|
Post by jtwodogs on Jan 3, 2009 8:31:17 GMT -5
I know this is a Savage link. But what is to keep an individual with one of the new break open muzzleloader that has the speed breech from dropping say a .452 bullet in a .45 cal barrel form the other end giving it a tap to engage the rifling throwing a pre-measured charge behind it, and viola sabotless quick load. Would it work? Just wondering.
|
|
|
Post by edge on Jan 3, 2009 8:36:17 GMT -5
That is called a breechloading rifle The first breechloaders were made just like that and did not have a case. edge.
|
|
|
Post by jtwodogs on Jan 3, 2009 8:41:44 GMT -5
I guess there would be no real advantage to it.
|
|
rexxer
Eight Pointer
Posts: 184
|
Post by rexxer on Jan 3, 2009 10:12:48 GMT -5
I think there could be! Always shooting sabotless,no knurling,better sealing of gases,deeper engraving of rifleing,no wainting between shots,better bullet selection! This is me just guessing,but I did stay in a Holiday Inn last night!
|
|
|
Post by CraigF on Jan 3, 2009 10:20:24 GMT -5
A problem with this is that it would be illegal for hunting in just about every state.
|
|
|
Post by edge on Jan 3, 2009 10:23:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jtwodogs on Jan 3, 2009 10:30:01 GMT -5
I guess to, it would have to be counterbored to allow the free space to load the bullet intially.
|
|
rexxer
Eight Pointer
Posts: 184
|
Post by rexxer on Jan 3, 2009 10:30:54 GMT -5
I see no reason why it couldn't be extremely accurate! rexxer wrote: I think there could be! Always shooting sabotless,no knurling,better sealing of gases,deeper engraving of rifleing,no wainting between shots,better bullet selection! When I made those comments I was thinking if someone was building a breech loader. By adding a slightly smaller bore and counterbore I thing those pluses would apply. If someone was to try and breech load a existing made muzzleloader I would have to agree with jtwodogs! Next time I will hook up the horses in front of the cart!!! Just remember CraigF has a very good point!
|
|
|
Post by SW on Jan 3, 2009 11:25:33 GMT -5
I guess to, it would have to be counterbored to allow the free space to load the bullet intially. I agree with this. The " tap" would otherwise require significant hammering.
|
|
rexxer
Eight Pointer
Posts: 184
|
Post by rexxer on Jan 3, 2009 11:46:21 GMT -5
I'm not sure how one would adjust different volumes of powder.
|
|
|
Post by CraigF on Jan 3, 2009 11:54:34 GMT -5
I'm not sure how one would adjust different volumes of powder. Push the bullet from the breach up about 6 inches into the barrel. Pore in the poweder with a long knecked funnel to get past the breach plug threads. Put the breach plug back in and then push the bullet back down from the muzzle end to seat it frimly.
|
|
rexxer
Eight Pointer
Posts: 184
|
Post by rexxer on Jan 3, 2009 12:11:00 GMT -5
That would work Craig but wouldn't it nullify any advantage of a oversize bullet. If a over sized bullet isn't used then I can't see any advantage to a breech loader.
|
|
|
Post by CraigF on Jan 3, 2009 12:16:12 GMT -5
That would work Craig but wouldn't it nullify any advantage of a oversize bullet. If a over sized bullet isn't used then I can't see any advantage to a breech loader. It would if there was if the lands were lapped down in the first couple of inches from the breach. When the bullet is forced by the ingited powder past this area it will seal in the tigher rifling. Or it might?
|
|
|
Post by jtwodogs on Jan 3, 2009 12:42:36 GMT -5
Kinda like a gradual transition to the full riflings, tight, but yet able to move in those first couple of inches
|
|
|
Post by jtwodogs on Jan 3, 2009 13:14:37 GMT -5
What if, now I am talking a modern rifle with the price of brass going up and up. Creating a barrel like we have talked about with a modern action and some monster locking lugs fore and aft possibly, and a place to put a primer. I know one of the co.'s tried I think they called it the Vorhese spelling, with the powder being the cartridge holding the bullet and electronic ignition, (did not go over well), but this idea might be fun to tinker with.
|
|
|
Post by jtwodogs on Jan 3, 2009 13:25:38 GMT -5
Or maybe even a gas seal breach that cammed foward similar to the speed breeches, that when cammed forward would rotate and close thus giving a rock solid gas seal.
|
|
|
Post by survo99 on Jan 3, 2009 16:03:32 GMT -5
Houston we have a problem! If there's an air pocket between the bullet and powder you could blow the barrel up using smokeless powder. A few years back this was attemted and didn't go over so well. The gun actually had a chamber to pour the powder in but when shooters tried to use less powder it blew up. I forget the name of it. But the concept has worked well on black powder for over 100 years..... I'm not advocating you try this but your bullet started would have to cut at certain length to accomadate the coorect amoutn of powder.
|
|
|
Post by jtwodogs on Jan 3, 2009 16:26:37 GMT -5
I wonder about the air pocket in an actual bullet why it does not blow up?
|
|
|
Post by 12ptdroptine on Jan 3, 2009 17:52:40 GMT -5
looks to me like somebody is going to fool around and shoot their eye out....
|
|
|
Post by edge on Jan 3, 2009 18:24:39 GMT -5
looks to me like somebody is going to fool around and shoot their eye out.... Ho...Ho...Ho ;D edge.
|
|
|
Post by art338wm on Jan 4, 2009 0:15:54 GMT -5
I can see a a number of problems that would affect both safety and accuracy.
To start with how could one loading from the breach end ever achieve anything even approaching a consistent loading pressure and we all know that in MLs, maintain as close as possible the same exact and consistent loading pressure with each and every loading is the God of accuracy.
Second it strikes me as waaaaaay to easy to wind up with a air pocket if loading from the breach end.
Then you have the inherent impracticality of trying to load a ML from the breach end especially with the 10ML-IIs bolt action design. To do so would require the employment of some sort of a funnel with a elongated spout, a additional item that would not by its very shape not lend itself to be easily stored and transported in the field, and even more cumbersome, adding far more time to the loading sequence and be more difficult to be used in a stressful reload under field conditions.
Think of it this way: You would have to use the breach plug to seat the powder and saboted bullet to the same point and loading pressure each time, in a bolt action rifle no less.
Unless you are able to design and then machine in some sort of a stop in the barrel you can never achieve any thing even approaching loading pressure consistency.
This strikes me as designing a solution to a problem that does not exist.
|
|
|
Post by jtwodogs on Jan 4, 2009 6:08:57 GMT -5
Na. I havent even gone the route of .40/.45 barrel, I defintley would not have the time nor the money to screw this idea on. But thats the nice thing about thinking its free.
|
|
|
Post by bigmoose on Jan 4, 2009 7:12:38 GMT -5
Talk about asking for trouble, how about sky-diving without a chute
|
|
|
Post by jtwodogs on Jan 4, 2009 8:09:20 GMT -5
Edge: Thanks for that site for the Ferguson Rifle, I found it very interesting, did not know that even existed.
|
|
|
Post by slipshod on Jan 4, 2009 12:37:02 GMT -5
A couple of months ago I was doing some research on Harvester Scorpion gold bullets and it led me to Modern Muzzleloader [Toby Bridges site] and it seems that he has been shooting sabotless in a .45 Knight rifle.I realize this is a departure from the topic on hand but it made some interesting reading.Slipshod
|
|
|
Post by slipshod on Jan 4, 2009 12:57:55 GMT -5
Sorry about my reference to Modern Muzzleloader as Toby Bridges site.My mistake,but the info is on his site and it is interesting reading.Slipshod
|
|
|
Post by edge on Jan 4, 2009 13:51:09 GMT -5
That is no problem, Toby is still a member here although I don't know how often he looks in.
edge.
|
|
|
Post by CraigF on Jan 4, 2009 13:59:18 GMT -5
I can see a a number of problems that would affect both safety and accuracy. To start with how could one loading from the breach end ever achieve anything even approaching a consistent loading pressure and we all know that in MLs, maintain as close as possible the same exact and consistent loading pressure with each and every loading is the God of accuracy. Second it strikes me as waaaaaay to easy to wind up with a air pocket if loading from the breach end. Then you have the inherent impracticality of trying to load a ML from the breach end especially with the 10ML-IIs bolt action design. To do so would require the employment of some sort of a funnel with a elongated spout, a additional item that would not by its very shape not lend itself to be easily stored and transported in the field, and even more cumbersome, adding far more time to the loading sequence and be more difficult to be used in a stressful reload under field conditions. Think of it this way: You would have to use the breach plug to seat the powder and saboted bullet to the same point and loading pressure each time, in a bolt action rifle no less. Unless you are able to design and then machine in some sort of a stop in the barrel you can never achieve any thing even approaching loading pressure consistency. This strikes me as designing a solution to a problem that does not exist. Art, the only way to make this work, and I don't recommend anyone EVER trying in any way to breach load a ML, is to push the bullet father than it needs to go towards the muzzle then pore the powder in. After this the ram rod needs to be inserted in the barrel from the muzzle end to push the bullet back down to get rid of the air gap and for consitant seating pressure. However, there is no potential benifit of this that comes anywhere close to outwaying the dangers of doing this. I had a barrel buldge on me and the scope hit me in the face so bad that it took a year of shooting light loads and 22 LR to get over flinching. Its not worth the risk.
|
|
|
Post by olegburn on Jan 5, 2009 9:16:39 GMT -5
How long would it take to load that way? CraigF's is right-it may not seat well with DNR. If that is not an issue-then one might as well load metallic cartridge. Which won't work with ML-II. Theoretically though-this could potentially be a very consistent rifle. I think I realised that i'm just repeating mostly what others said. ;D
|
|
|
Post by chuck41 on Jan 5, 2009 10:30:52 GMT -5
Sounds like the "Arizona" method. Push a bullet into the barrel, throw in a couple bags of powder, slam the breech closed and fire that sucker 25 miles. Not sure I would want to do that with my 40.
|
|