the way to go. I guess I'll find out! :D
     
  11. Jan 14, 2020 #11

    Tom Compton

    Tom Compton

    Tom Compton

    54 Cal.

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2008
    Messages:
    1,697
    Likes Received:
    43
    Just my opinion, Discussing rates of twist in ML barrels is useless without including the depth of the rifling.

    Shooting PRB in barrels w faster rates of twist like 1/48 and shallow rifling, say .004-.005”, require somewhat lighter powder charges or tighter ball and patch combinations if using heavier charges. There is a small ring or band of contact between the PRB and the barrel. The ball is trying not to accelerate creating recoil. Similarly it is trying not to spin. Accelerating too quickly can cause the small contact area to skip or slip (kind of like floor boarding the accelerator on wet pavement) resulting shooting a “knuckleball” - no or too little stabilizing spin. The same rate of twist in deeper grooved barrels will extrude lead and patch material deeper into the grooves providing a wider band of contact therefore more traction.

    Years ago I used a .50 for target work. 1/66 twist didn’t shoot well until I got to 90 grains FFg. After some calculations I ordered a .50 barrel cut 1/56 w .012” rifling. It works great with 60 grains FFg at 25 and 50 yards then using 90 grains FFg at 100 yards w the same sight picture.

    Conicals require higher revolutions per second to stabilize because of their length therefore a faster twist but they have more and wider bands of contact with the barrel and work with the shallower grooves.

    Because FFFg produces higher pressures quicker, use with PRB especially in larger calibers (heavier ball weight compared to the area of barrel contact) and faster shallower rifling will strip the rifling at somewhat lower charges.

    Just my opinion.
    TC
     
    RiverRat likes this.
  12. Jan 14, 2020 #12

    Stophel

    Stophel

    Stophel

    75 Cal.

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    5,613
    Likes Received:
    247
    How many of us are really shooting these shallow groove rifle barrels? For the most part, unless you've got an Italian gun, or some rather odd old barrel, I'd say that "we" are generally shooting barrels with deeper grooves, both round and square.
     
  13. Jan 15, 2020 #13

    Loyalist Dave

    Loyalist Dave

    Loyalist Dave

    Cannon MLF Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2011
    Messages:
    8,723
    Likes Received:
    1,422
    Location:
    People's Republic of Maryland
    It wasn't just "shallow" grooves. It was also when the grooves were hand cut and thus the lands were much wider. Today for the most part the lands and grooves at the level of the grooves are equal width. In a hand cut barrel, often the cutter was thin compared to the lands, AND because of the cutter shaft often being wooden, a land was opposite of the groove.

    Here is a modern barrel with 8 equal lands and grooves compared to the antique 7-grooved barrel with lands 3x as wide as the grooves.
    MODERN VS OLD RIFLING.jpg

    LD
     
    Goose, RiverRat and Kansas Jake like this.
  14. Jan 15, 2020 #14

    bang

    bang

    bang

    45 Cal.

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2011
    Messages:
    838
    Likes Received:
    313
    Don't have a GR but do have a 1:66 Kentucky 50. 85gs fff is superb where as my Hawken 1:48 50 likes 75-80.
     
  15. Jan 15, 2020 #15

    tenngun

    tenngun

    tenngun

    Cannon

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    Messages:
    11,370
    Likes Received:
    1,731
    Location:
    Republic mo
    We know arrows were fleched before the start of civilization. However I read an explanation once on how rifeling was invented. Groves were cut to catch fouling. By putting a twist in in the groves groves got longer then the bore, collected more fouling... but whoops the gun shot better.
    I never bought that, but....
     
  16. Jan 15, 2020 #16

    Rodd Boyer

    Rodd Boyer

    Rodd Boyer

    36 Cl. MLF Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2018
    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    52
    Location:
    NW Missouri
    My GM barreled .45 was "broke in" by the builder with .440 balls, 70 gr fffg and .015 patching. He had good groups..... I use .445 balls, 70gr fffg and .015 patching.
    Screenshot_20200114-203740_Gallery.jpg
     
    Goose and tenngun like this.
  17. Jan 15, 2020 #17

    Loyalist Dave

    Loyalist Dave

    Loyalist Dave

    Cannon MLF Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2011
    Messages:
    8,723
    Likes Received:
    1,422
    Location:
    People's Republic of Maryland
    There is also the theory that grooved barrels were made for such. Somehow the twist was added later.

    The problem with the idea is it works for a smooth bore, but not for a gun that is swaging bullets onto the rifling or for a gun using a patched ball. In fact a gun with such grooves, twisted or not, that uses a swaged ball or patched ball has more problems with fouling then an identical smoothbore without grooves or rifling. The first rifles from what we know so far, swaged the bullet onto the rifling at the muzzle. Somebody figured out they wanted to impart a twist on the ball (imho) …, how they got the idea is indeed a mystery...well at least for now....

    You also have the loss of grooving of the barrels over time, IF that was done to reduce cleaning. It was not a common practice for smooth bore guns in the 18th century (Rifling is attributed to the area of present day Switzerland in the latter half of the 1500's) So if that was the reason then why stop except for a few examples?

    LD
     
    tenngun likes this.
  18. Jan 15, 2020 #18

    Tom Compton

    Tom Compton

    Tom Compton

    54 Cal.

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2008
    Messages:
    1,697
    Likes Received:
    43

    Thompson Center made a few “Roundball” barrels w 1/66 twist I don’t know the rate of twist. All the others were 1/48 twist.

    Many if not most today have Italian, Spanish or other non US made guns.

    Button rifled barrels are .004-.005” deep. Check Traditions and Pedersoli that have 1/48 rifling. I haven’t.

    US made barrels in smaller calibers like .32 and .36 MAY have button rifling.
     
  19. Jan 16, 2020 #19

    ugly old guy

    ugly old guy

    ugly old guy

    40 Cal

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2019
    Messages:
    276
    Likes Received:
    120
    They noticed when throwing a rock that when they put a bit of spin on it, it went father and was more likely to reach (and hit) the "person" (note quotes) or other critter they were throwing the rock at?
    Or maybe it was carry-over technology from archery?

    Intentional or no, fletching puts a spin on the arrow or crossbow bolt which makes that arrow or bolt more accurate past a couple feet or yards than a bare shaft …
    Who the "Einstein" was that figured that out … and how is a mystery …
    As is how that knowledge spread across oceans to every continent and culture on this rock that used the bow. (which is all of them.)
    Europe, Asia, India, and Africa I can understand. The Romans did extend their empire to all four. (Check your map(s) or Google Earth if you doubt me. The "Middle East" is on/in Africa.)

    But how it made it to the America's, Australia, the "West Indies"/Virgin Islands … OK, maybe the Vikings brought it to North America, and it spread west and south, at least as far as North, Central, and South America is concerned, … there is little to no doubt warfare (and to a lesser extent, trading) helped spread the "you need to fletch your arrows" fact/idea. The same probably holds true for rifling the bore of gun.
    Another mystery is how they figured out the best rate of twist.
     
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2020
  20. Jan 16, 2020 #20

    Loyalist Dave

    Loyalist Dave

    Loyalist Dave

    Cannon MLF Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2011
    Messages:
    8,723
    Likes Received:
    1,422
    Location:
    People's Republic of Maryland
    Not Australia....atlatl..., no fletching, and no bow. ;) Question is why not, and even without the bow, why no fletching on the projectiles... because other cultures with atlatl did fletch.

    And when you do fletch, the feather often has a natural twist...especially if you go with the longest feathers, so it may be intentional that the feathers stabilized the arrow, but that it had to twist in flight to be stable is NOT intuitive.

    Darts for example do not spin, and Medieval cross bow bolts often didn't either, and the bolts were often made similar to modern darts :confused:

    LD
     
    ugly old guy likes this.

Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page

Group Builder
arrow_white