maxi-ball casting

  • 1.7K Views
  • Last Post 06 February 2016
tlkeizer posted this 07 January 2016

Greetings,   Today as it was above zero I was shooting some maxi-balls in my 45, and have never had them group as well as the round balls ever since I built the rifle from a kit in the early 80's.  The twist is 1-68 or so, so I know it is built more for round balls than elongated bullets.  Today I decided to measure the bands.  The base is.449, the middle band is .448,  top band is .455, all +/- .001 depending on where the calipers are on the band in the circle.  Putting one of my 45-70 bullets down the barrel a bit and then pulling it out to measure lands and grooves, I find the lands are .454, again +/- .001 (inches).  I wonder if the mold is made that way on purpose to get the maxi-ball started easier?   Anyone else who has a maxi-ball mold would you let me know how your bullets compare to mine?  I find it interesting the top band is larger than the base.  When it warms up, probably in April, I think I might shoot some maxi-balls inserted point down to see if the “better” seal on the bottom might give me better groups.   I may go to Gary's polishing method with chrome polish to try to open the mold a thousandth or two, but that will be after shooting some upside-down.   TK

Attached Files

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
admiral posted this 08 January 2016

Yes, that is how they are designed. The top band is the only one with full bearing surface engagement when loading.

Attached Files

onondaga posted this 08 January 2016

http://castbulletassoc.org/view_user.php?id=6948>tlkeizer

Progressive band diameters are great for easy loading, they start with the smallest diameter going in the muzzle first and significantly aid keeping the bullet centered well while loading. If you load them upside-down, expect them to upset off center upon loading and shoot all over the place.

Your rifling twist would have me pointed at the lightest bullet mold readily available. 45 Cal 200 and also 250 gr R.E.A.L. molds are available from Lee.

If the Lee 200 is lighter than what you are currently shooting it will be a better match  to your twist and shoot better and have a higher accuracy potential. Your trajectory will be flatter and 200 grains is NOT a light bullet for big game.  Cast them in Pure Soft lead and they are easy to load while being much more oversize than what you have there now.

I can't complement the R.E.A.L. bullets enough, they shoot wonderfully for me. the 200 gr. mold, in stock $21.99 two cavity:

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/147264/lee-2-cavity-bullet-mold-45-200-real-45-caliber-467-diameter-200-grain-real>http://www.midwayusa.com/product/147264/lee-2-cavity-bullet-mold-45-200-real-45-caliber-467-diameter-200-grain-real

This particular 200 gr. Lee bullet is specifically designed for slow twist 45 Cal. muzzle-loaders, it is not a compromise.

If you haven't tried this bullet in pure lead, I sincerely suggest you do but don't overload the design. past 1500-1800 fps and accuracy drops due to the strength limitation of pure lead.

Gary

Attached Files

Cary Gunn posted this 28 January 2016

Howdy TLK,

Gary's advice is sound on the lighter bullet being a better match in slow-twist barrels.

Have you tried placing a card wad between powder and Maxi or R.E.A.L.?  The wad seems to help grouping with a lot rifles; it probably serves to protect the bullet base from damage upon ignition (from simple pressure, and also from “dings” caused by large powder granules being thrown against the soft bullet base at idiotic speed).

Card wads can be easily hand-cut from almost any thin fiberous sheet material (waxed milk carton paper, cardboard from cereal boxes, and I've even used the thin Styrofoam from egg cartons).

Outdoor writer Sam Fadala used to recommend a wad made from a quarter-inch-thick gob of hornet nest, packed firmly against the powder before ramming the bullet.  Sort of an added sting, I guess.  (Sorry couldn't resist.)

Casting from the softest lead available also helps to insure the two undersized bottom driving bands on the Lee R.E.A.L. slug expand upon ignition to seal the barrel grooves.

By the way, I'd not be brave enough to hunt Alaska with a .45 caliber round-ball gun.  I'd be afraid something big, hairy and mean might get real mad if I had to try to stop him with a single-shot rifle pushing a 200-grain bullet at black powder velocities.

I think I'd want something closer to .58 to .66 caliber.  That way I could throw 400- to 600-grain slugs, and probably make a greater impression on those mean and hairy things.   

I've heard tell the Native Peoples up your way think little of popping polar bears with the likes of the dinky .223 Rem, but those fellas are lots more man than I.  And so are you.

Keep us appraised of how she shoots.

Happy trails,

-- Cary Gunn --

Attached Files

onondaga posted this 29 January 2016

http://castbulletassoc.org/view_user.php?id=8800>Cary Gunn

I believe the 200 gr Lee bullet loaded in it's power range to be a reliable 50 yard Bear load.  True ethical Bear hunters aim for the central nervous system and this bullet and load to the central nervous system will turn off a bear at 50 yards. Sure, there is bigger heavier loads but this is not an unsafe 50 yard Bear Hunting load.  Shooting farther? I'd use heavier bullets and a bigger caliber. Alaskan Bear hunters also generally carry a potent pistol for backup, a partner and a guide. Hunting Bear alone is blatantly foolish. I got Bear spit on my face the last time I hunted Bear alone. I was an indestructible teenager at the time.

Gary

Attached Files

Cary Gunn posted this 30 January 2016

Onondaga,

As I told TLK, I've known many who were lots more man than I, and you, apparently, are another one.  Had I been in the situation you describe, before I dried the bear spit on my face, I'd have had to change my wet, brown pants.

Personally, I think even Robert Ruark had it wrong with the admonition to “use enough gun."  I'd prefer to have more than enough gun when it came time to protect my tender parts.   And, keep in mind that TLK, being an Alaskan hunter, wouldn't necessarily be dealing with the likes of a 150- to 350-pound Adirondack black bear, but could quite easily run into a brown bear of three times that weight and known to be of an ornerier disposition than his lesser kin.

So, when speaking of slow-twist, black powder muzzle loaders, I'll stick by my preference for guns significantly heavier than .45 caliber.  I'd want something heavier than that, even for the Illinois whitetail I hunt, placid grain-fed herbivores without the taste for man-flesh.

With the roundball-twist rate muzzle loader of .45 caliber being generally limited to a projectile not much heavier than the 200-grain R.E.A.L. conical, and velocities limited to well below those reached by smokeless powder in more modern rifle designs, I think I'd have a better chance of keeping my face and pants dry with the larger diameter bore and much heavier projectile of a .58-or-above-caliber muzzle loader.

But then, I'm prone to diarrhea anyway, and I've always had an irrational fear of being slobbered to death.  I'm fine, though, with those of stouter character making other choices.

Happy trails and good huntin',

-- Cary Gunn --

Attached Files

Brodie posted this 06 February 2016

I have a .451” caliber muzzle loader that I would be happy to hunt bear with, but it shoots up to 600gr. conical bullets.  If you are interested in what a bear mauling looks like watch the Revenant.  Purported to be the story of Bill Glass  after the mauling (which is truly horrible to watch) little is historically accurate.

"Use enough gun” is good advice, but I would say: “Use all the gun you can shoot accurately, proficiently, and well."  No amount of fire arms energy can make up for inaccuracy. Brodie

B.E.Brickey

Attached Files

Close