Rifle Twist?

[Dphariss]

I have made it known that after the first of the year I would like to get myself a flintlock rifle. I currently have 2 percussion rifles but I have got the flintlock bug here lately.
Anyway, I was reading on Lyman's website about their GPR rifles in 50 cal. and they say that their barrels have a 1 in 60 twist for patched round balls and for hunting loads.
My current rifle is a T/C Percussion with a 1 in 48 twist. My question is this: Which is the best twist???

Your advise will be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your time.

There is nothing wrong with the 48 twist.
In larger bore sizes slower twists are better, large being over .62.
But even then I doubt that twists slower than 72" are really needed.
Unless the rifling is very shallow, shallow groove 1:48 can cause difficulty and has in the past but these barrels had .004-.005" deep rifling like cartridge guns. Making them basically useless with a RB.
A 1:48" twist 50 with .010 - 012" deep rifling will shoot 90 to 100 grains of powder with no problem an shoot very well. A 1:70" 50 caliber will do the same thing. I have had Douglas in 32-50-54 cal in 66. 48" twist Douglas 50, 50 and 54 in 70 and 72. THEY ALL WORKed fine and the 48" twist Douglas was VERY accurate with 90 gr of FFF GOI (pre-Goex), hardly a light load.
If I had to make a pronouncement I would prefer 1:48 for calibers to 54 and 1:66 or 1:72 for 54 up with the slower twist for .62 and larger.
But in general I use Green Mountain barrels for MLs and use their twists for the different calibers which work fine.
Douglas, when they were making ML barrels, made everything from 32 up as 1:66" except for 48" twist barrels they marketed as "Hawken"  barrels for awhile.

If you dislike the twist or groove depth have it rebarreled with a GM if you can find a drop in for it. GM barrels are excellent.
Track of the Wolf has 1" TC barrels in stock in 50 with a 70"  RB twist.
Tip Curtis might have them as well, he often has what TOW does not. Search for Tip Curtis Frontier Shop. He advertises in Muzzle Blasts
http://www.nmlra.org/classifieds.asp?ID=13

Otherwise its best to trade it off and buy something different. The breech in some TCs is so tight as to defy removal and if the breech is damaged it difficult to get a replacement breech only.

Dan

[Sir Michael]

While this is an extremely interesting discussion of rifling and Hawken rifling in particular, the question still remains:

My current rifle is a T/C Percussion with a 1 in 48 twist. My question is this: Which is the best twist???

Capt's statement pretty much sums it up:

How well are your 1 in 48 barrels shooting for you ?
Sub 1 inch at 50 and 100?
Sub 2 inch at 100 ?

vthompson, have you found the answer to your question yet or are you just more confused than ever?

[Uncle Russ]

Vern FWIW, you're probably in overload with all the stuff that's been thrown at you, but here is my take on your question regarding "best twist"...might as well get it out and take the flak, but it is "my take".....

But first I will say that I also have a T/C .50 with the same twist, along with tens of thousands of other T/C owners, and to the best of my knowledge there is little doubt as to the accuracy obtainable with this rifle with this same twist...loads may vary, to include different powders, different patch thickness, and different lubes, and on and on, but there is never any argument about about the guns ability to perform.

Now when you ask, what is the best twist? That becomes a hoss of a totally different color.

Personally, I don't know of any best twist for any given caliber, as I have seen a bunch of what I thought was weird stuff perform flawlessly...an example of that is the .50 GM 1:28 twist with a round ball and 60gr FFg. (not the FFFg powder recommended for the caliber, nor the "minimum" of 1:48 twist for round ball, and not the conical bullet this barrel was expressively designed for.) but it shoots surprisingly well.

Another example might be the lowly .56 caliber smooth-bore with a round ball...mine shoots a good as I can hold, so why would I ever want better, and yet many folks feel they are inaccurate.

Bottom line of all my gibberish is Capt. gave you some good information.
What you want, and what you intend to do, has everything to do with what you choose for a rifle and what twist that rifle will have.

Just don't overlook what you have right now.

I have also long heard and read that the 1:48 rifling machine used by Hawken in St.Louis was the only machine available at the exact right time, and I have long believed that story. I have  believed it mostly because it made good sense to "make-do" with what you had during that time frame, and I don't see Sam Hawken as being any different.... Was it by design, or the luck of the devil?

You be the judge. You pick the version of the story you like best, but never think of it as the 1:48 twist is somehow the wrong twist, or a one-twist-do-everything-twist.
It is a good twist, and it has served tens of thousands of black powder shooters well.....
Is a 1:66 better for round ball? Most likely.
Is a 1:28 better for conical? Most likely.
Is it the best twist? Probably not for specific tasks, but a better twist has been slow in coming.



Uncle Russ...

[vthompson]

I would like to thank everyone who took the time to reply to my post. You guy's have really opened my eye's in explaining how a rifle's twist works.
I think that whenever I get the money saved up after the first of the year I am going to get the Lyman GPR in 50cal. and give it a try. I have heard good things about that rifle.
Again, thanks to those who replied and I value your opinions and experience very much. You guy's have helped me out a lot.

[Dphariss]

Probably the most accurate, or at least second to none, Rb rifle I ever owned was a 48" twist Douglas.
I have a 66 twist 54 that is very accurate.
I have had a 72 twist 54 that was really accurate too.

Many problems that might be attributed to twist are just as likely attributable to things like patch/ball fit. The idiosyncracsies  of the individual barrel etc etc.
With the single exception of a Sharon Hawken from years ago all the 50s and 54s that I have owned shoot 90 to 100 grains of powder regardless of twist.
I still have a 38" long 66 twist 54 I shoot 90 gr of FFF swiss in. I used to use 100 gr of Goex FFF. I had a 72 twist 42" 54 that I used 100 grains in. Both shot very well indeed. I am not convinced that twist effects powder charge that much so long as its not too fast, like a bullet twist. Most RB rifles at least 45 cal and above seem to shoot best with about 1/2 ball weight of powder or a little more.

Dan

PS 1/2 ball weight is too much for rifles much over 58 and far too much for rifles like my 16 bore.

[Loyalist Dave]

Let us limit ourselves to the patched round ball,  ..., for IF we get into conicals there are, folks, depending on the caliber, from 8 to 16 different designs, and most of those are all lead types that may be hand cast!  LOTS of variables so what is "best" is really a function of the barrel, the projectile, and the distance it must be shot to the target..., oh and add the type of game animal if we are talking hunting instead of targets.   :shock:  Whether or not it shoot "straight" enough for a competing target shooter might be another matter.  

FYI ... I referenced Barber,    "Instructions for the Formation and Exercise of Volunteer Sharp-Shooters", 1804. by Captain Barber  c. 1804 for further information if desired.

LD

[Captchee]

Some interesting points Dave.
 This thread has kinda gone well past  the  answer LOL  
 But that’s what information exchange is all about

 I would however disagree with  not discussing the military applications  or for that mater their base with conical application .
 Reason being is that for the most part and with few exceptions, once militaries started adopting rifles in large numbers . The requirements for  accuracy were , and still are based on minimum standards   . Hence you get the  1 in 120 twist rates that  were often seen well into the American civil war . For that mater the rates of twist and projectile designs we see today . In other words it works fine tell someone comes along and claims something is better .
As we   became more knowledgeable  concerning conical  things began to change .
 But why ? Was it an actual need  or was it simply a way to  one up the fella across the isle ? In some cases its both .. But that’s another subject .

So back to the subject at hand  concerning the RB  is how much rotation does a  round object need in order for it  to  continue rotation  in that one direction . Oddly enough , not to much as mass in motion tends to stay in motion .

 But then to muddy the waters even more  you have strait rifling . Which if people have never tried it , works wonderfully well with a RB as it  insures no rotation within the barrel .
 Now someone is bound to say here :
Ahhh but Cap , when the ball leaves the barrel , it will then begin to tumble .

Well good point . But  I would point out that your thinking more of what happens with a conical then with a RB .
 See the odd thing is that  because the RB is ,,,, well round , it actually gets equal pressure
Assuming its round that is .
 There fore that pressure does not allow the object to  spin as much as we would think .
 If you ever get a chance to ride in a small airplane , look at and see if the tires are spinning . What you see is going to surprise you .
 .
As to recoil . Recoil is a  effect of  acceleration IE for every reaction there is an = opposite reaction .
 This goes back to twist rates . Because the ball  gets “ slightly more “ pressure with a faster twist . You can also feel more recoil with a faster twist .
 Notice I said “CAN”   the reason is that   felt recoil also has al whole lot to do with weapon design  and make up.

So now we are back to what is best ? Well again that depends on  the shooter  and what they are trying to do . But the general consensus today is that a RB does not need a whole lot of rotation in order to keep it stable

[Loyalist Dave]

Captchee, I didn't say "don't" talk about military rifles, only to "be careful" for if we are only talking about accuracy, in Barber's day he was worried about accuracy, speed loading, and clearing the bore, in combat.  I should have mentioned that at the time the British long range target set at 300 yards was 24" x 72" with a "bullseye" about 1/4 of the distance from the top edge, and any hit of the ball from the military rifle anywhere on the target was scored the same.  So..., based on that I concluded that since the military objective was to knock an enemy soldier out of the battle, not necessarily to hit a deer in vitals, we should look at civilian twist rates to gain a better understanding.  Granted, that's assuming that civilians care almost exclusively for accuracy, and quick reloads and easy cleaning not being nearly as important as they were to Captain Barber.

I agree that recoil is a function of physics, but percieved recoil as Barber wrote, was "disagreeable" in faster twist rifles.  Now, he doesn't mention differences in loads or in calibers, and the stock dimensions may also have played a part, but the fact that he does mention it was a factor, and torque is caused by rifling.  He also may have been full of beans..., for the Baker rifle had a wider surface area on the buttstock compred to many of the American and German rifles of his day..., could've simply been pounds per square inch on Barber's shoulder, and nothing else, eh?

As for "straight rifling" or a grooved barrel, can anybody say if the grooves were done to give better results when shooting shot, and they found it worked better for ball than a smooth bore, or if they did it for ball, and found that it also improved the pattern of shot.

Which came first the chicken or the egg?

LD

[Captchee]

i believe it was originally done for  improving accuracy with a ball . but we have learned that it works very well with shot as well

[Mustang]

I learned a lot, so you guys get my thnaks.

[Dphariss]

i believe it was originally done for  improving accuracy with a ball . but we have learned that it works very well with shot as well

I once saw an European made Rolling Block shotgun of about 16 ga that had straight grooves.

Dan

[Riley/MN]

I hesitate to say this, cuz I don't remember where I heard it... but I remember hearing that the straight rifling was developed as an aid to loading due to fouling build-up.... the straight rifling gave the fouling a place to go....