I don't like to use a ball starter.

[rodwha]

I use a ramrod only. Start the ball with my thumb and glide the load home. I have had customers complain about accuracy, only to watch them load with a short starter. In experience the rifleing cuts the patch if too tight. A shot patch should have a star formation on it after being fired. A too tight patch will show a cut, ragged edge, actually being cut when loaded. The patch is only to produce a spin on exiting ball. My opinion only.

My patches weren’t cut after the barrel was broken in. They were initially though.

 

[bigted]

I have a Green Mountain barrel in 54 coming from track. Hoping that it will accept a .530 ball in thin enough patching to hand start and ram rod only loading.

My 62 smoothy has me ruined for using a short starter. .595 ball with .015 cotton patch. I use my Vasoline/bee wax lube rubbed into patch at loading. Thumb start and easy smooth run to the powder with the gun rod.

This will be my first Green Mountain barrel. Anxious to find what it likes.

 

[Carbon 6]

Another reason I like like using a ball starter is because, I can place the short nub over the sprue and use it to perfectly align it before seating. Not only does this align the sprue but it begins the reduction of the sprue and begins ball obturation into the rifling.
These are important things when performing squirrel brain surgery .

 

[smo]

I thought the sprue went down......

 

[Carbon 6]

I thought the sprue went down......

 

[Ben Meyer]

Agree 100%

Another reason I like like using a ball starter is because, I can place the short nub over the sprue and use it to perfectly align it before seating. Not only does this align the sprue but it begins the reduction of the sprue and begins ball obturation into the rifling.
These are important things when performing squirrel brain surgery .

 

[Tanglefoot]

It surprises me to see how many ML shooters are apparently more concerned with their convenience while loading than they are with the accuracy of their shooting. Sure, if you use a loose enough patch/ball combination it's easier to load. It's also less accurate, in my experience. The more "play" there is between the bullet and the bore, the more random gas release when firing and the more variation in shot placement at any range. Handloaders of modern ammo preach the removal (or avoidance) of as much variation as possible, to achieve consistency and establish as much control as possible. Guess what, boys and girls, muzzleloaders hand-load every shot and if we want the best accuracy we should try to eliminate as much variation as possible.
There's also a legitimate safety concern. It's been my observation and experience that loose fitting patch/ball combos have a nasty tendency to drift towards the muzzle during a hunt, especially in a smooth bore and especially if you carry your gun with the muzzle angled down.
And while I'm up on this stump, here's another two cents worth: If you load round ball with the sprue up, you can tell where that sprue is. If you load with the sprue down you really don't know if it's in line with the bore like you hope it is or off-center. If it's off-center, that will affect the flight of the ball and reduce your accuracy.
Of course, if you choose to load loose patch/ball combinations or load round ball with the sprue out of sight (or both!) you would be welcome to pay your entry fees and shoot in competition with most of the ML shooters I've ever met.

 

[tom7bike]

I would agree with Tanglefooot on this issue. If you are shooting for money the tightest ball patch combination you can get is the most accurate. However, if you just can't stand the pain of a short-starter then having the most fun is the way to go for you.

 

[Carbon 6]

It surprises me to see how many ML shooters are apparently more concerned with their convenience while loading than they are with the accuracy of their shooting. Sure, if you use a loose enough patch/ball combination it's easier to load. It's also less accurate,

There is a time and place for everything.

 

[springfield art]

I couldn't have said that better, myself.

I also think that the average 18th century (and even 19th century) rifleman did not have the luxury of choosing patching material of exact thicknesses. They certainly didn't go around a fabric store with a micrometer... I propose they used smaller balls with thicker patches. This gives you more leeway in patch material. Oh, you might not get the ridiculously tight patch and ball combo for the utmost in one hole MOA accuracy that people today absolutely demand, but you would more easily be able to get something that WORKED well enough. You used whatever fabric (or leather) that you could get.

Here's another thought; guns recovered in under water archeological searches in the Upper Peninsula area have been found with grass or straw as 'wadding'...I'm sure some modern guys will want to use it, too, just like the oldtimers! Also, wasp nest "paper", etc.

 

[tenngun]

I’ve shot fresh grass grabbed in the field more then once, tow, stripped yarn from old wool, wasp nest, birch bark, cedar tow, dog hair, balls of fools cap, hand laid wood pulp paper. Felt stuffing from old saddles was popular in the old days, but I’ve not found any and felt I’ve found had some modren fiber in it that burned into ugly plastic ball when lit, so I’ve never tried it in a gun.

 

[tenngun]

Just thinking out load here:
Ml are manure, let’s face it. Some are works of art, and the best that technology could turn out at the time.
The propellant is manure, inefficient at best. The projectile is manure. Lousy aerodynamics, fly like a brick.
Sights? What a joke. V and blade... horrible sight picture. Oh we brag and play our little games, slap each other on the back and smile but what do we got in the end. Any cheap .22 off the shelf with a scope will shoot as well maybe better.
We can alter our guns just a tiny bit and get better then Boone or Kenton ever got. We can change the sights, play with our loads.
Is our sport playing with old guns in an old way, or getting the best but still third class performance from an generally old style gun. Both are viable options.

 

[Ben Meyer]

I consider myself a pretty good shot, with anything. And modern guns, especially with scopes are more accurate than old school sidelocks. That's just a fact. Case in point: this past summer, we hosted a foreign exchange student from Germany. Most European teens have never shot ANY gun, so my son and I thought itd be cool to take them shooting. We spent a whole day, shooting everything we had, and they loved it. I was able to get 2 German 16yo kids hitting Coke cans at 100yds with my AR15 within 15 min....kids who had NEVER shot ANY gun before that day.

Could I, or you, do that( teach 1st timers in 15 min) to hit cans at 100yds with my flintlock longrifle? Probably not.

I'm much more impressed with one who can drive tacks with a PRB and a longrifle than with ANYTHING modern, including modern muzzleloaders. I put more science, care and thought into shooting tight groups with 400yo technology than with 40yo technology. Its EASY for me to hit a Coke can at 100yds with my 30-06. No challenge whatsoever. Now, with my flintlock with iron sights??? Different story. But that challenge is probably why most of us post here and love shooting BP.

Just thinking out load here:
Ml are manure, let’s face it. Some are works of art, and the best that technology could turn out at the time.
The propellant is manure, inefficient at best. The projectile is manure. Lousy aerodynamics, fly like a brick.
Sights? What a joke. V and blade... horrible sight picture. Oh we brag and play our little games, slap each other on the back and smile but what do we got in the end. Any cheap .22 off the shelf with a scope will shoot as well maybe better.
We can alter our guns just a tiny bit and get better then Boone or Kenton ever got. We can change the sights, play with our loads.
Is our sport playing with old guns in an old way, or getting the best but still third class performance from an generally old style gun. Both are viable options.

 

[Brokennock]

It surprises me to see how many ML shooters are apparently more concerned with their convenience while loading than they are with the accuracy of their shooting. Sure, if you use a loose enough patch/ball combination it's easier to load. It's also less accurate, in my experience. The more "play" there is between the bullet and the bore, the more random gas release when firing and the more variation in shot placement at any range. Handloaders of modern ammo preach the removal (or avoidance) of as much variation as possible, to achieve consistency and establish as much control as possible. Guess what, boys and girls, muzzleloaders hand-load every shot and if we want the best accuracy we should try to eliminate as much variation as possible.
There's also a legitimate safety concern. It's been my observation and experience that loose fitting patch/ball combos have a nasty tendency to drift towards the muzzle during a hunt, especially in a smooth bore and especially if you carry your gun with the muzzle angled down.
And while I'm up on this stump, here's another two cents worth: If you load round ball with the sprue up, you can tell where that sprue is. If you load with the sprue down you really don't know if it's in line with the bore like you hope it is or off-center. If it's off-center, that will affect the flight of the ball and reduce your accuracy.
Of course, if you choose to load loose patch/ball combinations or load round ball with the sprue out of sight (or both!) you would be welcome to pay your entry fees and shoot in competition with most of the ML shooters I've ever met.

That is a pretty bold statement to start off with. (I'm trying to be nice)
No one said the more convenient load is not accurate.
Well, the ones who use a starter seem to, but, they really don't know, cause they can't be bothered to take the time to work up a load that doesn't need another accessory.
A .610 ball will never shoot half inch groups, there is nothing wrong with a load that will put 5 balls that are already over half an inch into a group of just a few inches, offhand.
Your statement reminds me of the irresponsible and misleading comments and testimonies of anti-bowhunters making it sound like hitting a target with an arrow is pure luck. Those of us who don't use a starter aren't spraying roundballs all over the countryside, yanking the trigger with no idea where the ball will wind up, but that is the impression your statement gives.
Who are you to judge and preach about what some people are more or less worried about?

 

[Carbon 6]

And modern guns, especially with scopes are more accurate than old school sidelocks.

Hmm, I've put that to the test more than once and walked away the winner using a muzzleloader. But, I know the point you were trying to make.

 

[Carbon 6]

Could I, or you, do that( teach 1st timers in 15 min) to hit cans at 100yds with my flintlock longrifle? Probably not.

You have to use a muzzleloader within it's limitations. You wouldn't hand a bow to a child and expect them to shoot pop cans in 15 minutes would you ?
You can't ask more of your weapon than you or it are capable of.

 

[Sinner]

I recently decided to try my own test to draw my own conclusion. I can shoot my .45 with .440 balls and .010 patch as accurately as .440 ball and .018 patch. I've always used a short starter, and will still carry one, but will most likely switch to .010 patches and no starter once I use up the .018 and .015 patch material that I have.

 

[tenngun]

Hmm, I've put that to the test more than once and walked away the winner using a muzzleloader. But, I know the point you were trying to make.

There is a little range I shoot at and I see a lot of boy and a few girls shoot some sort of simi auto modern gun. Shooting at fifty yards they get shots on paper but for the most part my TFC shoots smaller groups.
But...
At least once a time down there some boy has something he knows how to shoot. And gets hundred yard targets on a par with my best at twenty five.
Routinely we can shoot better then suppository shooter.... until we meet one who is as big a nerd in his sport as we are in ours. The boys shooting M-1 in competition at two hundred yards to start are going to chuckle at us.

 

[Rich]

All of this is pure conjecture. Shoot what works best in your gun. I have some that like a "beat it in" patch and ball and some that just like a loose fit. There is no one best for everyone. Just one best for a particular gun.

 

[Kestrel]

You load yours, I'll load mine, and we'll step to the line. My gun will talk for herself and never tell you her secrets....