I put some bling on the Short Snorter, but it didn't make her shoot any better. Range Report.

[Ugly Sauce]

Yep, I slapped on some bling. I kind of like it, might not be your piece of cake. !!

Anyhow, range report, probably/maybe might get long. Dang, it DID get long!

This is the best I could do with it, at 50 yards. The Miroku lumpy bore just don't want to shoot. I did, do want to use it as a trekking gun, as it's powerful, relatively light, shoulders fast, 100% reliable, and carries well. This best target was with 100 grains 2fg Goex, single 570" ball, and .015" patch. Wax wad over powder, and a felt wad over that. Some of the patches were blown pretty bad, so one last thing I can try is going back to the .565" ball and use a thicker patch. But by this time, I figured I had made enough noise for the day. The Short Snorter does have a bark as bad as it's bite.

I started out with the double-ball load, which was 100 grains 3fg Swiss, wax wad, patched .565" ball, felt wad, second patched ball. With that load she printed high and right, I mean real high, but only a 4.75" spread between the balls at 50. One load I forgot the wad between the balls, and that opened the spread a lot. Like a foot. Recoil was "serious".

Well, printing so high was not what I was really looking for, so I thought I'd re-visit some slugs. First the REAL 440, which comes out of my mold at 456 grains. 100 grains 3fg Swiss. SPG lube. Just as in the past, two shots would show promise, then a wild flyer to the right. I tried it with some different wad combinations, but same results. Boy, those REALs sure cut the cleanest holes. Those things are stable. The holes look like they were cut out with a punch or razor of exacto knife or something.

Then I went to some .575" Minne' balls, 525 grains. Hollow base filled with bondo, and then bullet dipped in hot bee's wax. I had experimented with these in my 1861 last year, with mixed results. They were left-overs from that. These bullets are too undersized, and will drop right down the bore. The thick wax coating keeps them centered, and "fits" them to the bore. Same thing, high and right, (real high) and after couple of promising shots, wild flyer way right. Bullet holes showed they were flying stable and nose first. No signs of tipping. Flyers were cutting clean holes.

So...I don't know. At 25-30 yards or closer the double ball load would provide good bear defense, but I would not trust it for subsistence deer hunting over 40 yards in an emergency. If her only talent is 25 yard blasting, I might as well take my short little (legal) 12 gauge double. At least it will take small game with shot loads. If I was Mr. Money bags, I'd have that barrel smooth bored out as far as possible, and it would shoot better at 50 than what it is doing now.

The slug loads I don't trust, as I don't know when a wild flyer will happen. It's funny that the REAL will not shoot consistently.

I know some will say if I throttle back the powder charges she may shoot, but as a defense gun in grizzly country I just can't justify less than 100 grains. Other opinions will vary, for sure, and that's okay.

Next shooting session, I'll try the .565's and a thicker patch. In the mean time, the Short Snorter says "thanks for listening", and she hopes you like her BLING. !!!

 

[hawg]

The bling looks good. The sling and wrist cover look out of place. Have you tried lapping the bore?

 

[Jackrabbit1957]

You're right Ugly, some are gonna say back off on the powder charge,, me included. Why not just for fun start off with 70 grains and work your way up towards your preferred load? That beast may surprise you with how accurate it can be. Come on, give it a try!

 

[brewer12345]

Just curious, how did you put the brass tacks on?

 

[Choctaw]

The bling looks good. The sling and wrist cover look out of place. Have you tried lapping the bore?

I like it too but agree about the sling and wrist cover.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

Just curious, how did you put the brass tacks on?

Drilled shallow pilot holes, then tapped them in. Same with the little brass nails.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

You're right Ugly, some are gonna say back off on the powder charge,, me included. Why not just for fun start off with 70 grains and work your way up towards your preferred load? That beast may surprise you with how accurate it can be. Come on, give it a try!

I know, and you guys aren't wrong. The stickler is that if I ever did have to face off with Grizz and shoot him, would I want, in that situation, 70 grains, or 100 grains behind the ball or slug? That is the question. And now with it's short barrel I'll never be hunting with it again, so just 50 yard accuracy would suffice. When hunting out of a camp, I have both the 1861, Bessie and a nice TC "Hawken" for back-ups. So I wouldn't even use it for that purpose.

I am asking a lot of a rifle with Minne' rifling to shoot with a heavy charge, actually an unrealistic expectation. A properly sized Minne' ball with the service charge would probably work fine, even in that lumpy bore. Perhaps with a modified thicker skirt to up the charge a bit. Do I want to buy another mold to do that? Not at the moment. Some would say that would put plenty of hurt on Grizz, but again I'd really rather have a heavy hunting charge. Anyhow, I'll have to do some re-thinking

On the other hand, I have plenty of other "Trekking Guns", so it's not a big necessity to get the Short Snorter up to speed. I just think it has great "Cool Factor", stubby little "Canoe" or "TeePee" gun. So, I guess if I just can't get it to shoot with a heavy charge, I can try more normal charges and she'll still be a shooter. I have one more option, and that is the .565" ball with a .020-.023" patch.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

I like it too but agree about the sling and wrist cover.

The bore is too lumpy to lap out. There was a lot of chatter, or stopping and starting when it was bored. The rifling is clean and good, but it's the very shallow three groove Minne' ball rifling.

Okay, I've got a confession on the wrist cover. This was my first muzzle loader, got it when I was young and dumb. I abused it badly in my early twenties. I made it shorter and shorter several times without the assortment of tools I have now. When Navy Arms came out with it's "Buffalo Hunter", I tried to make it into one of those. Then in more recent years I says to myself: "this old iron ain't good for much, I'm gonna make a "Canoe" gun out of it".

During those dark times, I put two different tang sights on it. The two tacks behind the tang cover two big holes. The next tang sight I wanted further back, but with the more pronounced curve there I attempted to inlet the base of the tang into the stock. I butchered it really bad. I cannot inlet stuff into wood. I filled the ragged crater up with epoxy and sanded it down, and man what a mess. So the wrist cover...wait for it...covers that up. !! However, it does feel great, gives the wrist a better grip, and better feeling grip when shooting. The failed inletting mess looks way worse than the cover. Trust me!

The slide sling I also did in the dark days, but it's very functional, and very comfortable if you sling the rifle front or back. And for a trekking rifle or any long gun where you don't know what situation you might find yourself in, climbing up or down an almost-cliff, crossing a stream that's running hard, crawling along the ground with a broken leg, etc., a secure side sling is an asset.

 

[Choctaw]

Oh yeah, we all have projects that went south instead of the way we had hoped. lol

 

[J-Bar]

I have never had to defend against a grizzly, or other wild animal, or human for that matter. After reading your range report I keep thinking about Hugh Glass and his experience with a grizzly using a single shot firearm. If I were in your position, I would be carrying a double shotgun or maybe a pump loaded with slugs. Using a somewhat inaccurate single shot to protect my life would be better than a knife I guess, but not much. Please don’t become another Hugh Glass!

 

[Ugly Sauce]

I have never had to defend against a grizzly, or other wild animal, or human for that matter. After reading your range report I keep thinking about Hugh Glass and his experience with a grizzly using a single shot firearm. If I were in your position, I would be carrying a double shotgun or maybe a pump loaded with slugs. Using a somewhat inaccurate single shot to protect my life would be better than a knife I guess, but not much. Please don’t become another Hugh Glass!

I hear you. From a totally logical viewpoint, using anything less than my .350 or .45-70 Marlin might be foolish. However, one can "play the odds" to some extent, and be safe. I've mentioned before that my two hour drive up to the mountains is a much greater danger than getting attacked by Grizz.

Roaming the mountains with primitive weapons gives me so much pleasure, that I'm willing to take the chance. And how I arm myself usually depends on my "mood" or mental state at the time. If I'm feeling puny, yeah then I take a .303, or one of my 7.65mm Monkey Mausers, one of my double hammer shotguns, something like that. I feel fairly confident with a .30-30, more power than a .44 Mag pistol. Other times I truly feel that to die in the mountains is not a bad fate, better than a nursing home bed, or on the side of the highway. Those times I'll take Bessie, or my Jeager, which both pack enough punch to even my odds against Grizz.

Sometimes I have really felt invincible and thrown caution to the wind, and trekked and explored with a powerful bow, and my Plains Pistol! And one time, with that set-up, got between mama black bear and her small cub. !!! All things considered, I don't think being Hugh Glass is the worst fate that can happen. And again, it sounds dramatic and corny at the same time, what better way to die, and what better day to die than one in the mountains? !!!!

And it is true, sometimes some really powerful, repeating rifles have failed to stop Grizz. So there are no guarantees.

Now, I been thinking, (and it's not an advantage to be able to type as fast as one thinks) concerning the Short Snorter, that I am kind of approaching things from the wrong end. I did have my heart set on 100 grains minimum. But the guys are "probably" right, I think, next range session, I'll start low, with the .565" ball and .020" patch, see if the gun will shoot at all, and then go up. Get either a base-line, or decide the gun just won't shoot, period. Perhaps I can work up closer to 100 grains, then say 60-70 grains. I think I could live with an 85 grain load. And, I've got enough 2fg and musket caps, and lead to do more experimentation.

As is, I could call it good with the 100 grain double load, if 25 yard and closer defense is the only criteria. But, I think even a trekking gun needs a bit more utility than that, and the capability of placing a good shot on a deer size animal at at least 50 yards, and 75 would be even better. !

 

[Jackrabbit1957]

Now you're on the right track Ugly! Find out if it really shoots by starting at caliber size in powder and go up from there. It might just surprise ya!

 

[Ugly Sauce]

It would surprise me...but it would be a good surprise. It will be interesting regardless. Yeah, guess I don't need to be fixated on it being a super-blaster or a bolt of lightning. As far as a trek gun, I often trek with less, a .30-30, or my .357 Carbine. Any .58 will outshine both of those! Dang I hate it when reality steps in!

 

[Ugly Sauce]

I have never had to defend against a grizzly,

I have encountered three Grizzlies in my life, two ran away like I was the devil himself, and the third kind of hurried away, which was nice as we were about 25 yards apart, I never would have pulled my pistol in time. May have got a shot off with a rifle, if I had had one, as I never sling mine. Always have a sling, but never use it other than to cross a stream, climb a steep thing, or something like that.