Elric
Well-Known Member
Shooting and Fishing, vol 37, no 17, Feb 2, 1905 page 352
https://books.google.com/books?id=EZMwAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA352&dq=rifle+load+ball&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjI3ZOhuI3QAhUN5GMKHSqQD3IQ6AEISTAJ#v=onepage&q=rifle load ball&f=false
AN ENGLISH SPORTSMANS EXPERIENCE
CHARGES FOR GAME SHOOTING.
Regarding the use of round balls, of which I note a most complete line in the Ideal HandBook, I would say that I believe in them for bagging small game; but my experience is that much depends on the depth of the grooves and the rate of twist of the rifling. I have never been able to get regular accuracy from a Winchester .38-55 using a round ball, and believe that this is owing to the grooves being so shallow that the lands do not grip the ball sufficiently. This rifle would probably do well with a short conical bullet, as it shoots the factory ammunition with exquisite accuracy.
On the other hand, a Maynard .40-60 which has rather deep grooves and one turn in 26 inches, will shoot round balls slightly hardened, very satisfactorily with any charge from 5 grains of fine black powder up to 48 grains of Curtis’s & Harvey No. 6. With the latter it will place several successive shots in an inch bull at 50 yards and in 3 1/2 inches at 100 yards. A Maynard .32-35, which also has deep grooving, but a much quicker twist,—1 in 15 inches - carries round balls of 45 grains very nicely when the powder charge is limited to 10 grains of No. 6 powder, but is liable to occasional wild shots when that amount is exceeded. I think the Marlin repeater would probably carry round balls better than the Winchester, through having deeper grooves.
When wishing to use round balls I always load with wads. First a card wad, then one punched from a shotgun felt wad, previously soaked in a hot mixture of vaseline and paraflin and then a thin paper wad to prevent the ball from sticking to the felt wad. With light balls this sometimes makes a difference in the accuracy, as I fancy they are sometimes deflected a bit at the muzzle unless the paper wad is used.
John Rigby, the well-known English rifle maker, wrote a letter to a sportsman's paper some years ago, drawing attention to the fact that the use of thick lubricating wads enables round balls to be fired in rifles with heavy powder charges without the risk of stripping. Of course for mere gallery practice with light loads, this is of minor consequence, but for small game shooting it is a great advantage, because the trajectory of the ball can thus be made very flat, and furthermore the round ball is safe for use in thickly populated districts on account of its comparatively short range.
For all the above-mentioned work I prefer black powder, having never been able to obtain such good shooting with smokeless. The bullets can be placed in as narrow a width of group with the latter, but the elevation generally varies more, and certainly in the small bores I have never been troubled with the smoke. Even in shotguns I believe that black powder is still the best for certain kinds of game. No doubt the various smokeless powders are the best for ordinary loads of the usual sizes of shot, but for buckshot the case is different. In order to have a sufficient number of pellets for long range, there is not enough of the shell left for turning down, and consequently smokeless powder is not confined sufficiently to develop its strength. Even with the usual loads of three drams bulk and 1 1/8 ounces for a 12 bore, and 2 3/4 drams and I ounce for a 16 bore, the full strength of smokeless powder is not obtained because the friction of such large shot is much less, bulk for bulk, than with the ordinary sizes.
https://books.google.com/books?id=EZMwAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA352&dq=rifle+load+ball&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjI3ZOhuI3QAhUN5GMKHSqQD3IQ6AEISTAJ#v=onepage&q=rifle load ball&f=false
AN ENGLISH SPORTSMANS EXPERIENCE
CHARGES FOR GAME SHOOTING.
Regarding the use of round balls, of which I note a most complete line in the Ideal HandBook, I would say that I believe in them for bagging small game; but my experience is that much depends on the depth of the grooves and the rate of twist of the rifling. I have never been able to get regular accuracy from a Winchester .38-55 using a round ball, and believe that this is owing to the grooves being so shallow that the lands do not grip the ball sufficiently. This rifle would probably do well with a short conical bullet, as it shoots the factory ammunition with exquisite accuracy.
On the other hand, a Maynard .40-60 which has rather deep grooves and one turn in 26 inches, will shoot round balls slightly hardened, very satisfactorily with any charge from 5 grains of fine black powder up to 48 grains of Curtis’s & Harvey No. 6. With the latter it will place several successive shots in an inch bull at 50 yards and in 3 1/2 inches at 100 yards. A Maynard .32-35, which also has deep grooving, but a much quicker twist,—1 in 15 inches - carries round balls of 45 grains very nicely when the powder charge is limited to 10 grains of No. 6 powder, but is liable to occasional wild shots when that amount is exceeded. I think the Marlin repeater would probably carry round balls better than the Winchester, through having deeper grooves.
When wishing to use round balls I always load with wads. First a card wad, then one punched from a shotgun felt wad, previously soaked in a hot mixture of vaseline and paraflin and then a thin paper wad to prevent the ball from sticking to the felt wad. With light balls this sometimes makes a difference in the accuracy, as I fancy they are sometimes deflected a bit at the muzzle unless the paper wad is used.
John Rigby, the well-known English rifle maker, wrote a letter to a sportsman's paper some years ago, drawing attention to the fact that the use of thick lubricating wads enables round balls to be fired in rifles with heavy powder charges without the risk of stripping. Of course for mere gallery practice with light loads, this is of minor consequence, but for small game shooting it is a great advantage, because the trajectory of the ball can thus be made very flat, and furthermore the round ball is safe for use in thickly populated districts on account of its comparatively short range.
For all the above-mentioned work I prefer black powder, having never been able to obtain such good shooting with smokeless. The bullets can be placed in as narrow a width of group with the latter, but the elevation generally varies more, and certainly in the small bores I have never been troubled with the smoke. Even in shotguns I believe that black powder is still the best for certain kinds of game. No doubt the various smokeless powders are the best for ordinary loads of the usual sizes of shot, but for buckshot the case is different. In order to have a sufficient number of pellets for long range, there is not enough of the shell left for turning down, and consequently smokeless powder is not confined sufficiently to develop its strength. Even with the usual loads of three drams bulk and 1 1/8 ounces for a 12 bore, and 2 3/4 drams and I ounce for a 16 bore, the full strength of smokeless powder is not obtained because the friction of such large shot is much less, bulk for bulk, than with the ordinary sizes.
Last edited:
