Smoothbores shooting round ball really high

[IanH]

Wow, well ... that assertion is not only wrong, and defines physics, but is total BS ...

EVERY barrel maker and/or firearm maker using such barrels bends their barrels .... muzzleloader barrels or not. Every custom maker of MZL barrels (I have a list of 8 names ... you?) bends their barrels. Bobby Hoyt may have to bend every barrel send to him; as in fact he just told me a few weeks ago that that the 1st thing that he does to EVERY barrel sent to him for work, before he works on it, it so check it for straightness and to bend it straight if needed.

Many of us are using any and all of the barrels as listed , so if there were an issue or this alleged 'hook' anomaly ... well we sure would have have heard about it and have been worried about it before now!

I've bent many a barrel, MZLs or modern, smoothbore or rifle. Now take my fully tapered round 75-cal custom 60" long smoothbore barrel (no rear sight) by Greg Christian. She was off @ 50-yards, shooting way low, and you can't file down a low front sight that is already very low, and there's no rear sight to adjust, so I bent the barrel. One cannot visually see the bend in this particular barrel, but the good bend is clearly there; I know, I bent it myself, with witnessed too. Now she's a tad low @ 25, dead nuts ON @ 50 and @ 100-yards, well there I really need to 'show more barrel' or hold high(er) on the targets. No left or right variation induced. And yet wth your alleged 'hook' hypothesis, she should have continued to climb well up and off the target high! But not so ...

In fact, NONE of the many barrels I've bent for me or others display any hook at all. Me thinks you've never actually bent a barrel on purpose, because if you have studied or are knowledgeable on exterior ballistics, it's impossible to induce such an effect. May I suggest you start with Dr. Mann and if you need to look that name up ... well then it's clear you have an opinion that has the 'hook' and defies scientific fact, LOL!

In exterior ballistics, i.e., once it has left the muzzle, for the projectile itself there is only yaw, pitch and roll (or spin), where a change in any of those 3 factors requires an external/other force to induce the change. Please re-read up on Newton's 1st Law of Physics. So please tell us ... what is that phantom force that none of us are aware of? Known external forces are of course, gravity and drag, where the gravitational force always acts vertically downward on the bullet, regardless of the bullet’s orientation relative to the vertical direction, and where aerodynamic drag always acts opposite to the bullet’s direction of travel through the air.

Other factors influencing the projectile's flight are the wind, i.e., causing drag, shooting up or down hill, the temperature of the propellent as it affects the combustion, affecting the velocity and perhaps the Coriolis Effect (spinning of the Earth) if shooting a far, far long distance away. Most small arms Ballistic Tables are factored on 4 of the 6 'degrees of freedom' of the trajectory analysis, lumping the effects of pitch, yaw and roll/spin into the effect of a yaw-of-repose to account for the trajectory. But note in the interest of science and full disclosure, that in long distance artillery shooting (i.e., shooting 20-miles away or more!), they factor in all 6 DoFs as a separate variable.

You spent a lot of time to ignore physics. F. W. Mann never published a test with a smoothbore rifle but did discover things we call "yaw precession" which, according your reference to Newton's laws, couldn't exist either. It would be a good service to attend your local driving range and inform all those there who are working to control their slice that they are wasting their time trying to correct something which does not exist.

Now, if you will discuss only the facts relevant to a BARE ball in a hooked, smoothbore barrel, then perhaps we can have an intelligent discussion, but I seriously doubt that because your mind is made up and you seem so hellbent to make me out a fool. I don't really care what you think, or about your many paragraphs of irrelevant, red herring evidence, but only about what actually happens when a round ball develops a spin from the side of a hooked barrel and the resulting aerodynamic forces cause the ball to travel downrange in an ever-increasing arc. Perhaps it is relevant to mention that the smoothbore that exhibited this phenomena for me had a bend in the last three inches of the barrel, and it went away when I straightened it.

 

[French Colonial]

You spent a lot of time to ignore physics. F. W. Mann never published a test with a smoothbore rifle but did discover things we call "yaw precession" which, according your reference to Newton's laws, couldn't exist either. It would be a good service to attend your local driving range and inform all those there who are working to control their slice that they are wasting their time trying to correct something which does not exist.

Now, if you will discuss only the facts relevant to a BARE ball in a hooked, smoothbore barrel, then perhaps we can have an intelligent discussion, but I seriously doubt that because your mind is made up and you seem so hellbent to make me out a fool. I don't really care what you think, or about your many paragraphs of irrelevant, red herring evidence, but only about what actually happens when a round ball develops a spin from the side of a hooked barrel and the resulting aerodynamic forces cause the ball to travel downrange in an ever-increasing arc. Perhaps it is relevant to mention that the smoothbore that exhibited this phenomena for me had a bend in the last three inches of the barrel, and it went away when I straightened it.

Comparing golf balls to ML round balls is a totally irrelevant analogy precisely because of the slice you mentioned.

The face of a golf club imparts spin to the ball and there absolutely NOTHING that imparts spin on a ML round ball as it goes down a smoothbore barrel, especially a patched one.

 

[R Ellis]

Dad was a competitive trap shooter back in the day. Vandalia was just right up the road. He had his dresser top filled with trophies. He did all that with a stock Winchester Model 12 that he picked up used. He just had a knack.

What I can tell you is that this same kind of discussion was going on with old trap shooters 60 years ago. The question of moving the sights or bending the barrel or moving your cheek weld has been thrown about like what y'all are doing endlessly at the clubhouse.

My best friend for 40 years was Bob. He was the gun editor for Gun Dog Magazine. I'd come to him with a problem like this and he'd chuckle and line out the possibilities.

But Cheese and Rice! Bending the barrel? Bob knew a guy who supposedly had an eye for it, and you could take your gun to him and he'd put it in a jig with two vertical posts and bend just the way you needed it. I never went that far.

BTW: That cheek weld idea has not been discussed, but it is how I fixed my problem with my Remington 1100 TB. When I got it, the stock was already kind of boogered. I used a belt sander and ground off the top until it fit my cheek perfectly, and shot it that way for about 20 years. Folks thought it looked funny, but I'd let them mount it and it felt like heaven.

Another thought: Stock shape and stock length are huge influencers. I have rifles set up for early season deer hunting and late season, because of the change in layers of clothing. Moving your cheek weld along a curved stock changes your sight picture.

Now I'm not saying taking a belt sander to the top of a muzzleloader is the way to go, but I would definately try adding or deleting a layer of clothing and seeing how that changes things.

YOU ARE SO RIGHT about the LOP I have a Browning sxs that did not have a recoil pad from the factory but I had a friend put one on it for me and the extra length makes it perfect for me I almost never miss Quail or Pheasant it makes a great bird gun

 

[IanH]

Comparing golf balls to ML round balls is a totally irrelevant analogy precisely because of the slice you mentioned.

The face of a golf club imparts spin to the ball and there absolutely NOTHING that imparts spin on a ML round ball as it goes down a smoothbore barrel, especially a patched one.

Is that so? How do you know? How did my 20-gauge send balls consistently in a group 6" left at 50 yards, two feet left at 75, and six feet at 100 and stop it's nonsense when I straightened the barrel?

 

[Kevin]

Best thread on smoothbore shooting, for me at least, right here.
Last week our club had a 30 yard bench shoot. Easy-peasy, I thought, and decided to use my .45 Verner style FL with the double triggers! It was a sunny day and for some reason I just could not sight it well or hit well with this rifle, the same one that I used last May (and tied first honors) at our woods walk. I don’t know if it was the lighting or my horrible cataracts (November 2nd I’m seeing the surgeon!), or a combination of all that with growing self- frustration. I was not having fun!
So, what did I do?
I withdrew from the competition roster and put my flintlock rifle and rig back in the car. I took out my .62 smoothbore Fusil de Chasse, and started having fun! I was hitting much better and became more relaxed. It turned out to be one helluva fun day, and my unofficial score was not that bad, actually.
Today I plan on really working on perfecting my aim with it. I am strangely growing more attracted to using it. Seems my vision and satisfaction are leading me into a growing smoothbore shooting interest.

I hear you brother, I do spend a whole lot more time with my smoothbores shooting round balls than I do with my rifles.
Offhand, I think I do better without the rear sight.

 

[French Colonial]

Is that so? How do you know? How did my 20-gauge send balls consistently in a group 6" left at 50 yards, two feet left at 75, and six feet at 100 and stop it's nonsense when I straightened the barrel?

Let us examine your theory, which if I understand it says friction on one side of the ball causes the ball to rotate on it's horizontal axis.

Assuming a patched round obviously the ball can not rotate inside of the patch while the patch is stationary.

Then we must assume the patch, which is a flat piece of material that is formed into a cup spins horizontally but the opening passes by the side of the barrel and then the patch inserts itself between the barrel and the ball again and it does this several times without losing the patch. Sorry impractical scenario.

"How did my 20-gauge send balls consistently in a group 6" left at 50 yards, two feet left at 75, and six feet at 100"

A rifle will do the same thing if the sights are misaligned with the bore, by straightening the barrel you aligned the bore with the sights.

"How do you know?"

I am an old guy, I know things

 

[smo]

Correct, the ball is not curving, it’s simply following the line of trajectory. The only curve would be from gravitational pull..
Bring the barrel back too where the ball hits your mark at the given distance..problem solved.

If spin made a ball curve would not all rifles shoot curve balls?

Again Rich was talking about shooting very small targets at various distances , so not just minute of deer accuracy..if I’m not mistaken.

 

[IanH]

Let us examine your theory, which if I understand it says friction on one side of the ball causes the ball to rotate on it's horizontal axis.

Assuming a patched round obviously the ball can not rotate inside of the patch while the patch is stationary.

Then we must assume the patch, which is a flat piece of material that is formed into a cup spins horizontally but the opening passes by the side of the barrel and then the patch inserts itself between the barrel and the ball again and it does this several times without losing the patch. Sorry impractical scenario.

"How did my 20-gauge send balls consistently in a group 6" left at 50 yards, two feet left at 75, and six feet at 100"

A rifle will do the same thing if the sights are misaligned with the bore, by straightening the barrel you aligned the bore with the sights.

"How do you know?"

I am an old guy, I know things

How many times do I have to tell you the ball WAS NOT PATCHED?
You keep bringing up the red herring of the patch to try and prove me wrong.

Next, a trajectory of 6" left at 50 yards, two feet at 75, and six feet at 100 is not linear. Plot it on a piece of paper, it is a parabolic curve, not a straight line.

Also, it is not THEORY, it is DIRECT OBSERVATION. It actually happened, repeatedly.

 

[French Colonial]

How many times do I have to tell you the ball WAS NOT PATCHED?
You keep bringing up the red herring of the patch to try and prove me wrong.

Next, a trajectory of 6" left at 50 yards, two feet at 75, and six feet at 100 is not linear. Plot it on a piece of paper, it is a parabolic curve, not a straight line.

Also, it is not THEORY, it is DIRECT OBSERVATION. It actually happened, repeatedly.

So your theory then is that the sidewalls of your smooth bore are so rough and the bore so crooked the ball is rubbing on only one side and that is spinning the ball and inducing horizontal rotation?

That sounds like a very rough bore on a very crooked barrel.

 

[IanH]

So your theory then is that the sidewalls of your smooth bore are so rough and the bore so crooked the ball is rubbing on only one side and that is spinning the ball and inducing horizontal rotation?

That sounds like a very rough bore on a very crooked barrel.

That is the theory part, yes. I don't have a better explanation. The bore was new and finished with a 320-grit ball hone and oiled 400-grit Scotch-Brite and was only bent enough to throw the ball six inches left at 50 yards, so I would not say it was either rough or severely bent. There were two bends, a general bow down and left, and and a more severe one mostly left and down some centered about 3" back from the muzzle. The location of the bend may have had mire effect on the ball's trajectory than anything, I don't know.

All I can tell you is the bent barrel made the ball trajectory hook and straightening the barrel fixed it. I have had a couple of other examples but not nearly so severe, and haven't seen one yet with an upward bend to observe the trajectory.

 

[rich pierce]

It’s interesting how off-topic parts of a thread become the main thing being discussed. It would be better off split and given a new title.

I solved my problem without bending the barrel, which was straight.

 

[Britsmoothy]

For the guys arguing over a ball following horizontal curve induced other than by wind.
Don't forget a round ball, bare, may indeed acquire a very slow rotation just via increased contact on one side only of the barrel.
Although very slight and totally random the element that will act on this condition is the compressed air on the front of the ball as it travels through the atmosphere.
Very similar to how long range rifle shooters will see slightly less drop from a bullet with a right-hand spin and a wind acting on the right side of the bullet.
The bullet via the grooves cut onto it in essence climbs up on the forced air from the wind. In tiny values I must add!

We must not direguard the influence of the compressed air Infront of our non gyroscopically stabilized ball in other words. It is this that can induce a parabolic curve other than by gravity or a side wind.

 

[BadDaditood]

Great thread Rich Pierce!
I’m going to sell my golf clubs and take up barrel bending- it’s GOT to be less frustrating!!

 

[Rob M.]

It’s interesting how off-topic parts of a thread become the main thing being discussed. It would be better off split and given a new title.

I solved my problem without bending the barrel, which was straight.

Very cool ! Was wonderin

 

[nhmoose]

I would hold a little lower myself.

 

[bronko220002]

I never bent a barrel nor would I even know where to start but I have played with loads long enough to know that you might shoot lower at 25 yards if you increase your charge. Its worth a shot rather than trying to bend an otherwise good barrel.

 

[DixieTexian]

Tippmann makes a paintball barrel that is specifically bent to impart backspin to a paintball, which creates a sort of floating effect and extends it's range. If held sideways, the paintball will hook because the spin is now a side spin instead of a backspin. I don't see how it is a stretch to believe the same thing could happen in a muzzleloader, particularly after the first shot or two when the bore becomes fouled. Now, I would assume that it would need to be a pretty bad bend to have that effect, but it is no stretch.