T.C.Hawken Shooting High

[azmntman]

I'm not sure I'd base a theory entirely on three rounds fired. The first round will likely shoot low given the same charge, according to this posted here in 2008 and linked to by Herb, I believe.
http://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/fusionbb/showpost.php?post/640226/[/quote]

Just my personal experience.
I have 5 rifles, 3 of them are TC Hawkens, 1 is Investarms Hawkens, 1 is Lyman Great Plains. Calibers represented are 50,54,and 58. Not a single one of them fires over a foot low on the first shot. NONE of them are even 2" low at 75 meters on the first shot. I don't buy it. Quote every source on the internet you can find. After all, it's just like Farcebook, if it's posted it's true, right? Come out and shoot with me. Let's test your theory together. (Bring some money)

I have no dog in this one BUT.... I have two Invest Arms .54. Cabelas chrome lined hawkins. OK, BOTH have issues getting the ball up. Sites all the way raised, still shoots about 4" low (BOTH of them) at 90 yds. I will order new primitive sites before Dutch's system is used on these two. Ironically the two .58 (same gun, different caliber and same dang site) both have sufficient adjustment?

:idunno: I am learning slowly not to doubt every weird statement made :nono: I slammed a guy recently about not giving more info THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN AVAILABLE.. Come to find out it wasn't available, he just refused to say why he wouldn't provide the info??? :slap:

 

[Black Hand]

:idunno: I am learning slowly not to doubt every weird statement made :nono: I slammed a guy recently about not giving more info THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN AVAILABLE.. Come to find out it wasn't available, he just refused to say why he wouldn't provide the info??? :slap:

Yes - but you don't need to accept the weird statement as accurate. All this means is something has happened that wasn't accounted for or went unnoticed. It doesn't make the statement true or false, just inconsistent with what is known...

 

[Black Hand]

If we don't work from what we know/understand to what we don't know/don't understand, then we are guessing and back to "if it doesn't work, just use a bigger hammer...."

 

[Rifleman1776]

More powder = Lower POI

:hmm: Maybe in Montana but not the rest of the world.

 

[George]

It doesn't make the statement true or false, just inconsistent with what is known..

A big problem is that in the hobby there is a body of info that is "known", accepted as fact, strongly believed and passed down from graybeard to nimrod as gospel, but that isn't true. I think this idea that balls leave the muzzle on the rise so that slower balls hit higher, faster balls hit lower is one of those. There are half a dozen other beliefs that fall in this category, and they refuse to go away. Some of them have been held for nearly 300 years.

Spence

 

[Black Hand]

More powder = Lower POI

:hmm: Maybe in Montana but not the rest of the world.

Those aren't my words - were put forth by another poster which started us down this road (this was what I referred to when I stated bad information). My experience (which I communicated in this thread) is that increasing the powder charge raised my POI (nothing else was changed including sight picture).

 

[Black Hand]

I think this idea that balls leave the muzzle on the rise so that slower balls hit higher, faster balls hit lower is one of those.

This idea directly contradicts what we know about projectile ballistics. Some ideas are so deeply entrenched that no amount of evidence with change people's minds UNTIL they make the effort to find and understand the facts rather than accept the (potentially mistaken) statements of others.

"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please."

“It's not what you don't know that kills you, it's what you know for sure that ain't true.”
-Mark Twain

 

[Jimbo47]

So with all that has been said, who is telling the truth and who isn't? Anyone can call someone out as giving false information, and vise versa.
Maybe what it all boils down to, is go to the range and shoot, and shoot some more, and make up your own decision! :surrender:
Otherwise this thread is going to continue going down those rabbit holes for no telling how long. :idunno:

 

[Black Hand]

So with all that has been said, who is telling the truth and who isn't? Anyone can call someone out as giving false information, and vise versa.

It isn't a matter of True vs. False, it's a matter of facts. Projectile ballistics are facts - changing the charge behind a bullet changes the trajectory which changes the POI. People can be mistaken in their use/interpretation of the facts, but this doesn't change the facts themselves.

I agree that the OP should go shoot various charges before getting new sights to see what the different charges do to the POI.

 

[CheckSix]

So with all that has been said, who is telling the truth and who isn't? Anyone can call someone out as giving false information, and vise versa.

It isn't a matter of True vs. False, it's a matter of facts. Projectile ballistics are facts - changing the charge behind a bullet changes the trajectory which changes the POI. People can be mistaken in their use/interpretation of the facts, but this doesn't change the facts themselves.

I agree that the OP should go shoot various charges before getting new sights to see what the different charges do to the POI.

That's what I intend to do. I will report back what I find.
I started out about 4 inches high at 50 yards; a tighter ball/patch combination brought down to the top of the bead on the sight. Same powder charge, I don't know which had the higher velocity. If I go much tighter on the ball/patch, I'll need a hammer to load. I don't want that.
I don't claim to be an expert shot, but I have been successful with everything from .22's at 25 yards to 12 gauge slugs at 100 yards.
I never intended to start a firestorm.

 

[Black Hand]

I never intended to start a firestorm.

When you have a hobby with so many passionate people, it is inevitable that discussions will occur. They are all (mostly) a good faith attempt to answer the question or help the poster.

 

[azmntman]

:idunno: I am learning slowly not to doubt every weird statement made :nono: I slammed a guy recently about not giving more info THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN AVAILABLE.. Come to find out it wasn't available, he just refused to say why he wouldn't provide the info??? :slap:

Yes - but you don't need to accept the weird statement as accurate. All this means is something has happened that wasn't accounted for or went unnoticed. It doesn't make the statement true or false, just inconsistent with what is known...

agreed :thumbsup:

Now......whats the best patch lube to use when we go shoot for ourselves to see who's facts are facts and who's are fiction? :dead: op:

 

[George]

When you have a hobby with so many passionate people, it is inevitable that discussions will occur. They are all (mostly) a good faith attempt to answer the question or help the poster.

It's the way we exchange information and learn new things. I think we need more such discussions. If people would come to the table with the attitude of trying to contribute instead of always making it a king-of-the-hill contest we'd all come out smarter.

A cooperative effort to figure out what the facts are would be much, much better than a pissing contest to see who's facts are best. Facts don't belong to anyone.

Spence

 

[Gene L]

I think some clarification is in order. Taking into account that a rifle is zeroed in at a certain distance, say 100 yards. Or with whatever load that will zero the rifle. You can adjust the sights to achieve this.

At half that distance, the rifle will print high. Probably about four inches @50. At 25 yards, it will be likely about half that since the angle of the bullet is still rising through the line of sight . At 100, it will be zero, of course.

Less powder and a slower ball means you have to aim higher to lob the ball into the zero. Thus the ball will strike higher at 50, but lower on the target at 25 than it does at 50. It's going slower, so you have to aim higher. And you'll hit higher.

Of course a faster bullet will hit the target much faster and the parabola will be less, but it will still strike high at 50. Just not as high as a slower bullet because the arc of velocity on the slower bullet is greater.

This all depends on initially setting a 100 yard zero and maintaining that known zero. The higher bullet print v slower bullet is ONLY because you have to AIM higher. It's not because of some miracle of ballistics. If you shoot a rifle without sights and the bore level, it'll hit the ground pretty quickly, but that's not how we shoot rifles. We use sights which elevate the muzzle in order to hit a target.

I don't see these discussions as pissing contests. They should make you think.

 

[Black Hand]

If nothing else is changed (sight picture, angle, elevation, distance, aiming point) except for the increasing the powder charge, the POI will move up. Ballistics...

 

[Adui]

Gene, Black hand;

You do realize you are both basically saying the same thing from different angles of the equation right?

 

[Black Hand]

Yes - I was in full agreement until I saw:
The higher bullet print v slower bullet is ONLY because you have to AIM higher. It's not because of some miracle of ballistics.

This is why I stressed that nothing else changes except the powder charge...

 

[Gene L]

Gene, Black hand;

You do realize you are both basically saying the same thing from different angles of the equation right?

No, I didn't. I thought it was the same principal, but others didn't seem to recognize it. If I'm wrong, I apologize. There are a number of posts questioning my POV.

 

[Zonie]

While the rest of the crew are debating the merits of external ballistics and Newtons laws, can I ask a question?

Have you examined your rear sight closely?
If it is like mine, on the left side you will see several lines marked on the sight base.
If you adjusted it as low as it can go, the bottom of the adjustable blade should be at or just a little bit above the lowest line on the sight base.

If it is much higher than this, remove the height adjustment screw and swivel the adjustable blade up at the rear and forward.
Check out the rear screw that holds the sight onto the barrel. If it is loose and the screw head is sticking up above the inside of the base you've found part of the problem. Tighten that screw so its head is about flush with the inside of the sight base.

The next question is, what is to keep you from using a file to lower the height of the blade on your rear sight?

Yes, I know. If your sight is like mine, the rear blade is not square across the top but, there is no good reason it can't be made flat.
If you don't like the sharp edges where the top of the blade meets the sides of it you can easily file it to round it off.

According to my calculations, to lower the point of impact 4 inches at 50 yards, you need to file off .044 of an inch of material.

Doing that will lower the point of impact 4 inches, assuming your sights are like the ones on my Thompson Center Hawken. They are very close to 20 inches apart.

That .044 inches the rear blade needs to be lowered is about the same as the depth of the sighting notch in it.
Knowing this, you can use a small triangular file to increase the notch depth, leaving a little V in place of the existing square notch.
It will work just as well if it is a V.

Also, you might measure the height of your front sight.
Mine is .358 from the barrel flat to the top of the blade. That's about 1/64 of an inch less than 3/8 of an inch.

If it is much shorter than 3/8 of an inch, someone may have "adjusted it" for reasons unknown.
In any case, a replacement TC Hawken front sight should be easy to find on the net or, even right here on the MLF.

 

[George]

Less powder and a slower ball means you have to aim higher to lob the ball into the zero.

There is a basic misunderstanding here, I think. If you change the powder charge without changing the sights, the gun is no longer sighted in at 100 yards. Then, if you want to hit that same 100 yard target at the same spot, you will of course have to aim higher or lower.

Forget about hitting the same point on the target. Change the powder charge but still use the same sight picture to shoot at the target. If you increased the charge the ball will hit high. If you lowered the charge, the ball will hit low.

Spence