Traditional Muzzleloading Association

Shooting Traditional Firearms and Weapons => General Interest => Topic started by: Lastmohecken on August 01, 2009, 07:50:27 PM

Title: Question about TC's barrels with the QL counterbore?
Post by: Lastmohecken on August 01, 2009, 07:50:27 PM: What is the general opinion of the QL Counterbore, that was offered on some of the Thompson Center barrels. I guess that is what is was called, I can't remember for sure, but I have one on a TC Hawken. It has the end of the barrel counterbored out for a little bit to aid in easy loading.

I ordered mine from Midsouth, or Midway, etc. a few years ago. It was a 54 cal, roundball twist and says so on the barrel. I thought they were made by Thompson Center, and mine is so marked on the barrel, but I seen one exactly like it at a gunshow today, and was told it was a Green Mountain barrel. Did Green Mountain make those barrels for Thompson Center and put TC's name on them, also?

That was one question, the other is how well do these normally shoot? It sees like I remember reading somewhere years ago, that lots of people blamed them for poor accuracy, and I have never been that impressed with mine. It seems like I also read that quite a few people had the barrels shortened and got rid of the QL addition. Does anyone here know or have much experience with these barrels?
Title:
Post by: Bigsmoke on August 01, 2009, 09:50:49 PM: In theory, it might be a good idea, but as you have seen, maybe not. I have had trouble keeping patches centered while loading. And while cleaning, when the patch gets to the end of the rifling, if you are bringing it out kinda fast, there is this sucking sound and the patch pulls off the jag and goes back into the bore. Ain't that fun, now you gotta go fishing.
I guess with a maxi ball, it would be a better idea and with a PRB.
Accuracy wise, I think it deteriorates a bit. However, another of the selling points is the crown of the bore will not get damaged. Maybe not.
Title:
Post by: Ohio Joe on August 01, 2009, 10:53:00 PM: My findings are pretty much the same as Bigsmoke's.

I think the idea behind the QLA was to help in loading the TC Maxi straight. It didn't do anything for me as I only shoot round ball, and centering a patch isn't always easy.

Your best bet for using the TC QLA barrel with patched round ball is to cut the patch at the muzzle, then an off center patch is not an issue.

As for barrel accuracy? I never got the kind of accuracy from any TC barrel that I get from Green Mountain or old Douglas barrels.

There's something to be said for .008 depth (or more) grooves, and slow twist rifling for patched round ball.

I have never felt the .005 depth grooves and 1 in 48 twist rifling had much to offer for accuracy. But that's just my findings over the years. I just never felt that combination was right for either the TC Maxi or patched round ball. Perhaps .008 depth & 1 in 48 would have been a better choice for TC?
Title:
Post by: Skychief on August 02, 2009, 11:15:23 PM: I have a T/C Hawken "Custom". It has the QLC on it. I have had the rifle for ~15 years and shot it a ton and killed 60-70 whitetails with it. The QLC absolutely STINKS! I think T/C really goofed when putting these on their barrels as most users (I think) use prb much more than elongated bullets out of them. I exclusively use prbs and so have no use for the "counterbore". Starting a precut patch is an exercise in holding your mouth right while muttering things to yourself in a hushed voice. Pillow ticking, you ask? My barrel refuses to accept ticking of the same thickness as the precut patches I use without dragging out a hammer to beat on the short starter!

End rant. I really like the rifle, but the QLC is a joke for a prb shooter. I recently got my first flintlock (it has a Green Mountain slow twist barrel). It will shoot ragged holes from a benchrest while my Hawken really wont (unless I get lucky). If your a roundball shooter, you wont like it if you know what you are missing otherwise.
Title:
Post by: Lastmohecken on August 03, 2009, 01:26:28 AM: I have had my TC with the QLC barrel on it for a few years now, and I have been wondering if cutting it off shorter would be a good idea. At anyrate, it looks like most people don't really like it for patched round balls which is what I shoot, also.

It has crossed my mind today to cut it off and make a really short rifle out of it, for something different. How short could a 54 cal roundball barrel be and still be effective without giving up that much in down range power?
Title:
Post by: mossie on November 29, 2009, 08:24:58 AM: I have went to using the Hornady Plastic patch for my .50 caliber TC round ball gun. It's designed for .490 ball. It's not traditional I know but it does avoid all the issues with that dang QLA muzzle. I hate the dang things but didn't know any better when I bought the rifles. Never again though.
Title:
Post by: Shadow Hawk on November 29, 2009, 05:43:26 PM: my renagade shoots pretty good with the ql barrle. i just went to a over sized patch. i use a 54-62 patch instead of a 50. centering is no longer a problem. now im just working out lube and load combos. btw i also had a barrle rubing problem. but a patch between the stock and barrel just forward of the wedge solved that.(thanks Russ).
Title:
Post by: LRB on November 29, 2009, 06:08:26 PM: I have one, and it is a tack driver. Their system works great for mine. Easy loading and one ragged hole group with RB hunting loads. I will say though production guns are subject to vary in performance.
Title:
Post by: James Kelly on November 30, 2009, 10:44:54 PM: First guy I know to use this system of relieving the muzzle was John Hall. Did this so his breechloading US Model 1819 rifle could be loaded from the muzzle if necessary. The normal "54" caliber rifle cartridges for loading the Hall rifle from the breech used a ball which would otherwise be rather tight for easy muzzle loading with a patch. The Hall, I believe, had a slightly tighter bore than did the common .54 cal military rifles of the time.

Daniel Kurkowski here in SE Michigan told me he developed/patented the contemporary QLA system for Thompson/Center.

Me, I like my Caywood mountain rifle, thankee very much.
Title:
Post by: Fletcher on December 01, 2009, 08:56:23 AM: Mine came with that. It performs fine with conicals but not at all impressed with PRB. I bought a Fox River 30" barrel in 1-60" twist and that is what I take to Rondys.

Just got a T/C Hawken in .54 and it has the counterbore. I will use it for conicals as well and if I get a wild hair and a good year on the archery stuff I make get a Fox River .54 in 1-60" for it as well.
Title:
Post by: Daehenoc on December 25, 2009, 09:33:51 PM: Well. if it isn't working you could cut it off. And, use that cut-off piece to engrave rifling on conicals for easy loading if the need should ever arise.
Reckon to play with mine a few more years. Wanta see how to best make it work with the 54 maxihunter.
Title:
Post by: Daehenoc on February 05, 2010, 02:31:32 PM: At the bottom of the c'bore there's a sharp square shoulder. Loading a patched round ball is like trying to do it on a square cut muzzle crown...it cuts the patch.
Talked to the TC help line. The lady asked the smith about it and he said that yeah, that's the way they are.
Now I know why it's so danged hard to load a conical in it. You have to stamp the rifling through the lead ridges on the bullet.

Can you imagine anything goofier than having a square cut end where you need to guide a lead bullet or a patched round ball into the muzzle?
There's no on this one!
Title:
Post by: Swamp on February 05, 2010, 08:21:27 PM: Here's my 2 cents, I think it was just a "New" thing to offer to sell more guns!

We see this all the time from companies. They make some change to their product, make claims it's the best thing since sliced bread when it's really not, and hope everyone has to have one.

This is just my opinion.
Title: QLA
Post by: greyhunter on February 06, 2010, 08:22:07 AM: The QLA "system" was made to help load plastic sabot bullets in inline muzzleloaders. It does a good job for the rifle/projectiles it was designed for. I can only assume that because Thompson Center Arms was bought out by Smith and Wesson, that in the interest of cost savings they use the same tooling on all their barrels. From the few recent examples of TC Hawkens I have seen for sale in Gander Mtn. they are horrribly constructed with poor fitting furniture and cheap wood, so sticking a QLA barrel on them doesn't surprise me. Cut it off and recrown or buy a replacement barrel, otherwise you'll haf ta us CVA powerbelt bullets in your Hawken
Title:
Post by: Sharp Shooter on February 06, 2010, 05:45:10 PM: I have a TC 58cal barrel for my Renegade with the QLA. I dont mind it at all and see no problem with it. I shoot roundball and some conicals on occasion.
Title:
Post by: Uncle Russ on February 07, 2010, 12:32:49 AM: There has been a lot said about the T/C barrel. Spme of it good, and some of it not so good.

Here is what we're actually looking at.........................

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v143/RussB256/Guns/TCQLA.gif)

Now the problem, as I see it, is there is no real muzzle "cone"...or if there is a muzzle crown, or cone, it is not sufficent for some round ball / patch combinations.

As was said previously, it's design was simply to compliment the popular Maxi-Ball and Sabot of the time.

T/C was, at one time making and selling Maxi-Ball moulds for as much as a good Lyman single cavity was costing, and that represented a handsome profit, on the side....so to speak.

When this QL was introduced the marketing gurus indicated an advantage for loading round ball.
There is no real real advantage, as the end of the QL is just a bit to large to properly settle a patch, and being oversized, it allows error in seating the patch and ball in a straight line...to much play on the sides, as opposed to a normal / regular barrel.

I want it understood that I am not slamming the system, not at all.
Many folks have learned this system, deal with it, and even like this system...and that is what it's all about.

I have seen, and shot, exactly one rifle that was properly crowned with a 11 degree cone "inside" the QL and it shot remarkably well!

Does that mean they would all shoot better if properly crowned inside the QL where the actual barrel is?

No, that is not what this means.

What this means is that one person thought he could solve the problem of a poor shooting rifle by crowning the actual barrel. He did, and it worked out great!

Back in the day when casting your own was a very satisfying, and money saving experience, the folks at T/C were taking notes and decided they wanted a piece of this action too...
It was a time of Black Powder Cartridges, false muzzles, connicals, sabots, long range shooting, and conicals were the rage...T/C was a little late coming, but in my opinon that is the very thing that brought the QL on the scene and theoretically this idea should have brought about sales in both rifles and moulds.....did it actually work that way? You have to be the judge.

Uncle Russ...
Title: QLA
Post by: greyhunter on February 07, 2010, 08:07:12 AM: Good one Russ, like they say a picture is worth a thousand words! Outstanding job .
Title:
Post by: Swamp on February 07, 2010, 07:54:08 PM: TC conical bulllets, the maxi-ball, and the maxi-hunter, and even the Break Away Sabots from TC, are self aligning anyway. The first ring on the bullet, as well as the sabot are smaller in dia, and then a little larger for the next, and so on. I used to shoot all these. They self align themselves. Other sabots might benefit from the QLA, but that kind of talk is for other sites!
Title:
Post by: mossie on March 07, 2010, 02:56:42 PM: Even the sabots themselves are smaller on the bottom and they enter a non QLA barrel just fine. I have barrels both ways and would not buy another QLA barrel as long as I live. Your mileage may vary.
Title:
Post by: Shadow Hawk on March 07, 2010, 07:19:54 PM: I have a .50 renegade with the QLA. the only problem i have found with round ball is the normal size patch is easy to get off center. i just went to a larger patch and the centering problem was fixed. now it maybe off center a little but the patch is still all around the ball.