westrayer
32 Cal
I used to hang out at a shop where the owner was a big muzzleloader guy. He swore that recoil of smooth bore guns was less than rifled. Sounds like a story, but how about it?
-
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 -
Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.
We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.
Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103
Smooth bore recoil?
- Thread starter westrayer
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
Johnny Too-Tall
62 Cal.
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2012
- Messages
- 711
- Reaction score
- 732
Well - here is what I learned about recoil long ago. Felt recoil is different then generated recoil. For instance if using modern stuff you can say a 30/06 creates this much recoil pressure. What is doesn't take into account is the felt recoil. Felt recoil is determined by the weight and fit of the gun in relation to the shooter. A properly fit gun will generally have less felt recoil than a gun that does not fit properly. The same is true for weight the heavier the gun the less felt recoil. Here is where all the data is tossed out the window with an equal charge 2f (Commonly used in fowler/shotguns) will have less recoil and pressure than the same charge in 3f. Then you have to take into account is the smoothbore shooting shot or round ball. Obviously a round ball should have more felt recoil, especially if shooting through a choked barrel. A ton of variable come into play here that the shop owner did not discuss.
Last edited:
I’ve not noticed much difference with shot compared to ball, if anything I think shot a bit more, but my guns aren’t choked
Brokennock
Cannon
I've noticed a difference. With the rifle, if using similar ball and powder charges, having more felt recoil.
But, I've noticed far more effect on felt recoil difference in felt recoil being dictated by stock design and fit.
With the differences between felt recoil and generated recoil having already been pointed out, I would not be surprised if a rifled barrel shooting the same size ball with the same size powder charge developed more generated recoil than the smoothbore. Just based on the patch and ball having to go through the physics of traveling down the rifled barrel as opposed to just sliding down the smooth barrel.
Fwiw, in both my smoothbore flintlocks, and my unmentionable "smoothbores," my turkey loads "kick" a but more than my roundball loads.
But, I've noticed far more effect on felt recoil difference in felt recoil being dictated by stock design and fit.
With the differences between felt recoil and generated recoil having already been pointed out, I would not be surprised if a rifled barrel shooting the same size ball with the same size powder charge developed more generated recoil than the smoothbore. Just based on the patch and ball having to go through the physics of traveling down the rifled barrel as opposed to just sliding down the smooth barrel.
Fwiw, in both my smoothbore flintlocks, and my unmentionable "smoothbores," my turkey loads "kick" a but more than my roundball loads.
Those explanations make sense to me. I just wonder if anybody's ever actually measured it?
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2009
- Messages
- 233
- Reaction score
- 293
One thing to keep in mind, if you're comparing rifles to shotguns is that you usually drive those rifle balls and bullets a lot harder than a load of shot, but the shot loads are usually much heavier.
He's quite right ... and here's historical proof!
The 1st Wilson-designed Nock Volley Guns, as built by Henry Nock & Company, had (7) 50-cal rifled barrels. Historical writings and anecdotes abound about dislocated shoulders upon firing et al, so they changed them to be 50-cal smoothbores, which would also allow them to be reloaded faster, as well as it reduced the recoil.
Due to them being fired - and reloaded - way up in the crows nests on ships of sail, they then also changed to loose paper cartridge loads, noting that tightly patched or wadded loads also increased the recoil.
The 1st Wilson-designed Nock Volley Guns, as built by Henry Nock & Company, had (7) 50-cal rifled barrels. Historical writings and anecdotes abound about dislocated shoulders upon firing et al, so they changed them to be 50-cal smoothbores, which would also allow them to be reloaded faster, as well as it reduced the recoil.
Due to them being fired - and reloaded - way up in the crows nests on ships of sail, they then also changed to loose paper cartridge loads, noting that tightly patched or wadded loads also increased the recoil.
For me it depends on the caliber and what you put in them. My .72 smothie with a .700 ball and 100gr of 1F powder is a beast to shoot, load it down to 1 1/4 oz of shot and 70gr of 1F and it isn't bad at all.
rich pierce
70 Cal.
In general a small gauge smoothbore like a 20 gauge has a ball weight much less than the weight of shot used in the same gun. So if powder charges are comparable, the shot load will kick more.
I’m unaware of a reason why twist would increase recoil significantly. So a 20 bore smoothbore with round ball, will kick the same as a .62 rifled gun using same ball and powder charge.
Shot loads may appear to give less recoil because its point and shoot, standing on one’s hind legs. Not the same careful aiming and anticipation.
I’m unaware of a reason why twist would increase recoil significantly. So a 20 bore smoothbore with round ball, will kick the same as a .62 rifled gun using same ball and powder charge.
Shot loads may appear to give less recoil because its point and shoot, standing on one’s hind legs. Not the same careful aiming and anticipation.
Doesn't stock design, drop in particular, affect how much recoil you feel (other things being equal of course)?
Does it matter?
Shoot the RB with the same 70 grains and it should kick a bit less or the same as the 1 1/4 ounce of shot as the .700 rb is a bit less than the shot load.
Compared to .30 cal military cartridge rifles, BP ML rifled or smooth are both marshmallows.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm, you could be on to something ... as maybe I jumped the gun with my Nock Volley Gun info history and that from The Rifle Shoppe. (FWIW I also just talked to Jess from TRS yesterday, who has built a dozen NVGs, and he even expressly cautioned me against using any tightly patched or even tight wadded loads! He went so far as to recommended using only loose [in the bore] paper cartridge loads ... if I like my shoulder where it is, that is ...
There are two kinds of recoil, where 'Free Recoil' is based upon a mathematical formula. 'Felt Recoil' is that perceived recoil at your cheek and/or shoulder and while they are different, free recoil is directly related to felt recoil. Some Free Recoil calculators also include the weight of that fired (e.g., projectile or shot, wad, and powder) but given where we're assuming the same load, we can use the simple mathematic formula of Recoil Momentum = (Mass X Recoil Velocity).
Assuming an 8-pound Hawken or Longrifle versus a smoothrifle in 50-caliber, let's play with some numbers:
Rifle - 8 pounds x 1800 FPS (an 80grn load just tested yesterday via chronograph) = 14,400
Smooth Rifle - 8 pounds x 2000 FPS (Presumption here ... as faster muzzle velocity due to less resistance) = 16,000
So 'per the formula' ... a smoothie should have more Free Recoil. Whaddya think?
Now I have a 54-cal dbl-barreled SxS Cape Gun of rifled and smoothbore barrels ... looks like I need to add that one to my current BP powdah chronograph testing project, huh?
Ya, do that, it would be fun to see your chrono results.
I am with Britt on the topic but the engineer types really enjoy hashing these things out.
I think most of us have noticed when we shoot at game, we feel "0" recoil and only feel it on the bench.
I think most of us have noticed when we shoot at game, we feel "0" recoil and only feel it on the bench.
Weight of the gun should be a factor as well as the grain & type of powder & load being used..
My 9 lb .54 cal rifle with 70 grns of fffg & a prb vs My 6.5 lb smoothbore with 70 grns of fffg & 2 ounces of # 6’s…
You be the judge…
My 9 lb .54 cal rifle with 70 grns of fffg & a prb vs My 6.5 lb smoothbore with 70 grns of fffg & 2 ounces of # 6’s…
You be the judge…
WW Greener would only make 4 bore in smooth bore because of the recoil. Just for fun, try running these numbers through one of those recoil calculators. I believe he was using 20 dram powder charge for 1900 fps in the 4 bore.
I am only suggesting this as a SWAG. Wouldn't pushing a ball through a rifled barrel create more resistance, which would create more rearward force (recoil)? What about the shape and width of the usual smoothbore stock, don't they spread the felt recoil over a larger area compared to a rifle?
Bill, your comments about Greener and the four bores brings to mind Sir Samuel Baker and the rifle he had Gibbs build for him in 1840 taking 16 drams of powder and shooting a three-ounce hardened ball or a 4-ounce conical. The rifle weighed 21 pounds.
