Author Topic: Help with my 209X50 (Read 1616 times)

hntrjack · « **on:** January 15, 2004, 06:01:31 AM »

I have had problems with groups in my 209X50. I have an excellent trigger job and an oversize hindge pin. The forearm is free floated. I have tried three different styles of breech plug. The flat old style, the new generation style with the cup, and a new generation style with a conversion to a shortened 22 hornet case for iginition by PR Bullet.
The rig wears a Leupold 2.5-8 which has been checked by Leupold for defects..none found.
I am using 130 grains of 777 and a dead center 240 grain bullet.
Groups are 2.5-3 inches...TERRIBLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
With this rig I feel the groups should be much better...?

Oh ..I have also tried the new Hornaday SST Muzzleloader bullet in 250 gr..not much better!

DaddyPaul · « **Reply #1 on:** January 15, 2004, 06:06:23 AM »

Have you monkeyed around with different powder charges at all? Maybe a different grain bullet as well. I would try this before sending the barrel back to T/C. Are your scope rings and bases tight?

upnorth · « **Reply #2 on:** January 15, 2004, 09:39:09 AM »

I agree. not every encore likes the same powder/ bullet combo. Mine really likes 100 gr pyro over a 275 gr dead center bullet. 130 gr t7 is pretty hot. you might want to start with 80gr and work up in 5 gr increments from there. keep everything the same.... but only alter one component at a time. don't switch powder and bullets.

tuck789 · « **Reply #3 on:** January 15, 2004, 09:40:48 AM »

I noticed my groups shrink when I took the oversized pin out and put the original one back in. There have been others that had noticed the same. Are you swabbing between shots?

hntrjack · « **Reply #4 on:** January 16, 2004, 06:08:40 AM »

I have used charges from 110 grains to 130 grains, 5 grains at a time.I really love the 777 ..really don't want to go away from it if possible. I also swab with a spit patch between shots. I have not went back to the original hindge pin though..thats a good idea..although I would think the tighter the better? The scope base is a Warn with Leupold rings..have checked and re-checked...definetly tight.

Bullseye · « **Reply #5 on:** January 16, 2004, 04:59:20 PM »

As another poster said, start with 80 gr 777 and work up. 777 is 15% hotter than BP or Pyrodex. 130 gr. is getting up there which generally does not help accuracy. When you start burning that much powder, everthing gets more critical (sabot design, bullet design, etc.) I shoot 80 gr of 777 in mine but it shoots almost as well with 100. I have never gone above 100.

Smiley · « **Reply #6 on:** January 17, 2004, 03:52:48 AM »

Look use common since. The tight pin is best. Have you tried to clean bore and get out all the plastc. Changing around gets it confused. We were having the same problems. Took remington bore cleaner and started fresh. Shoots under 2 inches. Any fouling will cause problems. Use heaver bullets due to twist rate. make sure right sabot and bullet if it a 50 cal..My $.02 <

hkg3k · « **Reply #7 on:** January 17, 2004, 04:22:17 AM »

Should tight(ness) on a hinge pin with a muzzle loader really matter that much if at all?.....except for the extreme possibility where the tolerance would not allow for consistant strike on the primer? There is no ctg case set back variance to cause potential problems as in a ctg gun.

Everything in/on a Encore M/L bbl is self contained, with the exception of your hornet breech plug. Floating the foreend has/will probably make some difference. Changing breechplugs has/will probably also make some difference, although were it me I would go back to a 209 primer.

From what you've explained, you've made an effort to change hardware, but not done alot of projectile/powder combo experimentation. I would try a few more projectiles and start a little lower with your powder charge until I found the sweetspot of the rifle.

Smiley · « **Reply #8 on:** January 17, 2004, 05:56:57 AM »

Well less see. If the barrel shifts a few thousands every time you shoot could that change sight pisture?? would impact be consistent? I think the plan has always been consistency to be accurate. Now unless you close your eyes at every shot, which, then it makes no difference. It goes where it goes. The big deal is also the wood. I have found that several different pieces of wood were tight to the frame, this has to be look at at also. Stick a piece of paper there if it doesn't go in, problem, then the pin makes no difference, due to wood contact. It has to be free all around, not just barrel channel. we have found that 100 grains of 777 worked the best. Nothing out performs Black Powder for concistency. But it is a little dirty but easier to cleanup. If you don't believe that leave rifle over night.. <

Catfish · « **Reply #9 on:** January 17, 2004, 06:48:00 AM »

Mine shot like yours and I had one heck of a time with it. Barns makes an alinement tool, looks like a cleaning jag, and goes on your ram rod. It has a concaved end to aline the bullet axis with the bore axis. They claim it will cut your groups by 1/2 no matter what size you start with. It cut mine by 2/3`s. Turned a very poor shooter into one that is pretty desent. One other thing, mine likes the Serria 210 grn. JHC bullets. I use the Hornady green sabots and 100 grns. of 777. I put a very thin layer of Bore Butter on the sabots and never clean the gun till I`m ready to put it up for storage. I`ve fired over 30 rounds through it without cleaning and the balls never got hard to seat.

jimmyp50 · « **Reply #10 on:** January 17, 2004, 09:07:46 AM »

I have a question as well. If the sight is mounted on the barrel and the barrel is aligned to the sight (scope) and the scope is mounted properly so it does not move in relation to the barrel, how does a hinge pin effect accuracy? The barrel-scope relationship in my mind is what positions the bullet out of the barrel, down range to the target. Does a different hinge pin effect the vibrations of the barrel thus making the end of the barrel position more consistent on the release of the bullet? I have a 209 x 50 as well, I cannot use a scope in Georgia, but a big ragged hole at 60 yds with open sights and 5 consecutive 348 powerbelts, 90 grains of 777 is the best I can do. JimmyP

hkg3k · « **Reply #11 on:** January 17, 2004, 11:30:44 AM »

Exactly my point, Jimmy. When the bbl moves (front to back or laterally), the sight moves relative to the bbl whether its a scope or iron sights. It's not like a bolt action or other where the sight (scope) is attached to a separate receiver.

Now I can see where in a ctg gun a loose hinge pin might produce inconsistant ctg setback from shot to shot and thus minor inconsistancy in ignition and how the bullet engages the rifling of each shot.

This is not the case with a muzzle loader where EVERYTHING is contained/attached in/on the bbl.

Any yes Smiley, I know how the bbl is bedded in the wood might make a difference. I acknowledged that in my original post.

I've never changed a hingepin on any of my Contenders (all ctg bbls). From reading responses from a few who have, changing the hingepin either made NO differerence and the gun shot worse (marginally).

Smiley I think the hair you're trying to split on the hingepin of a Encore muzzleloader MIGHT POSSIBLITY make a difference inside of 1/2moa, but not the difference between shooting an 1" or 3"s. Shooting projectiles the guns doesn't like OR charge overloading the capability of a given projectile/bbl combination will produce a 2"+ difference in group size easily.

I think hntrjack needs a little more projectile/charge experimentation to find what his Encore likes. I believe that is where he will find substantial gain.

Smiley · « **Reply #12 on:** January 17, 2004, 05:01:43 PM »

Well this is a lot of opion unless the piece can be locked down and tested its all in what we each think. It really doesn't make any difference with it being all in the barrel. The fellow that brought up the vibration issue is thinking. If you have a sight picture and make the shot, in the split second it takes the bullet to leave the barrel, it vibrates and now shifts a few thousands. That is two problems. If you remove the issue of the loose pin, you have reduced the possibility of that contributing. The vibration is what you are working on to get the shots consistent. You hope the barrel vibrates the same each shot so the bullet hits in the same spot. When you find the combination of bullet and powder this is what you are doing. But the idea is to have fun, I agree he needs to work on the combination to get it to work.. The 50s can take some work..<

hkg3k · « **Reply #13 on:** January 18, 2004, 12:45:36 AM »

Smiley wrote: ***It really doesn't make any difference with it being all in the barrel.***

Smiley please clarify. This statement is totally incorrect. Perfect example are the cantilever scope mount rifled shotgun bbls out there vs mounting the scope on the receiver. If it didn't matter, no manufacturer would bother. But the truth is, mounting the scope on the bbl does matter and does make a difference. Just ask Hastings.

***The fellow that brought up the vibration issue is thinking.*** Yes, and this is most relavent when speaking of high-intensity rifle ctgs and high frequency vibrations. For this particular discussion, this hinge pin issue is just splitting hairs. There is plenty of empirical evidence presented by TC C/E owners which suggest that the hinge pin issue really doesn't make a significant difference.

We do agree that for this particular discussion load development will most likely solve the problem and should be fully explored first.

Smiley · « **Reply #14 on:** January 18, 2004, 05:46:37 AM »

As for the canallevered mount, I would think there was more to it than just accuracy on this. First, on shot guns, the receiver is not real thick to be drilling into, when you change the barrel, if its mounted on the barrel its more convenent, prior to barrel mounts, most of the mounts are mounted on the pins. If the barrel doesn't move in relation to receiver, I dought the lock up of the bolt effects the position of the scope, be it barrel or receiver mounted.

For the muzzel loader, the barrels are thicker and stiffer, this adding mass changes the vibration. The powder acts and burns different than smokeless, so for me its like chevys and fords, what works on one may not be the same as the other.

A couple of thousands movement of the barrel shifting ( at 100 Yards += inches) will effect the bullet impact, especially if its not costent (in the same place each time) be smokeless or Black powder. Black is not as forgivening as smokeless with little changes. Be it bullets, powder, mounting of sights or scopes, they are not flat shooting rifles. They are very costent if all is the same, Loading techniqueon, cleaning, powder, and bullet, they are consentent and they will respond.

Sorry about spelling, this is only my opinion, I like yourself have tried a lot of things, not an expert, What Ever That Is. Don't take it personal thats why the world goes around, we all have beliefs, mine work for me and yours work for you.. Have fun.. <

hkg3k · « **Reply #15 on:** January 18, 2004, 11:22:28 AM »

Smiley, you might try going to Hastings website and read what they have to say. I don't think even you :grin: could refute that they say their #1 reason for mounting the scope base to the bbl is ACCURACY, and eliminating bbl movement relative to the scope mounting preserving both ACCURACY and zero. Not a word about convenience. But then maybe you can call them up and debate them that they really do it because there just isn't enough meat in them shotgun receivers and the convenience of the whole thing. :-)

***For the muzzel loader, the barrels are thicker and stiffer, this adding mass changes the vibration.***

You're right Smiley, additional mass and stiffness actually DAMPEN bbl vibrations, thereby diminishing what you're trying to debate as a huge issue with regard to bbl vibration relative is point of aim. :shock:

***A couple of thousands movement of the barrel shifting ( at 100 Yards += inches) will effect the bullet impact, especially if its not costent (in the same place each time) be smokeless or Black powder.***

I assume you mean bbl shifting relative to point of aim as you've stated before. Ya know, with all these bbl vibrations and the muzzle "flippin around" relative to point of aim, it's a wonder anyone can hit paper past 50 yards according to your model.

It just doesn't have the effect you're making it out to have, irregardless of what your opinion might be.

Is there an effect? Sure, but it is my opinion that high intensity center fire rifles are much more sensitive to bbl resonance than a thick bbl'd muzzleloader.

This dialogue started because it is my contention hntrjack would be better served focusing on load/projectile development rather than swapping out hingepins. The hingepin on an Encore muzzleloader has even less effect on that system because EVERYTHING is self-contained on the bbl and moves as 1 unit.

Smiley, I doubt I've convinced you, but my fortitude to continue this debate is diminished. On to other things.

Smiley · « **Reply #16 on:** January 19, 2004, 03:37:52 AM »

Well you are right about one thing this is getting boring.

***For the muzzel loader, the barrels are thicker and stiffer, this adding mass changes the vibration.***
<<<<Your on the right track. It rasies the natural frequency of the material, there by changes the vibration.
If what i said wasn't true why do they use bull barrels for target rifles? :-D

*** I don't think even you could refute that they say their #1 reason for mounting the scope base to the bbl is ACCURACY, and eliminating bbl movement relative to the scope mounting preserving both ACCURACY and zero.**
I don't refute anything but if you think that hanging a scope from a piece of metal over the action is more stable than mounting directly, then test the natural frequency. They make new products for the less informed or uneducated, thats how we learn or some do. :twisted:

As stated about the barrels "do flip around" as you said and I said, its how we control it that matters. If that didn't happen then we would all shoot like we think we can. The human factor is the problem. Its not as complexed in muzzel loaders. Bullet, powder. :roll:

Have a nice day :lol:

Wishunt.com · « **Reply #17 on:** January 19, 2004, 01:32:38 PM »

I use 150gr pyrodex and the Barns X sabots

This year I shot 6 shots at 100 yards and they were all touching. Not bad when you use a 1x scope.

Every guy that I hunt with uses a different load for their M-Ldr. Each guy had tested and tested. I just tested out 150gr pyrodex and the heavy powerbelt bullets. They were also touching at 100 yards. I belive that the encore 209x50 is an awsome M-Ldr and traded my Knight for it.

In my Keep It Simple Stupid way of doing things I found that using the pellets works best for me. I don't have to worry about volume variance in my powder or spillage. Also I want to have a really reliable loading procedure. Just keep it simple and you'll do fine.

I have shot about 250 rounds though the gun though I belive that the barrel is really worked in.

hntrjack · « **Reply #18 on:** January 21, 2004, 04:56:08 AM »

Thanks alot for your imput guys..didn't mean to stir up a hornets nest regarding my hidge pin...I'll wait for warmer weather and start some loads at 100 gr of 777..by the way..as I read it powerbelt bullets are legal for muzzleloader season in Colorado..is this true?

hunting1 · « **Reply #19 on:** February 05, 2004, 02:48:17 PM »

I will almost gurantee that if you put 100gs pyrodex and a 300gr Barnes or Powerbelt it will shoot 1" or less! Good luck!

Dago1 · « **Reply #20 on:** February 15, 2004, 05:56:41 PM »

I started T7 loads at 100 grs and up w/240XTP Mag and never got any groups under the 3"- 4". Loaded up with 150 pyrodex, my old load, she's back to 1"-1 1/2". T7, Hodgdon has a good idea, needs more R/D. The product was put on the market before it was ready. When Hodgdon didn't post any Magnum loads for T7, that should have let everyone know it was still "Under Development".

Bim · « **Reply #21 on:** February 16, 2004, 02:36:33 AM »

A starting load of 100 gns t7 might be a bit too high 70 or 80 might be more like it for starters.
Bim

rpseven · « **Reply #22 on:** February 17, 2004, 04:00:28 AM »

I think the biggest mistake people start out making when they start shooting muzzleloaders is they watch to many hunting shows and read to many magizine articles. This is not directed toward you so don't take ofense, and please don't take this the wrong way, but this using 150grs. of powder is a bunch of crap. You are just using 130grs. of powder, I would start out with 80 or 90 grs. of powder and see what kind of groups you get out of that and work from there.

mikej · « **Reply #23 on:** February 17, 2004, 06:01:22 AM »

I tried using 240 gr XTP's, and 300 gr XTP's with sabots over 2-50 gr (100 total) Pyrodex pellets and accuracy was not good. I switched to 295 gr Powerbelts and everything tightened up nicely. Getting 2" at 100 yds, which makes me happy, but the deer, not so much.

tscott · « **Reply #24 on:** February 17, 2004, 09:22:44 AM »

Lots of good thoughts to this problem. I have shot 90gr 777, and any
copper jacketed Powerbelt with terrific accuracy, through everything from
CVA Hawken kit to Encore. I am stunned by the accuracy, in the 3 years since I started hunting deer with a muzzleloader. An added benefit for me
is the ease that the Powerbelt slides down the barrel. I clean every 6 - 10
shots with no drop off in accuracy. 90gr 777, will put a 295gr bullet
right through a deer sized animal at 80 - 100 yards. (I'm not crazy about the amount of pressure I must exert to get a sst down the barrel..