Double balling

[Black Jaque Janaviac]

Every now and then I've been pondering the use of double ball.

Has anyone ever tried it intentionally?

Any particular hazards to watch for, other than short-starting the second ball?  And over pressure?

I'm curious if there would be a notable difference in the lethalness of a double ball hit on deer and other big game.  I particularly like to read stories of performance on game.

Can they be made to shoot sufficiently accurate?

[Naphtali]

Edwin Yard did several test series on bullet weight and pressure in black powder combustion. His findings: double projectile weight, double the breech pressure.

But breech pressure from linen-patched RB muzzle loaded would not exceed 9,600 PSI.

Conclusion: Modern ML rifle, using modern barrel steel such as 4140, will be nearly impossible to overload if properly loaded without exaggerated space between propellant and projectile.

Parenthetically, maximum pressure identified was from BP cartridge rifle at 28,000 PSI. And maximum pressure from BP combustion in a sealed pressure vessel was 96,000 PSI.

Note that in the early 1960s when testing occurred PSI meant, I believe, what we refer to as Copper Units of Pressure.

So it appears that some ML rifles could have their muzzles welded shut on a proof load, then fired without anything happening besides sound and fury. I wouldn't try it, but that's what the numbers seem to show.

[Black Jaque Janaviac]

Naphtali,

I suppose you could also consider, double roundball load wouldn't be any sort of extraordinary projectile weight.  Two .54 balls would total 450 grains - about what you'd expect from a .54 conical which are a piece of cake pressure-wise.

So, if you calculate the KE for a single 450 grain conical would you then DOUBLE the KE by summing the two .54 balls?  If that be the case, we're looking at some Authority with a capital "A".

[Ramrod]

Double ball was commonly called "loaded for bear" in the period parlance. Nobody would waste two balls on anything like a deer, or even a hostile native for that matter. Any .36-.45 cal was considered enough gun. But a "bar" took a lot more killing.

[Will Bison]

There is an excellent photo of a double ball load on page 53 of the Lyman Black Powder Handbook, 6th edition.

As to pressure, Lyman shows an example of a .54 220 gr round ball over 100 grs of 3f G-O at 11,700 CUP and a 410 gr conical at 13,600 CUP. Both of these are within safe limits as far as pressure goes.

Deformation of the two round balls is fairly severe and probably accounts in part for the poor accuracy.

[HWooldridge]

Not sure if this is the right way but I tried the ball next to the powder without a patch.  The one on top gets the patch and makes the whole thing safer to ram home.  I have only shot this once at 25 yds and the balls did separate by about an inch on the target - no idea what it will do at ranges farther out but accuracy is probably squat.

[lostid]

I'm what they call  a "Realist",,OK? not an opptomist or pessimist,, I just kinda look at what is,,get it?

If doubleballin guns EVER was a good and proficiant thing to do,,,??

Don't ya think we'd all be buying "Doubleball Speed loaders" today??

 Or We'd have written legend of danial boone catching "2 ball" in his teeth,or barking two squriell with one shot??

Buck an Ball,,MAYBE,,in a smoothy,,but Doubleball in a rifle?? for provance yes,,practical application as far as accuracy?,,Sure,,,go ahead,knock yourself out. Maybe you and Naph an Hollywood can, after 300 years finally figure it out.

This is a "traditional" BP board ain't it??

[Evil Dog]

I do occasionally load "buck and ball" in my smoothbore Brown Bess.  A .715 round ball with three .345 round ball on top of that.  Recoil is a lot more pronounced with my usual charge of 85gr GOEX FFFg.  At 35 to 40 yards the .715 ball will hit pretty much to the point of aim with the three .345 balls forming a triangular pattern about 14" in diameter and centered on the .715 ball.  Fun to do, but generally no real purpose.

[Longcruise]

I played with double ball loads quite a bit some years back.  They typically impacted the target one above the other and were pretty close together.  You need to be cautious in loading since the second ball down can be compressing the air between it and the first ball.  It can be pushed back up the bore by the pressure.  Push the second one in slow like and double check it;s depth before dropping the hammer.

Like evil dog said about the buck n ball load;  not all that practical.

Some guys shoot double balls in stake matches.

[crow_feather]

Evil Dog,

I always thought that the buck went down first with the ball on top.  This way, the three buck center the ball in the middle of the bore for a more accurate shot.  

I guess that I learn something new every day

C F

[Evil Dog]

Hi Crow-Feather,

Actually the larger ball will be pretty much centered in the bore by either the paper cartridge wrapping or the cloth patch (if you use one).  3 of the .345 round ball placed on top of the main ball come about as close as you can come to touching the bore wall with out actually touching it.  To put them under the main ball would probably require some sort of wad between the powder charge and buck.  Personally I habitually use a paper cartridge load for the Brown Bess as I feel it is just more traditional.  Then to add buck all it requires is the smaller ball and an over shot card placed on top of the buck before ramming everything down the barrel.

[Black Jaque Janaviac]

Longcruise,

You wrote that you've played with them quite a bit, you also wrote that they impacted pretty close to each other.  Sounds good - so why did you conclude that they aren't practical?

I keep encountering conflicting accounts on this.  I read that double balling is not accurate.  Then I read or see otherwise.  Perfect case in point is that High speed photo someone referred to on this thread.  I've seen it in Sam Fadala's books, and that photo doesn't exactly convince me that this is a woefully inaccurate load.  One ball was right behind the other!

[Longcruise]

Black Jaque,

You wrote that you've played with them quite a bit, you also wrote that they impacted pretty close to each other. Sounds good - so why did you conclude that they aren't practical?

I just could not come up with a use for them although I never tried them in a stake shoot.

Accuracy was quite all right, especially for hunting.  However, only a single ball is allowed in my state (Colorado).  Further, consider that a good conical bullet in a .50 cal gun will weigh from 350 to 400 grains.  Two .490 balls will weigh about 350 grains.  I could not come up with a scenario where hitting an animal with two round balls would be superior to hitting them with one conical.  Even at the same velocity (I never chronoed any of the 2 ball loads), the single 350 grain projectile should penetrate better than either of the 175 round balls.  If gaining killing power is the goal of shooting two balls, then IMO, it may not be such a great solution.

These reasons are all laced with my own opinion and preferences as you surely can see.  So take them for what you may think they're worth.

To clarify, my preference is to hunt with round balls and my main concern when sending a ball to the animal is that it penetrates all the way through regardless of the angle of impact.  If a .50 ball won't do it (my opinion regarding elk but often disagreed with :grin: ) then use a .54 or .58 or .62.  If caught with only a .50 for an elk hunt (my back up gun is now a .50 since I gave my TC .54 to my son in law) then I'd use a good flat nose conical so that I can be confident of penetration.

So, "practical use" is nothing more than my preferences and opinion.  My playing with 2 ball loads was mostly just curiosity and taking an opportunity to have fun doing something different.  I'd encourage you to do the same and if you should decide they would be a good hunting load then go ahead and use it for that as well.

[crow_feather]

Evil Dog,

The way that I load buck and ball in my 10 guage is to load the powder charge, put down an over powder card and felt wad, then three 36 caliber balls and a 54 caliber ball on top of them using the three 36 caliber balls to center the 54 caliber ball.  When confering with Pedersoli, they advised against the ball being close to the diameter of the barrel and suggested something like the above instead.  I saw pictures of these used in the civil war and the three smaller ball were fused to the larger ball.

C F

[Black Jaque Janaviac]

Longcruise,

Thanks.  I understand a little better now.

From some of my reading, there is some benefit of two balls vs. one conical.  Not that anyone has written about this particular comparison - but it comes from alternate studies.

For one, I think it is a book called Handgun Stopping Power by Marshall and Sanow.  They mentioned something about the increased effect of multiple hits on an assailant.  They pretty much admitted that in almost any case, two bullet holes is better than one.  Police and military are routinely trained to pop off two or three shots whenever they fire.

There is also a lot of respect for buckshot loads.  Now, anyone considering a puny 45 or 60 grain roundball traveling at shotgun velocities would reckon this as rather anemic medicine.  However, when hit by several of these, the target crumples instantly.  The weapon gets nicknames of respect like "Street Howitzer" or "Street Sweeper".  

So I'm thinking a deer getting hit almost simultaneously by two .50s would drop like a rock.

[Longcruise]

So I'm thinking a deer getting hit almost simultaneously by two .50s would drop like a rock.

No argument from me on that.  OTOH, every deer I've hit with one .50 ball dropped like a rock. :grin:

[crow_feather]

one of the old Lyman Blackpowder books shows two balls in flight that were fired from a rifle.  Both balls were flattened on one side making them appear unstable.  I would believe that they would be more effective than one ball, (it will kill the deer twice) provided that one or the other hits the deer


C F

[Black Jaque Janaviac]

Crow Feather,

That's the picture I was referring to.  You'll notice that the two balls are right behind each other - not exactly "inaccurate".  Of course we don't know how far from the muzzle the photo was taken.

To counter-act that "flattening" you mention, I am thinking of putting a cornmeal buffer between the balls.

Oh, and would the two balls actually kill the deer twice?  Or would they just make it twice as dead?  I find this would be a nice advantage, as the more dead they are the easier it is to dress 'n' drag 'em.

[Longcruise]

Jaque,

That's the picture I was referring to. You'll notice that the two balls are right behind each other - not exactly "inaccurate". Of course we don't know how far from the muzzle the photo was taken.

To counter-act that "flattening" you mention, I am thinking of putting a cornmeal buffer between the balls.

As I recall, my shooting was done at about 50 yards and they struck about two inches apart on paper usually vertical.  I doubt if the flattening is a detriment.  Maybe the rear ball being flattened on the "front" side causes is to lose velocity a little faster and therefore hit a little lower??

My guess is that slight separation would be a good thing for killing the deer since two balls following the same wound channel would not probably improve the killing effect.

For velocity to be you usual one ball speed, you'll have to stoke up the powder a bit but got no idea how much! :-)

[willysjeep134]

The only buck&ball load I've seen was for a .69 smootbore. It looked like a standard roundball cartrige with three buckshot lashed on top. It looked like the round ball was crowned with the buckshot, then wrapped in paper, then tied off with string. I don't know which way  you were supposed to load it though, but I would guess the ball would go in first because there would be more paper under it for a wad than if you sent the buckshot down first.

[Glanceblamm]

I did see the 2 balls in flight (badly deformed) in the lyman manual.
Also read a test on weather the 12L14 cold drawn steel became brittle after so much usage & they were trying to get a barrel to fail.

They had a T/C class barrel that withstood several hundred grains of powder & six patched balls before recieving an .002 bulge. Most of the barrels were much tougher than realized and would take a sever loading with multiple patched balls to get one to split. An air gap in the seating would cause the barrel to fail much quicker.

I personally have never shot more than one patched ball & will continue to do so. All of us have had the occasion to shoot through a small gap "like the fork of a tree" and have done so with great confidence as the ball continues on to our deer.

[Guardian]

I believe that the Buck & ball load was devised only to increase the chance of striking your target with something! I don't think that
it was meant as a multiple strike load like todays shotguns. I have seen
several original Buck & Ball loads created from heavy paper and string and the shot has been on top of the ball in every one. As I understand it,
this type of load was quite popular in large smooth-bore pistols also!
There are several modern cartridges loaded with more than one
projectile,(Remington Multi-ball, Strike 3 etc...) so I think that they do have a purpose (SELF DEFENSE).
I have experimented with multiple balls in my
Muzzle loaders, But I can't see that I am gaining anything by it except
the fact that I have wasted a ball.  If shooting a game animal such as a deer, it would seem to me that you would ruin twice the meat by striking it with the second ball also.
Concentrate on putting the single ball where it needs to go, and the second ball will not matter anyway.

[crow_feather]

I have to admit that I am not sure what a buck and ball load was designed to do back when.  I find that if I want to center a ball smaller than the bore of my 10 guage, I put it on top of three 36 caliber balls which pretty well centers the larger ball.

[Pogue]

I've only ever seen it done on purpose at a stake shoot.  Even at 25 yds, the balls will still separate 2-3 inches in a vertical string.

[roundball]

FYI...as a related piece of information, I ran some tests in my .62cal smoothbore to see how a number of round balls would do...sort of like a magnum buckshot load.  I tried numbers of Hornady round balls in a paper shot cup, first .440's, then .490's, with 80grns of FFg.

I could never get acceptable size or consistent shaped patterns with the small sized .440's because of the significant offset from each other due to their stagger-stacking in the bore.  Their offset was so great that they were almost side-by-side but not quite, so that when they exited the muzzle they began veering off in various directions due to this stagger stacking.  Patterns were 18-20" wide, inconsistent, never equally distributed within that spread.

However, the larger .490's were outstanding and it was because they had far less stagger-stack, stacking much more closely to a vertical line.  The results were that 3 of them would repeatedly print a 3-4" group at 30yds, and 5-6" group at 40yds.

And there was plenty of energy...I had the target stapled to the side of a large wooden "cable reel" used by power companies.  Each side of the wooden reel was constructed of 2" of hard wood separated by a few feet of air space, and the sets of .490's blew right through all 4 inches of hardwood.

Since the .490dia / 180grn balls are .50cal, there should be no problem using them for deer hunting in any state, unless a state specifically does not allow a smoothbore firearm or multiple projectile to be used for deer hunting.

Anyhow, it was an interesting experiment, and seems like the 3-ball load of .490's would be a very viable deer load...sort of like a "magnum buckshot load"...anyone of the three balls striking a Deer in the vitals should do the job within 50 yards.

[Ramrod]

Roundball, wouldn't one .62 cal ball do the job at 50 yards also? :lol:
The problem with the stagger is why they only use certain size buckshot in a particular gauge. The pellets have to fit in a single layer of two, three, or four, with one layer on top of another for good patterns. Pretty much limits it to smaller balls.

[roundball]

Roundball, wouldn't one .62 cal ball do the job at 50 yards also? :lol:

Of course it would...so does a single ball of many different calibers...but the thread was about double balls (multiple projectiles) in a single barrel at the same time, and as I mentioned, I was sharing the results of an experiment for anyone who might be interested in it

[filmokentucky]

I believe the buck and ball load was more of a "combat" load than a hunting load. At least, whenever I've run across the term, that's the context it was being used in. The military of the day seem to have accepted poor accuracy-hence the absence of rear sights on muskets for such a long period. And the buck and ball load certainly did nothing to improve accuracy-it just increased the chance of a hit by tossing a greater
number of projectiles out there. I doubt that many hunters would have accepted such compromised accuracy. And when they wanted a larger number of projectiles, as when after birds, they would have gone to birdshot of the appropriate weight.