Author Topic: #1 Cause of Poor Accuracy (Read 3044 times)

RandyWakeman · « **on:** January 02, 2004, 08:58:55 PM »

What do you think it is?

sheephunterab · « **Reply #1 on:** January 02, 2004, 09:18:00 PM »

Operator error!

jh45gun · « **Reply #2 on:** January 03, 2004, 12:49:08 AM »

Several to me equal out but I would think the # 1 reason is not loading the same all the time keeping pressure of the rod the same as close as you can, starting straight, using the same projectiles and weight. ( If casting weighing them to keep them the same weight helps)

2.Good sights you cannot hit what you cannot see

3 finding the right load and combination. ''

If you take care of 2 and 3 then I would say to really tighten up those groups to the best the gun can do would depend on the consistancy of # 1 Jim

big6x6 · « **Reply #3 on:** January 03, 2004, 03:20:52 AM »

I can't tell you how many folks I help at the range. In my experience the number one reason for poor accuracy is ignorance. Ignorance probably begins the instant one begins looking at muzzleloaders.

Many people believe advertisements. 2650fps out of a muzzleloader sounds great RIGHT? Well, that figure is out there. Anyone have an accurate muzzleloader out there at 2650fps? You also have "magnum loads," "three pellets," and "150gr" to contend with. EVERY muzzleloader I ever shot is more accurate with two pellets vs. three pellets and 100gr loose vs. 150gr loose.

You also have ignorance on how to operate a muzzleloader. Most manuals are still lacking in instruction. Nowhere in my Omega manual does it tell me which end of the ramrod to use when loading and it is certainly not obvious. There is also no mention that one should use a " loading jag," expecially when loading polymer-tipped bullets. There is also no instruction on how to sight-in a muzzleloader using a scope.

You also have ignorance of "knowledged professionals" better known as dealers. Sometimes I hang around dealers just to see what is said. The advise it scary.

When one thinks of the number of items that can be involved in shooting a muzzleloader; bullets/sabots, primers, solvents, lubes, patches, ramrods/attachments, power/pellets, bases/rings, optics, rests, and I SURE I'm leaving something out, it's a wonder they shoot as well as they do.

RandyWakeman · « **Reply #4 on:** January 03, 2004, 04:21:40 AM »

My vote is improper / incomplete cleaning of barrels. That seems to be a pattern in all rifles, not just muzzleloaders-- but there are more barrels out there that never, ever get a thorough cleaning than many would imagine.

Sometimes, accurizing your gun is just no more than scrubbing your barrel to super-clean condition.

savageT · « **Reply #5 on:** January 03, 2004, 06:51:04 AM »

Randy,
I'm already scared to ask?

.....What's your method of "really cleaning" the bore? Is there very hot water and detergent in this formulation?

Jim

sheephunterab · « **Reply #6 on:** January 03, 2004, 08:14:41 AM »

Hey big 6x6, you are right about much of what you say. I've never thought about someone not knowing which end of the ramrod to use but I guess if you don't have a lot of experience, it's a valid question. The concave end goes into the barrel first and you don't need a loading jag with the PTX and I know many people that load the SST without one either. For the Dead Centers, yes you definately do. The Dead Centres come with one or you can just drill out a regular brass jag if you like.

RandyWakeman · « **Reply #7 on:** January 03, 2004, 08:25:27 AM »

Quote from: savageT

Randy,
Is there very hot water and detergent in this formulation?

Jim

I steam clean my muzzleloader barrels.

Underclocked · « **Reply #8 on:** January 03, 2004, 09:05:52 AM »

By mouth. :-D

HEY!!! Just kiddin' ya, Randy. Yeah, that's it.

RandyWakeman · « **Reply #9 on:** January 03, 2004, 09:42:35 AM »

My ex-wife could suck the numbers off of a credit card. She didn't care much for guns, however.

Whut? :shock:

jh45gun · « **Reply #10 on:** January 03, 2004, 01:00:48 PM »

Quote from: RandyWakeman

My ex-wife could suck the numbers off of a credit card. She didn't care much for guns, however.

Whut? :shock:

Did we have the same ex wife or maybe they were related? :eek: :eek: :eek:

jh45gun · « **Reply #11 on:** January 03, 2004, 01:11:12 PM »

I got to agree with big 6x6 on the powder comment I have said this all along that using too much powder is a waste and you do not gain that much if any. These powders are ineficient and you can take any charge and shoot over snow and see unburned powder on the snow larger charges just amplifies this. All this does is stress your guns with the larger charges and your shoulder who does iit help the powder companies. The 45/70 used 70 grains of black and its smokeless equivelent and has dropped anything that walks on this earth with 70 grains so why do you need 150? Randy, and Toby, may disagree with me and they are the experts but I know what I see out of my guns muzzleloaders and the 45/70 included and I know I do not need 150 grains of powder to get the job done. I know as the bore size goes up more powder is needed to get the job done but that is on the really big bores and shotguns. For 45 through 54 depending on the caliber 70 to 120 grains of powder is plenty. Jim

RandyWakeman · « **Reply #12 on:** January 03, 2004, 01:21:18 PM »

Quote from: jh45gun

These powders are ineficient and you can take any charge and shoot over snow and see unburned powder on the snow larger charges just amplifies this.

Of course I disagree. How do you decide what powder burned after it left the muzzle, anyway?

It is hardly a "waste" as long as the velocity goes up without loss in acceptable accuracy. More performance is just that; your car may be more efficient at 35 mph. Ever "wasted gas" by driving any faster than that, pushing wind in the process? What is the BC of your car, anyway? You use a car far more often than you do your muzzleloader, and the design life of your muzzleloader is only TWENTY SECONDS.

jh45gun · « **Reply #13 on:** January 03, 2004, 01:35:54 PM »

Quote from: RandyWakeman

Quote from: jh45gun
These powders are ineficient and you can take any charge and shoot over snow and see unburned powder on the snow larger charges just amplifies this.

Of course I disagree. How do you decide what powder burned after it left the muzzle, anyway?

It is hardly a "waste" as long as the velocity goes up without loss in acceptable accuracy. More performance is just that; your car may be more efficient at 35 mph. Ever "wasted gas" by driving any faster than that, pushing wind in the process? What is the BC of your car, anyway? You use a car far more often than you do your muzzleloader, and the design life of your muzzleloader is only TWENTY SECONDS.

Just going buy the law of diminishing returns or do you disagree with that also. after a point of going up the powder ladder of charges to much of a charge your accuracy falls off. So to me the best load is the most accurate with the powder needed to do the job? why use 150 grains if 100 does it better. But then I am not a pellet person or do I have a 150 " magnum" gun either I shoot 80 to a 100 grains in most guns and have no problems with that I do not see the need to use anymore than that. I guess you disagree with Sam Fadala's studies on the subject then as most of what I have said mirrors his findings. If you and others want to shoot 150 grains go for it all I am saying is that not all need to do that to be successful. And what about my comment on 70 grains of powder in the 45/70 getting it done? Just because these guns are muzzle loaders does not make them that much lower on efficient than a cartridge gun? All I am saying is that in most cases you do not need the max load to do the job and do it right and I would think you would agree with that? I still stand by my opinion that not all powder is used up so where does the optimum load begin? I do not think it always has to be at 150? Jim

RandyWakeman · « **Reply #14 on:** January 03, 2004, 01:58:41 PM »

[quote="jh45gunAll I am saying is that in most cases you do not need the max load to do the job and do it right and I would think you would agree with that? I still stand by my opinion that not all powder is used up so where does the optimum load begin? I do not think it always has to be at 150? Jim[/quote]

I thought that might get a rise out of you.

As to the "Law of Diminishing Returns," only muzzleloaders are silly enough to think that was coined by Sam Fadala!

See:

Quote

The principle, first thought to apply only to agriculture, was later accepted as an economic law underlying all productive enterprise. The point at which the law begins to operate is difficult to ascertain, as it varies with improved production technique and other factors. Anticipated by Anne Robert Jacques Turgot and implied by Thomas Malthus in his Essay on the Principle of Population (1798), the law first came under examination during the discussions in England on free trade and the corn laws. It is also called the law of decreasing returns and the law of variable proportions.
(See W. J. Spillman and E. Lang, The Law of Diminishing Returns (1924).)

Now that that is out of the way, who said anything about pellets or 150 grains of powder? As for "getting the job done," just how is one to know exactly what another's "job to be done" actually is?

big6x6 · « **Reply #15 on:** January 03, 2004, 01:58:51 PM »

"The concave end goes into the barrel first and you don't need a loading jag"

That TRUE, but what about the groves around the rod? Isn't that to help HOLD it? Also, when using that end, I can hear the groves scrape on the rifling crown. I use the small, SLICK end, and add a jag. Let's face it, the T/C ramrod is of GREAT strength, but sorry design.

"For 45 through 54 depending on the caliber 70 to 120 grains of powder is plenty. Jim"

If we're talking about 777 I agree. After helping my girlfriend sight in her new Knight Wolverine 209 Youth I learned something. Would you believe I got 1321fps with a 240gr projectile using 40gr ffg 777 and 1426fps using 50gr? That's a stout 44mag handgun load right there with plenty of energy to take a whitetail or a hog to 75 yards or so. Very manageable recoil also as you would expect.

"O K. big6x6,
Which end of the ramfod? Not obvious to me and my good shooting friend either.
Where does one find a loading jag?"

SEE!!!! I put the small, slick end in the muzzle and usually use a "dead center" plastic jag or one of these:
http://www.cabelas.com/cabelas/en/templates/product/standard-item.jhtml?id=0006506214075a&navAction=push&navCount=3&indexId=cat20819&podId=0006506&catalogCode=XD&parentId=cat20819&parentType=index&rid=&_DARGS=%2Fcabelas%2Fen%2Fcommon%2Fcatalog%2Fitem-link.jhtml_A&_DAV=MainCatcat20712&hasJS=true

jh45gun · « **Reply #16 on:** January 03, 2004, 02:19:29 PM »

Randy why are you trying to get a rise out of me? I was only stating in what I believe and said you probably would disagree with me. As far as Sam goes I did not mean to credit him with the term of diminishing returns He uses it as a examlple that too much powder just starts going the oposite way in terms of accuracy. Sorry I did not make my self clear. I think you may think I am trying to cause trouble here and I am not I was just stating my opinion and is that not what these forums are for. As a moderator here I would not go to a other board and cause trouble at least not intentionally just stating my opinion on the subject. I allready made the comment you and toby are the experts here so I am allowing you guys know more about it than me I was just going on what works for me. Sorry for the confusion but I do stand on what I said from what I have seen myself yet I do realize your guns and expirences may be different. I still say that heavy charges of powder help the powder companies more than the shooter but that is my opinion.

Jim

RandyWakeman · « **Reply #17 on:** January 03, 2004, 03:08:47 PM »

Jim,

Believe it or not-- the loads I prefer, and use the the most in muzzleloaders (and CF rifles, shotguns, pistols, air rifles, etc.) are never the "fastest" "lightest" or "heaviest."

Any time you look at a rifle it is a system (IMO)-- a combination of weight, handling, scope (or not), velocity, type of bullet that gives the individual hunter a blend of performance that suits him, his style of hunting, and gives him (or me, as the case may be) great confidence in the chosen system's ability to harvest game under the conditions at hand.

There is no particular glory (IMO) in harvesting game with the bare minimum (sure, a .22 magnum will, and has killed deer) or a .338 WinMag (used by a few friends, actually).

A return is a return. If four cents worth of loose powder gives an increase in game taking ability, what is the problem? As few shots per year as is fired by most muzzleloaders, the price of a "Happy Meal" either way, per year, is not going to change the national economy either way.

It's a loooong, long way from topic of "#1 Cause of Poor Accuracy".

If someone decides that 150 grains of pellets is part of the best muzzleloading system he or she has for taking a moose or a caribou, why should that bother anyone? The powder, rifle, bullet, etc., is the fraction of the cost of any big game hunt.

jh45gun · « **Reply #18 on:** January 03, 2004, 03:34:48 PM »

OK Randy maybe I read you wrong on what you believe in. Sorry for the mistake. I just think too many folks try to make muzzle loaders more that what they are capable of. I like inlines now that I own one I also like sidelock ball shooters/ and or conical if they will shoot them. I do think though that all muzzle loaders load and shoot the same way and they are only capable of what the projectile used is. If I read you wrong I appologise. Jim

RandyWakeman · « **Reply #19 on:** January 03, 2004, 04:06:53 PM »

Jim,

My favorite pheasant gun is an A-5 Sweet Sixteen, 1-1/8 oz. of #5s, my favorite moose gun is a BAR .270 (standard velocity loads), I shoot a Beeman R-9 .20 air rifle to whack rabbits around the house, my Bushmaster is just for plinking, my clays guns are mostly 390s and B-80s, I shoot a Glock 19 with no +p loads, a Ruger Redhawk is the only pistol that is scoped, and although I can shoot the farthest with a Ruger 10/22, a little dinky iron-sighted Browning .22 auto is my favorite .22. The only varmint gun of any note is a Ruger .22-250 heavy barrel, and I reload more Green Dot shotshells than anything else. I no longer own any rifle with "magnum" as part of its cartridge's name.

My best ML loads are 105-110 grain Triple 7 loose-- with 220 or 300 gr sabots. Standard table fare these days.

sheephunterab · « **Reply #20 on:** January 03, 2004, 04:37:07 PM »

Quote

I got to agree with big 6x6 on the powder comment I have said this all along that using too much powder is a waste and you do not gain that much if any. These powders are ineficient and you can take any charge and shoot over snow and see unburned powder on the snow larger charges just amplifies this. All this does is stress your guns with the larger charges and your shoulder who does iit help the powder companies.

Maybe with some guns but certainly not with the Omega. I've heard this old wives' tale so many times but I've shot 150 grains of loose over pristine snow several times and the absolute greatest number of particles that I could locate was 11. It just isn't so. 150 grains makes a bullet go faster than 140 and so on.

jh45gun · « **Reply #21 on:** January 03, 2004, 04:56:09 PM »

Quote from: RandyWakeman

Jim,

My favorite pheasant gun is an A-5 Sweet Sixteen, 1-1/8 oz. of #5s, my favorite moose gun is a BAR .270 (standard velocity loads), I shoot a Beeman R-9 .20 air rifle to whack rabbits around the house, my Bushmaster is just for plinking, my clays guns are mostly 390s and B-80s, I shoot a Glock 19 with no +p loads, a Ruger Redhawk is the only pistol that is scoped, and although I can shoot the farthest with a Ruger 10/22, a litle dinky iron-sighted Browning .22 auto is my favorite .22. The only varmint gun of any note is a Ruger .22-250 heavy barrel, and I reload more Green Dot shotshells than anything else. I no longer own any rifle with "magnum" as part of its cartridge's name.

My best ML loads are 105-110 grain Triple 7 loose-- with 220 or 300 gr sabots. Standard table fare these days.

Well like I said I misjudged you and I should no better as I have read your Secrets of modern muzzle loading and you covered all aspects of the game. Guess my memory is not as good as it used to be either. Jim

jh45gun · « **Reply #22 on:** January 03, 2004, 05:08:06 PM »

Quote from: sheephunterab

Quote
I got to agree with big 6x6 on the powder comment I have said this all along that using too much powder is a waste and you do not gain that much if any. These powders are ineficient and you can take any charge and shoot over snow and see unburned powder on the snow larger charges just amplifies this. All this does is stress your guns with the larger charges and your shoulder who does iit help the powder companies.

Maybe with some guns but certainly not with the Omega. I've heard this old wives' tale so many times but I've shot 150 grains of loose over pristine snow several times and the absolute greatest number of particles that I could locate was 11. It just isn't so. 150 grains makes a bullet go faster than 140 and so on.

Ok so maybe with your gun it does? I have seen this powder on the snow and I was supprised at the amount but then maybe other factors came in to play also temperature, lube, ect ect. What I do not know for sure but not all guns will shoot 150 grains well or accurately. Your comment of 150 is faster than 140 ect is true but how accurate. I know for a fact as it is true in reloading and muzzle loading that not all powder charges act the same or are as accurate as others
depending on the variables. You say I am talking about wives tales ok fine I suppose I could accuse you of the same with your comments that 150 grains is the holy grail of muzzle loading?? Now I know you did not use them same words but your comments of 150 grains being better or I suppose I should say faster as what you said but since you are defending 150 grains I am guessing that you think that fine hey if it shoots in your gun go for it all I am saying that it does not in all guns and not even in 2 guns alike. Hey if it works for you go for it and I will do the same. Have a good one. Jim

RandyWakeman · « **Reply #23 on:** January 03, 2004, 06:04:56 PM »

Tempting fate by somehow slothfully treading back to the topic of the cause of inaccuracy, I was referring to the maintenance / equipment based type.

BUT, Sheephunter mentioned "operator" error. So, I'll hazard a guess as to what I think the #1 example of operator error is-- and it tends to manifest itself whether you are shooting 90 , 120, or 150 grains of powder equally, and regardless of gun.

It is just an opinion, of course. It is the lack of a steady rest, shooting sticks, or tripod.

Dutch/AL · « **Reply #24 on:** January 03, 2004, 06:19:43 PM »

The number 1 cause of poor accuracy?

Too much dang gun.

Or specifically, too much bullet, and in the case of blackpowder guns, too much powder.

Can cause ya to shoot with yur eyes closed too! Gotta keep em open! :shock:

:lol:

jh45gun · « **Reply #25 on:** January 03, 2004, 11:37:44 PM »

That is true a good rest is a handy thing to have. I have that on my to do list to make a pair of shooting sticks expecially since not only do I shoot a lot of rifle shooting but pistol as well including a 14 inch barrel 308 Encore which to get all out of it takes a good rest though I have shot deer with it off hand at close range I would not attempt longer ranges with out a good rest. You are right a good rest benifits all shooting. Jim

sheephunterab · « **Reply #26 on:** January 04, 2004, 08:12:30 AM »

Quote

What I do not know for sure but not all guns will shoot 150 grains well or accurately.

Very true but I can shoot sub 1" groups with 150 grains, so for me it is very accurate and I don't feel I'm throwing my money away as I am not seeing all this unburnt powder that people talk about. I like to shoot long distances and to do that ethically, I need extra velocity among other things. Three pellets gives me the most speed I can get out of my Omega while staying within reccomended maximum loads.

I agree 100% that some guns and especially bullets can't shoot 150 grain loads well but mine can and to me, it is more ethical to be shooting a very accurate rifle with a fairly flat trajectory at 200 yards than it is to shoot one that is equally accurate but requires me to hold-over an animal at the same range. If you limit yourself to less than 150 yards, 100 grain loads are more than adequate but start pushing that range and the only ethical decision is to flatten the trajectory. For me that includes going faster with a larger powder charge.

vinconco · « **Reply #27 on:** January 04, 2004, 02:49:03 PM »

This one ain't hard.... The #1 cause of poor accuracy is bullet fit / powder charge. One is directly related to the other. When the bullet is loose and the charge is heavy you get blow by, base deformation and flyers. The same thing happens with sabots. How can they grip the rifling when the powder gases are blowing past and melting the plastic? So the answer is to find the max charge that will not blast past yer boolet. Of course this assumes that your barrel has rifling and is attached to the gun, along with your sights and that your using good components and bullets proper for your twist and ... and... and ....... See, that was easy... :-D

RandyWakeman · « **Reply #28 on:** January 04, 2004, 04:31:16 PM »

Quote from: vinconco

See, that was easy...

Glad you think so. Now, just what dimension is ".50 caliber" in muzzleloading?

vinconco · « **Reply #29 on:** January 05, 2004, 12:50:23 AM »

quote] Now, just what dimension is ".50 caliber" in muzzleloading?[/quote]

EXACTLY !! You can't change the bore diameter and since they vary the problem boils down to fit..... figured that one out with my patch and ball rifle. Starting to miss the ol' gal now... damn sabots, conicles, plastic, fast twists, etc. etc.