muzzle loader vrs cartridge gun... charge per charge... how do they compare ???

Going back to the original Creedmoor matches of 1876, the Irish team said the only advantage the Americans' Remington and Sharps breechloaders had over their Rigby muzzleloaders was being able to wipe the bore between shots. Range and accuracy were comparable.

My only use of black powder is in BPCR silhouette and target shooting. Everybody I know there compresses their powder charge from a little with Swiss to a lot with Goex.

I think the Savage smokeless powder muzzleloader is an unfortunate mutation.
 
I do too, even though I have seen pictures of period inlines, clear back to an 18th century inline flintlock.

But the Savage makes me worry about the risk of somebody loading another make with nitro and then moaning from his hospital bed... "But Joe shoots Veetavoory in HIS muzzleloader."
 
the Savage makes me worry about the risk of somebody loading another make with nitro and then moaning from his hospital bed... "But Joe shoots Veetavoory in HIS muzzleloader."
Click to expand...

I find that to be a bit unreasonable. The same argument could be made about almost any product on the market.

What about reloading? Plenty of potential for injury there.

What about the guy with a diesel truck that see his buddy put gas in his truck?

Or the guy who puts waste oil in his furnace because he saw his buddy do it?

Knowing how to use a product and being safe about it is the OWNERS responsibility, not the manufacturers.
 
muzzle loader vrs cartridge gun... charge per charge... how do they compare ???

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

is there any advantage or disadvantage ( energy wise ) between one system or another ???

for example, I was looking at Black Powder double rifles, & ARCTICAP was nice enough to give me this link...

http://www.traditionsfirearms.com/es...ctCode=REX-100

in which they state the gun can be loaded with up to 150 grains of black powder...

so would that out muscle a 50-110 cartridge gun & in escence equal a 50-150 ??? or is there a loss of some kind I don't see with either the cartridge gun, or the muzzleloader ???

any thoughts ???
Click to expand...

The question still isn't really thoroughly being answered although I don't really think that it can be adequately with the known data.

What's the velocity of a .50-110 BPCR verses the velocity of a 50-150 muzzle loader?

My response was basicially that with equal charges and the same bullet, the velocity would probably be greater with the BPCR. However when more powder is added with the stronger primer, we don't really know what the ML's velocities will be. That's the comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of the 2 systems. The data is unknown and we can only guess.
The other major difference as noted is that the BPCR is limited by powder capacity as the size of the loaded bullets are increased, which doesn't limit a muzzle loader.
As far as smokeless powder comparisons go, that makes for an interesting comparison. However, isn't the question really about the BPCR system vs. this .50 over/under muzzle loading rifle? That's black powder vs. black powder and not to do with smokeless as the question was stated. A BPCR system vs. a similar ML system using similar ML powders.
The muzzle loader may have more power with the greater 150 grain loads, and the BPCR may exceed that when loaded with smokeless powder. But then the muzzle loader may be loaded with even larger caliber conicals, sabots and plastic ballistic bridge sub-bases (gas checks), and except for the missing velocity data, that's where the practical known comparisons end. The muzzle loader can be loaded with .40 caliber (10 mm) and .458 bullets too if sabots are used, as well as .50 conicals, .429 and .451 bullets. That's another advantage to a muzzle loader besides velocity and it's power factor.

*Brass cartridge re-loading beforehand is not required, but loading with brass cartridges is quicker and easier.
Every system has trade offs. :)
 
Last edited:
Yes, I suppose that's true but I still think it's the best platform AVAILABLE.
Click to expand...
I think the best way to test this is with a fast twist .45 or .50cal muzzleloader (for using conicals) against a cartridge rifle with the same length barrel, similar twist rate, chambered in an appropriate .45 or .50cal straight-walled cartridge. Bullet and weight should be near identical, as should powder and charge.

I too have often wondered about the difference and would love to see the results of some credible, comprehensive testing. Just to know.
 
I agree that it would be better that way. I don't think that's a terribly likely scenario though.

If we wanted to be REALLY precise, even a straight walled 50cal rifle would not be good enough because the chamber would be smaller than the ML by the thickness of the case.

The 45-70 is fairly straight walled, compared to most modern cartridges. The reduction over the full 2.1 inch case is only .025 inches.

It would be better if the ML were 45cal also, but I don't believe that there is any such thing as a 45cal smokeless ML, at least not at any reasonable price point that I have seen.

In fact, having looked up the numbers, the Savage is producing more like 2250fps with 57gr of N120, so it's actually about 88% as efficient as the cartridge load.

I know, a couple of guys with a gun and a chrony is not exactly "scientific" but it's still pretty good data for comparison.
 
It would be a hell of a lot closer than comparing a .50cal muzzleloader with a .45 sabot to a .45-70!


I don't think that's a terribly likely scenario though.
Click to expand...
Why is that? As long as the tester has two very similar rifles, I think the results would be pretty indicative. Since the original post pertained to blackpowder, I'd say any smokeless reference is tangent to the discussion.
 
The OP used a BP gun as an example. The original question did not specify.

You don't like my comparison, I think it's fine.

Until somebody comes up with something better, it's all we've got available.


I'm not going to argue the point any farther.
 
I'd think any old 45 caliber percussion muzzleloader with an equal charge & equal weight bullet against a 45-70 loaded with black powder ( with equal length barrels ) would get me close to the answer I'm looking for... in fact I have a 45 caliber percussion rifle... maybe I should give them a shot ( so far, I've never loaded a black powder cartridge actually with black powder though ):D

while I find the Savage rifle interesting, I'm more interested in the power differences between that black powder express rifle, & ( for example ) my new Remington Bakail double rifle in 45-70 ( the express rifles are available in 45 caliber as well, even though I have been looking at the 50 caliber version... even though I plan on smokeless loads in the double, it could fire a couple black powder just for comparision sake... the fact that the Savage is capable of smokeless offers 2 different oportunities for expirimentation ( I always wondered why they didn't make smokelss muzzleloaders :confused: & then Savage went & did it...

I could compare a black powder charged 50-70 round through my Martini, but the barrel is longer than the Express rifles, & I don't think cutting the barrel on the Martini is prudent;)
 
You don't like my comparison, I think it's fine.
Click to expand...
I don't like it because it is seriously flawed. You're comparing a .50cal muzzleloader to a .45cal cartridge rifle. As I said before, for a given powder charge, the pressure and thus velocity will be higher in the .45-70. You don't see the problem with that??? Compare it to an equally loaded, comparably configured .50-70 or .50-90 and the results would be usable. Although the results won't be quite as meaningful to someone who despises modern inlines.


Until somebody comes up with something better
Click to expand...
I already did!


I'm not going to argue the point any farther.
Click to expand...
Good!
 
BP cartridges must be slight compression loaded. If powder charge, card (or wad) and bullet do not fill the cartridge, then a filler must be used to fill up the air space above the wad and below the bullet. Most wads are .030 and .060 thick and made of a compressable material like felt. There are a lot of fillers, but I do like cornmeal.
 
8738Pb260007.jpg

.45-70 cases with 70 grains of Goex compressed to seat the 500 grain Govt bullet. This is almost 1/2" OF COMPRESSION using a compression die. 70 grains of Goex almost fills the case level full.

8738Pb260010.jpg

.45-70 loaded. Almost half the bullet is seated in the case.

Comparing this load to a smokeless abberation of fantasy is apples and oranges.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top