Flintlock Muzzleloader Ball and Patch question

[Rockrivr1]

At a local gun show I picked up an old Traditions 50 cal Shenandoah flintlock for pretty much dirt cheap money. In talking with the guy he said his best load was with 65 gr of 3F using a .490 50 cal ball and a lubed .010 patch.

I easily found 50 Cal balls with a .490 diameter. My question though is with the patches. They list the caliber size and have a range. Basically they state the following

.010 for .40 to .49 caliber
.010 for .50 to .59 caliber

For my rifle using a 50 cal ball with a .490 diameter, do I use the .40 to .49 caliber patch because of the .490 diameter ball or do I use the .50 to .59 caliber patch because I'm shooting a 50 caliber ball?

I know this is probably a stupid question, but this is my first muzzleloader and I'm starting from scratch here. Due to accuracy reasons I'm figuring a patch to big or two small will give me problems.

Thanks for the help!

 

[nchawkeye]

Use the .50 to .59...Or better yet, go to WalMart and buy a yard of pillow ticking...

If you buy store bought patches I would start with a .015 patch, .010 usually burns through, even though he told you .010 was better, I doubt it...

 

[djnye]

go with the larger size since you want to be sure and have the ball covered all the way around the bore. it is win-win with the larger patch.

welcome to flintlocks. use the folks on this forum for guidance and you might just still be doing this decades from now.

take care, daniel

 

[paulvallandigham]

YOu are probably going to find that the .010" thick patches are too thin for that rifle, and will either tear, or burn in the barrel. I recommend using a .490 ball and patching that is at least .015" thick. Use a good lube, like Wonderlube, or Hoppes' Black solve and lube. Or just use saliva to dampen the patching.

I think you are far better off using strips of patching fabric you buy locally, and cut off at the barrel after seating the ball in the muzzle with your short starter. It takes time to learn how to center a ball in a precut patch, and you will make mistakes.( We all do, and did.) :hmm:

By all means, if you are going to buy precut patches, by the larger sizes. The extra material is not going to interfere or effect the flight of your ball in the least. It becomes an " Air brake", when the ball and patch leave the muzzle, separating the patch from the ball quicker, than a smaller patch will.

Do measure the bore of that new to you gun with a caliper, to determine its Actual bore and groove dimensions. The depth of the grooves gives you an idea how thick a patch is needed. The land to land( bore) diameter tells you what diameter ball is likely to work best. :thumbsup:

 

[Otter]

Not to contradict what Paul has said (see second paragraph), but I use 50 gr Goex 3f, .490 RB and spit lubed .010 patch cut at the muzzle in my .50 cal ML's and don't have any burn through. Now, that .010 is measured with my dial calipers and I have a tendency to "crush" things pretty tight, so the real thickness may truly be .015 or there-abouts.

Paul, how should one measure the thickness of patch material to be accurate? I've often wondered but never asked. All I know is I don't trust the thicknesses printed on the bags of pre-cut patches, never have . . .

 

[Dphar]

.010" is likely going to be too thin. If so try some .015-.020" ticking or denim.

Dan

 

[Dphar]

I tend to moderately compress mine.
The problem is filling the grooves.
Deeply rifled barrels simply (I guess I should say generally) will not tolerate thin patches. Too much blowby in the grooves this will tend to eat patches. If you have shallow grooves this might not be a problem.
I would point out that most people shoot more than 1 gr per caliber too. I usually shoot near 1/2 ball weight to about 58 caliber.

Dan

 

[Len Graves]

Well just like you I am just into muzzle loaders (about 40 years. What I would do is start with your 65 gr and .10" patch. Shoot at a place you can retrieve your patches, and "read them" See if they are cut, burned through, or are frayed badly. Check your accuracy. Try thicker .15" patching, different loads Ten grain either way can make a difference, 2FF 0r 3fff. Every gun is a little different. We load them a little differently. In a word experiment, learn your gun. Most of all, and this is important, have fun doing it. Len

 

[paulvallandigham]

I don't trust the manufacturer on any measure products I buy. I just have found too many variations from purchase to purchase. I measure all patches as soon as I open a new bag. One of my motivations to go to fabric, and cutting patches at the muzzle again for my fowler is dues to the inability to get patching that is consistent in thickness. Why pay more for something that is not going to work well? I have some thin denim now, that is not working out at all, so I am looking to find something thicker.

 

[Rockrivr1]

Thanks everyone for the help. I'm going to order the both the .010 and .015 lubed patches and see which ones work best. Once I get more used to shooting this type of firearm I'll try making them myself. I'll go for the larger size as it doesn't seem to effect accuracy.

Another question. I'm using a brass powder measure and am wonder whether or not to tap it after I pour to settle the powder and then fill as necessary to get the charge I'm shooting for. Or do I not tap it to settle the powder because that way I'm actually increasing my powder charge even though it's only filled to the level I wanted?

 

[renovato]

I tap the measure. I figure it makes the measurement more consistant.

Also, if you find it hard to start your .490 ball .15 patch combo, you might consider going to a smaller ball size. It's usually better to go down in ball size than to go to a thinner patch. Tinkering with powder charge, ball and patch combinations, etc., is the best way to find what your gun likes the best. I'll reward you with good accuracy when you find the sweet spot.

 

[paulvallandigham]

Everyone pour powder into measures differently. The only way to learn what works best for you, is to ue a scale to weigh the charges at home, pouring several of them, and see what methodseems to throw the most consistent powder charge. Don't expect to throw a charge in a volume measure that will be exactly the same as what your scale reads. Because of the slow rate of burning of black powder, accuracy is not affected if your load is a grain or more off from the prior one, which is why volume measures are used in the field. At the range, you will find some shooters using pre-measured, and weighed charge transported to the range in individual tubes.

Eventually you will try some weighed charges. If you are shooting a PRB in your gun, you will find that it doesn't make that much difference in your groups sizes, particularly when you are shooting off-hand. Then you will return to using your volume measure and just shoot and have fun. :v :thumbsup:

 

[Stormrider51]

To tap or not to tap...that is the question. :hmm: If you have a powder scale try a little experiment. Pour and weigh several times without tapping. Record the results. Then pour, tap, add powder to bring the measure back to full, and weigh. Do this several times too and record the results. I think you will find that the difference in consistency of charge weight will be so small at to not count in the real world. Yes, the tapped charges will be heavier than the untapped ones by a small amount but both methods produce consistent charge weights. We are talking about black powder where the smallest increase or decrease in charge weights is usually at least 5 grains. A change of +/- 2 grains just won't be visible on the target unless you are shooting some sort of heavy benchrest rifle.

Using a consistent technique is more important than which technique you choose. This applies to more than the tap/no-tap question. Consistency is the key to accuracy. The amount of pressure you apply when seating the ball should always be as close to the same as you can make it as well. A patch cut at the muzzle will always be centered exactly on the ball and therefore be as consistent as possible. I never use pre-cut patches for that reason. Just keep in mind that with a muzzleloader every shot is a handload. It's great fun.

Storm

 

[redwing]

You will need a Mic. or caliper. I like the Mic. that can be adjusted to slip on contact with a surface. what every tool you use set the cloth between the jaws and adjust the tool to a point where it just holds the cloth.

You should be able to pull the cloth from the jaws
of your tool with just a light pull. The cloth can not be crushed to a point where you must stretch it to remove it from the tool. Practice on a known thickness if you don't know you tool.

I would agree with the other fellows a .010 may not be a good choice for your rock lock. The stated load of a .490 with .015 walmart pillow tick and 50 grs. of powder is a good place to start. The lube can be about what ever you like.

I would also check the bore for lead. Over the years I have found rifles fired with .010 patches to be leaded. I would use a good lead remover and brass brush. You may clean the rifle and run a patch down if it comes out black you may have lead.

Although, I don't use the bagged patches I doubt they are off enough to be a big problem. I don't think it matters if you cut at the muzzle or precut your own. For the .50 and .54 I use a precut 1 1/4" round patch. I cut round patches with a hole saw. The saw teeth are ground off, the edge is made very sharp with a stone in a Dremel tool. You use an electric drill with the cloth on
a soft board.

This works well with ticking or with teflon patches. And as has already been stated the real key is checking your fired patches. They should look good enough to use over. If they are cut or burned or have stretch holes come back to this forum and ask for help. Good luck with the Flinter the only way to go.

 

[Otter]

Paul,

Just for reference points, I went upstairs to my "man-perch" and weighed and measured some things. Here are the results :

The patch material I use measured at .014" when gently compressed in the jaws of my dial caliper. What I use is what is left of a 300 tpi Egyptian cotton bed sheet. I haven't used store bought patches since about '95, so had nothing to compare to.

I measured equal volumes of Goex BP, tapping the side of the measure until it did not settle any more, then struck off with the funnel, then weighed each:

Goex 1fg - 70 gr vol = 75.0 gr by weight
Goex 2fg - 70 gr vol = 77.3 gr by weight
Goex 3fg - 70 gr vol = 74.3 gr by weight
Goex 4fg - 70 gr vol = 74.3 gr by weight
Goex Ctg - 70 gr vol = 77.3 gr by weight

I was surprised that the 3f and 4f were both lighter per measured volume than the others, so I weighed several different charges and they were within .1 gr of my original weighing. For a personal note of reference, I use 70 gr by weight of Goex Ctg in my 45-70 BPCR loads.

FYI - the scale used is an RCBS 10-10 nalance beam scale.
- the volumetric powder measure is a 0-120 gr brass adjustable powder measure w/ funnel set to 70 gr.
- the dial caliper is a Mid-Way manual.

 

[paulvallandigham]

Otter: If you do the same tests a couple of years from now with a different lot of powders, you will probably find they differ a bit from these weights.

I have screened powders to get rid of fines, and clinkers, and that has seemed to help reduce SDV in my guns. I have weighed volume measures of powder, and had different measurements using two different powder measures. I don't expect that the scale on the measures will throw the same amount, but when the barrel of the two measures are the same, and I set the measures to throw the same amount by volume, I don't expect to see much of a variation in the powder charges thrown, when weighed. But they did. Go figure!!!! :hmm:

I have even gotten different measurments on fabric using first a good micrometer, and then a good caliper. Go figure. The variations are not wide, but enough to notice.

Remember that long hunters did not have machine made cloth to use for patching in their guns. They used leather from small animal hides they trapped or killed for food along the way, they used woven cloth, Homespun, leaves, wasp and hornets nest, and even tobacco leaves to provide a filler between the powder and ball. I am convinced that they fired bare balls when they could not patch them with any cloth or hide. I am also convinced from talking to some old timers, who grew up poor, that they re-used leather patching over again when ever they could find it, and it wasn't full of burn holes. Nobody had calipers, or micrometers, although they were invented in the 18th century, I believe, in the woods to measure cloth when it could be found and purchased. These men were HUNTERS, and were not relying on long range accuracy to feed themselves. Ranges longer than 100 yards came about as military officers looked for ways to advantage their troops. When rifling came in to popular use, and then conicals, long range accuracy began to be explored more fully. But it wasn't until the mid 19th century that we had the guns and loads to be shooting consistent small groups at long ranges, and the understanding of Rates of Twist as they affect bullet performance. `

 

[renovato]

Actually Storm, I had tried that and it's why I tap now. Without tapping, most of my charges were pretty close to the same, but now and then I'd get a light one. It would fill the measure, but it was lighter than the others. By tapping, my charges are closer in weight. I think it had more to do with how my spout threw powder than anything else, but it's a habit I've just kept over the years in my search for consistency.

 

[Bill Bryan]

Tap or no-tap - consistency is the real answer to accruacy. I use a powder measure at the range that fits right into the mouth of the can. I just turn it over and the powder magicly appears at the right level in my measure.

In the field I do what they tell you not to do and measure directly from a flask.

 

[Many Klatch]

When I measure fabric thickness I use an old micrometer, the hand has a slide on it and when I start to tighten it down the handle slides telling me that it is as tight as it needs to go. I find that if I can slide the fabric without too much tugging between the jaws of the micrometer that I am probably as accurate as I'm going to get.

Many Klatch

 

[Otter]

MK,

I did my "testing" on my fabric only because of all the folks saying "use .018 or .020" patching. I really don't care what thickness my patches are (and I have only measured them once before) as long as the ball goes where I want it to. I did try some pillow ticking that measured .020 (after being washed several times) and the only way I could get the RB down the bore was to literally use a hammer. Didn't shoot well either. I weighed the measured charges only due to curiosity. I believe the key to shooting ML's with RB is CONSISTENCY in measuring your powder, what balls you use and seating the ball with the same pressure each and every time. That puts the rest of the accuracy problem squarely on the "nut behind the butt."