The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

Sounds like some good groups Adam , thanks for the info .


Dave

*wanders off to Google t'internet for a prompt and witty response to Dromia*

I'll take that as a yes.

Fun day out, shame I didn't think to take foties of the paper cartridges.

Or the flintlocks and the rest of the guns.

Sunshine, a rifle and a target, what is not to like

Dave 101 wrote:What were you using Minie ball or round ball and what was the accuracy like .

Dave

For the real gen on Enfields, I don't think you can beat this article, which has a wealth of information, written by Bill Curtis (past Vice President of the Muzzle Loaders Association of Great Britain and the holder of the World Record in the Minié Rifle Class from 1972 to 1980).
http://milpas.cc/rifles/ZFiles/British% ... field.html

He also gives a complete rundown on all the variations of Enfields - in terms of barrel lengths, rifling systems, and different manufacturers - as well as advice on powders, loads and moulds.

Re. accuracy, Bill says:

"Given a good Enfield, the practised shooter can enjoy competitive target work at all ranges out to 600 yards."

This comment matches a mass of anecdotal evidence from the US Civil War.

Re. ball or Minie bullet; even with a snugly fitting patched ball, I don't see how it can ever be as accurate as a well made Minie - though there is a point to watch, which I picked up years ago on an American forum. The shooter in question was unfamiliar with muzzle loaders, though a very competent shot with modern rifles, and wisely decided to start off with a light load of powder, and work his way up.

He found the recoil pretty gentle, but the grouping was awful! On the advice of an experienced shooter, he tried increasing the powder load in small steps, but found very little difference in the recoil (and grouping) until he reached a certain load. All of a sudden, there was a sharp increase in recoil, and a dramatic improvement in the grouping. After a lot of discussion as to why, I suggested he check the shape of the base of his bullets, in case the lip around the cavity was a bit on the thick side; it turned out that it was, compared to a Minie from a Lyman mould.

After more discussion, I suggested that the reason for the soft recoil and poor grouping was that, with light loads, the base of the bullet was not deforming enough to give a good gas seal, so he was getting a lot of blow-by, and the bullet was not getting a good grip on the rifling - hence the poor grouping. But, when the powder load was increased to a certain point, the blast was finally enough to bulge the base out into the rifling (hence the increase in recoil), and not only cut down the blow-by, but also ensure that the bullet was properly spun as it travelled down the barrel - hence the improvement in grouping.

He reported back later on that he'd switched to the same Lyman mould as his friend, and could now vary the powder charge quite significantly without affecting the grouping.

I have a theory about the way Minies work, and would be interested in anyone else's opinion on this. For a long time, I wondered about how the base of the bullet gripping the rifling could steady the bullet so well - but, if it was only the base that deformed, how could the upper section of the bullet have any stabilising effect? Then I thought about the nice, squishy soft lead - Curtis recommends the purest lead you can find - and the way it would behave under violent acceleration. Uh-huh.

The powder fires; the shock wave hits the base of the bullet, and the base jumps forward; but the main body of the bullet momentarily tries to resist that forward movement due to its considerable inertia. So what happens next? The main body of the bullet bulges outwards - right into the rifling; so the rifling is not just gripping the bullet by its base, but right up the parallel section of the bullet, until it starts curving in towards the point. Maybe the inventor of the Minie worked all this out and wrote it down somewhere, but I've not seen it - though my theory does seem to match the reality of how accurate a well-made Minie can be in a good barrel.

Over to you guys; what do you think?

Best regards,
Jack

This is mine---I have been shooting it for many years and have reached some conclusions: Firstly, absolutely pure lead is not needed---that said, the bullet must be very soft. Second, You can overload an Enfield and accuracy drops off quickly. I use 54 grn of FO Triangle. I have used Swiss and, in this gun, it gives no advantage for the increased cost. Thirdly, lube is important. I finished up dipping the bullets in Wonderlube melted in the microwave oven. I do not size them. Lastly, the Lee Modern Minie mould, which prouces a bullet which is a hollow based wadcutter, is more accurate than the traditional Lyman bullet mould at short distances----I am not biased; I have both moulds.

Last week I shot a 13 round card , off-hand at 50m. The first 5 shots were in one ragged hole in the 10 ring. The next 5, the group opened up to 3". The last three were all over the place.
I attribute the deterioration to me being 73 years old---I am still stronger than most people but my endurance, particularly that of my eyesight when concentrating, is not what it was.
I have about a dozen tifles. All of them are older than me. When I see my fellow club members spraying lead from plastic military look-alike .22s, I feel sorry for them. They just don't know what they are missing.
Fred

FredB wrote:Last week I shot a 13 round card , off-hand at 50m. The first 5 shots were in one ragged hole in the 10 ring. The next 5, the group opened up to 3". The last three were all over the place.
I attribute the deterioration to me being 73 years old - I am still stronger than most people but my endurance, particularly that of my eyesight when concentrating, is not what it was.
Fred

I'm 5 years younger than you, Fred, but have similar problems; even a 24 inch varmint barrelled .22 is more than I can hold steady, in the standing position - even though I go horse riding twice a week and work as a signalman on a steam railway.

(and, for those of you who have never taken a 16.2 stallion for an hour's work out in a school - no, the rider does NOT just sit there, while the horse does all the work! Sometimes I think it would be less effort for me to carry him . . . )

Left bicep starts to twitch, and the muzzle goes all over the place. In theory, a 20 inch standard barrel ought to be far less accurate - but I can hold one of them steady for a full card. Unfortunately, my days of being able to hold an P.1853 on target (like my days of firing steam locos on the Kent & E. Sussex Railway) are gone. But I'd love to get my hands on a 1970s Parker-Hale P.1858, or a Musketoon . . .

Jack

Evening fellow musket owners! Having recently picked up an 1861 P53 that has not been fired in recent years and certainly not by the previous owner... I thought I'd have a trawl through here and pick up some tips before taking her down the range for a pop.

From what I've read on this thread and links within it, it seems that various calibre balls or minies are being used in P53's.

At least one person has recommended the Lee mould - would this be the right one for the musket?
http://www.sinclairintl.com/reloading-e ... 55148.aspx

Dromia - I wasn't having much luck finding Pritchett moulds from my first Google searches, but I've now seen your recent post on the http://noebulletmolds.com/ forum requesting a .550 mould. Should I be adding my name to the list for one of these? (If they ever agree to make them?)