1853 enfield musket load

[surveyor47]

Thompson Centers technicans used to talk to people. At this point, I would surprise me if there were anyone other than the Custom Shop willing to speak with customers at all.  I had many conversations with T/C Technicans over a 15 year period, picking their brain and they taught me a lot.  The conversation I referenced took place in the early 1980s, not long after I purchased my first 54 Renegade.

The point that you are making is that the instruction manual specifies a much higher maximum powder charge than technicians or gunsmiths or competitors would recommend.  Granted. But should you shoot maximum loads? 

I shot my orignial T/C 54 barrel for 20 years on a regular basis with a load  about 20% below maximum.  One day at the range, a fellow shooter pointed out that the barrel was bulged near the breech plug.   I sent the gun back to T/C and they replaced the barrel. That experience showed me that my load was too hot for regular shooting. If I had been shooting a charge closer to a traditional charge about 33% below T/Cs maximum charge, I might probably still be shooting that barrel and would have been rewarded with superior accuracy. 

With all the people shooting maximum charges from modern inline magnums, I shudder to think of the burst barrels likely to come in years to come.  For example, the T/C Black Mountain Magnum barrel appears to be nothing more than a New Englander barrel with a 1:28 twist. I hope that it has stronger steel to handle their quoted maximum charge, but I wouldnt count on it.

I believe that it is fair to say that T/Cs guns will fire the maximum charges quoted in instruction manuals, but the major question is for how long? This is precisely the point made by T/Cs technician 20 years ago.

[longcaribiner]

TC makes a really good production gun.  As in everything, crap happens.  Impure alloys, cracks that don't show upon x-rays, work hardening, idiotic practices like overloading, obstructed bores, bores that have been "rung" , double balling, and other forms of stupidity.

Despite all the best precautions, etc, sometimes guns blow up.   Now, in the overall scheme of things, how many times have you heard of a ford pinto exploding?  Some did.  A fraction of them.  That was due to a possible design flaw.  the addition of a plastic shield could have prevented some of those incidents.   The folks at the company are the ones that hear about the mishaps.  And it is just human nature to think the operator was not at fault.  How many of the small fraction of guns actually had mishaps due to operator error, intentional or otherwise.

I was once at a range and one guy shooting a muzzleloader had a misfire.  His buddy immediately said can you see the ball and the fellow looked down the bore.  You and I certainly know better.  If it had gone off, would that be blamed on the manufacturer somehow after an ambulance chaser perjured the witnesses properly. 

Folks who continually load max loads down their rifles run the risk of eventual failure due to something called work hardening.  It may take years, it may take months.     

It is something I don't fully understand, but my one metallurgy book has a confusing description about multiple stresses affecting the crystalline structure of the metal and eventual brittleness and stress cracks.     
 
Max loads are reasonable probability matters.  Given certain statistics, the gun will most likley stand up to those loads.  It doesn't mean reccommended loads, target loads or hunting loads.  It doesn't even have anything to do with powder efficiency.   Get a copy of the 1st edition Lyman Black Powder handbook and read the stats for those heavy loads in their test barrels (Which were 1.125 inches across the flats.)    Pay attention to how for each ten grain increment of additional powder, the pressure goes up proportionately while the velocity and down range energy do not.    from 50 grains to 150 grains, the pressure triples, the velocity barely doubles and the down range energy at 100 yards is not much increased, maybe by a two-thirds.  Certainly not double or triple as would be expected.

So for an extra 100 foot pounds of energy at 100 yds, you risk three times the pressure/barrel stress?  Not me.  There comes a point at which the extra powder becomes a weight to be pushed out the barrel.  Almost like an extra ball or even a barrel obstruction.  It is not a good thing. 

I have a buddy that was shooting a brand new semi auto pistol  he was about half way through the first box of 380's when the slide broke in half and the rear of the slide flew back and gve him a four inch laceration across his cheek, smashing his cheek bone.  It was made of modern steel.  Several weeks after being intorduced on the market, there were dozens of accidents and they were recalled.    TC hasn't had the anywhere near same high percentage percentage of mishaps.  In fact probably a very low percentage.    If you shoot moderate loads, as the guns were intended for, there should be no problem.     


 

[filmokentucky]

The point that you made was that "too many of these guns had blown up". According to this statement, a dangerous situation exists. Since you appear unable to shed any useful light on the subject it now falls into the area of rumor. I will let my friends know that I was unable to gain any facts about this situation and they can contact Thompson Center and ask them directly about the many exploding barrels. Perhaps you won't mind giving me your name so that T/C can contact you directly if they feel a need to investigate what may prove to be merely libelous rumors on the part of a disgruntled employee. I'm sure you will want to assist in any way possible in clearing this up as expeditiously as possible.
 Thanks.

[surveyor47]

How many is "too much"?  In my book, 1 burst barrel is too much, but they do happen in the real world.  Factory technicans get to see 1st hand the sort of abuse their guns have been exposed to. Hot loads. Harder than pure lead bullets. Not fully seated bullets. Fouled barrels. Rusted barrels. Bullets that thehir guns were not designed to shoot. The factory cannot control these conditions. Ever notice that T/Cstarted specifiying to use bullets of their manufacture only and stopped making molds?  Ever notice that T/C replaces barrels without hesitation? The fact that some barrels bulge, as I have personally experienced, does not mean the product is faulty.  It means that their guns are exposed to real world conditions and the safety factors work. My gun gave me a warning and I heeded the warning. Does this mean that everyone is  going to recognize that something is wrong and stop shooting? Of course not. Had I continued shooting a bulged barrel, it very likely could have burst.  To this day, I have no idea why that barrel bulged and it really doesnt matter. It gave me 20 years of excellent service and I have a new one that should give me another 20 years service. Does that sound like a defective product? Or does it sound like the barrel had reached the end of its service life? 

[surveyor47]

Also, pleae be reminded that T/C lists both maximum loads and recommended loads.  Right behind the word maximum is the phrase "do not exceed". It does not say that you can shoot this load every day and expect the barrel to last forever. T/C also lists "recommended loads', which are much closer to traditional loads.  My experiences with these guns is very much in line with the advice I have been given over many years, starting with a T/C technician who warned me emphatically not to shoot the maximum load after I had broken the stock of my rifle with that very load.  I would stick with T/Cs "recommended loads".

If you start shooting on the Skirmish Line, you will hear stories of Civil War replicas bursting, of bulged barrels, loads going off while loading shooting off fingers, guns going off unexpectedly. My team captain recently had a charge of black powder go off while he was loading, sending unburned black powder into his fingers. Is this due to a "defective product" or is "the nature of the beast"? This is why we have strict safety rules and enforce them.

Remember, "the only real safety on a muzzle loader is the safety between the shooters ears".

[surveyor47]

When you load your "maximum load" of black powder, do you determine it by weight or volume?  The question is important because black powder varies in densiy typically by 10 to 20% and there have been cases of 40% variation.  So, by just opening the can and measuring out a maximum load by volume, lets say 100 grains, you may actually be loading as much as 140 grains by weight and not even know it, based upon a 40% variation. Would you feel comfortable with a maximum load that high? 

Funny how T/Cs recommended loads seem to run almost exactly 20% below maximum.  Think that there might be some correlation with that 10 to 20% typical density variance?  Does the phrase "Use With Extreme Caution" ring a bell?

And who told me about the density variation?   None other than Hodgdon Powder Company, owner of GOEX. Why dont you call them up and ask them about your maximum loads?  913-362-9455.

[filmokentucky]

How many is "too much"?  In my book, 1 burst barrel is too much, but they do happen in the real world.  Factory technicans get to see 1st hand the sort of abuse their guns have been exposed to. Hot loads. Harder than pure lead bullets. Not fully seated bullets. Fouled barrels. Rusted barrels. Bullets that thehir guns were not designed to shoot. The factory cannot control these conditions. Ever notice that T/Cstarted specifiying to use bullets of their manufacture only and stopped making molds?  Ever notice that T/C replaces barrels without hesitation? The fact that some barrels bulge, as I have personally experienced, does not mean the product is faulty.  It means that their guns are exposed to real world conditions and the safety factors work. My gun gave me a warning and I heeded the warning. Does this mean that everyone is  going to recognize that something is wrong and stop shooting? Of course not. Had I continued shooting a bulged barrel, it very likely could have burst.  To this day, I have no idea why that barrel bulged and it really doesnt matter. It gave me 20 years of excellent service and I have a new one that should give me another 20 years service. Does that sound like a defective product? Or does it sound like the barrel had reached the end of its service life? 

Apparently you refuse to grasp the point of this conversation. I need no help with loads for my guns as I have been involved with muzzleloaders, both antique and modern for well over 50 years. I do not use maximum charges in my firearms and I do not use Pyrodex or any other fake powder. I do not know where you are getting your powder from, but if you are experiencing typical density variations of 10 to 20% and even 40%, you are either buying the worst powder ever made or your scale is hopelessly inaccurate. I always spot check my powder measures for throw weight and have never in all my years of muzzleloading experienced a variation of anything like these proportions. No one in my acquaintance has either.

T/C has long been known for its lifetime guarantee, so it is not surprising that they replace barrels. They also replace locks, stocks, triggers and just about any other part you care to name.  The most common cause for a bulged barrel is failure to seat the ball all the way down on the powder. There are barrels that are much older than yours that have not bulged because they "reached the end of their service life".  I have several barrels that are 40+ years old with thousands of rounds through them and as strange as it may seem, they have not reached the end of their service life yet. No bulges anywhere. Haven't burst, either. Go figure. This concept is new to me and to every one that I've mentioned it to.

Had some friends--fellow muzzleloaders--over this evening and we got to discussing this thread. They all read it through and were surprised to hear that T/C had a tech who knew of many barrels that blew up which naturally means that T/C knew and that they had concealed this from the public. With you being the notable exception. One of these gentlemen, a lawyer by trade, said that he never saw anything about a lawsuit against T/C regarding this issue, or as one might expect, a class action suit. He reads a number of legal journals you see.

He found this interesting enough that he said he was going to look into this for his own edification. As he was leaving, he said, "You know there's something odd about this whole thing. As many times as you have asked for direct confirmation of this information, this fellow has yet to give you such an answer. You have received answers in no way related to your question--we call this obfuscation in the courtroom." Anyway he wrote down your user name. I told him that was useless since it is an alias of sorts be he assured me that isn't a problem.

So he said that tomorrow he's going to call the legal people at T/C and get the scoop on just how many T/C barrels have actually blown up. And maybe get the tech's name too.  He's got a copy of your post where you quoted the tech's words, so he can prove the tech existed and said the words--or that you rembered them and posted them. He said that once he faxes them a copy they'll have to respond. Now that you have made this issue public, T/C will be forced to react to this situation. Thanks to you all those folks out there who had no idea how potentially dangerous their beloved and trusted guns might be now are aware and can take precautions. You've probably saved thousands of lives--or fingers anyway. Bravo lad. This could be front page stuff!  You must be very proud of yourself at this moment and well you should be!!!

[surveyor47]

Good luck! I hold a little Thompson Center manual in my hand that perhaps you ought to read. It contains numerous warnings about the various conditions which can lead to injury or death to the shooter or bystanders. It specifically mentions the possibility of certain conditions leading to "ruptured or burst barrel". T/C did not write these warnings for nothing. If you dont want to heed their warnings and advice, thats your business- so long as you are nowhere near me when you do so.

[longcaribiner]

Film, don't get so riled up.   1. every manufacturer has had some or another claimed or alledged defect with their products.  some more than others.      2.  People run the range of wise and cautious to extreme idiots, expecially those who are into the outdoors.  3. these guns are for an intended purpose and going beyond the parameters of that purpose is abuse.    4.  Just as I wouldn't use a corvette to go 4 wheelin, I wouldn't load 10  50 grain pellets of whopp-de-butt powder into any muzzleloader.  5.  as noted above there are all manner of reasons why barrels are abused.   6 When problems occur, suddenly folks expect their life time warranty to take care of fixing the product, or when injuries occur, they suddenly remember  those 500 grains of whopp-de-butt powder as something far less.   

It is great to say that if one barrel blows up, that is too many.  What if that barrel was completely filled with powder by some drunk on the 4th of july, who was somewhat unintelligently trying to produce a shower of sparks?  (As has been known to happen, I know of at least one pistol that was destroyed that way with only a trigger finger tip lost)   TC has no control over abuse.     Abuse occurs at an alarmingly frequent rate.   

There are several court web sites where case searches can be done.  You can't believe the number of product liability cases against the likes of Barnett cross bows.   TC has a very good safety record.  The fact that barrels may occasionally blow for numerous reasons most of which are not due to negligence of TC, does not make the product dangerous.  People are killed by idiots driving corvettes, that doesn't make corvettes dangerous as automobiles.         

[filmokentucky]

Good luck! I hold a little Thompson Center manual in my hand that perhaps you ought to read. It contains numerous warnings about the various conditions which can lead to injury or death to the shooter or bystanders. It specifically mentions the possibility of certain conditions leading to "ruptured or burst barrel". T/C did not write these warnings for nothing. If you dont want to heed their warnings and advice, thats your business- so long as you are nowhere near me when you do so.

 

For crying out loud! Can't you read? What should have been a simple and brief conversation about an employee of a company claiming--falsely it seems-- that his company's products have failed many times while being used within company specified tolerances has dragged on interminably. I ask for clarification about the number of failures since no one else has heard of these failures except you and a now mysterious and un-nameable tech and you spew unrelated drivel apparently in the hope of muddying the waters and directing attention away from what is now appearing to be more and more likely a cock and bull story on your part. I shoot a T/C Seneca with standard .45 caliber loads and am in no danger of harming myself or anyone else and resent the implication, particularly considering the source. I never have and never will overload my firearms--regardless of which end they load from and I don't recall saying that I did.

I can conceive of no reason why you would wish me luck. It's quite possible that you will soon need some however. You might at this point consider your situation: You have made public statements impugning the products and reputation of a company known for the quality of its products and its sterling support of its products. These statements would appear to be unsupportable unless you can suddenly recall the name of your big mouthed tech. Now, totally by happenstance, the lawyers are chatting. If the tech cannot be located you most certainly will be. And you will be held responsible for your statements. This could become painful for you in financial terms unless you can come up with a list of many people whose T/C barrels exploded.  If you should do so, please post that list in this thread. That would be good news for you and finally, after all the unrelated crap you've spewed, I will get an answer to my question!  I supposr I could save myself the trouble of waiting for your next post about Lord only knows what and call the folks at T/C myself and ask them about the exploding barrels and dead bodies and such. May I use you for a reference? I'll be sure to include all your deep insights into the care feeding of their products. Thanks, good buddy. I knew I could count on you.

Or--and this is just a thought, mind you--you might in your very next post concede that the statement about techs and exploding T/Cs was a load of utter rubbish and you just said it to hammer home a point. And say you are sorry for all the fuss you caused. That might go a long way towards digging your butt out of the hole you are likely to be in soon. This is good advice, but given your inability to comprehend the language and  make relevant and reasoned responses, I have no expectation that you will act upon it. Good luck and I hope the house is in your significant other's name.

[filmokentucky]

Film, don't get so riled up.   1. every manufacturer has had some or another claimed or alledged defect with their products.  some more than others.      2.  People run the range of wise and cautious to extreme idiots, expecially those who are into the outdoors.  3. these guns are for an intended purpose and going beyond the parameters of that purpose is abuse.    4.  Just as I wouldn't use a corvette to go 4 wheelin, I wouldn't load 10  50 grain pellets of whopp-de-butt powder into any muzzleloader.  5.  as noted above there are all manner of reasons why barrels are abused.   6 When problems occur, suddenly folks expect their life time warranty to take care of fixing the product, or when injuries occur, they suddenly remember  those 500 grains of whopp-de-butt powder as something far less.   

It is great to say that if one barrel blows up, that is too many.  What if that barrel was completely filled with powder by some drunk on the 4th of july, who was somewhat unintelligently trying to produce a shower of sparks?  (As has been known to happen, I know of at least one pistol that was destroyed that way with only a trigger finger tip lost)   TC has no control over abuse.     Abuse occurs at an alarmingly frequent rate.   

There are several court web sites where case searches can be done.  You can't believe the number of product liability cases against the likes of Barnett cross bows.   TC has a very good safety record.  The fact that barrels may occasionally blow for numerous reasons most of which are not due to negligence of TC, does not make the product dangerous.  People are killed by idiots driving corvettes, that doesn't make corvettes dangerous as automobiles.         

True. Actually, I'm not all that riled up. This guy is making slanderous and unsupported statements that seem at this point to be utterly bogus. I spoke to a friend this morning who collects T/Cs and anything related to the company. I told him about this story and he said that it was a damned lie but that he would check it out and get back to me. He got back to me at supper time and told me that the story is a complete fabrication and that "many" T/C barrels have not blown up. There was one case where some one is supposed to have put a load of smokeless in a T/C but even that is unproven. HE is riled up and intends to call his pals at T/C about this. He has about 100 T/Cs of all descriptions, so he takes this stuff seriously. And he has clout.

It's amazing when you think about it. All I wanted was some data to back up this story and instead of simply saying, "hey I may have exaggerated a bit", he posted several chapters of unrelated nonsense. Now look!

[surveyor47]

Who are you to think I should ever reveal the name of any person to you? You simply dont have that power and its none of anyones business. How do you presume to know his state of mind?  Only he knows what he saw in the days and weeks before he spoke to me.  He sounded genuinely concerned.  All that matters is that the person I spoke with was an employee who was advising a newcomer to blackpowder. His advice was consistent with their manual.  His empahsis was certainly a bit over the top, but consistent with the typical conflict that inevitably exists within many companies between management, marketing and the production floor/repair department.  Marketing is going to push for higher and higher performance to keep up with competition.  The guys who get to see all this owner abuse is going to be a bit more cautious than management and engineering. The more I learn about BP the more cautious I become with it as well. So, given the level of owner abuse the product receives, I can only imagine how cautious the production floor guy must be. I was shooting a 54 not a 45, whole different ballgame. I have never to this day shot a maximum load since that man set me straight. I stick strictly with recommended laods and I believe that T/C is correct in their advice. 

I have personally seen almost unbelievable customer abuse on T/C guns an it only gets worse with store clerks selling powders and projectiles suitable for an inline mangnum to owners of caplocks. I have literally seen a man hammering a sabot down the barrel of a 50 Hawken with a 5 pound maul.  I have stopped guys from trying to load magnum loads into these guns, which we all know they are unsuitable for.  I have seen guys about to shoot a stuck bullet out of a barrel, stuck about halfway down, and stopped them.  Given the level of abuse and ignorance I have personally seen it would be one of the worlds greatest wonders if a burst/rupture hasnt happened. If it has never happend, then they have truly have created an idiot proof gun. Guys seem to think that they can load traditional caplocks up like magnums, becuase that is what they are used to or heard about.  The best gun for these guys that I have seen is the Omega, which is sweet and simple and reliable. When these guys have a mess up, they can simply unscrew the breech plug. 

The only thing I shoot these days is black powder, primarily out of Civil War muskets, which are a whole different ballgame from T/C caplocks.  T/C guns operate at about 3 times the chamber pressure of Civil War guns.  This and the accidnets I have seen and heard about on the firing line make me all the more cautious, and I am constantly being corrected by other shooters.  Again, the more and more I learn, the more cautious I become. There are guys who have been shooting these guns a lot longer than I who teach me all the time, and they had to unteach some things written in the T/C manual, which is inconsstent with a gun being rapid fired with minnies.

If I called you up (as a new shooter) and  asked you to fix the stock of my rifle, because it split on the 20th round out of a 54, you might become a bit alarmed as the tech did so long ago.  As I recall, the model I was shooting deveoped a reputation for splitting stocks in 54 with maximum loads, possibly the factor influencing T/Cs decision to switch to synthetic stocks after their fire. His advice was sound and I follow it to this day when dealing with T/C rifles. I also bear it in mine when dealing with my Civil War rifles, which have not tech to speak to other than your teammates. Given the fact that I have followed his advice for over 20 years, I truly believe that he did an excellent job of representing his employers best interest as well as my best interest.  I dont believe that anyone now or then is or was trying to underime T/C, whom I believe to be the best in the business.  In fact, I have a safe full of their guns and if I didnt believe in them, I wouldnt have so many.

You can rest assured that the technical representatives words were as I quoted them. I have never forgotten them and I follow his advice to stick with "recommended loads".

[surveyor47]

Is it your position that an overload of black powder has never resulted in a burst or ruptured barrel or in a bulged barrel? T/Cs manual specifically warns that these conditions can result from failure to adhere to the warnings in their manual.  Why would a company admit that a condition that it specifically warns about has never come about in 30 or 40 years? To do so would be to encourage people to disregard their manual, which they have gone to great efforts to encourage, defeating their purpose. 

Since when does T/C have any duty to report their internal information to the public?

[filmokentucky]

Once more you show that you have elevated the art of missing the point to a fine art. It is impossible to converse with one as obtuse as you. If you miss  targets the way you miss the point then you must indeed be a lousy shot. Or perhaps you have gone off your meds and are not reponsible for what you say or do? That would explain it all quite nicely.

My contention is that you made an unsubstantiated statement and refuse to back it up. I did not say that an overloaded gun will not blow up--of course it will. You seem to have a talent for misconstruing what is said to you. That has been obvious in the way you did not simply give a direct reply to my post but instead rambled on about irrelevancies.

Your position is that your conversation took place in the early 80s. T/C first produced a muzzleloader, the "Hawken", in 1970, August I believe. So in a 12 year period say, prior to your call, many barrels blew up, and yet no one in the black powder world ever heard about it? And T/C, unlike say Ruger, never felt it necessary to issue strong warnings beyond load recommendations? Save of course for your civic minded but nameless tech. Although you do seem to be the only one he told of this risk. I guess he really, really liked you! Ruger, you may recall began putting long paragraphs on all their gun barrels to protect themselves in liability suits. T/C, despite their exploding barrels didn't seem to feel that need. Right.

You ask "Why would a company admit that a condition that it specifically warns about has never come about in 30 or 40 years?" I read this several times and I guess that the answer is that they would be proud that their product had not succumbed to this deadly condition in all those years. I suppose this condition is an overload of blackpowder that you, in your desperate attempt at misdirection, try to make seem that my position is that said overload would not cause a burst, ruptured or bulged barrel. Once again, in the faint hope that my words will penetrate this time--THAT IS NOT AND NEVER HAS BEEN MY POSITION AND BY NOW YOU SHOULD DAMN WELL KNOW IT!!!

I simply asked you for the tech's name so that when I call T/C to find out how many of their barrels blew up WHEN LOADED WITHIN THEIR RECOMMENDED GUIDELINES, which has been my point all along, and they ask me where I heard such a bunch of drivel I can give them your alias and tell them that your special little friend--let's call him Brucie--told you about the frailty of their products. So don't get your panties in a wedgie sport. I'm not forcing you to do anything and I don't think I have any special powers to do so. I think you must be confusing me with all those lawyers. Besides, quite frankly, I don't think your little friend Brucie the techie ever said what you say he did and everyone who has read your post here thinks it is a load of hogwash too.

And that is as good a place as any to leave it. In all my years in muzzleloading, I have heard some silly stuff and some stuff that was hilarious. But I think this is the worst smelling pile of B.S. I have run into. There is no need to reply to this post and I pray that you won't. I will continue to investigate this claim of yours with my friends and we don't need your help--not to imply that in any sense you have been of help. Perhaps we will find your elusive little pal Brucie and he will be of help. As one of the boys said tonight regarding your memory: "He seems to mis-remember alot. And he's damn good at it too!"

We're done as far as I'm concerned. Any further attempt to clear this up by corresponding with you would be as futile as the previous attempts have been. And it could have been so simple, too. Really. Good-bye.

[coyotejoe]

I don't know what any of this has to do with an 1853 Enfield but I've seen bulged barrels on numerous muzzleloaders, generally part way up the bore and clearly caused by a bullet or ball not fully seated. I did encounter one idiot who boasted of shooting 250 grains of powder with a leather patched ball in his T/C Hawken. He said he had bulged two barrels but T/C replaced them without charge. Here he was on his third barrel and still shooting 250 grains! I had to ask if he thought T/C would replace his eyes if that barrel burst instead of just bulging.

[polarstar]

Hi everyone,
You all seem to quote a 68grain charge for the Enfield 577".
I have a reproduction PH 2 band, (early model with the progressive rifling), and it is stamped on the barrel- bullet:- 430 grains and powder charge:- 3-1/2 drams, approximately 92 grains.
I have shot it with 80 grains of fine powder and it tends to throw the shots high at 100 yards. 65 grains is more appropriate at 100 yards.

I have a Parker Hale bullet mould, 500 grain, but it came without the base plug.
Does anyone know where I can obtain a base plug?
Or, does anyone have a picture of one, is it a shallow base or a deep cavity on the bullet?
The Lyman base plug leaves too much sprue around the edges and has to be trimmed off.

Thanks
Polarstar, Manchester, England.

[blackpowderbill]

Polarstar, sometimes as I have found, it is simpler to improvise. When I was not happy with the accuracy of my PH P1858 and wanted to try different bullets, I found I could not afford a new mold in every wieght I desired to try. I gained access to a lathe and began to turn new baseplugs. Each one took about 30 minutes to make. I varied the skirt thicknes and depth of the base cavity until I attained the desired accuracy.  What began as a 500gr lyman minie ended up as a 596 gr bullet with a shallow cavity and a thick skirt.
  If you can get to a lathe without having to purchase it, that would save you some pounds.

[rsl]

My 1970 vintage Euroarms shoots great with a .562 round ball and .15 thousands patch in front of 60 gr. of Pioneer Powder or Triple 7.. Mold is a Lee..

[dbm]

Somewhere in here is an interesting thread about shooting the Enfield!

I get the impression much (all?) of the shooting here is at short range - 100 yards and less. In the UK we shot Enfields matches out to 600 yards and have occassional forays at 800 yards. Out to 600 yards I use 75 grains of a 2F equivalent powder with a 560 grain RCBS Minie in my original 2 band rifle - I up the charge when we have our annual match at 800 yards. My loads are conservative compared to some.

David

[groundhog107]

(

thanks for the reply. maybe the powder they used was hotter or maybe they didnt expect the bullet to hit much with the untrained marksman you mention. my understanding is that the bayonet killed more than the rifle. joe gifford aka argie1891

The bayonet was pretty useless in the Civil War unless you count candle holder tent stake and meat roaster.  Records from surgeons state that the overwhelming majority of injuries came not from edged weapons ( knives swords bayonets) but from artillery and rifles.  Of course there are accounts of great bayonet charges ( 20th Maine etc) but they were notible BECAUSE such charges were very very rare.