50 yard smoothbore is driving me up a wall

[jonk]

So, I have 3 smoothbores. 1816 H&P, 42, and a Potsdam. At 25 yards, I hit more than I miss, running in the 30-40 second mark. Maybe not a world breaker, but a solid performance. I can do that with any of the above. Load is 50 gr of 3f with a dipped ball, 'as cast' .678. Which is the perfect diameter for my 42, maybe my 16 could stand a .681. But point is, from a bench, either gun will shoot at least a 48 at 25 yards, and the Potsdam isn't far behind. Point being, I've done load development and am a decent shooter.

At 50 yards with a musket I can run a similar hit time unless I screw up, so I know I can hold a gun steady for that distance. But with the smoothbore, not just me but the team in general usually screws up.

So today I did some tests. I shot both my 16 and 42, 30 rounds each. All at 50 yards.
10 control shots using what I've been using, balls with sprues intact.
10 with sprues removed
10 with sprues removed and rasped.

For the 16, I didn't see a lick of difference with any of them.
For the 42, I might have gotten a slightly better result with the rasped balls than anything else... I hit 3 in a white tile paper cutout mounted on a cardboard backer. Hard to say, that's still not that great, but better than my usual 1-2/9, which is how many shots I usually get off in an event if we run full time.

Something is amiss. Not sure what the next logical step is; more powder? Different brand of powder? Using Goex right now, maybe trying it with Swiss will help.

So, whatcha all shooting at 50 yards?

FWIW, my whole team is suffering at 50... we'd often be in a medal run "if only we can hold it together for 50" just to blow it.

[Maillemaker]

In my 1842 Armisport I shoot a .678 round ball cast with wheel weight lead using 70 grains 3F Goex.

Ball has sprue removed with Mike Rouche cutter and is then rasped between two files. Then double-dipped in Lee Alox.

Here is the best bench grouping at 25 yards. I don't have a similar target for 50, but last skirmish I hit the backstop gong at about 120 yards. :)

http://imgur.com/gXY53YH

Steve

[jonk]

I'll try upping to 70 gr. I had tried 60 with little improvement.

[bobanderson]

I have an H&P that shoots knots at 50 yards. Having seen you on the line, I'd say it's your load. For what it's worth, here's my routine.

I start with hard cast balls that are a minimum of .012 under bore sized. I have a sample of a .678 barrel about 4" long I got from Bobby Hoyt that I use as a bore gauge when I rasp my balls. Ideal is just touching the gauge.
After rasping, I apply ONLY 3 drops of Lee liquid Alox to 15 balls and roll them in a bowl until it is spread evenly.
Now to powder. When I first started doing this, I tried 45 grains of Goex 3f, which shot well but in a long string I had to brush the bore so I could finish a 10 shot match in Virginia. Also, the Goex would develop a fouling ring about 8" down from the muzzle that made loading difficult. It happened with such regularity, I thought I had a bad spot in the barrel. Because of the fouling, I switched to Swiss, both 1 1/2 and 3f. That fouling ring I had with the Goex moved from close to the muzzle to about 2" above the chamber. I got more shots before it became hard to load, but still not a sighter and a 10 shot string.
Lastly, because I am also a Black Powder Cartridge Silhouette shooter, I tried a new powder Goex released to compete with the Swiss called Express. Express was advertised as hotter, shot cleaner and with much softer fouling. All of these claims I tested and can confirm are true. The current Goex Old Eynsford powder is the same formulation as Express...I've been told. Before you ask, Express was discontinued and I got the last that Back Creek had in stock. Nanner, nanner, nanner.
Anyway, I switched to a charge of 45 grains of Goex Express 3f. All of a sudden, that fouling ring disappeared. My first trip to the range, I shot 24 consecutive times without wiping or brushing. Accuracy was great and loading was not much more difficult than the first shot from a clean bore.
I have 2 smoothbores, the H&P and a 30" Macon that both have Hoyt .687 barrels and shoot the same load. The Macon doesn't group that well at 50 yet, but I think that's just a tweak away.
I know this is the kind of thread that will generate a ton of different responses. Since I know you're not afraid of spending time at the range trying new loads, I'd say try it and see how it goes.

[efritz]

Jonk,

Get a mould .0012-.0015 under bore size. Remove sprue (file, cutter, whatever) rasp with whatever. I use a wood rasp. I lube with Alox 1x by rolling them around in a cut down coffee can and let them dry for a day. Start with 60 gr. 3F GOEX. Bench at 50 yd. Go up and down 2 gr. increments until group enlarges. pick best group. If it shoots at 50y, it'll shoot at 25 yd. As impressive as Maillemakers group is, that 7 and 8 would kill the target at the Nationals.
The good shooters are shooting mid 90's at 25 and 50 yds. Use the H&P. I too had problems getting my SB to shoot 50 yds. until DSSA shooters helped me out here on the BB. I'm returning the favor.

Good luck
Eric Fritz
149PVI
DSSA
5-gun
G-A
SB
Car.
Musk.
Rev.
Repeater

[Michael Bodner]

Hmmm. Interesting information. I'm wondering out loud WHY clean burning powder (which prevents fouling) would work so much better than a standard-lubed ball which will also keep the fouling soft... In other words, if Crisco/Bees wax keeps fouling soft (so the bore diameter stays consistent) just as clean-burning powder with reduced fouling keeps the bore diameter constant, then why does an Alox-coated ball shoot better then a lubed ball?

Any ideas?

-Mike

[Maillemaker]

Hmmm. Interesting information. I'm wondering out loud WHY clean burning powder (which prevents fouling) would work so much better than a standard-lubed ball which will also keep the fouling soft... In other words, if Crisco/Bees wax keeps fouling soft (so the bore diameter stays consistent) just as clean-burning powder with reduced fouling keeps the bore diameter constant, then why does an Alox-coated ball shoot better then a lubed ball?

Well, you're looking at two different definitions of "better".

Better in terms of reduced fouling, and better in terms of accuracy.

I suspect that a slimy, gooey ball is going to give superior fouling resistance. Whether you can get good accuracy out of it would have to be determined.

My suspicion is that most of the people doing the rasping/Alox thing (as I am) are really adding a deformable, windage-eating barrier around the ball that makes for a tight fit down the bore, thus promoting accuracy.

The rasping displaces ridges of lead all over the surface of the ball, effectively increasing its diameter. But the ridges are tiny and so are also deformable (squishable) so they will rub away or bend over when loading in a fouled bore. The ridges also give a tooth for the Alox to grip to - without it the Alox tends to flake off when removing the balls from the rubber cartridge tubes. The Alox gives some measure of lubrication and is probably also acting as a windage-eating mechanism as you have a light gooey layer around the ball.

My balls fit so tightly that they act as an air-cushion when loading the ball - you have to be careful because when you let go of the ramrod it can be launched back up out of the tube by the compressed air pushing the ball back up. My gun is not the only one that does this - when I shot teammate Chuck Garvey's smoothbore he lent me before I got one, using his prepared ammo, I got the same effect, and that gun, and Chuck, could shoot.

However, I know there are people, like another teammate Rod Harbin, who has shot 14 for 14 and 18 for 18 including 4 hits at 50 yards, who use a deliberately under-sized balls.

As always, there is probably more than one way to achieve accuracy.

As I said above, I shoot rasped balls with Alox, with a relatively tight fit in the bore. Fouling has not been an issue for me in normal courses of fire, either in individuals nor team shooting. It is certainly noticeable, but not show-stopping, and I clean after every course of fire so I'm always starting out with a clean bore.

[Maillemaker]

Here was my complete load workup for my 1842:

http://imgur.com/a/9Mj21

Steve

[Michael Bodner]

Has anyone tried clean Swiss powder with tight balls? Way less than the 12 thou folks seem to use...

-Mike

[jonk]

I have some swiss 3f. It's not something I use regularly.

I know at least one of our team is using it in his cadet smoothbore 60 gr. He ain't doing any better than I am.

Still, it's something I do want to try.

As to the alox vs. naked vs. dip lubed debate... I rather think that that depends on the gun in question. My 42 will shoot alox great, my Potsdam is useless with it but shoots dipped balls very well, my 16 doesn't seem to care either way.

I have noticed that across the board, I seem to get better results with fairly hard lead. Maybe not smokeless rifle bullet hard, but hard-ish anyhow. Which is fine by me as I get it free and it's easier to cast with. I know other guys who swear that their smoothbore only shoots with soft lead, and I'd suspect that they are right; again, it's certainly a question as to working out what any given gun wants.

That said, you've given me a few areas to try. Heavier goex load, swiss powder of various charges, going back and playing with alox again with rasped balls and such...

[Carolina Reb]

I'd suggest another area to check. Is your barrel tang well bedded? Take off the bands and tighten the tang screw. Does the muzzle lift out of the stock? If it does, put some shims under the tang until you can tighten the tang screw and the muzzle stays down. I use 1/64 Finnish plywood, but anything solid will do. This will help accuracy problems in any musket, but it seems especially so with smoothbores.

[Michael T.]

I threaten to put mine under the rears tires on my motorhome--- I think it scares it straight...http://www.n-ssa.net/vbforum/images/smilies/icon_razz.gif

[jonk]

I'd suggest another area to check. Is your barrel tang well bedded? Take off the bands and tighten the tang screw. Does the muzzle lift out of the stock? If it does, put some shims under the tang until you can tighten the tang screw and the muzzle stays down. I use 1/64 Finnish plywood, but anything solid will do. This will help accuracy problems in any musket, but it seems especially so with smoothbores.

Good call. I checked this and found that it did indeed rise with the bands off as I re-tightened the tang screw. A thin piece of sheet tin cut to shape solved that issue.

[jonk]

As an update to this:

I tried the 70 gr load for the 50 yard event at a skirmish and went 0 for 8. Thinking it was useless, I was pretty disgusted.

I also talked to Mike Rouch and he suggested trying 55 gr with a cut, shaken ball.

I went back out to the range yesterday and tried 3 loads in my 42.

50 gr (my standard) dipped in musket lube, sprue removed. 3 of 5 hit the paper tile cutout from a bench... but just barely. It would have been 3 "Is it hit?" moments, all on the edge. The other 2 were about a foot away and I ascribe the hits to luck, figuring the group size was about 20" or so.

55 gr, sprue cut and shaken. Musket lube. Good group, just about 6" low and left of point of aim. If I had taken about a 2 o'clock hold, about half would have it.

Then I regarded the remainder of my 70 gr loads left from the skirmish that had gone 0 for 8 and figured, "ok, try them." Fortunately I had my high power jacket with the padded shoulder to try these, as from a bench it would be pretty painful otherwise.

Damned if they didn't chew up the target with the misses being very close. Holding dead on too. So, I have to put my misses at the skirmish down to me screwing up, or nerves about shooting such a snappy load and the anticipated recoil.

I want to re-run these experiments with alox, which I abandoned as it coked up in my potsdam a lot... but it works ok (at least for a relay) in my 42. I honestly don't think the lube matters THAT much but if it shrinks a group an inch, two of those misses with 70 gr would have hit.

[Maillemaker]

I would recommend that you not just "try a load" and give it a whirl, but instead do an actual load workup.

Make up at least 5, maybe even 10 cartridges in 5-grain increments from 50 grains to 75 grains and see what the groups tell you.

Now you may have gotten lucky and found "the" load with 70 grains, but I'd still do a full workup.

Steve

[jonk]

Well, usually I do that, yes. I certainly did it when I settled on 50 gr for 25 yards, and did so with my musket and carbine.

I figured I'd try the recommended ones first. But so far as it goes I have tried:

35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60, 70 grains... all that's left to try is 65 and 75. I always keep pics of the targets so I knew which loads I have tried.

Once I get it close I usually then start on one grain increments... so let's say 70 works good, I try like 68, 69, 70, 71, 72. That might be a bit much for smoothbore, but it made all the difference in musket... 45 and 50 were good, 48 tore the center out.

[Maillemaker]

Cool.

Steve

[efritz]

Jonk,

You're doing everything right. It just takes time, trial and error. It took me over 500 rounds to settle on a pure lead RB .0015 undersize. Remove the sprue and wood rasp. 1X Alox. 60 gr. 3F GOEX. All testing at 50yd. If it shoots at 50yds it'll shoot at 25yds. Tried 3F GOEX, Swiss, 2F GOEX, Swiss, 1 1/2 Swiss. Alox and my concoction. Smooth and rasped. Like you kept all the targets to compare. Some were revisited but did not repeat. All benched. Settled on the above. Next National went out and won SB agg. Shooting a H&P with a .687 Hoyt barrel. Had a string of 3 skirmishes in a row without a miss. Shot a 99 at one of them. These guns can shoot. Prediction --- eliminate 25yd. and insert 100 yds. They'll do it. I know. When you get yours zeroed in at 50, give it try one day at 100.

[jonk]

Went out again and gave it a try. Both 65 gr (which was one of the few I hadn't yet tried) and 70. Sprues removed, balls shaken, alox, thin coat.

Both were good, the 70 gr load was still the better of the 2. I got about half on a paper 6X6 cutout at 50, with the other half all within 2 inches of the target, and actually in a pretty fair group themselves, about 1-2" to the left. May be a case of the lighting today, may be the heavier load pulls left (or I was) but I'm satisfied that it's a load that should produce... IF I do.

We shall see a week from now at Centerburg. :)

Now to start dialing it in, and trying single grain 5 shot benched increments, since I'm in the ballpark.

I do think that it will be a case of a 25 and 50 yard being separate loads though. From a bench at 25, 50 grains doesn't miss. I miss when I'm shooting sometimes. Just doesn't seem to have the pep for the 50 yard event. Sure, I could shoot the stiffer load at both ranges, but that is both uncomfortable and wasteful of powder. And, while the gun seems to handle the fairly stiff load fine, and given the metal is in excellent shape, I'd rather not risk cracking the stock by battering it that hard over and over or something.

I do think too that I have seen an accuracy increase at both distances since I shimmed the tang. That was a good call.

[Maillemaker]

My Armisport 1842 shoots to the left also. I have to aim at the edge of the black at 25 and 50 yard targets at 3 o'clock.

Steve

[Eggman]

Since I went four for four on the 50 yd bathroom tiles last Deep South shindig I claim expertise on this subject. Efritz has it exactly right except 56 grains instead of 60.
As a side note, the Smoothbore Theory string now has some 22,400 hits. If you read through that string, plus this one and others, you'll see quite a number of variations on how to skin this cat. You would think the ML fraternity would be elated at the pletora of information. But alas, you can't please everyone. There is a letter posted right now in the latest Muzzle Blasts contending that the stuff I recommended (including the smoothbore string contained here) is bogus. The guy's main contention is that if "this" method were any good the vendors would be selling premade feathered balls.
What fascinates me is the huge variation on what works. And that's the essence of why this sport is fun. It is cerainly different than heading down town and buying a box of bullets. When you finally get success it is YOUR success. Nothing better.
Anyway, as an aside I use a hard lead. Some say you must use soft lead. Back in the 70's the popular black powder writer was a guy named Sam Fadala -- Sam is famous for concocting the "antigasket" theory -- that the patch on a ball prevents "obturation," i.e., it PREVENTS the (soft lead) ball from expanding/flattening and properly engaging the rifling. Could it be the soft lead guys are capitalizing on this obturation - getting their stability from the ball expanding and stabilizing in the bore that way? We should call these people obturizors.

[Kevin Tinny]

Hello, Eggman:

You and Sam have something to consider with that obturation stuff.

I can assure you from my shooting of even 60 lead to 1 tin alloy, 70 caliber balls in a bench gun for several years at Friendship, that the 500 grain, .700" balls expanded to .875" just going through the target paper as far out as 200 yards. NO FOOLING! The backer was very thin and of soft paper. The scoring room thought the holes were fake because no one had a .875" bore. Yes, the load was stout, but one can easily determine if their load does this, at least to the degree of becoming true smoothbore diameter, by firing and gauging the hole diameter.

We also tried cup-shaped turned Delrin bases under the ball to preserve the radius on the powder side, but they would reach the 50 yard cards. I don't see why a 1/8" card wad over the powder wouldn't help, if Rules allow it.

I like the "knurling" approach, too. Maybe "sneeze" loads won't cause obturation.

Regards,
Kevin Tinny

[jonk]

Well I tried 55 grains, which is close enough to 56 that I would see decency if that were going to happen there. It was a little tighter than my normal 50 gr load at 50 yards, but still bigger than the tile. Different gun and so on.

I've shot pure lead out of all 3 of my smoothies. 1, it got worse. The other 2 didn't change. So I'll stick with the free hard lead. I can see bore diameter having and impact on that too though. I don't know what pressure a smoothbore produces, but it's certainly above the deformation pressure for soft lead. I would think that to some extent, the ball does obdurate. Not like a minie, but even so. As to whether that helps or not, certainly it depends on the gun/load.

Ah the anti-gasket equation. I have mixed feelings on that, as I have heard of it. I have no doubt that without a patch, with a stiff load, the ball obdurates better with no patch. Whether that is a good thing or not, well... seems to me that the patch is also serving as lubrication for the bullet, and preventing deformation isn't entirely a bad thing, as a round ball (unlike a minie) isn't going to obdurate evenly. Again, I can see it working with some guns/loads, but not all.

I have read the smoothbore theory page. What I take from that is, lots of people have things that work, FOR THEM. Some good practices may go across the board, but I've played around with dip lubes, alox, naked balls, 2f, 3f, hard, soft, varying charges... about the only thing I haven't done yet is Swiss or Ole' E. Just because I'd rather like to use the cheaper powder across the board if I can.

[Jim Wimbish, 10395]

I know a number of shooters with H&P's that are basically shooting the same setup. One uses Swiss and Alox, the rest of us use regular musket lube, Goex 3f, and balls that will basically drop down the barrel. Our loads are all 50 grains of Goex 3f or the equivalent in Swiss. One day, I needed some rounds and my friend who uses the Swiss powder gave me some of his. They shot the same out of my gun. The only difference between 25 yards and 50 yards is that I hold about 2 inches higher. The biggest key to success for me with smoothbore at 50 yards is follow through. I can shoot an entire SB match and never brush the barrel, except on a hot dry day. I shoot an original barrel.

[gjwarren]

Why so much powder? I use 43g fff with .72 (710) ball, sprue removed, farrier rasp very roughed, coated with axel grease. Can shoot all day, accurately with little fouling. Same load 25 & 50, but shoots higher at 50, so I hold 6:00 with a little gap. I use a 2 end load tube so powder and ball grease don't mix. Fast n accurate. Grant, 8th Va.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[jonk]

Why so much powder? Because I've tried everything from 35 grains on up and it just doesn't group for me at 50 with a lower charge. Not with the gun I'm working with at the moment.

I have no doubt that for others, it does.

I tried synthetic wheel bearing grease as a lube for minie bases at one point. It works, but it's pretty messy, so it isn't a road I care to play with with the smoothbore.

[Maillemaker]

Why so much powder? Because I've tried everything from 35 grains on up and it just doesn't group for me at 50 with a lower charge. Not with the gun I'm working with at the moment.

I had started to type almost the exact same reply but deleted it as I didn't want to sound snarky.

Why so much powder? Because the load workup dictated it.

It's entirely possible, in fact probable, that a different ammunition configuration (smaller ball, different lube, etc.) would result in a different optimal charge. But for the .678 round ball I'm currently using cast from wheel weight lead, with sprue removed, and rough filed, and dipped in Alox, 70 grains is what creates the optimal group for my Armisport 1842.

The bench don't lie.

Steve

[jonk]

If I sounded snarky in my reply it certainly wasn't my intent, of course.

I had the same thoughts as you, that the blunt truth of it was hard to couch and put any other way, but it did sound a bit snappy.

[R. McAuley 3014V]

I wonder whether barrel length makes any difference? What length barrel are you guys using for smoothbore? I have only recently (well, about 3 years ago) acquired one of the 30" JRA Macon short guns for smoothbore with the intent to not having to hold my 24" Richmond in the air while loading or kneeling to load. While I certainly got better accuracy with my full length musket, loading it was too slow because the internal pressure that often built up inside the bore made it more difficult to load during the musket matches. I changed to the short gun to increase my loading time and found no real appreciable decrease in the number of hits during the team matches but the group did open up for individuals. The best group I could muster with the 24" Richmond at 50 yards has been a 76-1x and they were all in the black if not just cutting black. Yeah, several people had said that I wouldn't do well with the 24" short gun but it surprised even me. I often shot better at 50 than at 25.

[Maillemaker]

My guess would be that barrel length would be a significant factor.

Steve

[bobanderson]

My guess would be that barrel length would be a significant factor.

Steve

I'm not so sure about that, Steve.

I just shot the smoothbore aggregate at Laingsburg II with a new 30" Macon conversion I just got put together. Because the groups opened up at 50 yards in testing, I brought along some loads with a stiffer powder charge just for 50 yards.

The gun shot a 45 at 25 yards with my normal load and then a 42 at 50 with my test load. There was a nice 4 shot group in the black and a 5 way out at 9 o'clock that I'm willing to own as my fault. The load shot dead on at 25 and about 2" over my point of aim at 50.

With that said, I totally choked in the team event.

I've got some other work to do on this gun, but I'd say bumping my powder charge by 5 grains tightened things up nicely.

As far as barrel length being the determining factor, I think ball to barrel fit is first, and velocity and fouling control (based on the powder you use) a close second.

[Maillemaker]

I had always heard that different length barrels result in different velocities, which I assumed would result in different accuracies.

Found this interesting article:

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/10/daniel-zimmerman/the-truth-about-barrel-length-muzzle-velocity-and-accuracy/

Now this is for modern rifles, but it was still interesting.

Steve

[jonk]

Regarding barrel length vs. accuracy... it's not entirely true. Yes, the longer sight radius- even on a smoothbore with only one sight- does afford the eye the ability to focus a bit more consistently and with less variation from shot to shot. And, yes, a rifle is going to be more accurate than a carbine due to the longer time for powder to combust, barrel to bullet contact, and so on. But, there is a point of diminishing returns.

I know that with modern rifles, there is a good reason that various militaries settled on the short rifle design (think 98k, 1903 Springfield, Lee-Enfield No 1Mk III and No IVs) and it wasn't because they cared about the ergonomics of troops carrying the guns in the field. They found that the rifles could be made of that length and suffer no loss in accuracy.

For a smoothbore, I'd have to imagine that the same is true enough. The ball is going to bounce and roll and blast down the barrel, and it's accuracy is going to be impacted on how it exits the bore more than how much bore it ran down. Given the fast ignition of black powder, the longer barrel won't impart much more velocity (though probably some), it's more a matter of longer sight radius giving easier repeat-ability. I don't know where the trade off with a smoothbore may be, meaning how long the gun has to be before extra barrel is just extra weight, but at some length it is just that, there for sighting only, like any other gun.

As to my own update; I shot a skirmish this past weekend. I got one hit at 50 yards. I won a medal shooting at paper at 50 yards. Search me! I don't know if it's the visibility or optics of the round black bull vs. the diamond shaped tile, the nerves of being in the event, what. But I fired 7 rounds and had 1 hit. This is a load that I now KNOW shoots well from a bench. So it's me I'm sure. If I could blame the gun before, until I worked up the load for the 50 yard event, now it has to just be me.

Still it isn't just me. One teammate also struggles with this event, and he also shot well on paper.

[Maillemaker]

I know that with modern rifles, there is a good reason that various militaries settled on the short rifle design (think 98k, 1903 Springfield, Lee-Enfield No 1Mk III and No IVs) and it wasn't because they cared about the ergonomics of troops carrying the guns in the field. They found that the rifles could be made of that length and suffer no loss in accuracy.

That's what the article above says. :)

Steve