Buck and ball

[jek279]

What is the proper loading procedure for loading buck and ball in the Model 42 Springfield .69 musket? What powder charge, and which ball goes in first? Also, what is the actual diameters for the large and small balls?

[B-Davis]

I do not remember which one is loaded first. In the cartridge, they came as one unit. As to size, I could be wrong, but I believe that the ball was 65 caliber and the "buck" was 31 caliber. I do not have my refrence books with my right now, but I believe it is four of the 31 caliber balls ontop of the ball. Orginal powder charge was 110 grains, but many gunboard recommend 80grs. as a modern equivelent.
Bryan

[Ron/The Old Reb]

69 cal. Buck and Ball for Smooth-bore muskets. Civil war Buck and ball consisted of one .69 cal. round shot surmounted by three . 31 cal. buckshot.

Col. Wm E. Potter of the 12th N.J. Infantry described the scene on July 3 as his men awaited Pickett's advance:

" The regiment was armed with the Springfield smooth-bore musket, caliber 69 - a terrible weapon at close range. The usual cartridge carried a large ball and buckshot, but many of the men, while awaiting the enemy's advance, had opened their box's and prepared special cartridges of from ten to twenty-five buckshot"

From
Ready Aim Fire!
Small Arms Ammunition in the Battle of Gettysburg

[Jim_Burgess_2078V]

Ron is correct that it was three .31 cal. buckshot over one .69 cal. musket ball but Bryan is also correct that the musket ball was actually .65 diameter. These were loaded together within the cartridge paper on top of 110 gains of musket powder. If you try this combination (not allowed in N-SSA competition) be prepared for some severe recoil. At Bull Run, the 2nd Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry was armed with Harpers Ferry muskets and buck & ball ammo. They had never fired their muskets prior to going into battle and upon firing their first volley at the enemy, many men in the regiment were knocked flat on their backs from the kick according to the regimental history.
Jim Burgess, 15th CVI

[ms3635v]

The buck and ball cartridge was found in many variations, with the ball diameters running from .618" through .670". The buck ran from .290" through .352". The balls were packed on top of the round ball and was loaded with the buck exiting the barrel ahead of the ball. Dean Thomas's book, "Roundball to Rimfire," volume 1, has great information on buck and ball beginning on page 104. I have attached a photo of an original buck and ball cartridge from my collection.

[MR. GADGET]

Would be cool if we could shoot B&B in the match.
It is the way they did it and by design.
Be fun to watch the birds on a backer.

[hwaugh]

Funny you should mention buck and ball, John Holland and I are planning to do just that at the Fulton shoot in August. Will wrap the buck and ball in alum. foil and fire it at various distant cardboard backers to see the effect of the round. This will be a non-competitive demostration just for interest sake.

[R. McAuley 3014V]

Ron is correct that it was three .31 cal. buckshot over one .69 cal. musket ball but Bryan is also correct that the musket ball was actually .65 diameter. These were loaded together within the cartridge paper on top of 110 gains of musket powder. If you try this combination (not allowed in N-SSA competition) be prepared for some severe recoil. At Bull Run, the 2nd Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry was armed with Harpers Ferry muskets and buck & ball ammo. They had never fired their muskets prior to going into battle and upon firing their first volley at the enemy, many men in the regiment were knocked flat on their backs from the kick according to the regimental history.
Jim Burgess, 15th CVI

That was the trouble with them there Yankees (2nd Wisconsin)... they was picked before they was ripe!

[jek279]

So, from what I have read here, we are looking at .670 size ball with roughly .31 cal buckshot. Would it be safe to use a .680 cal ball since that is what most dealers sale? Also, is there any ill effect of using the aluminum foil in these bores? I know paper is not allowed in n-ssa shoots, but I use paper wading for my shooting since that is what they used back then. I use Parsel paper since it is light and easily consumed by the explosion of the powder. I guess the other question is when you say you load the paper with the ball, if I use the .680 ball, the string will be in the way then if using an authentic cartridge. How would foil hold the rounds in?

[Blair]

jek297,

What you need to take into consideration is that the B&B projectile was wrapped in a paper cartridge.
This paper adds thickness to the overall diameter to the ball and the buck shot.
.650 for the ball is probably a good dimension. However, the buck shot would probably be better sized at about a .280 cal. size.
The ball and three buckshot are held together in the paper cartridge tube. Once the powder is pored into the bore, the ball end of the cartridge is inserted into the bore with the buckshot on top... and rammed home with the ram rod.
I hope this info helps,
Blair

[jek279]

How thick was the paper on the cartridge? .650 seems very undersized and the ball would bounce around to much. The paper I use is about .08 thick. When left on the ball, it forms .16 thickness. Which works great on a .680 round ball. Would this not be more accurate and safer to fire?

[Maillemaker]

The paper I use is about .08 thick.

I think you missed a zero. Unlikely your cartridge paper is over 1/16th of an inch thick, unless you are using corrugated cardboard. :)

Steve

[jek279]

Is .650 "probably a good size" just your guess? Are there any facts out there? I shoot a ton of flintlock with patched round ball and use a .50 cal with .490 round and a .015 wad. So why would a smooth bore .69 be any different at using .680 with a paper cartridge being armed down than my .50 cal? Is there some guru with a book and the exact facts?

[B-Davis]

The fist book of "Roundball to Rimfire" which deals with small arms ammo and thier manufactures would be a good source for you.

[Muley Gil]

Is .650 "probably a good size" just your guess? Are there any facts out there? I shoot a ton of flintlock with patched round ball and use a .50 cal with .490 round and a .015 wad. So why would a smooth bore .69 be any different at using .680 with a paper cartridge being armed down than my .50 cal? Is there some guru with a book and the exact facts?

Don't forget that the patch on your round ball is there to grip the rifling. A smoothbore musket was designed to be fired A LOT and at close range. It is a lot easier to load an undersized round in a fouled musket. Individual accuracy was not stressed with muskets. It was the mass of pointed fire, delivered by troops shoulder to shoulder, directed towards the enemy that was important. This was often followed up by a bayonet charge as well.

[Ron/The Old Reb]

The safest place on the battlefield when engaging an emeny armed with smouthbore muskets was to be the person they were aiming at.http://www.n-ssa.org/vbforum/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif

[Bruce Cobb 1723V]

I think there are alot of dead deer that that would disagree with you. One person wanted the paper to burn up before it exited the bore. This defeats the the purpose of the paper which encloses the load and is to keep the load close togeter after it exits the bore, like a early version of a choke. Sounds like a great idea to see what an actul round would do. Be sure and post he pictures.

[Mike Stein]

General Grant thought anyone hit by a smoothbore at 100 yards or beyond was just plain unlucky.

[Ken Hansgen, 11094]

Grant wrote in his memoirs "At a range of 200 yards, a man with a smoothbore musket could fire at you all day without you finding it out." Question: How far would a .65 caliber ball fired from a .69 cal. musket (held at a reasonable angle --as if it were aimed at person) travel before it fell to the ground?

My understanding is the large ball was .65 cal. (so it could still be loaded in a fouled .69 cal. barrel), and the 3 buckshot were .33 cal.

[B-Davis]

"Round Ball to Rim Fire" page 103: "Civil War era round balls average .650 inch diameter. The U.S. Ordance Department preferred those that were made by pressure or by means other than by ordinary casting."

I hope this helps in your efforts...

[jek279]

Does anyone out there make a .650 cal round ball, or even a mould in that size. I have yet to find one. If this is indeed the size to use with buck and ball.

[danajhanson]

Track of the wolf sells .648 round ball

[John Holland]

Jeff Tanner makes any size you want.

[jek279]

So, before I think about dropping cash on a mold, was the .650 cal round ball the exact size as used during the civil war for the buck and ball shot? Has anyone had any experience with shooting buck and ball?

[jek279]

I have also heard that the buck shot goes on top of the .650 ball, but for better accuracy to place the large shot on top of the buck shot. Which is best/correct? On another note, anyone out there willing to share with me what ball size to bore size combo works with there model 1842 smoothie compitition shooter. And do you use aluminum foil? And if so, how do you roll your rounds?

[B-Davis]

I do not remember exactly how the balls were loaded. As for the right size, you will have to get your bore mic'ed to find out it's size. The most popular/common size seems to be in the range of .678. As to wrapping in tinfoil, I used to have a Potsdam that liked having the balls wrapped, but I have found in my two current smoothbores, this is not the case. I take the balls and put them in a one gallon laundry detergent bottle (empty of course) and shake about 50 of the balls at a time for about 3-5 minutes. This gets rid of the sprue and it dimples up the balls. I then triple dip the balls in lube, and this works great for me. I have just picked-up some ALOX also, and many shooters are just covering the balls in ALOX and are having great results also. I will be experimenting with this to see how it works...Bryan

[jek279]

I would assume that the idea of a dimpled ball is like having a golf ball. It creates a more stable flying object. I know one should mic his barrel, but I was looking for a size of bore to size of ball general relationship. Like .002-.004 difference. I don't know how much to compensate for fouling.

[B-Davis]

Yes, the dimpling on the ball is similar to the golf ball. I do not know why it works, but it seems to stabilize in flight. As to bore size, if you are firing a '42, the common size is .678. Some shooters use smaller, others use bigger, it is a subject of what type of lube your are using and powder charge. .678 just seems to be a good starting point with much consistency.

[jek279]

After some deep thinking. Let's assume my bore diameter is .69 exactly. If I use Vellum paper, it is .003 thickness. If I wrap the cartridge like they would in 1863 with the lenien rope, then that diamenter is .004. I am looking at a paper, ball, rope thickness of .67 . I know historically they would use .650, but wouldn't it make since to use a fairly tight ball to bore size for accuracy. I would leave the paper on the buck and ball shot as I ram it home. And to those that talk about fouling, I know this is not historically accurate, but I would dip the buck and ball shot end of the cartridge into my Alox/Mink oil mix. Just like you would for an Enfield cartridge. This way there is lube and a tight fit in the bore. Any opinions on this mad scientist theroy before I go ahead and order a mould for the .67 diameter. Some one has to run the experiements. Now for N-SSA rounds, I could use paper for the powder cartridge and then wrap the outer tube that holds the buck n ball in foil.

[Edwin Flint]

Jek279: I get the impression you intend to use Buck and ball in NSSA. Not a legal load for NSSA Competition. No frangible loads and no patches except aluminum foil on the ball.

Several years ago,as a special event at our skirmish, we tried Buck and ball as part of our pigeon board event for the first shot only. As I recall, the only birds broken were broken by the main ball, not the buck. Also, the number of hits of the main ball were very low compared to normal. Seems the main ball was thrown off by the buck rounds in the barrel. So my view was that while maybe effective against troops standing shoulder to shoulder, for individual targets, it is not an effective load.

[Maillemaker]

And to those that talk about fouling, I know this is not historically accurate, but I would dip the buck and ball shot end of the cartridge into my Alox/Mink oil mix. Just like you would for an Enfield cartridge. This way there is lube and a tight fit in the bore.

Here are my thoughts:

I don't think most people who shoot smoothbore muskets put any "lube" on their bullets that aids in softening fouling. They might coat their balls in Lee Alox, but I suspect this is more to make a good fit to the bore rather than to aid with fouling. I don't think dried Lee Alox is runny enough to do anything for black powder fouling.

As you note, period B&B cartridges were not lubed in any way.


Now for N-SSA rounds, I could use paper for the powder cartridge and then wrap the outer tube that holds the buck n ball in foil.

I emailed John Robey of the Rules Committee a couple of times about the possibility of using authentic paper cartridges for N-SSA competition. This was for .58 Expanding Ball cartridges whereby the bullet is removed entirely from the paper and loaded "naked" into the bore. He never responded to my email.

The rules say:

"Cartridges for muzzleloading arms must consist of a cardboard or plastic cylinder, sealed on one end. No cartridge shall be employed that allows the ramrod to be pushed through the cylinder. No cartridge may be used that is designed to be set in place on, in, or around the muzzle."

I don't know if the multiple laminates of paper and cardboard in period cartridges would fit the rule or not.

You can see some of my authentic-style .58 Expanding Ball cartridges here:

http://imgur.com/a/H5PHo#7
http://imgur.com/a/n1hJ7#0

I think it would be fun to use authentic cartridges. It's a shame I couldn't get a reply.

Steve

[B-Davis]

I dip my balls three times in a bees wax/crisco mixture. The purpose of this is to aid in the loading by reducing the amount of fouling in my smoothbore. The bore stays quite slippery and the fouling does not harden up for me. I have not tried ALOX as of this time, but would be curious as to the reasons for using it on roundballs, if it is not for lubrication purposes.

Bryan

[Old Hickory]

164116421643

B&B is very effective in a 12ga. also, 4 shots-30yds-2.5" group with the .69 ball-50% hits on paper with the buckshot, fired from an Ithaca M37 with a smoothbore Deer Slayer barrel.

[John Robey]

I never saw an email regarding your rules question. Rule 17.5c states, "The use of combustible cartridges in muzzleloading arms is prohibited."

[Blair]

Here is how I see what is going on within this thread,

jek279 is not a member of the N-SSA. (I am not either, I have no dog in this fight,at this time)
If jek279 were, then jek279 would have done the research into the N-SSA's requirements regarding projectiles. And why multi/frangible projectiles are not allowed in competition.
A great deal of very good information has been supplied to jek279 within this thread concerning something they, the N-SSA members can't shoot in competition.
Should the individual require documentation... then the individual should be able to provide it. It is out there, if the individual looks for it.
The experimentation in the use of "buck & ball" is up to the individuals quest for such information, not the responsibility of members of the N-SSA.
Should this posting come across as being too inflammatory... please let me know. I will be more than happy to delete it.
Thank you,
Blair

[R. McAuley 3014V]

I dip my balls three times in a bees wax/crisco mixture. The purpose of this is to aid in the loading by reducing the amount of fouling in my smoothbore. The bore stays quite slippery and the fouling does not harden up for me. I have not tried ALOX as of this time, but would be curious as to the reasons for using it on roundballs, if it is not for lubrication purposes. Bryan

Same purpose as your beeswax-crisco mixture, a lubricant and thrice coated to reduce the windage in the bore -- but does not involve wrapping with aluminum foil or any dipping. Take a 4-inch diameter by 6-inch high plastic container with sealable lid (like Tupperware). Pour about one liquid ounce of Alox into the container together with say 20 to 30 "dimpled" round balls, and shake vigourously until all balls are coated with alox, then set out to dry. When dry, repeat the process, and dry for the third coat (if needed). No need to wrap the finished balls in wax paper or handle any differently than .58 conicals. Just stick them in your tubes and load as usual. Balls coated with Alox will feel a little tacky when dry (not runny unless still wet) but no different from any other ammo coated with Alox.

[Maillemaker]

I never saw an email regarding your rules question. Rule 17.5c states, "The use of combustible cartridges in muzzleloading arms is prohibited."

Hi John!

I had received your email address from Linwood McMahon and emailed you on 9/19/2012 and again on 9/22/2012. Maybe the email address was incorrect or it got caught up in a spam filter or something.

Please note that 58 Caliber Expanding Ball cartridges as designated by the 1855 and 1862 Ordnance Manuals are not combustible. No paper goes down the barrel with the bullet.

The paper is simply a wrapper that contains the powder and the bullet, just as our plastic tubes do today. To use them, you tear the paper tail off of the cartridge, dump the powder down the barrel, and then break the cartridge in half to extract the lubricated bullet, which is then inserted into the muzzle as per usual.

The 1855 style of cartridge has an inner powder case made of cardboard, which is in turn surrounded by the paper outer wrapper.

The 1862 style of cartridge has an inner paper wrapper for the powder, surrounded by an identical paper wrapper which contains the inner wrapper and the bullet.

In both styles, the powder charge is separated from, and protected from, the lubricated bullet. This way you don't end up with powder sticking to the bullet.

But again, no paper goes down the barrel with these styles of cartridges, and no paper is combusted.

So, do you think they can be used?

You can see the 1862 style on the left, and the 1855 style on the right:
http://i.imgur.com/SLYq9.jpg

You can see more pictures of them here:

http://imgur.com/a/H5PHo#0
http://imgur.com/a/n1hJ7#0

Steve

[jek279]

I am not on a quest to change policy nor ruffle feathers. I compete locally in live fire events identical to the N-SSA. I also compete with the buckskinners and their rules here locally are to use round ball only, but can use paper cartridges. This makes my 42 Springfield with a smooth bore a fun gun to compete with against the Hawkins rifles. Mainly to because I don't own a Kentucky rifle but have this civil war rifle. So, I want a round that loads easily and quickly, but providing the most accuracy with some retention to historical accuracy. I live by a simple rule, don't re-invent the wheel. Ask others what they have or are doing and build on it. I use this thread because you chaps are the best of the best and have more info than any google search. America was founded on the improvement of weaponry either created by us or others. Thank you to those who have aided my quest. Hopefully one day when my kids are older I will join the N-SSA. I want to use the buck and ball to compete with and hunt with, both of which I can do here regardless of N-SSA rules.

[John Robey]

Steve, having been in on the Board of Directors' discussion of this rule I can assure you that the intention was that paper cartridges NOT be used in N-SSA muzzleloader events. That being said, if you want the board to reconsider either the rule or its interpretation you should take it up with your region commander, who might be amenable to bringing it back to the board. Or not. http://www.n-ssa.org/vbforum/images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif John

[Maillemaker]

Steve, having been in on the Board of Directors' discussion of this rule I can assure you that the intention was that paper cartridges NOT be used in N-SSA muzzleloader events.

What was the reasoning?

Steve

[jek279]

I want to give a shout out to Jeff Tanner. I emailed him about making a .650 round ball mould for the buck and ball, and 3 days later the thing was in the mail. And two of those days were the weekend. Only $55 for it.

[John Holland]

I'm glad my suggestion of using Jeff Tanner worked out well for you!

[jek279]

Yep, Jeff also has a guy that is looking in to making a Pritchett mould for my Enfield. If anyone wants information on that, let me know?

[robertdeans72]

Yep, Jeff also has a guy that is looking in to making a Pritchett mould for my Enfield. If anyone wants information on that, let me know?

Interesting,.... What dimensions were you going to go with?

Rob

[jek279]

.970 tall .564 diameter. The base will have a hollow taper starting at .423 diameter at base of bullet and going .353 deep to a inter diameter of .249. Starting from the base moving up to the point where it starts its taper going to a point is .485. Does that help

[robertdeans72]

Sure does. Sounds just like the design I had Brooks' Moulds make for me.....

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b166/RobDeans/Bullet Making/OSPritchettMkII.jpg

Not to highjack this "Buck and Ball" thread,...... But I have found the best results with this bullet mould adjusted to 1.06" with a shallow base (half the height of the deep base) when shot with my PH P53 and PH P58 Naval Rifle...

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b166/RobDeans/Shooting Pics/11Apr106S60gr_zps905e6e6a.jpg

Best of luck and look forward to any updates on your experiments.

Rob

[jek279]

how much did your mold cost? Does your have an ajustable base? I have wonderd if a shallower base may help. Like a parker hale mold with a shallow base.

[robertdeans72]

Not wanting to take away from the Buck and Ball topic......

May I refer you here?

http://www.n-ssa.org/vbforum/showthread.php/6724-Pritchett-bullet-mould

Lots of info there. Most, if not all, of your questions are answered there. If you want more I can dig more up.

Rob

[jek279]

So did the armi actually use solder to hold the three balls together occasionally? I have even heard people claim that they pushed the three smaller ball against the larger one indenting them all four to help hold them in a tighter pattern. Anyone with experience with this?

[jek279]

So did the armi actually use solder to hold the three balls together occasionally? I have even heard people claim that they pushed the three smaller ball against the larger one indenting them all four to help hold them in a tighter pattern. Anyone with experience with this?

[B-Davis]

This may be a misunderstanding by some individuals. Ordinance testing did find that if the buck was behind the ball, it created a better pattern, but for loading ease, the buck was placed on top of the ball. With that being said, when the powder charge was ignited, the velocity of the ball would be the main factor pushing out the buck part of the charge. Many balls have been found in excavation that have three definitive "dents" on them. This was from the buck being impressed into the ball as the charge was travelling down the barrel. There are several examples of where the buck actually never left the ball because it had been pushed so violently into the ball portion of the load. I hope this helps clarify things!

[Bruce Cobb 1723V]

There are several threads going into this posting. One asked why no paper is to be used when we load ..... it's all about safety, it's not about the way it was done during the war. There is a chance when using any combutable packing that some may remain in the barrel and on reloading cause a cook off. Since this person who started this thread is not an N-ssa competitor I'm surprised no one has suggested him trying a patched round ball for hunting and target shooting.

[Maillemaker]

One asked why no paper is to be used when we load ..... it's all about safety, it's not about the way it was done during the war. There is a chance when using any combutable packing that some may remain in the barrel and on reloading cause a cook off.

This does not apply to .58 (and other caliber) expanding ball cartridges, however.

With these cartridges, no paper ever goes in the barrel.

I asked John Robey what was the reasoning behind the Board of Directors not wanting to use paper cartridges for these kinds of cartridges but he hasn't replied yet.

Steve

[jek279]

Yes I started this thread and it wasn't just about using a patched round ball, it was about using a historically correct type of cartridge. I want to shoot this load for hunting and to be able to just shoot it for fun. I haven't recieved my .650 round ball mold yet, so I had to make due with my .680 round ball and .21 for the shot. I was worried about fouling using the .680 round ball so after I rolled the round and tied it off, I warmed up some mink oil and dipped the cartridge into the mink oil covering the .21 shot and the .680 round ball. I made up 60 rounds. When shooting, I would tear the cartridge, pour the powder and while pouring the powder, basically just bush the round into the muzzle with my thumb. Then ram it home. I only used 60 grains FFF Goex, it shot well and never had trouble ramming down round 60. And because the rand I shot at had steel targets up, I tried my hand at the 200 yard gong which was a 50 gallon propane tank (empty and gas free). I shot my last ten rounds at it free hand hitting it 3 times. Not bad in my book. God knows how many times I would miss it with a minie ball. The paper I used for the Cartridge was Rag Vellum. Worked darn well. Will keep those interested posted on what happens when I get my .650 round ball mold in. Thanks to all those who have helped me in my quest for creating an authentic round, regardless of whether I'm an N-SSA member or not and regaurdless of the fact that it can't be shot in the N-SSA.