Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5  Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Strength of older single shots using smokeless (Read 23579 times)
Fogman
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 155
Joined: Mar 10th, 2016
Re: Strength of older single shots using smokeless
Reply #45 - Dec 9th, 2017 at 11:38pm
Print Post  
"Fogman, what if we don't want to shoot black?
Lee" 
Then maybe stick to rifles that were intended for smokeless. There's lots of old time smokeless rifles out there -but a Sharps isn't one of them. I have nothing against smokeless in the appropriate rifle. I've reloaded smokeless rifle cartridges before. They work just fine in my 1917 Springfield 03-A3. But just as I would not use black powder in my 30-06, I would not put smokeless in my 45-110 or in my flintlock muzzleloader. I have a 45-70 Rem RB with an action that is dated 1901 and that action is probably half again bigger than the RB action on my 1876 RB Creedmoor. I'd use smokeless with the 1901 action because it was made for it - but never in the original RB Creedmoor. Just sayin'
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
rkba2nd
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Online



Posts: 2103
Location: earth
Joined: Feb 16th, 2009
Re: Strength of older single shots using smokeless
Reply #46 - Dec 9th, 2017 at 11:54pm
Print Post  
Art- it may be easier, but you have to do it a lot more often.
  

rkba2nd
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
4570mike
Senior Forum Member
****
Offline



Posts: 460
Location: On the Peninsula
Joined: Apr 11th, 2013
Re: Strength of older single shots using smokeless
Reply #47 - Dec 10th, 2017 at 10:09am
Print Post  
Very interesting thread with many expected opinions being expressed.
I shot BP competitively (muzzle loaders) for fifteen years back in the 70's and 80's.  Went into XTC Service Rifle and still do that, but not as much.  Three years ago, I got the bug for something different and picked up a repro Sharps in 45-70.  I wasn't interested in going back to BP, so I tried WP with mixed results.  To be honest, my downfall was concerns about using various fillers to mitigate powder location in the big case (and, yes, powder location does make a difference).   
I started using BH209 and have been able to develop loads for several calibers that yield excellent results.
Still, there are matches I attend where I must shoot OoC due to my powder selection. 
During this time, I have shot with several serious BP marksman and observed their on/off range routines.   My conclusion is that there is a greater challenge associated with BP that one escapes using WP.  I believe this is why dedicated BP shooters stick with it; it's much more of a challenge.  I also understand why BP only matches don't want to mix the powders as a WP shooter gets to skip many steps in loading and shooting.  This is certainly a fair practice.
Getting back to the topic of this thread, I considered acquiring some original rifles to shoot, but not using BP, I decided upon modern made pieces with modern materials and often minor design changes that make this safer in the event of a problem. Still these actions are of limited strength and that's why I have stuck with BH209; double charges overfill the cases and correct charges are easy to monitor.
Just my thoughts and opinions.
Mike.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
svartkruttgris#369
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 2980
Location: Colorado, Norway, Sweden
Joined: Oct 28th, 2014
Re: Strength of older single shots using smokeless
Reply #48 - Dec 10th, 2017 at 2:30pm
Print Post  
I find BP vs WP discussions a bit absurd, especially after Swiss BP became available on USA market. Here is a brief description of my personal experience with BP vs WP since early 1950s.

At age 13 I got my first CF rifle, a Winchester LW in 32-20 and a box of true HV 80gr Winchester loads. I was allowed to reload my ammo, but only with the only BP then common in USA, Dupont. Quickly learned that only way to get small enough 1st shot groups with BP was to totally clean and lube bore after each shot. That resulted in small enough groups to head shoot foxes at 100 paces with my BP loads.

Much later in life I was resident in a state with a BP deer season. Bought a T/C .54 caliber muzzle loader and quickly learned that, again, Dupont BP was only good for 1st shot hunting groups from cleaned and lubed bore, that were small enough for deer hunting in woods. Pyrodex as good for 3 shot 3" groups at 100 yds. Lotsa deer dropped with that rifle using Pyrodex.

Even much later in life I tried cowboy action shooting, using 44-40 Winchester 92 (Brazilian made) carbine and Ruger 44-40 or replica Rem C&B revolvers. Initially only Pyrodex gave good enough groups for clean matches with no cleaning (5 or 6 10 shot groups with rifle and half that in two revolvers) -- I only cleaned guns after each match, 50-60 rounds through rifle and 25-30 from each revolver. When Swiss FFg became available, found that I could also shoot all day matches, with no need to clean bores, and often no missed targets. This was comparable performance to what Winchester advertised for its 44-40 BP ammo & 1973 rifles.

Most recently I tried BPCR with replica 1885 in 40-65. My goal for load testing was 10 shots in less than 2,00" at 100 yards using Swiss FFg or 1,5Fg, NO WIPING BORE. So long as I used BP bullets of known ability to give excellent groups, as well as proven BP loading methods, this was easy goal to attain. I was only able to do BPCR for 1+ season before failing eyesight and fine muscle control put stop to this. That was enough to determine that, so long as I got off good shots, I could score a few 10/10s, and many 6-8/10 scores on pigs (300M), turkeys (385M) and often on rams (500M). NO fellow BPCR shooters were willing to forego wiping after each shot.

SO, by no means do I consider BP shooting with Swiss BP to be much, if any, more difficult, than with White Powders. At least not for hunting, cowboy action shooting or BPCR.

DO NOT TRY this with Goex BPs!!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
calledflyer
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Online



Posts: 3973
Joined: Mar 9th, 2015
Re: Strength of older single shots using smokeless
Reply #49 - Dec 10th, 2017 at 5:44pm
Print Post  
I wanna see pictures of that M1917 03-A3.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
uscra112
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 4079
Location: Switzerland of Ohio
Joined: May 7th, 2007
Re: Strength of older single shots using smokeless
Reply #50 - Dec 10th, 2017 at 6:42pm
Print Post  
calledflyer wrote on Dec 10th, 2017 at 5:44pm:
I wanna see pictures of that M1917 03-A3.

I wanna know where it IS, so I can go steal it.  Gotta be worth millions! Grin
  

<div class=
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
calledflyer
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Online



Posts: 3973
Joined: Mar 9th, 2015
Re: Strength of older single shots using smokeless
Reply #51 - Dec 10th, 2017 at 7:36pm
Print Post  
uscra112, that was my plan as well, but you let the cat out of the bag. Angry
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Fogman
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 155
Joined: Mar 10th, 2016
Re: Strength of older single shots using smokeless
Reply #52 - Dec 10th, 2017 at 11:38pm
Print Post  
"I wanna see pictures of that M1917 03-A3."   
Sorry - been a few years since I shot the 03-A3. Different gun I had in mind. Still wouldn't put BP in it though.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
gunlaker
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 2605
Location: lower mainland, B.C.
Joined: Dec 13th, 2010
Re: Strength of older single shots using smokeless
Reply #53 - Dec 13th, 2017 at 4:27pm
Print Post  
marlinguy wrote on Dec 9th, 2017 at 3:07pm:
Fogman wrote on Dec 9th, 2017 at 10:52am:
Challenge yourself with some real black powder loads. Very satisfying to load and shoot my Creedmoor with breech seated paper patched bullets over some BP just like back in the day.


That sounds contradictory to what every BP enthusiast has told me? They always say to not challenge yourself, and simply shoot a full case of BP. Where's the challenge?


Val you are talking to the wrong black powder enthusiasts.  Try your hand at a Creedmoor match.  I can assure you that it is extremely challenging to be competitive.  I don't know a single serious BPTR shooter that expends less effort on mastering the sport than any other shooter in any other precision related discipline.

Chris.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
oneatatime
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 4473
Location: Rocky Mountains
Joined: Oct 30th, 2011
Re: Strength of older single shots using smokeless
Reply #54 - Dec 13th, 2017 at 4:58pm
Print Post  
Vall, it's kind of like that but not really. Some considerations: Brass - which? (capacities vary) - Remington, Winchester, Starline - annealed or not? - sized or not?- neck tension - none or how much? Primers - LRM, LR, LP? - which brand? - overprimer wad or not? Powder - which brand? what size? how much? dumped or drop tubed? Compression - none or how much? Wads - fiber or LDPE? - what thickness? - how many? - newspaper wad under bullet? Bullet - weight? - nose design? - alloy? - seating depth? - paper patch? (grease cookie or not?). Almost forgot lube choice and wiping (with what and how much?) or blow tubing (how many and with what temperature and humidy?)
And for many of these options the choices affect other options. Serious black powder is more an art than a science. Sure, fill the case with powder, stick a bullet on top and shoot and holler s---. Good luck!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
gunlaker
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 2605
Location: lower mainland, B.C.
Joined: Dec 13th, 2010
Re: Strength of older single shots using smokeless
Reply #55 - Dec 13th, 2017 at 5:32pm
Print Post  
I know plenty of people who just enjoy plinking with black powder rifles as an enjoyable pastime, but just filling a case and topping it with a bullet is not going to win any matches.

Same as shooting smokeless.

Like anything else, you get out of it what you put into it.  My next match involves 1500 miles of driving each way.  You can bet that I put very serious effort into what I do, just like the other people who will be there.

Chris.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Schuetzenmiester
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 6707
Location: Cool Wet Side of WA
Joined: Apr 27th, 2008
Re: Strength of older single shots using smokeless
Reply #56 - Dec 13th, 2017 at 7:33pm
Print Post  
Chris, I agree 100%.  After the first international match at Ottawa, the next was in South Africa. There was a #10 ammo limit for flying then.  With 525 gr slugs, #10s doesn't go very far. They would have powder available on the other end.  Flying half way around the world to start developing a load to shoot 1,000 yards didn't appeal to me.  Shocked
  

"some old things are lovely, warm still with life ... of the forgotten men who made them." - D.H. Lawrence
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
gunlaker
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 2605
Location: lower mainland, B.C.
Joined: Dec 13th, 2010
Re: Strength of older single shots using smokeless
Reply #57 - Dec 13th, 2017 at 7:53pm
Print Post  
Schuetzenmiester wrote on Dec 13th, 2017 at 7:33pm:
Chris, I agree 100%.  After the first international match at Ottawa, the next was in South Africa. There was a #10 ammo limit for flying then.  With 525 gr slugs, #10s doesn't go very far. They would have powder available on the other end.  Flying half way around the world to start developing a load to shoot 1,000 yards didn't appeal to me.  Shocked


That wouldn't appeal to me either.  That's one of the reasons that I drive to all of the matches rather than fly.  This would be trickier for South Africa unless you have a big boat  Cheesy

I know that Brent Danielson recently competed in South Africa.  I'm not sure if he is able to bring powder and primers with him.  That's some serious commitment!

Chris.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
svartkruttgris#369
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 2980
Location: Colorado, Norway, Sweden
Joined: Oct 28th, 2014
Re: Strength of older single shots using smokeless
Reply #58 - Dec 13th, 2017 at 9:36pm
Print Post  
oneatatime wrote on Dec 13th, 2017 at 4:58pm:
Vall, it's kind of like that but not really. Some considerations: Brass - which? (capacities vary) - Remington, Winchester, Starline - annealed or not? - sized or not?- neck tension - none or how much? Primers - LRM, LR, LP? - which brand? - overprimer wad or not? Powder - which brand? what size? how much? dumped or drop tubed? Compression - none or how much? Wads - fiber or LDPE? - what thickness? - how many? - newspaper wad under bullet? Bullet - weight? - nose design? - alloy? - seating depth? - paper patch? (grease cookie or not?). Almost forgot lube choice and wiping (with what and how much?) or blow tubing (how many and with what temperature and humidy?)
And for many of these options the choices affect other options. Serious black powder is more an art than a science. Sure, fill the case with powder, stick a bullet on top and shoot and holler s---. Good luck!


Sounds like a 10yr project, maybe even 10hrs X 5 days/week for all those years.  By then your rifle might need a new barrel and and your wife, if you ever had one, has moved on. 
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
marlinguy
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline


Ballards may be weaker,
but they sure are neater!

Posts: 18055
Location: Oregon
Joined: Feb 2nd, 2009
Re: Strength of older single shots using smokeless
Reply #59 - Dec 14th, 2017 at 11:31am
Print Post  
It always looked like a big challenge to me, and a lot of work too! But guys who endorse it usually aren't telling all the pointers and tips you guys have! They make it sound like a book called "Loading for Dummies" where a person can't screw up if he uses BP.
On the other hand those same people make smokeless powder loading sound like the devil's brew, and the most dangerous thing a gun owner could do!
  

(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 
Send TopicPrint