.500 balls?

Jackrabbit1957 said:
Pictures, or it never happened! I would think doubling the powder charge would work just fine, the 25 grns may be the minimum accurate load while 50 would be the maximum accurate load. If you're shooting at people you are most likely gonna be fairly close so minute of bad guy is all that's required.
Click to expand...

Ha ha, okay I'll post a pic. Pretty sure that when I tell the story of that rifle, some think: "it never happened". But my wife's family were prolific diary writers. Been meaning to take some pics anyway, as I keep trying to I.D. the maker, but never get any responses when I post the question. I've tried contacting collectors but never get a reply, and I've posted it on forums before. So...but she's in the very back of one of the safes, so it might take a day or so, we'll see.
 
Jim Watson said:
My neighbor the gunsmith assembled his own .40 from Dixie mechanical parts but carved the stock out of a cherry plank. I gave him a magazine with a picture of a half stock sorta Hawken and he scaled the stock style off the photograph.

I don't recall what patched ball diameter he started out with, but he fooled around and found that a .38-40 bullet completely coated in lube would seat smoothly, hold in place over the powder, and shoot accurately. Kind of a modern iteration of the "picket ball."

Several states' game laws gave .40 as the minimum caliber for muzzleloading deer season, I figure because of the popularity of the Dixies in the early days of black powder revival. I know his was effective, even with a ball before he found that a bullet would work.
Click to expand...

Welp, if he loaded at least 40 grains of powder he should have gotten at least 1100 - 1200 FPS with the 180 grain .38-40 bullet, about the same as a Winchester or Marlin in that chambering. And plenty of deer were killed with rifles in .38-40. It's as least as potent as a pistol in 10mm.
 
hawg said:
Unless the maker signed the top barrel flat you'll never know who made it.
Click to expand...

It has a maker's mark, on the top-flat, "PB" (no NOT a Phillip Beck!) but I think it could just be a one off deal, maybe the maker just made a couple or something. And it's a very plain, simple build. I kind of doubt it was made by a known rifle maker. Yes, most likely I'll never know. I've done a little research into "PB", but I couldn't really find a maker that matched the time or place. And of course it could have been made anywhere and still showed up in Independence Missouri, and the age of the rifle when traded is unkown....so that don't nail it down very much either.
 
Jim Watson said:
He used an 8mm Mauser case as a powder measure, however much that holds.
Click to expand...

I did some googling and an 8mm Mauser case has a volume of 4.09 cubic cm. I then dug up my copy of the Lee Dipper chart. Lee Dippers are graduated in cubic cm and they list capacity for 1Fg, 2Fg, and 3Fg.

ASSuming that he used 3Fg it about 64 grains of powder, which is a pretty good load in a .40, and would actually put his load closer to .40-60 Winchester which used a 210 grain bullet, than .38-40. .40-65 WCF used a 260 grain bullet. No wonder it worked well on deer.
 
Ugly Sauce said:
It has a maker's mark, on the top-flat, "PB" (no NOT a Phillip Beck!) but I think it could just be a one off deal, maybe the maker just made a couple or something. And it's a very plain, simple build. I kind of doubt it was made by a known rifle maker. Yes, most likely I'll never know. I've done a little research into "PB", but I couldn't really find a maker that matched the time or place. And of course it could have been made anywhere and still showed up in Independence Missouri, and the age of the rifle when traded is unkown....so that don't nail it down very much either.
Click to expand...

I found an unknown maker of Kentucky rifles during an unknown time frame. A Peter Barrett but he was an inspector for Colt in 1862 and a Pomeroy Booth in 1862 but I didn't find out anything else about him. He was probably an inspector for somebody but they all used the PB stamp.
 
gwpercle said:
Never feel dumb asking an honest question .
I figured a rifle ... back in the day barrels were "freshed out " to the next diameter but hadn't considered 20 gauge . Learned something new today ...
Thanks for asking !
Gary
Click to expand...

I had a D'OH moment when I said 20 gauge. A .500 is too small for a 20.
 
hawg said:
Unless the maker signed the top barrel flat you'll never know who made it.
Click to expand...
It's possible the maker put a mark on the the bottom flat as well. Has Ugly taken it out of the stock? If not it may be worth a look. I have an antique Japanese sword that's signed under the handle. Turns out it was made by a very well known blade smith around 1800.
 
Jackrabbit1957 said:
It's possible the maker put a mark on the the bottom flat as well. Has Ugly taken it out of the stock? If not it may be worth a look. I have an antique Japanese sword that's signed under the handle. Turns out it was made by a very well known blade smith around 1800.
Click to expand...
Good question, I did have the barrel out many-many years ago, and don't remember any markings. The rifle did need some restoration when I got it, it had set in a bank-vault for 50 years, standing in a corner, so the stock had dried out and cracked in the wrist, just from the weight of the barrel.(also still loaded with a dry-ball) Anyhow, I'd be pretty reluctant to remove the barrel again, but could do it. Don't want to. However, I would think the PB would make or break it as far as identifying the maker. If not, not that important with all the other provenance and documentation. It will never be sold or out of the family, and if it is after I croak, a curse upon them that did it!! So I'm not looking for the "value", or any interest in selling it or putting it in a museum. I think most museums take crappy care of firearms.

Well, if it stops raining, I think the cloudy outside light will make for a good photo session. Then I'll throw it out on THR and some other forums and see if I get any "bites".
 
The gauge of a .50" smooth bore would be equal to how many .500" balls it took to make a pound.
 
Ugly Sauce said:
Truth. Plus, what ball size works best in any caliber depends on the "personality" of the specific barrel. So to squeeze the best performance out of any barrel, one will want to experiment with different ball size and patch size combinations.
Click to expand...

I knew, long ago, a guy who could barely shoot his beloved old family muzzle loader because it liked ONE type of patch for whatever reason, and that got discontinued so he had like 20 different bags of patches, and had gone to the fabric store to try out different things in a quest to find one it liked.

If anyone thinks seeking /precisely/ the right load for your rifle is hard, or it's annoying how your .22 only works with one brand, some muzzle loaders are apparently all but magic and super duper finicky about things that make little apparent sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Mn Fats
  • Locked
Track of the Wolf cast vs swaged Hornady
Replies
15
Views
701
Mike 56
M
Sburk1993
  • Locked
Opinions of mold manufacturers
Replies
15
Views
544
Officers'Wife
Officers'Wife
SlowFuse
  • Locked
What's your go-to round ball?
2 3 4
Replies
83
Views
5K
W. Bittle
W
R
  • Locked
Combination Bullet/Round Ball mold: Anybody used one?
Replies
6
Views
505
Gatofeo
Gatofeo
F
  • Locked
First blackpowder rifle - Need accessories...
Replies
13
Views
1K
rehoppe
R
Back
Top