Which load makes sense?

[hanshi]

My .62 smoothbore shoots well with patched and bare ball loads. At the range today I was very short on ammo and only had 12 rounds. First I loaded a .606" WW ball like this: 100 grains of 2F, a card wad, a lubed 1/2" fiber wad/ball/card wad seated as one unit. Three shot groups at 50 yards gave 2-1/2" about 4" low; this is how I always load bare ball. Next I fired a three shot group with a .600" lead ball loaded like this: 70 grains of 3F, op wad and the ball patched with a thin - .010" to .012" lubed patch. Three shots at 50 yards grouped just over 1-3/4". This load, however, grouped nearly a foot to the left.

Now looking for opinions. The bare ball load is fine as is and can be adjusted with a light filing on the front sight if needed. The patched load would have to have the rear sight moved quite a ways over to bring it on target. What do the forum say?

 

[nhmoose]

I would file the front site a bit and go with the first load or try a little less powder and see where that goes.

Bare ball is easier to load and cheaper/

 

[Maven]

I, or rather my 20ga. trade gun favor the patched RB, but your grouping with the bare RB can't be denied: go with the bare ball and hold a tad higher. That way you don't have to alter the front sight.

 

[The Baron]

IMHO, the difference between 2 1/2" group and 1 3/4" is negligible and could reverse from day to day. I'd say shoot the bare ball load and just hold a bit of front sight out of the notch to get up on centre. Might be that you get the "look" of the correct sight picture into your subconscious and all is well. Certainly, I'd be hesitant to adjust your rear sight for a PRB load until trying some other combinations 'cuz if the bare ball flies true for windage, there must be a patches load that does the same.

 

[Artificer]

Honestly, I would want to try the different loads at least twice more to see if your results are repeatable and uniform. I would suggest keeping the results, if not the targets, from this round of shooting and writing down the next couple of times you try it again.

However, if those results do show uniformity and your primary use of the gun is deer hunting, I would go with the load that shot low, but was well centered.

Gus

 

[Keb]

I would suggest not using wheel weights when shooting clanger targets. They will bounce back and possibly hit someone. The wheel weights are too hard to splatter like pure soft lead. I've seen it happen before and usually the shooter tries to blame the target but in reality they are using round balls made with wheel weights. So, if you are using it, please advise me if I'm around. I don't want to lose an eye or some other injury.

 

[Rifleman1776]

Both results are excellent. I would not change sights until you have done much more shooting. Wheel weights are not made of predictable substances anymore. With them you really do not know what you are shooting. If pure lead is available just use that. That said, I was give an bunch of mystery metal which I melted down and cast into .590" round balls for my smoothie. They are considerably lighter than lead and I expect results will differ also. Showing to others, consensus is the metal is zinc. When my recovery from surgery is more complete I'll be shooting again and will find out how they perform.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

Hanshi,

It sounds to me that the patched ball loads were a tad more consistent, BUT also that you hold your smooth bore at an angle when loading with the patched ball, and so the ball was also consistently to one side of the barrel when fired.

The unpached ball, being loose when accelerated..., was forced toward the center of the wad combination, though it was less consistent when being forced, than the patched ball, hence being closer to your sights AND having a slightly larger group at 50 yards.

So the short term suggestion I'd say is go with the load the fits your sights with only a slight adjustment of elevation.

Keb wrote:
I would suggest not using wheel weights when shooting clanger targets. They will bounce back and possibly hit someone. The wheel weights are too hard to splatter like pure soft lead. I've seen it happen before and usually the shooter tries to blame the target but in reality they are using round balls made with wheel weights. So, if you are using it, please advise me if I'm around. I don't want to lose an eye or some other injury.

That's odd. I've literally shot thousands of rounds of lead alloy of various hardness, including lots made directly from wheel weights, as bullets from a .45 acp, and a .38 Super, from subsonic to supersonic and faster, and they all splattered quite well upon impact with steel silhouettes, clangers, and pepper popper metal targets. Never had any of the lead alloy ones bounce back, nor ever seen another shooter's lead alloy bullets bounce back....I have seen copper bullets, copper jacketed lead bullets, and steel pellets bounce back. In fact the minimum safe distance for clanger type targets when shooting IPSC handgun matches is 7 meters (7.65 yards)..., The velocities and weights of the bullets are very similar to round balls from flintlocks....so I would've thought that 50 yards for Hanshi would be more than enough safety.

I wonder if it has something to do with the shape of the bullet?

LD

 

[hanshi]

Thank you all for the suggestions. At my range any metal target has to be set up at the 100 yard berm. And I, too, have shot WW & harder bullets at steel targets and had them spatter or get squashed paper thin. I do not shoot smoothbore at 100 yards.

I certainly intend to shoot some more and try different powder charges; I want to test these loads thoroughly. I have plenty of lead but the WW ball is a bit larger and, I believe, it helps the groups; my .62 is rather tight in the bore. The WW I have are from the 1960s when I use to cast pistol bullets so their quality is a known. I actually don't like to cast but I'm out of .62 ammo. I've got to make myself get to the basement and cast some more. Also, I'm short of 2F and only have a pound or less. I do intend to try for the same bare ball results using 3F, of which I have a good supply. So it may be a while before I have more results to post.

 

[nhmoose]

Hanshi,

It sounds to me that the patched ball loads were a tad more consistent, BUT also that you hold your smooth bore at an angle when loading with the patched ball, and so the ball was also consistently to one side of the barrel when fired.

The unpached ball, being loose when accelerated..., was forced toward the center of the wad combination, though it was less consistent when being forced, than the patched ball, hence being closer to your sights AND having a slightly larger group at 50 yards.

So the short term suggestion I'd say is go with the load the fits your sights with only a slight adjustment of elevation.

Keb wrote:
I would suggest not using wheel weights when shooting clanger targets. They will bounce back and possibly hit someone. The wheel weights are too hard to splatter like pure soft lead. I've seen it happen before and usually the shooter tries to blame the target but in reality they are using round balls made with wheel weights. So, if you are using it, please advise me if I'm around. I don't want to lose an eye or some other injury.

That's odd. I've literally shot thousands of rounds of lead alloy of various hardness, including lots made directly from wheel weights, as bullets from a .45 acp, and a .38 Super, from subsonic to supersonic and faster, and they all splattered quite well upon impact with steel silhouettes, clangers, and pepper popper metal targets. Never had any of the lead alloy ones bounce back, nor ever seen another shooter's lead alloy bullets bounce back....I have seen copper bullets, copper jacketed lead bullets, and steel pellets bounce back. In fact the minimum safe distance for clanger type targets when shooting IPSC handgun matches is 7 meters (7.65 yards)..., The velocities and weights of the bullets are very similar to round balls from flintlocks....so I would've thought that 50 yards for Hanshi would be more than enough safety.

I wonder if it has something to do with the shape of the bullet?

LD

Huh?? I call, BULL. The patch is the same size at every point around the ball. Tipping the barrel will make no difference.

 

[Brokennock]

I would suggest not using wheel weights when shooting clanger targets. They will bounce back and possibly hit someone. The wheel weights are too hard to splatter like pure soft lead. I've seen it happen before and usually the shooter tries to blame the target but in reality they are using round balls made with wheel weights. So, if you are using it, please advise me if I'm around. I don't want to lose an eye or some other injury.

Who said anything about "clanger targets" ?????
Anything to offer about the o.p.'s actual question?

 

[smoothshooter]

I don't see how a wheel weight bullet, or any lead alloy could ever bounce back off of an uncratered steel target toward the firing line unless the shooter was using " mouse fart " loads as are common in cowboy action shooting.
I have fired literally tens of thousands of rounds at steel targets from as close as three feet to as far as several hundred yards, and have never known one to rebound UNLESS THE TARGET HAD BEEN CRATERED FROM PREVIOUS HITS FROM BULLETS AND VELOCITIES THAT THE STEEL WAS NOT RATED FOR.

In which case any bullet of any hardness hitting a crater or the edge of a crater will turn or squirt back fragments toward the firing line.

 

[smoothshooter]

Cratered steel targets are almost always the cause of rebounding fragments.

About the only exception I can think of is when some of the splatter that is directed down and / or up and hits a base plate, or some other target support on a poorly designed target system, and is redirected AGAIN in yet another direction, unfortunately sometimes toward the shooter.

 

[Ray-Vigo]

Shooting the ball bare brings the bore-ball fit into play more. My experience is that the patch tends to mitigate some of the bore-ball fit issues.

If you can get a good fitting bare ball load, my experience is that there is not a great amount of accuracy loss at reasonable distances.

I have a 24 gauge smooth bore that I've experimented with using different loads. The bore is right around .58 with calipers. I tried three loads:

(1) .562 with a .010 patch
(2) .562 bare with an overpowder wad and over ball card
(3) .575 bare with an overpowder wad and over ball card

(1) and (3) were the best. What I noticed was that the patched .562 raised the point of impact, but did not really shrink the group size. This was especially true at 50 yards and under. At over 50 yards, the patched grouping was only marginally smaller, not enough to matter. The patched ball point of impact was somewhat higher, but the .575 bare ball load really was comparable still. Both loads got tight with fouling present. Wiping every 2d or 3d shot was the best way of addressing loading tightness.

Load (2) was poor. The bore fouled excessively. Point of impact was lower and grouping was larger, even at 25-50 yards.

My opinion is that a bare ball load, accompanied by an overpowder plug or wad could be a good choice, provided the bore-ball fit is reasonably good. In my .58 bore, the .575 ball was good. The beauty was that the .575 mold was easy to get because .58 is also a common rifle size.

 

[hanshi]

In the unpatched load I use a lubed 1/2" cushion wad which is a tight fit. The bore id is, as best as I can measure, about .610". This means the cushion wad is larger than the bore and wipes the bore clean with each loading. The WW ball is only .004"-.005" undersize.

 

[Ray-Vigo]

That's very similar to load (3) I tried, which I really like. I've had that one shoot 3 balls through one hole at 25 yards, and hold a good group at 50 yards. I like that combo and would not be afraid of sticking with it.

 

[ptaska]

Hanshi, sorry for being late to this party. The loading method you describe is exactly what I do as well. My fowler likes 70 gr of FF, which is convenient because that equals 100 shots per pound of powder (Graf/Wano @ $14.99/lb. + fees) and a .610 ball. I soak my fiber wads in Crisco so that keeps all the fowling nice and soft. That said, some days I hit and some days I don't, so it's me and not the firelock that needs adjusting. I wouldn't change a thing in your loading method or your firelock.

 

[hanshi]

Longeye, with my smoothbore being .610" or just slightly over that the largest ball I can cast is a WW ball that measures about .606". I'd like to get a .610" mold and have thought of ordering one from Jeff Tanner. I hate it that Lee doesn't make that size. I guess I'll keep using that size ball; it doesn't shoot half bad and is easily deer accurate beyond 50 yards at least a bit..