New CVA Bobcat Stock

[Winter Hawk]

I got out to the range today and, after three shots to confirm the sights, I shot my October postal target.  I can't say that I am pleased with it.  The factory rear sight was not conducive to good accuracy, at least not for my eyes.  I'll see what I have in the goody box to replace it.

As light as the rifle is, it thumped me pretty good with 70 grains of FFFg Goex.  When the boy was using it I had a pound or more of lead in the plastic stock to tame the recoil.  I may revisit that and drill a hole in the butt to fill with lead.  Otherwise all went well and I am pretty please with it.

~Kees~

[Ohio Joe]

I got out to the range today and, after three shots to confirm the sights, I shot my October postal target.  I can't say that I am pleased with it.  The factory rear sight was not conducive to good accuracy, at least not for my eyes.  I'll see what I have in the goody box to replace it.

As light as the rifle is, it thumped me pretty good with 70 grains of FFFg Goex.  When the boy was using it I had a pound or more of lead in the plastic stock to tame the recoil.  I may revisit that and drill a hole in the butt to fill with lead.  Otherwise all went well and I am pretty please with it.

~Kees~

Kees, if you're not going to hunt with it, and only shoot 25 yards, I'd just drop that charge down to 50 grains and see what the rifle does... Your call of course. 

[RobD]

What Joe just posted rings true for a few good reasons.  A reduced charge for paper or steel at distances 50 yards and under will make for less recoil and better accuracy.  Not to mention less powder burned = win-win-win.    

[Hank in WV]

+1   

[Winter Hawk]

   I agree, gentlemen.  In fact, I was going to go down to 35 grains since I have a measure for that.  But it is attached to the shooting bag while the larger one is attached to the horn strap and it was just easier to use the larger one.  When Nathanael was shooting it he used a 50 grain measure which I should have grabbed as I went out the door. 

~Kees~

[RobD]

The only thing to be a bit careful about with light loads is if the gun in question has a patent breech plug.  You don't want to charge less than the volume of the ante chamber, else there could be a space 'tween patched ball and powder.  I think I did a test with a .50 GPR and the ante chamber volume was 25 grains.  I have a Gemmer Hawken flint .50 kit coming next week and will be pulling the breech plug to anti seize the threads and will check it's patent breech volume.

[Ohio Joe]

You should be okay with a 35 grain charge with that CVA. My kids and grandkids started out with an old .45 CVA Kentucky rifle that I shorten the barrel (from the muzzle) to 26 inches, and they've always shot 35 grains of 3fg from this particular rifle with never a misfire. I don't think I'd go much more below that charge of 35 grains since we're talking .45 -vs- .50 cal...

I'm not a fan of the bolster type chamber, but they are a solid piece of work after examining one that I took off another CVA .45 Rilfe when building my wife her little .45. I shortened this particular rifle barrel from the breech end / and drilled tapped for a breech plug and installed a side mount drum - than drilled and tapped for a nipple...

I was younger then, and these things came rather easy to me back then... 

Here's a picture with a q-tip passing from the anti chamber to the Drum;



Just a side-note; I have that anti chamber in front of me now and the opening is a 3/16ths hole running 3/8ths deep - then a sharp turn of about 3/8" into the drum. You'd really have to tap the side of your barrel a 'lot and with fine powder to get powder into the (less then 1/8" nipple cap channel to the Anti Chamber). I don't like the setup, but it is a solid one built to take pressure for sure.