I think it depends on how deep the jug actually is Pathfinder and if one loads with a patch or loads with a wad . I have had a couple that when I inspected the patch , it showed signs that the ball had slipped the patch . Now where that happened in the bore
Would it really mater considering where the jug choke is , I cant say . Did they still shoot RB fine , ya they did . Was it worse then a barrel that wasn’t jugged , no IMO not .
I think all to often we strive to get the best of two worlds while living in one .
i would also point out that having a choked bore , does not mean you will suddenly achive better results then a cylinder bore . its more complicated then that.
now the rest of this post is probably more then what the auther of this thread wants or exspected . however here it is anyway for those who maybe interested .
Myself I have never been big on chokes for smooth bores . I just don’t see the need . Especially on a gun that’s intended to be duel purpose . But in which case if a person wanted a choke on a smooth bore and wanted to shoot RB from the same bore , IMO jug choking would be the way to go .
As far as a choke goes though . I don’t believe that jug choking compares anywhere near restrictive choking . Does it work , yes it does .
However if we look at the public “FIELD “ events of the 1840’s - 1890’s prior to early smokeless breechloaders entering the events , we don’t see any jug choked bores listed they are all restrictive bores . At least not that I have read . In fact even the restrictive choking doesn’t really show up untell rather late when greener entered the events with his treble-wedge -fast breeched design, which was a combination of restrictive choke and breechloading design .
Prior to that though , the scores show that muzzleloaders with cylinder bores ,were still beating the pants off of breech loaders in both pattern and penetration well into the 1870 events . It wasn’t tell the 1874 event where Greener entered with his triple wedge breechloaders that things began to even out . later when that design was combined with Schultz wood powder , thats when things really changed , leaving the cylinder bore in the dust .
I would also point out that the ranges for those events for both pattern and penetration were listed as 40, 50 and 60 yards .
So where does Jug choking fit into all this
? Good question , that’s something I don’t know . But it would appear that either it was so common on fowling piece , that it wasn’t mentioned , it simple wasn’t used or it was used and writen down simply as choked . in which case it still was found lacking in the trials .
but then i could have missed its mention in my reading. which could be a big possability as surly it could have been mentioned somewhere . but i dont find it mentioned by eather greener, Hawker or Walsh in their recourdings of the events
I think that the real facts of the mater is that between the later half of the 19th century and the mid 20th century with the resurgence of Muzzleloading popularity , we lost a vast amount of information . Luckily we do still have some documentation in the form of records and writings . But these are so sparse that it leaves a lot of questions . It also requires us to accept whats writen as factual based on the reputations of the person writing down the information .
Take Walsh’s writing where he states in 1874
the target in this case was an ordinary field pad of tough brown paper , thirty six sheet, the Greener in every instance near put pellets through the whole thirty six; the best performance of my gun “Manton “ was twenty- five. Reverting to pattern, I think the Greener gun , at 40 yards, it would have been almost impossible for a snipe to escape .
I omitted to say that we were using No.6 shot, the charge being 3drs and 1 1/ oz shot
At the same time Greener is recording patterns and penetration at 60 yards from what was then modern loads , in the 188 range . While at the same time muzzleloaders were producing scores in the 70’s . that’s un believable event by today’s standards of smokeless powder . Especially when we consider that the loads being recorded were No. 6 shot ”290 pellets per oz “ later records show the amount of shot was raised , so the records are skewed a little if we compare them to prior events . It also should be noted that a lot of times the smaller bores out scored larger bores . So its not uncommon to read of 16 and 20 gage bores scoring much higher the 10 or 12 bore guns .But we have to remember that this is mostly do to the rules of the events . only after those rules are changed to allow those larger bores to use proper loads do we see them start to preform much better
Its also rather fun to read that Rigby himself did not accept Greeners evaluations of the choked bore over the cylinder bore , thinking , in so many words ,that Greener had somehow found a way to cheat ..
Anyway , I could go on and on about this but I think I have made my point .
Somewhere we have lost something and are possibly tainting our opinions on the cylinder bore
For those interested in this subject , one of the easiest writings to find is
Greeners ; The Gun and its Development .
In it you will find a whole set of chapters dedicated to these field trials comparing muzzleloader to breechloader and cylinder bore to choked bore.
But I warn you . Its going to leave you with questions and even more so if you dig into the writings of Walsh , Hawker , Rigby….. And their transitional opinions on choked vs. cylinder bore
im not sure if this will work or not , but here is an" E link" to Greeners book for those that dont have it .
this link is to a pattern faximaly found on page 357.
for those who only quickly scan through a couple pages before and after this link , the long target spread is the recourded penitration test board faxsimalies at 40 yards
but if you scroll up to page 326 thats where you will start reading about the Field trials.
past those pages you will read also where Greener mentions several times about not being able to use a load thats best suited for his choke OR the gage of the gun .
the link is also for all of volume #1 . so the complete 800+ pages
anyway , i hope this link is interesting to some of you and gets you thinking about just what a cylinder bore is capable of when using BP
http://archive.org/stream/gunitsdevelopmen00greerich#page/357/mode/1up
Topic: jug ckoking (Read 1395 times)