I'll be honest; I've never heard of chewed balls before and I've been shooting for a fair while. So it's great to see something I've not heard of before and a demonstration of them.
That was a really interesting video and congratulations on your fortitude in the cold! Once the surgery on my spine has healed I'll be at the range testing chewed balls. I remember a reference made to them in an archaeological programme where an Independence War era house/hospital was dug and one was found. They thought a soldier had bitten it whilst having a bit of himself removed. I would have thought something softer would have been better!
For what it's worth, my favorite 20 ga smooth bore loading recipe is powder followed by veg fiber wadd soaked in peanut oil followed by chewed .610 ball. If the friction fit is not enough to hold the ball I split some of the wadd and use a thin slice on top of the ball. I only use this at the range or on trail walk shoots where I am keeping the muzzle up till shooting, not for a hunting setting where the muzzle will be in many up down positions. This gives me very good accuracy and keeps the fouling at bay for all day shooting plus easy cleaning. Tried olive oil but it goes bad after a while. Also coconut oil works well. And peanut and coconut oils smell good too. I'm using 80 grains of 2ff that works well but I will have to try going up to see if I get the same results you did Mike. Thanks again for all the insights, teaching, and entertainment.
Mike I will agree with the sight issue. I believe repeating the test with a smooth bore with a full set of sights will have the same end results just smaller groups. Can't wait to see the video. Stay warm.
"Ach du lieber, mein freund", we must always remember to put on our "big boy pants" when talking about muzzleloading! After all, we are all "brothers in da balls" aren't we???!!! Pardon the "course jesting" but I just had to get that off my chest! Always wonderful to watch your videos. Now go on & have a "ball" for yourself!
Golf balls are made with dimples to make them more aerodynamic. I have no idea what a lead ball looks like after a hot gas explosion. Thanks duelist1954. Good demonstration.
Mine is an old Northwest trade gun. Built it from one of Curly's "kits" basically a box of parts and a piece of wood that "kind of" looks like a gunstock.
Mike, I am very interested in learning to shoot my Fowler the way they were shot. I learn a lot from you - thanks. As for NSSA's comment, I am not surprised that there is more to it, such as load development, than just the surface texture of the ball. In a different subject, I now have an Uberti 1851 Navy to learn to shoot, too.
I agree. But of course distance is desired in a golf ball and accuracy is a function of body mechanics to the clubhead. I don't see how it would matter with the velocities and distance to the target in a smoothbore firearm. He may need to adjust the charge for the chewed balls to re acquire accuracy. Now with the chewed balls accuracy may improve at greater distances with the golf ball dimpling effect. I thought of golf balls the first thing.
Golf balls spin, and the dimples amplify the aerodynamic effects of the spin. A proper golf shot has backspin, which produces lift, which increases distance. A bad golf shot has sidespin, which gives you the classic slice. Dimples have no effect on non-spinning smoothbore balls. If there's any accuracy gain to be had, it's probably just that the dimpling process from the modern tool increases uniformity.
I roll my .61s to get them perfectly round in an old dryer with the paddles remove.. Look like a factory swaged ball. THEN I roll them between two horseshoe rasp. More aggressive "teeth marks" and ball needs no wadding and work like fouling scratches. Accuracy is on par with rifles out to 75 yards. Doubt? Ask the people I shot against.
A good information video, and the results I feel are representative of the average shooter. For accuracy and velocity a patched spit ball is hard to beat.
This makes me think about my golf ball cannon. I have not fired it over a great distance, but I have fired a 1lb lead ball , a golf ball and a handful of marbles out of it... I have to say the marbles are the most accurate being it has a smooth bore and no sights.
I have used dimpled balls in my Ardesa Old Ironside .69 Naval Cannon and found the consistency to be much improved over smooth balls shooting over 25yds.
Thanks for this vid. Saved alot of us the freezing effort. Think no wad between ball and powder on cap and ball revolver would just as or more accurate than using the wad? Rifling negate ant difference?
chewed balls LOL, im a bit slow on the uptake , it took a couple o sec's to register , then i was chuckling like a fool , i have a son in 8th grade and its exactly what i would expect from him , cheers big ears
I wonder what long term use of chewed balls does to the smooth bore barrel? I also noticed the almost instantaneous ignition as well and wondered about it.. Good video Mike.. Take care of that shoulder...
I'm still looking around into flintlocks but I think the wadding instead of a patch is what is causing the inaccuracy. Think of smoke falling on a smooth surface and it's distribution over that surface is pretty even, now think of that smoke falling on a rough surface and the smoke isn't very evenly distributed over the surface like fog in the mountains. With a regular patch it may be more accurate due to the patch creating a smoother surface for the gasses to surround. Just my thinking but correct me if I'm wrong.
Good luck on the next round of tests . I enjoy these videos I learn a little with each one . With your hurt shoulder why do you not use a padded stock or shoulder pad ?
Since the purpose of dimpling on golf balls is to provide "lift", and then only with a projectile spinning against the direction of travel, it seems obvious that any deformity on the face of a projectile will adversely affect accuracy and increase drag.
I'm a bit old fashioned as I like using the Goex data as they publish, 2F powder is for 50 caliber at 60 grains or less. 3F is for 45 caliber or smaller. Where as 1F is for 50 caliber with a powder charge of 70 grains or more and with any caliber larger. In the days gone by, 1F was also known as Government powder. In a smooth bore of 20 gauge or larger 1F powder is correct. The larger powder granules actually have a reduction to the recoil without affecting ball velocity. You should try to recover a fired round ball into a ballistic bullet recovery tube that is filled with rolled surgical cotton so as to determine if the balls are obstulating in the bores and picking up the rifling and becoming sealed in the barrels riflings, with 90 grains or greater amounts of powder this should be happening. As a side note the Government load for Frankfort Armory 45-70 was with 1F powder. Golf balls are covered with a relatively soft covering after the inner core is wrapped with a long rubber band, the club smacks the outer skin thus allowing a grip of the balls outer skin to flex the inner core also flexes thus the golfers arms are not being subjected to the shock wave of having to strike a solid ball. But original smooth golf balls were more dense and had a tendency of glancing off of a wood iron face. So you shouldn't compare lead round balls chewed to golf balls. Perhaps a rough cast Cannon ball would be better. Otherwise a nice video.
Mike, what about taking balls and simply rolling them around on a piece of coarse-grained sandpaper, with a little pressure applied by the palm of the hand?
I'll say this 70-80 grains is enough for a smooth bore. Because after 60 yards the pattern is too big for good kill shot placement. Your gun might be different. good video
Test request. To my mind these should offer less drag than a standard roundball much the way a dimpled golf ball does over a smooth one. I would be curious to see these shot out of one of your rifles side by side with the roundballs and see if they impact higher due to less drag. Keep up the great work!
Well, as noted, they dimple golf balls for a reason. Mythbusters show noted a good effect on fuel economy from dimpling a car body. So it seems likely that if you dimple a musket ball like a golf ball, it will probably result in higher velocity downrange.
I haven't seen any such testing, though. It could be that dimples are effective with lower velocity rounds, and ineffective with high velocity rounds. Or not.
Mmmm? as a golfer I can tell ya any spin is going to change the trajectory, even tho you had a smooth bore the wad (blanket) gots to maybe snag a little and spin the ball , I have a old Herters mold that leaves a proud spur which I sand down while watching youtube vids, works good , but use corrugated cardboard (punch cut) for a over ball wad , I can hold a 5" group at 50yds with a DP mortimer fowler , luv it
Maybe the reason they chewed the musket balls was to decrease the diameter of the ball when they are oversized for the musket? The oval shape might have added some accuracy, similar to an American football.
Been a while since I've seen one but sportsman's warehouse used to carry a Hawkins style stainless steel cap and ball with a laminated stock but that was a rifled barrel
Mike, again, thanks for doing so much of our homework. I was wondering if you had heard anything from the NSSA , in regards to loading and smoothbore accuracy, since posting this video?
Great video. Seems to me just hitting the paper at 50 yards is exceptionally good shooting. I am like you not enough difference to go through any extra effort to shoot chewed balls.
I would assume that as many other comments have pointed out it's like the dimpling on a golf ball. Though this is made for distance as far as I know, rather than accuracy, so while this was an interesting test it would be better if you were shooting at a longer range I'd have thought. By which i mean you'd expect less bullet drop.
So, I wonder if you could make chewed balls easily by putting a handful of them in a vibratory case tumbler and let them slam into one another for a day or two?
The traditional fusil has no rear sight, right? How much of it do you think was the inherent accuracy of the gun/balls, and how much do you think was the sights keeping you from taking advantage of that inherent accuracy? I am not sure I trust all that wind, either. :3
Either way, your cleaning my clock at 50 yards. A deer would hafta play pro catcher for me to hit a paper plate at 50. I’m off to the range for more science!
Growing OLD is inevitable. Growing UP is optional. Hickok45 addressed a similar issue up front on his colt dragoon video, with the phrase “ball grease.”
Sir I want to know i have a shotgun. 410 conberte on massolauoter I want to know waht cal I had to use 45 oh smaller please can you tell me Im Sgt A Gonzalez from P.R.but i live in fitchburg massachusett if you can help il thankyou for it sir
My trade gun 62 cal dont do gd at all bare ball. 36" colerain barrel. I find a 600 ball patched with cloth..greased with ( fat) processed fr taken game usually bear fat rendered down.. Shot best. I do use lubes like " wonderlube" and bore butter... Works ok. Bare ball in my gun doesn't really do well enough. Ive even had .575 balls dbl patched shoot better than bare ball. My gun is a David Dolliver built northwest trade gun 1998 production. 62 cal
Christopher Hess is your Baker one of the ones that The Rifle Shop made several years ago? I ask because theirs are the only ones I've ever heard of being actual close to original repros with a rifled barrel.
I will qualify myself as not knowing a lot about smooth bore muzzle loaders. I think you should repeat that test with very tightly patched balls. I have always had people tell me that a tightly patched smooth bore was more accurate. The military forces of the world did load loosely more as a matter of increased reloading speed as one line of standing soldiers fired into another standing group of soldiers. Dimpled balls: The increase of accuracy is supposed to happen once in flight. Likely going down the barrel unpatched might not be the most accurate way of loading.
Interesting results. I just recently got a Reproduction 1861 Springfield. I would be interested in meeting up to do a channel collaboration and you can teach me a little about muzzleloaders. I’m in the south central PA area.
The other claims are that they were chewed to make them more painful/damaging (this was thought to be true), or that found chewed balls were used in amputations. In reality many have been chewed by animals later on. There is no evidence that anyone thought that chewing them made them more accurate. Oh, and no evidence that this is where "bite the bullet" came from either, before anyone says it. Edit, that phrase is probably from biting on bullets during corporal punishment.
I have a hard time buying the "chewed" ball concept but if it works for someone, so be it. "Each gun is a law unto itself" is very true. I just finished a project with my two Glock 9mm's, a 17 and a 19. The 17 shoots anything well so I'm using 3.8 grs of Clays powder. The 19 hates fast burning powders so I went to Hodgdon's Universal and it shoots great. I'll never understand why guns are like that. Why would it make such a difference? It'll shoot 7" groups with Clays and 3" groups with Universal at 20 yards consistently. Don't get it.
Okay, I have never seen this rough coat ball method before in the U.K. I have a smoothbore 50cal Hawken replica, what ball mould would you recommend, and what about this roughed up method on that size ball...???? I feel that my ball mould is a tad small perhaps...!!!
Thanks for the heads up, I am using a .495 mould, but use a thin patch sometimes with about 65 grains powder. Dependent on how much I have really, sometimes as little as 55 grains. It is much more awkward to get any over here as far as the boys in blue are concerned. It is not exactly cheap either, one expects it is to minimise usage by the general public...... enjoyed this clip though, excellent sound as well despite the wind...
Many decades ago, I played golf. Golf balls are dimpled, not smooth. The theory is that the dimples "trip the boundary layer," leading to turbulent air flow around the ball. Otherwise, with a smooth ball, the flow can be laminar, which at certain air velocities is very unstable, switching erratically between laminar and turbulent flow, which changes the flight of the ball unpredictably. The speed of a bullet is typically faster than a golf ball, so maybe that theory doesn't come into play. The transition between laminar and turbulent flow is determined by the "Reynolds Number," which depends upon the velocity, geometry of the object, and the air properties. I forget everything else.
HAHAAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH Google ARGHHHHHH hahahahahahahahah....Awesome video.... I can actually see the shock/Horror of some green horn googling that term "Chewed Balls" and what the search engine brings forth. Just imagine. I know it is sad.
I'll be honest; I've never heard of chewed balls before and I've been shooting for a fair while. So it's great to see something I've not heard of before and a demonstration of them.
Ditto for me. Long time gun guy but never heard of "chewed balls" till about a month ago on the net.
Thanks for getting me interested in black powder guns again. They are a big part of American history and seems like a great hobby.
Probably one of the only people ive seen on youtube say Fusil de chasse correctly. Also good video.
I know. I know. Sometimes you just have to shoot with bare balls.
I very much enjoy all your videos Mike and always look forward to learning a bit history!
Mike, I was beginning to think you had lost it until you finally explained your loading sequence. Your explanation makes good sense.
That was a really interesting video and congratulations on your fortitude in the cold! Once the surgery on my spine has healed I'll be at the range testing chewed balls. I remember a reference made to them in an archaeological programme where an Independence War era house/hospital was dug and one was found. They thought a soldier had bitten it whilst having a bit of himself removed. I would have thought something softer would have been better!
For what it's worth, my favorite 20 ga smooth bore loading recipe is powder followed by veg fiber wadd soaked in peanut oil followed by chewed .610 ball. If the friction fit is not enough to hold the ball I split some of the wadd and use a thin slice on top of the ball. I only use this at the range or on trail walk shoots where I am keeping the muzzle up till shooting, not for a hunting setting where the muzzle will be in many up down positions. This gives me very good accuracy and keeps the fouling at bay for all day shooting plus easy cleaning. Tried olive oil but it goes bad after a while. Also coconut oil works well. And peanut and coconut oils smell good too. I'm using 80 grains of 2ff that works well but I will have to try going up to see if I get the same results you did Mike. Thanks again for all the insights, teaching, and entertainment.
And if you've ever had chewed balls, ya know how painful that can be! (With apologies to Mike, and to TV movie host "The Ghoul..")
Mike I will agree with the sight issue. I believe repeating the test with a smooth bore with a full set of sights will have the same end results just smaller groups. Can't wait to see the video. Stay warm.
"Ach du lieber, mein freund", we must always remember to put on our "big boy pants" when talking about muzzleloading! After all, we are all "brothers in da balls" aren't we???!!! Pardon the "course jesting" but I just had to get that off my chest! Always wonderful to watch your videos. Now go on & have a "ball" for yourself!
Great seeing you on the range again, I'm thinking shooting now and then while building your rifle helps with stress.
Thanks for the video Mike!
That's one well tuned lock.
Golf balls are made with dimples to make them more aerodynamic. I have no idea what a lead ball looks like after a hot gas explosion. Thanks duelist1954. Good demonstration.
Yes! Keep working at it Mike, I want to see that beast shoot! Hope you're back at Duelist's Den soon too. :)
Really informative video. Gave a like for all the weather you had to endure.
You got better groups with the smooth balls. Fusil De Chasse is still my favorite of the smoothbores.
Mine is an old Northwest trade gun. Built it from one of Curly's "kits" basically a box of parts and a piece of wood that "kind of" looks like a gunstock.
Always learning from you, thank you.
Mike, I am very interested in learning to shoot my Fowler the way they were shot. I learn a lot from you - thanks. As for NSSA's comment, I am not surprised that there is more to it, such as load development, than just the surface texture of the ball. In a different subject, I now have an Uberti 1851 Navy to learn to shoot, too.
Love your vids Mike !
Not gonna lie though.
Chewed Balls did make me chuckle.
I don't know about accuracy, but dimpling on a golf ball significantly increases distance traveled.
I agree. But of course distance is desired in a golf ball and accuracy is a function of body mechanics to the clubhead. I don't see how it would matter with the velocities and distance to the target in a smoothbore firearm. He may need to adjust the charge for the chewed balls to re acquire accuracy. Now with the chewed balls accuracy may improve at greater distances with the golf ball dimpling effect. I thought of golf balls the first thing.
Golf balls spin, and the dimples amplify the aerodynamic effects of the spin. A proper golf shot has backspin, which produces lift, which increases distance. A bad golf shot has sidespin, which gives you the classic slice. Dimples have no effect on non-spinning smoothbore balls. If there's any accuracy gain to be had, it's probably just that the dimpling process from the modern tool increases uniformity.
Very informative, gonna try it myself with out a patch on the ball.
I roll my .61s to get them perfectly round in an old dryer with the paddles remove.. Look like a factory swaged ball. THEN I roll them between two horseshoe rasp. More aggressive "teeth marks" and ball needs no wadding and work like fouling scratches. Accuracy is on par with rifles out to 75 yards. Doubt? Ask the people I shot against.
Well you don't have to worry about this video getting age restricted. UA-cam has no issue with people playing with their balls on the platform.
Shooting them might be a different way to look at them! UA-cam too!
If u look at it the wrong way
This is dedication! Looking forward to those smoothbore techniques. Thanks Mike. I'm guessing that you were the only one there at the range. ;-)
A good information video, and the results I feel are representative of the average shooter. For accuracy and velocity a patched spit ball is hard to beat.
This makes me think about my golf ball cannon. I have not fired it over a great distance, but I have fired a 1lb lead ball , a golf ball and a handful of marbles out of it... I have to say the marbles are the most accurate being it has a smooth bore and no sights.
I have used dimpled balls in my Ardesa Old Ironside .69 Naval Cannon and found the consistency to be much improved over smooth balls shooting over 25yds.
Thanks for this vid. Saved alot of us the freezing effort. Think no wad between ball and powder on cap and ball revolver would just as or more accurate than using the wad? Rifling negate ant difference?
Interesting. One thing I noticed is your ignition seemed instant. Impressive for a flintlock at least it impressed me.
And the flash of the priming powder was next to nothing
Wich helps with the flinch lock syndrome.
That range has great acoustics.
chewed balls LOL, im a bit slow on the uptake , it took a couple o sec's to register , then i was chuckling like a fool , i have a son in 8th grade and its exactly what i would expect from him , cheers big ears
I wonder what long term use of chewed balls does to the smooth bore barrel? I also noticed the almost instantaneous ignition as well and wondered about it.. Good video Mike.. Take care of that shoulder...
Gregg Woods Lead is so soft I doubt it has any effect on the barrel compared to a smooth ball.
....good video. Thanks again
Not to disparage the maker, but I think it's suppose to look more like a golf ball than a disco ball.
I wonder what a 4 second vs 10 second ball looks like?
It works. Horse hoof rasp work for me.
I'm still looking around into flintlocks but I think the wadding instead of a patch is what is causing the inaccuracy. Think of smoke falling on a smooth surface and it's distribution over that surface is pretty even, now think of that smoke falling on a rough surface and the smoke isn't very evenly distributed over the surface like fog in the mountains. With a regular patch it may be more accurate due to the patch creating a smoother surface for the gasses to surround. Just my thinking but correct me if I'm wrong.
Have you ever used Sheeps wool for wadding?
Good luck on the next round of tests . I enjoy these videos I learn a little with each one . With your hurt shoulder why do you not use a padded stock or shoulder pad ?
Hola Mike. Un video muy bueno. Saludos desde España.
I stopped doing that when one of them came around the barn and damn near hit me in the head.
Fascinating video to watch. Thanks for producing it!
Since the purpose of dimpling on golf balls is to provide "lift", and then only with a projectile spinning against the direction of travel, it seems obvious that any deformity on the face of a projectile will adversely affect accuracy and increase drag.
Reason why i like mike, what he said beginning of the video
I never heard of putting the patch after the ball very interesting
I'm a bit old fashioned as I like using the Goex data as they publish, 2F powder is for 50 caliber at 60 grains or less. 3F is for 45 caliber or smaller. Where as 1F is for 50 caliber with a powder charge of 70 grains or more and with any caliber larger. In the days gone by, 1F was also known as Government powder. In a smooth bore of 20 gauge or larger 1F powder is correct. The larger powder granules actually have a reduction to the recoil without affecting ball velocity. You should try to recover a fired round ball into a ballistic bullet recovery tube that is filled with rolled surgical cotton so as to determine if the balls are obstulating in the bores and picking up the rifling and becoming sealed in the barrels riflings, with 90 grains or greater amounts of powder this should be happening. As a side note the Government load for Frankfort Armory 45-70 was with 1F powder. Golf balls are covered with a relatively soft covering after the inner core is wrapped with a long rubber band, the club smacks the outer skin thus allowing a grip of the balls outer skin to flex the inner core also flexes thus the golfers arms are not being subjected to the shock wave of having to strike a solid ball. But original smooth golf balls were more dense and had a tendency of glancing off of a wood iron face. So you shouldn't compare lead round balls chewed to golf balls. Perhaps a rough cast Cannon ball would be better. Otherwise a nice video.
Mike, what about taking balls and simply rolling them around on a piece of coarse-grained sandpaper, with a little pressure applied by the palm of the hand?
Doesn’t the dimples on a golf ball make it more stable in flight? If so, i don’t see why this wouldn’t work.
try shooting a golf ball out of a musket
It's been done, watch Demolition Ranch.
I don't think the way he was making them was leaving the ball round. I'd like to see him use a micrometer on his balls, his lead balls.
dimples on golf balls are for aerodynamics, somehow they make them fly faster and farther
No consistent spin
Thank you ill give it a try
I'll say this 70-80 grains is enough for a smooth bore.
Because after 60 yards the pattern is too big for good kill shot placement.
Your gun might be different.
good video
Test request. To my mind these should offer less drag than a standard roundball much the way a dimpled golf ball does over a smooth one. I would be curious to see these shot out of one of your rifles side by side with the roundballs and see if they impact higher due to less drag. Keep up the great work!
Well, as noted, they dimple golf balls for a reason. Mythbusters show noted a good effect on fuel economy from dimpling a car body. So it seems likely that if you dimple a musket ball like a golf ball, it will probably result in higher velocity downrange.
And yet, modern high speed rifle projectiles are not dimpled. Consider why.
I haven't seen any such testing, though. It could be that dimples are effective with lower velocity rounds, and ineffective with high velocity rounds. Or not.
If it were golfballike, it would go farther in a volley fire situation. I'm unclear if accuracy is affected.
I always thought the reason for chewed balls was so the ball made contact with the bore while being shot to improve accuracy
It is. It is a windage eater.
Mmmm? as a golfer I can tell ya any spin is going to change the trajectory, even tho you had a smooth bore the wad (blanket) gots to maybe snag a little and spin the ball , I have a old Herters mold that leaves a proud spur which I sand down while watching youtube vids, works good , but use corrugated cardboard (punch cut) for a over ball wad , I can hold a 5" group at 50yds with a DP mortimer fowler , luv it
that was not in my head until you put it there
Maybe the reason they chewed the musket balls was to decrease the diameter of the ball when they are oversized for the musket?
The oval shape might have added some accuracy, similar to an American football.
Any of y'all know of any modern smoothbore muzzleloaders that are currently in production? Like ones with a synthetic stock.
.... eh???
Been a while since I've seen one but sportsman's warehouse used to carry a Hawkins style stainless steel cap and ball with a laminated stock but that was a rifled barrel
What is the point in that? Just get a modern cartridge shooting firearm.
Ive had a idea but never had the fowler to do it with how about cutting out rifle slugs from a 20 guage an seeing the results
Never chew dry balls!!!
The problem is the balls have to really be chewed, not ran a machine. By the time you get done chewing them for real you'll make ever shot count LOL
Wonder what would happen if you do powder patch then ball. Both kinds
Mike, again, thanks for doing so much of our homework. I was wondering if you had heard anything from the NSSA , in regards to loading and smoothbore accuracy, since posting this video?
An earful. It seems that they lube them with liquid Alox. They all swear to great results.
Interesting, looking forward to seeing how this develops. Thanks for taking the time to reply.
My guess is the chewed balls wouldn't load faster as they wouldnt necessarily require wadding or a patch.
Makes sense. Think of the dimples in a golf ball.
Great video. Seems to me just hitting the paper at 50 yards is exceptionally good shooting. I am like you not enough difference to go through any extra effort to shoot chewed balls.
I would assume that as many other comments have pointed out it's like the dimpling on a golf ball. Though this is made for distance as far as I know, rather than accuracy, so while this was an interesting test it would be better if you were shooting at a longer range I'd have thought. By which i mean you'd expect less bullet drop.
So, I wonder if you could make chewed balls easily by putting a handful of them in a vibratory case tumbler and let them slam into one another for a day or two?
*for those of you still in the 8th grade* killed me haha
The traditional fusil has no rear sight, right? How much of it do you think was the inherent accuracy of the gun/balls, and how much do you think was the sights keeping you from taking advantage of that inherent accuracy? I am not sure I trust all that wind, either. :3
Aha, I posted that before the video was over, haha. Looking forward to seeing how your further research goes!
One more thing to remember, don't put more than one of any size ball in the base. They tend to stick together and fly everywhere!!
Either way, your cleaning my clock at 50 yards. A deer would hafta play pro catcher for me to hit a paper plate at 50. I’m off to the range for more science!
Steve has come a long way from doing chainmail by hand.
I also stoped using chewed balls . Never got the accuracy’s as with plain bare balls with tow on top
Chewed balls hurt and are prone to swelling
theol31 Mike warned us about those 8th grader viewers...
mannys9130 I couldn't, sorry
Growing OLD is inevitable. Growing UP is optional.
Hickok45 addressed a similar issue up front on his colt dragoon video, with the phrase “ball grease.”
I wonder if an accuracy difference will be apparent with patched chewed balls at longer range ie 50-75 yards?
Well, you’d scare the blazes off those English Interlopers Along New France’s frontier !
Unless I’m really wrong, powder,ball, was was the way military smoothbores were historically loaded.
Good intro.😄
So would you put patches after the ball in a rifle, like a Hawken?
No. Seat the rifle ball in a cloth patch.
Golf balls are dimpled to increase range and accuracy. Perhaps there is something to it for black powder enthusiasts.
it does seem that if it works for golf balls it would work for a musket. I would expect 10% or more accuracy+range
Mike, how did you make the spout for your black powder can (appears to be a 30-06 case soldered to the metal can lid)?
Sir I want to know i have a shotgun. 410 conberte on massolauoter I want to know waht cal I had to use 45 oh smaller please can you tell me Im Sgt A Gonzalez from P.R.but i live in fitchburg massachusett if you can help il thankyou for it sir
My trade gun 62 cal dont do gd at all bare ball. 36" colerain barrel. I find a 600 ball patched with cloth..greased with ( fat) processed fr taken game usually bear fat rendered down.. Shot best. I do use lubes like " wonderlube" and bore butter... Works ok. Bare ball in my gun doesn't really do well enough. Ive even had .575 balls dbl patched shoot better than bare ball. My gun is a David Dolliver built northwest trade gun 1998 production. 62 cal
Wonder if hornets nest wading would work or would it be better for shot loads.
there is hope for me and my smooth-bore Baker.
tony Wyatt didn't know bakers came in a smooth bore version
The baker didn't come in smoothbore, but the reproductions are all smoothbore.
rw mine is not
Christopher Hess is your Baker one of the ones that The Rifle Shop made several years ago? I ask because theirs are the only ones I've ever heard of being actual close to original repros with a rifled barrel.
It was a rifle shop gun made about 2 years ago IIRC
I will qualify myself as not knowing a lot about smooth bore muzzle loaders. I think you should repeat that test with very tightly patched balls. I have always had people tell me that a tightly patched smooth bore was more accurate. The military forces of the world did load loosely more as a matter of increased reloading speed as one line of standing soldiers fired into another standing group of soldiers.
Dimpled balls: The increase of accuracy is supposed to happen once in flight. Likely going down the barrel unpatched might not be the most accurate way of loading.
Interesting results. I just recently got a Reproduction 1861 Springfield. I would be interested in meeting up to do a channel collaboration and you can teach me a little about muzzleloaders. I’m in the south central PA area.
The other claims are that they were chewed to make them more painful/damaging (this was thought to be true), or that found chewed balls were used in amputations. In reality many have been chewed by animals later on. There is no evidence that anyone thought that chewing them made them more accurate. Oh, and no evidence that this is where "bite the bullet" came from either, before anyone says it. Edit, that phrase is probably from biting on bullets during corporal punishment.
I wonder if it could also improve cavitation.
I am curious, what is the point of the wad over the ball? Is the ball a bit smaller than the bore, and the wad is so the ball doesn't shift?
Yup. You've got it.
I have a hard time buying the "chewed" ball concept but if it works for someone, so be it. "Each gun is a law unto itself" is very true. I just finished a project with my two Glock 9mm's, a 17 and a 19. The 17 shoots anything well so I'm using 3.8 grs of Clays powder. The 19 hates fast burning powders so I went to Hodgdon's Universal and it shoots great. I'll never understand why guns are like that. Why would it make such a difference? It'll shoot 7" groups with Clays and 3" groups with Universal at 20 yards consistently. Don't get it.
you could try changing your top wadding material, something is not working..
I run a rasp over my .735, .725 round balls to take up the windage between the ball and the bore.
I've heard long ago that native Americans use to chew led shot to make rounds. But never seen this before.
Humm like a golf ball with
Hell your better than me!
Okay, I have never seen this rough coat ball method before in the U.K. I have a smoothbore 50cal Hawken replica, what ball mould would you recommend, and what about this roughed up method on that size ball...???? I feel that my ball mould is a tad small perhaps...!!!
.490 to .495 should work. You can lube the ball with liquid alox
Thanks for the heads up, I am using a .495 mould, but use a thin patch sometimes with about 65 grains powder. Dependent on how much I have really, sometimes as little as 55 grains. It is much more awkward to get any over here as far as the boys in blue are concerned. It is not exactly cheap either, one expects it is to minimise usage by the general public...... enjoyed this clip though, excellent sound as well despite the wind...
What size roundball would you use for a TC New Englander 12ga ml.
12 gauge is right there at .72 caliber.
If your loading method works for smooth bore, will it work with a rifled barrel using w/ roundball?
Many decades ago, I played golf. Golf balls are dimpled, not smooth. The theory is that the dimples "trip the boundary layer," leading to turbulent air flow around the ball. Otherwise, with a smooth ball, the flow can be laminar, which at certain air velocities is very unstable, switching erratically between laminar and turbulent flow, which changes the flight of the ball unpredictably. The speed of a bullet is typically faster than a golf ball, so maybe that theory doesn't come into play. The transition between laminar and turbulent flow is determined by the "Reynolds Number," which depends upon the velocity, geometry of the object, and the air properties. I forget everything else.
I just realized, the Reynold's number explains why I gave up golf and why my shooting is so lousy. I'm going to stick with that story.
HAHAAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH Google ARGHHHHHH hahahahahahahahah....Awesome video.... I can actually see the shock/Horror of some green horn googling that term "Chewed Balls" and what the search engine brings forth. Just imagine. I know it is sad.