Accuracy?? 1850/60 Swiss Jaeger 60 cal.

[j-houser]

Purchased the rifle because its fine craftsmanship, excellent condition, and my strong desire to hunt with it. Have not been able to find how they got these rifles to shoot so accurately in the 1800's.  Could not find a mold or a mold maker to make a mold, so I made a bbl casting and used the specs. to make a 498 grain bullet mold based on the maxi bullet concept. Went to the range and it shot 14" high at 50 yds. with the lowest sight setting.  I assumed that it had been used for long range shooting. Have since been to the range twice with 60, 70, 80 grains loads of FF with 3" groups at 50 yds., but past 50 the were unacceptable to shoot a deer at 75 or 100 yards.  The specs.  are 28" heavy swamped bbl, 1 in 42 twist, .600 bore dia., and 14, .012 deep round rifling.
Any help with my problem through advice, information, or contacts would be very much appreciated.
Only have 27 days of deer season left in NC. barrel

[sse]

Welcome...

Sounds fascinating.  I'm sure the fellas would like to see a few pics of the piece, if possible.

[Riley/MN]

I have no real experience with conicals. Have you tried a patched round ball?

[j-houser]

May join, I enjoy nostalgia and firearms. As for the picture, I am not internet savy enough to  post pictures. Just learning to navigate a forum. The rifle is very similar to the period German jaeger, full stock with moderate engraving, except it has the schutzen style but plate.
As for round balls, I have tried to find balls, a mold or a mold maker that I thought would work with the .60 bore with no luck.  One person told that the 1 in 42 twist in a .60 was for conical, due to the size,  where as a smaller caliber may do better with with 1 in 42.  Any help with this perspective would be appreciated. Also, The quality of the Maxi style mold that I made, and the bullets it produced might not have been precision enough to  preform past 50 yds. I used a boring bar to make the mold instead of making a button that was  cut to bore specks, to cut the mold. If I can get enough info. on these rifles, I may make another  mold . I have thought of trying  paper patch but I think I would have to have a false muzzle to load it.?? I also do not know what advantage I would need to use these .012 deep riflings for. This seems to be very deep to me, and would get a lot of blow by if not used for its purpose. I heard years back that the Germans some times loaded  using a mallet to drive the bullet to get a tight bore fit for accuracy ?? Also, does anyone know anyone who use to shoot a Jaeger in competition at  Friendship??  Any perspective, information or contacts would be very much appreciated.

[ridjrunr]

Go to bagmolds.com  they have selection and the option to order any size by .001 of an inch. Not shure if they do conical a. Perhaps if you explain what you have they could give some input or advise. Good luck with your project!

[j-houser]

Thanks for your time and information. $70 for a custom mold to specs. sounds good.

[ridjrunr]

Curious, round ball or conical?

[j-houser]

$70 was for the round ball. I think a conical mold would be a lot higher if they would make it. If I can get enough info on what type of bullet would work in this rifle, I will find out.

[pathfinder]

Not sure if Larry would do a conicle. Round ballnshould be fine. .590's are common and with pillow tick you should be ok. Suppose if you get the powder up there,say over 110-120grs of 3f,you may begin to strip past the rifling. .012 rifling seems to be awful deep for a conicle. Capt. Ned Robert's book,"The Muzzleloading Cap Lock Rifle" has a TON of info on "Bullet" muzzleloaders

[Uncle Russ]

If you're thinking of a Round Ball Mould.................
You might want to think about Jeff Tanner moulds, special made to bore size at a great price.
 http://www.jt-bullet-moulds.co.uk/

I have probably four, maybe five moulds, from Jeff for odd-ball sizes and they are top notch.
He made me a .522  for an old swiss rifle, and a .655 for my current .69 cal.
The problem, if such can be said, he only makes the Mould, you will need a set of handles.
I use a Lyman handle, and a Lee-6 Banger handle as they interchange real well.

Uncle Russ...

[j-houser]

Couldnt get in touch with Jeff Tanner. His molds look  precision. I found Ned Roberts book at Track Of the Wolf. If our gunsmithing school doesnt have a copy , I will order one Monday. I keep thinking that this is a long range rifle due to its origin in the mountains, 5/8" adj. rear sight and it shooting min. of 15"  high a 50 yds with the original front sight. Then, when I pulled one of the conicals from the bbl, it did not look bellistically coefficient. The .012 riflings made the front of the bullet looked like a deep cut gear. Also from my limited experience, I cant get accuracy with round balls at 100 yds. However, what I think and what actually  is, is often to different things. Thanks for your imput. It helps me have more knowing and understanding  rather then just thinking.

[pathfinder]

Captain Robrt's book will answer all your questions! Without a false muzzle I dont think it was a purpose built long range gun. I once shot a 200yd match and had a 4 shot group of @ 4"! The one and ONLY time I was able to do that,off hand no less,.570 round ball,115grs 3f,38" Colrain barrel in a percussion Hawkin. It has .014 round bottom rifling.

[j-houser]

Thanks again. Looking forward to getting the book. Use to shoot competitively in the Marines. That was some very outstanding shooting, especially off hand. I read years back about a national muzleloading shoot where the winner used what I think was a t.c. hawkin against a lot of high end rifles.  I think it was a nra match. Seems like he used 40 pounds of black powder or maybe more a year practising. Was that you?

[j-houser]

On other question. What twist bbl did the hawkin have?  Was it straight bore and was it gane twist? Just got the book, will start reading.