Modern loads vs Traditional Equipment?
 

Okay the concept.

Using percussion rifles like the Hawken and modern powders and any style of conical bullet.(power belts, tc maxi, lyman gpb, or casted maxi balls.)


Here's the dilemma. Using either the .45 or the .50 cal Hawken I have come to find out that the front sight on both muzzle loaders are approximately 1/8 to 3/16" shorter than the lowest position that the rear sight can go.

The outcome. No matter the weight of the bullet in either rifle. The bullet strikes the target 12" to 16" high at 100 yards using 100 grains of powder(Triple 7)(Pyrodex close to same results). Now dropping the powder charge to 70 grains they come close to leveling out. But I refuse to just shoot 70 grains of powder while hunting.

My Solution. On just the .50cal I replaced the front sight with one that is 3/16 higher than the original one. It worked. Using a 100 grains of powder it is level out at 100 yds with the rear sight less than half way up the ramp of the sight, so plenty of elevation left to adjust. The .45 cal was on hold for a front sight change until I got this figured out.

My Question. Why on earth would they want the muzzle elevated when the rear sight is in it's lowest point? I set there on the bench for 20mins or so moving my front sight up 1/8" on the target visually to see where the point of impact would be. Guessing the amount of inches at 100 yds it came out to about 12-14" of change in point of impact.

My only conclusion is that the way the set up of the sights are they were never designed to shoot max charged loads using a maxi ball style bullet. I'm not the only one in my area to discover this lately. Two other people have also changed out their front sight on their hawken rifles to accommodate max loads with conical bullets. And changing weights of bullets did not help one bit.

I grew up on an old .54 Lyman GPR that always put them in the bull at 100yards using 100 grains of powder. A few might remember a dilemma I posted about severe arch in my .50cal awhile back. It made no sense to me. And even now after changing sights to peep then changing front sight to a higher sight. It should of never have been doing that much elevation in trajectory. The .50 cal is fixed. The .45 cal is the next test dummy. BTW I did switch the Hawken stock out to a Renegade stock and man what a difference in shooting. No longer do I get a golf ball size swelling on my cheek from max loads. It's a pleasure to shoot. I guess the hawken stock will be put away until Rendezvous time.

Anyway enough spouting any similar experiences out there?

Sorry if I missed it but did you try raising the rear sight ???

Sometimes heavy bullets shoot high because of the added recoil. :wink:

It's not the trajectory of the bullet as much as the fact the recoil is elevating the muzzle before the bullet exits the barrel.

Most of the older sidelocks were designed for round ball ballistics, and a heavy conical would often necessitate a new (higher) front sight or some file work on the rear sight in my experience.
I can remember T/C's optional "primitive" (non-adjustable) accessory sights that usually required "drifting" the sight for windage and file work for elevation, but were great if you had a pet load you stuck with. Once sighted in they remained sighted in forever.

That would make it shoot higher.

Wabi might have the reason for your situation. And that is, many of the old T/C Rifles were set up to shoot roundball or maxiball with what we now consider moderate powder charges. You remember when they came out.. a heavy load was 100 grains. And NO ONE shot that much powder it seemed. We killed our deer shooting 60-80 grains of powder and never knew you had to push the bullet any harder. Also other then the military rifles that shot 60 grains of powder, 99% of us shot roundball it seemed.

I remember when Knight came out with their MK85 and I was reading a magazine article about the rifle. And Tony Knight also talked about shooting 100 grains of powder and a pistol bullet in a plastic sleeve. My muzzleloading shooting buddy and I howled laughing about someone doing something so silly. I guess we laughed too soon.

It might be the recoil causing the rise. But even that, the amount seems rather extreme. Also the manner or sight picture you use can make a difference. But again, no two rifles are the same. But I am glad to hear you have it all figured out. My buddy used to remove the front sight off his rifles and solder half a silver dime as the front sight on all his rifles. Then he could trim that dime and he claimed that silver made them stick out like a sore thumb.

I never could get my TC Hawken to shoot great groups with 777FF. I shoot round balls, PB platinem 338gr, TC maxiball 370gr and precision conical 390gr. With Goex FF I use 80gr for a round ball, 90 for the PB and 100 for the rest for the best accuracy. I also don't shoot over 75yds. The 777 works great with the inlines but just never could get it to shoot to my liking with the Hawkens.