Anybody here hunt with a flintlock?

[Freezer]

I'm starting another ML project, a CVA Kentucky Rifle. I will use it for Pa's special deer season. With that said, I'm interested in the most effective projectile for humanly and consistently dropping deer, so I'm considering a sabot. I went on to two other websites to ask that question, you would think I bad talked their mother! The Flintlock guys are pi$$ed, the modern in-line think I'm out of place. WTF!

I've been doing some research and found I should use black powder, not Pyrodex. A separate priming powder is best, and FFFG for charging. I ate $#it for that comment also. Starting charge should be 50 grains, but I can't find a safe max charge. Without a chronograph, how do you know what a safe max charge is? I understand the point of diminishing return. Current sights on this rifle aren't adjustable, so where I sight it is where it will stay.

[Zee]

No flintlock experience. But, I love that you’re shaking the foundation of purist. Haha! You go, Boy!!

[CPJ 2.0]

Real BP for the main charge . Smaller grain size for the pan. This way you get reliable ignition as BP lights easier than the subs.
Patched round balls for projectiles. Reason? Your twist is way too slow to stabilize a conical bullet.

The purists were right, but not just because they are purists.

[breamfisher]

I'm not sure the twist rate on a flintlock is fast enough yo allow you to shoot sabots well. Some are, some aren't. I would check that first.

[Freezer]

Oh, some of these guy are really stuck-up. If it's not Lyman or a custom gun, you'll hear about the junk you own. On one site, the moderator locked the discussion! I have a PM to him, but I doubt I'll visit there after he responds.

[Bigslug]

I've gotten little more than a toe wet in the black powder pool (maybe up to one ankle), but I'll help how I can.

Pure lead, patched round balls have killed A LOT of critters. Elmer Keith, who came in at the tail of when percussion revolvers were still in semi-common use, was generally in favor of their effectiveness over conicals in the same guns. . . which considering he was one of "THE" core guys that gave us both the .357 and .44 Magnums should be regarded as significant.

The biggest concern I'd have with conicals is the rate of twist in your rifling. It's going to be VEEEEEEEERY SSSSSSLLLLOOOOOOOOOW in a rifle designed for round ball, and may not properly stabilize a more cylindrical projectile - - research what you have. Since your gun is fixed sight probably adjustable for windage and file-for-elevation, my guess would be that it's been manufactured for the "older tech" round balls.

It's going to be damn near impossible to blow up a quality, modern steel rifle with black powder. To get some idea of what I mean by that, look up Wambli's recent thread containing the anecdotes of what Winchester did to prove the strength of the 1876 lever action to the world.

It'll be laborious, but shoot at a big enough target to get hits and work up until tight groupings disappear, velocities stop increasing, or recoil becomes prohibitive, then lock in your sights for that load. Given you have only one shot with the delayed ignition of a flintlock, I would guess that a 50-75 yard zero is pretty popular, but that is just a guess.

I suspect your difficulty in getting unbiased info is that there is the "traditional" camp of Hawkens and buckskin, and the modern camp who's 600-yard capable rifles look like a fully custom tuned and scoped Remington 700 sniper rifle - - with a ram rod under the barrel. The first camp wants the 1800's experience; the second camp would prefer to bring a .300 Win Mag and is playing "letter of the law" with the equipment in order to gain an extra hunting season. It doesn't surprise me the two have little to say to each other.

[Freezer]

Real BP for the main charge . Smaller grain size for the pan. This way you get reliable ignition as BP lights easier than the subs.
Patched round balls for projectiles. Reason? Your twist is way too slow to stabilize a conical bullet.

The purists were right, but not just because they are purists.

Does that include Mini balls, as they're conical?

I'm former military because I have a hang-up with "Because". I want to know why!

[breamfisher]

I seem to recall Teach on the old forum saying some CVA and Traditions flintlocks have soft frizzens, making ignition spotty. Lyman... not so much a problem. Most folks don't want to or know how to harden a frizzen, so they buy a less expensive rifle and get discouraged. That's why some folks don't like them. Turns people away from the sport.

[CPJ 2.0]

Real BP for the main charge . Smaller grain size for the pan. This way you get reliable ignition as BP lights easier than the subs.
Patched round balls for projectiles. Reason? Your twist is way too slow to stabilize a conical bullet.

The purists were right, but not just because they are purists.

Does that include Mini balls, as they're conical?

I'm former military because I have a hang-up with "Because". I want to know why!

Length is the determining factor in twist rate. Minnie balls are as long if not longer than a saboted projectile.
I tried Minnie’s in my BP rifle. (slow twist for round balls) Precision sucked donkey wang.

A flintlock ain’t an inline. Not supposed to be. Put the ball where it’s supposed to be at a reasonable distance and deer won’t give a poop what it was hit with.
If I’m wrong, we wouldn’t be here today as our ancestors would have died from starvation using round balls.

[sakodude]

My T/C Hawken 50 cal rifle is a good example of RB vs Mini. It will shoot the RB into about 1" 50 yard groups but opens to closer to 3" at 100 yards which I consider still acceptable for the purpose. Switch to the Mini and things just about double.
The problem is here in Colorado anyway, you can hunt deer with a RB but can't hunt elk with a 50cal RB, you have to use a conical of some description.
And of course our seasons run concurrently.

[CPJ 2.0]

And before you think I’m a fuddy duddy, when I hit the lottery I’ll build a flint lock and stick it in an aluminum chassis complete with AR grip and folding stock with a high power scope and fast twist to shoot sabots.

Because I’m an asshole like that.

[Freezer]

I've gotten little more than a toe wet in the black powder pool (maybe up to one ankle), but I'll help how I can.

Pure lead, patched round balls have killed A LOT of critters. Elmer Keith, who came in at the tail of when percussion revolvers were still in semi-common use, was generally in favor of their effectiveness over conicals in the same guns. . . which considering he was one of "THE" core guys that gave us both the .357 and .44 Magnums should be regarded as significant.

The biggest concern I'd have with conicals is the rate of twist in your rifling. It's going to be VEEEEEEEERY SSSSSSLLLLOOOOOOOOOW in a rifle designed for round ball, and may not properly stabilize a more cylindrical projectile - - research what you have. Since your gun is fixed sight probably adjustable for windage and file-for-elevation, my guess would be that it's been manufactured for the "older tech" round balls.

It's going to be damn near impossible to blow up a quality, modern steel rifle with black powder. To get some idea of what I mean by that, look up Wambli's recent thread containing the anecdotes of what Winchester did to prove the strength of the 1876 lever action to the world.

It'll be laborious, but shoot at a big enough target to get hits and work up until tight groupings disappear, velocities stop increasing, or recoil becomes prohibitive, then lock in your sights for that load. Given you have only one shot with the delayed ignition of a flintlock, I would guess that a 50-75 yard zero is pretty popular, but that is just a guess.

I suspect your difficulty in getting unbiased info is that there is the "traditional" camp of Hawkens and buckskin, and the modern camp who's 600-yard capable rifles look like a fully custom tuned and scoped Remington 700 sniper rifle - - with a ram rod under the barrel. The first camp wants the 1800's experience; the second camp would prefer to bring a .300 Win Mag and is playing "letter of the law" with the equipment in order to gain an extra hunting season. It doesn't surprise me the two have little to say to each other.

Thank you! You hit the nail on the head without using a sledgehammer! I want more deer hunting opportunities, not pretend to be Jeremiah Johnson or a mall ninja stuck in a time warp. I didn't know asking a simple question about projectiles would pi$$ off so many people.

This was a gift from the kid I built the T/C Hawken for. It is missing some pieces and the tang needs bent to fit the stock, but after what I learned today I'll be able to make this look good and function well. To answer another question, Teach did say there were some hardness and geometry problems with the lesser brand MLs. The rear sight doesn't have a groove in it, it's straight across. I may need to pi$$ of the purists and put adjustable rear sights on it. A peep sight would be better with my eyes.

[CPJ 2.0]

My T/C Hawken 50 cal rifle is a good example of RB vs Mini. It will shoot the RB into about 1" 50 yard groups but opens to closer to 3" at 100 yards which I consider still acceptable for the purpose. Switch to the Mini and things just about double.
The problem is here in Colorado anyway, you can hunt deer with a RB but can't hunt elk with a 50cal RB, you have to use a conical of some description.
And of course our seasons run concurrently.

I’d keep a handful of conicals in my pocket during elk season what for show and tell .

“Sure. Stick your eyeball on a loaded barrel, Mr warden. Have a look for yourself.”

[CPJ 2.0]

Yay Bigslug!
You finally typed slow enough for it to sink in!

[Freezer]

I've gotten little more than a toe wet in the black powder pool (maybe up to one ankle), but I'll help how I can.

Pure lead, patched round balls have killed A LOT of critters. Elmer Keith, who came in at the tail of when percussion revolvers were still in semi-common use, was generally in favor of their effectiveness over conicals in the same guns. . . which considering he was one of "THE" core guys that gave us both the .357 and .44 Magnums should be regarded as significant.

The biggest concern I'd have with conicals is the rate of twist in your rifling. It's going to be VEEEEEEEERY SSSSSSLLLLOOOOOOOOOW in a rifle designed for round ball, and may not properly stabilize a more cylindrical projectile - - research what you have. Since your gun is fixed sight probably adjustable for windage and file-for-elevation, my guess would be that it's been manufactured for the "older tech" round balls.

It's going to be damn near impossible to blow up a quality, modern steel rifle with black powder. To get some idea of what I mean by that, look up Wambli's recent thread containing the anecdotes of what Winchester did to prove the strength of the 1876 lever action to the world.

It'll be laborious, but shoot at a big enough target to get hits and work up until tight groupings disappear, velocities stop increasing, or recoil becomes prohibitive, then lock in your sights for that load. Given you have only one shot with the delayed ignition of a flintlock, I would guess that a 50-75 yard zero is pretty popular, but that is just a guess.

I suspect your difficulty in getting unbiased info is that there is the "traditional" camp of Hawkens and buckskin, and the modern camp who's 600-yard capable rifles look like a fully custom tuned and scoped Remington 700 sniper rifle - - with a ram rod under the barrel. The first camp wants the 1800's experience; the second camp would prefer to bring a .300 Win Mag and is playing "letter of the law" with the equipment in order to gain an extra hunting season. It doesn't surprise me the two have little to say to each other.

Thank you! You hit the nail on the head without using a sledgehammer! I want more deer hunting opportunities, not pretend to be Jeremiah Johnson or a mall ninja stuck in a time warp. I didn't know asking a simple question about projectiles would pi$$ off so many people.

This was a gift from the kid I built the T/C Hawken for. It is missing some pieces and the tang needs bent to fit the stock, but after what I learned today I'll be able to make this look good and function well. To answer another question, Teach did say there were some hardness and geometry problems with the lesser brand MLs. The rear sight doesn't have a groove in it, it's straight across, if I use it I'll have to notch it myself. I may need to pi$$ of the purists and put adjustable rear sights on it. A peep sight would be better with my eyes.

[Freezer]

.

[Freezer]

.

[Freezer]

.

[sakodude]

My T/C Hawken 50 cal rifle is a good example of RB vs Mini. It will shoot the RB into about 1" 50 yard groups but opens to closer to 3" at 100 yards which I consider still acceptable for the purpose. Switch to the Mini and things just about double.
The problem is here in Colorado anyway, you can hunt deer with a RB but can't hunt elk with a 50cal RB, you have to use a conical of some description.
And of course our seasons run concurrently.

I’d keep a handful of conicals in my pocket during elk season what for show and tell .

“Sure. Stick your eyeball on a loaded barrel, Mr warden. Have a look for yourself.”

I actually did have Mini's in my pocket. Kind of hard to prove what's stuffed down a muzzle loader barrel

[Freezer]

.

[Freezer]

CJP, that sounds like a job for justsomedude! A flint lock or percussion on an AR lower, you're a fart smeller...I mean smart feller!

[Freezer]

CJP, that sounds like a job for justsomedude! A flint lock or percussion on an AR lower, you're a fart smeller...I mean smart feller!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0AUm-vXdkw

[Freezer]

CJP, that sounds like a job for justsomedude! A flint lock or percussion on an AR lower, you're a fart smeller...I mean smart feller!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0AUm-vXdkw

[Freezer]

You guys have me thinking, The Minié ball was a great improvement in the Springfield rifle during the civil war. The Springfield rifle had a 1:77 twist rate. The CVA has a 1:66. I understand the sabot logic, how about the Minié ball? Has anyone tried it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mini%C3%A9_ball

[breamfisher]

The Springfield is .58 caliber. Your CVA is?????
In .58, a Minie is still relatively short snd stubby. In smaller calibers, depending on the mold, they get longrr.