Post by: Thunderhawk1828 on September 17, 2015, 07:08:23 PM
1) is there any documentation that states what "F" powder was used during the Fur trade era? Believe they only carried 1 horn so whatever the "F" was it was used for barrell and prime.
2) any record of what patch thickness was used? Or did they really not care so much as they used a smaller ball for ease of loading (that is maybe used a .495 ball in a 54 cal, etc).
I am using a .15 patch with a 530 ball with no problem - but was curious.
Thanks.
Thunderhawk1828
Post by: mario on September 23, 2015, 08:16:29 AM
Quote from: "Thunderhawk1828"
I have 2 questions about loading:
1) is there any documentation that states what "F" powder was used during the Fur trade era? Believe they only carried 1 horn so whatever the "F" was it was used for barrell and prime.
In the 18th century, there are distinctions made between powder and "rifle powder". Rifle powder being a bit finer than that used in muskets/fowling pieces.
Quote from: "Thunderhawk1828"
2) any record of what patch thickness was used? Or did they really not care so much as they used a smaller ball for ease of loading (that is maybe used a .495 ball in a 54 cal, etc).
Never come across any. They used what they had. Shooters didn't go around with digital calipers in those days.
Mario
Post by: Rocklock on September 23, 2015, 01:26:46 PM
Bottom line is that there were many different combinations.
TC
Post by: One Shot on September 23, 2015, 03:47:14 PM
As far as I know or remember short starters came into use somewhere around the mid 1800s when shooting competitions became more popular and accuracy was being looked for that demanded a tighter ball patch fit. Short starters, particularly on the battle lines or in a defense against hostiles would slow you down somewhat.
Post by: Dewey on September 23, 2015, 08:23:11 PM
Audubon, Maria R. (2012-12-18). Audubon and his Journals, Vol. 2 (Kindle Locations 6144-6150). . Kindle Edition.
Audubon, Maria R. (2012-12-18). Audubon and his Journals, Vol. 2 (Kindle Locations 6136-6144). . Kindle Edition.
Well, I don't know what thickness that thread count linen is (and I suspect a typo or that the cloth measurement was different than used today - that is a large number!), but Dan'l weren't using no short starter, for sure !!!
PS
Found this about historical Scottish tartans: "The average-sized sett for a kilt in modern times is 5 to 6 inches (12 - 15 cms) which gives around 250 threads per sett using a medium weight wool yarn. If of course you were using a much thinner yarn such as silk then that thread count could multiply by three or four.", so if 6 inches was the basis then, then a 600 count would be 100 today (per square inch).
Post by: RobD on September 24, 2015, 05:15:00 PM
i wouldn't doubt even tow was used for patching, as well as leather, leaves, much softened bark, and gawd knows what else. i doubt that tightly patched balls were the norm, either.
as to powder, there were many sources including home grown, so lotsa variations in both grain size and potency.
aren't we glad for the abundance we have today!
Post by: sse on September 24, 2015, 09:23:42 PM
Quote from: "Dewey"
Barking off Squirrels is delightful sport, and in my opinion requires a greater degree of accuracy than any other. I first witnessed this manner of procuring Squirrels whilst near the town of Frankfort. The performer was the celebrated Daniel Boone. We walked out together, and followed the rocky margins of the Kentucky River, until we reached a piece of flat land thickly covered with black walnuts, oaks, and hickories. As the general mast was a good one that year, Squirrels were seen gambolling on every tree around us. My companion, a stout, hale, and athletic man, dressed in a homespun hunting-shirt, bare-legged and moccasined, carried a long and heavy rifle, which, as he was loading it, he said had proved efficient in all his former undertakings, and which he hoped would not fail on this occasion, as he felt proud to show me his skill. The gun was wiped, the powder measured, the ball patched with six-hundred-thread linen, and the charge sent home with a hickory rod. We moved not a step from the place, for the Squirrels were so numerous that it was unnecessary to go after them. Boone pointed to one of these animals which had observed us, and was crouched on a branch about fifty paces distant, and bade me mark well the spot where the ball should hit. He raised his piece gradually, until the bead (that being the name given by the Kentuckians to the sight) of the barrel was brought to a line with the spot which he intended to hit. The whip-like report resounded through the woods and along the hills, in repeated echoes. Judge of my surprise when I perceived that the ball had hit the piece of the bark immediately beneath the Squirrel, and shivered it into splinters, the concussion produced by which had killed the animal, and sent it whirling through the air, as if it had been blown up by the explosion of a powder magazine. Boone kept up his firing, and, before many hours had elapsed, we had procured as many Squirrels as we wished; for you must know, kind reader, that to load a rifle requires only a moment, and that if it is wiped once after each shot, it will do duty for hours.It was very nice to read this...
Audubon, Maria R. (2012-12-18). Audubon and his Journals, Vol. 2 (Kindle Locations 6144-6150). . Kindle Edition.
Audubon, Maria R. (2012-12-18). Audubon and his Journals, Vol. 2 (Kindle Locations 6136-6144). . Kindle Edition.
Well, I don't know what thickness that thread count linen is (and I suspect a typo or that the cloth measurement was different than used today - that is a large number!), but Dan'l weren't using no short starter, for sure !!!
PS
Found this about historical Scottish tartans: "The average-sized sett for a kilt in modern times is 5 to 6 inches (12 - 15 cms) which gives around 250 threads per sett using a medium weight wool yarn. If of course you were using a much thinner yarn such as silk then that thread count could multiply by three or four.", so if 6 inches was the basis then, then a 600 count would be 100 today (per square inch).
Post by: snake eyes on September 25, 2015, 11:39:14 AM
:shake [/color]
Post by: cb on September 25, 2015, 01:39:58 PM
"… He blows through his rifle to ascertain that it is clear, examines his flint, and thrusts a featther into the touch-hole. To a leatthern bag swung at his side is attached a powder-horn; his sheath-knife is there also; below hangs a narrow strip of homespun linen. He takes from his bag a bullet, pulls with his teeth the wooden stopper from his powder-horn, lays the ball in one hand, and with the other pours the powder upon it until it is just overtopped. Raising the horn to his mouth, he again closes it with the stopper, and restores it to its place. He introduces the powder into the tube; springs the box of his gun, greases the "patch" over with some melted tallow, or damps it; then places it on the honey-combed muzzle of his piece. The bullet is placed on the patch over the bore, and pressed with the handle of the knife, which now trims the edge of the linen. The elastic hickory rod, held with both hands, smoothly pushes the ball to its bed; once, twice, thrice has it rebounded. The rifle leaps as it were into the hunters arms, the feather is drawn from the touch-hole, the powder fills the pan, which is closed. “Now I’m ready,” cries the woodsman…."
As for granulation sizes in F, FF, FFF, etc. are noted in both 18th and 19th Century texts. Spence on the Muzzleoading forum has listed several primary docs.
Post by: Thunderhawk1828 on September 27, 2015, 10:31:32 PM
While not going to be as accurate I like the idea of a easier / smoother loading with not as thick a patch and will try such and see how much difference there may be with a loose patch v. a tight hammering down patch load.
As for the "F" grain I'm hoping to get good quick ignition with 2F in my .54 for both barrell and pan and if not will go with 3F and try that. Would like to stay away from 2F and 4F in the pan.
Thanks again for all replies.
Thunderhawk1828
Post by: RobD on September 28, 2015, 05:15:00 AM
Post by: cb on September 28, 2015, 01:02:41 PM
Post by: Riley/MN on September 28, 2015, 02:40:10 PM
Quote from: "cb"
Like rfd I too use only 3F in my guns up to 16 ga. and have even used it in my original 11 ga Potzdam musket. My 54's love it. Went to 3F back in 1973 and haven't used anything else since and FWIW I've been shooting BO since 1961..
Dang Chuck! I were just a glimmer in '61.....
Post by: cb on September 28, 2015, 09:56:42 PM
He grew up shooting muzzle loaders and never needed anything more. His main two guns were New York built late percussion with a Harry Pope barrel that was his pride and joy, along with an 1880's built 16 ga.
Anyway I turned eight in January 1961 and when my uncle found out he had me come up for hunting season and taught me how to shoot the old guns - I got a nice fat doe for eating that year.
A year later I went to visit my first cousin in Allentown, PA, and when Mike found out how interested in the old guns, he took me to meet a friend who was into collecting and shooting flinters. Pretty much never looked back since than - my first two rifles were 1850-60's percussion Lemans, which in the mid-1960's could still be bought through the mail and I paid less than $100.00 for both! Those were the days.....
Post by: Riley/MN on October 01, 2015, 10:49:24 AM
Post by: Uncle Russ on October 03, 2015, 03:38:00 PM
Quote from: "cb"
........................- my first two rifles were 1850-60's percussion Lemans, which in the mid-1960's could still be bought through the mail and I paid less than $100.00 for both! Those were the days.....
Geesh! I thought I was about the only one that remembered those Golden Days of yesteryear.
I have often wondered what happened to all the "good stuff" that was available prior to the 1968 GCA.
I ordered a Rolling Block, back sometimes in the early 1960's, and if memory serves me right I paid about $39.00 including shipping. Got a Kentucky Rifle with all the makings, including a possibles bag, for $29.00
Nice, and I do mean NICE Muzzleloaders sold for a bit more than what a pound of powder will run nowadays.
(When I started writing this I had the name of two such catalogs that I had ordered from in my mind, one of them being Kleins, if remember right, but dadburn it the other name seems to have slipped out.)
I have sometimes had the fleeting thought that Turner Kirkland may have got his start from insiders knowing and predicting what would happen in the Arms / Mail Order Trade after Pres. Kennedy's death, and wondered if he didn't snatch-up a bunch of that "mail-order" stuff to get DGW up and running???....just sayin!
Sorry for ramblin, but it was nice to reflect back on those days with Chuck.
Just an old man thinking out loud I guess.
Uncle Russ...
Post by: Bigsmoke on October 03, 2015, 08:28:46 PM
Interestingly enough, although he called it a 4 bore double rifle, I have actually handled that rifle and it is more like a 6 bore, with the bore measuring about .900. Whatever bore it is, it is a fine rifle. To me, it comes up to aim in one smooth motion. At about 18 - 19 pounds, I can see why the great white hunters relied upon gun bearers.
At the tender young age of about 9, I recollect sending away for a .455 Webbley that was advertised in the pages of Popular Mechanics or some such magazine. That was probably about 1954 or '55. I think it was $9.95 plus $2.00 for postage. I think my pre-adolescence handwriting gave me away. They sent the money back. Darn, I really wanted that pistol.
Bannermans's the other one you are thinking about, Russ?
No doubt Turner did grab a bunch of that mail order stuff, but I think he was rolling pretty good by the time Kennedy was assassinated.
John