Lyman Great Plains Rifle

[Loyalist Dave]

It is very fast, tear, pour, ram, cap. Yes the paper and ball are rammed down as one unit, hence the wax on the ball end. I use .490" ball.

I've never had burning cartridge paper on the ground after shooting, but that's probably a possibility. For sure, they are fast and easy to make.

I shoot a Brown Bess, and although I usually use patched 690" "chewed" ball, I keep some emergency cartridges of the same type for it in the pouch. Those are used just like the traditional Bess cartridges, and the ball is also rammed down in the paper. Unlike the pistol, these are not near as accurate as my usual patched ball loads, and 30 yards might be the maximum range I'd use them at. In the pistol, as mentioned, they are good out to at least 30 yards.

I'd like to see this work in a rifle.

I use paper cartridges for my Bess, and for my Serjeant's Carbine, as well as my trade gun. But these are smooth bore.
I've used bare ball in a speed loading target match out to 25 yards with my rifle, and won..., we had to cut a 2"x 2" stake, and the first stake cut in half was the winner. So using no patch the rifle is accurate, to a point....

But a pistol at 30 yards is not a rifle at 50-100 yards...., when using a patched, round ball, and I'd find it interesting that after all these centuries, a paper patched round ball working as well as a cloth patched ball at 40 yards and beyond.

The paper that is being discussed is not anywhere near as strong as cloth. The paper that is used for conical bullets in something like a Sharps Rifle [see Quigley Down Under] , is normally a very thick "rag", meaning it contains linen or cotton fibers within the paper.

The patching on a round ball actually contacts the ball/rifling point in a very small way, while a paper patched conical bullet, has much more surface area. So the paper must survive on a round ball the cutting action of the powder gasses, AND in the opposite direction, the cutting action of the friction of the barrel, even when mitigated with lube. Further, patched round ball do not obturate as a paper patched, conical bullet will. It's been tested, and not only does a round ball not obturate when fired, it also should not be smashed out of round during the loading procedure to try and get it to obturate. The weave of the cloth helps to grip a ball, which is not present in the paper. The strength of the cloth helps to resist "cutting" the patch during the firing, as well as the loading. I submit that if you're not cutting the paper when loading..., you're likely not tight enough in fit.

Here's an illustration



LD

 

[Ugly Sauce]

Ok, well, I'm certainly not suggesting, or did not suggest that paper patching was anywhere near as good as cloth patching, or that one would use it for hunting or target shooting, or any normal use for that matter. The entire purpose of my paper patched load is for close in, rapid fire (!!!yeah I know!!!) defense against a wolf pack closing in. (if that sounds silly, we just had our first wolf-attack on a human, up North, last October I believe. A pack (this is near where I hunt, and there are quite a few packs up there) started to close in on a man, but he had a rifle, so the wolves lost).

So, my purpose with these loads is just for close in, 30 yards and under fast reloads. I did not suggest that a pistol at 30 yards is a rifle at 50-100 yards. Or did I? Don't think so. I would not shoot at an aggressive wolf at 50-100 yards. At that point, the animal would not be a threat. Most likely just curious at that range. The loads I described are not for hunting. Just close range, "rapid fire" defense loads. I don't suggest they would "work" in a rifle, for normal use. I do suggest they will stay on a paper plate at 30 yards.

Dave I'm a bit confused that you so misinterpreted my post, and suggest I suggested something I did not suggest! Have I offended you?

So to be clear, these self-contained paper cartridges are intended ONLY for close in, fast loading, 30 yards and under purposes. I do not load them in the pistol before I hit the woods. They are not for hunting. I do not load them in my rifle before I hit the woods, or even use them for re-loads after shooting at a deer/bear/elk. They are for EMERGENCY use only.

My observation that they are far more accurate in my pistol, than I expected, was just that, an observation. Not a suggestion that I would use them for normal use. I did not observe that they were as accurate as a cloth patched load. I think I said "almost", which perhaps was vague.

Everything in your post is absolutely true, but again, very confused that you so misinterpreted mine. ???

 

[KennBarrett]

Ok, well, I'm certainly not suggesting, or did not suggest that paper patching was anywhere near as good as cloth patching, or that one would use it for hunting or target shooting, or any normal use for that matter. The entire purpose of my paper patched load is for close in, rapid fire (!!!yeah I know!!!) defense against a wolf pack closing in. (if that sounds silly, we just had our first wolf-attack on a human, up North, last October I believe. A pack (this is near where I hunt, and there are quite a few packs up there) started to close in on a man, but he had a rifle, so the wolves lost).

So, my purpose with these loads is just for close in, 30 yards and under fast reloads. I did not suggest that a pistol at 30 yards is a rifle at 50-100 yards. Or did I? Don't think so. I would not shoot at an aggressive wolf at 50-100 yards. At that point, the animal would not be a threat. Most likely just curious at that range. The loads I described are not for hunting. Just close range, "rapid fire" defense loads. I don't suggest they would "work" in a rifle, for normal use. I do suggest they will stay on a paper plate at 30 yards.

Dave I'm a bit confused that you so misinterpreted my post, and suggest I suggested something I did not suggest! Have I offended you?

So to be clear, these self-contained paper cartridges are intended ONLY for close in, fast loading, 30 yards and under purposes. I do not load them in the pistol before I hit the woods. They are not for hunting. I do not load them in my rifle before I hit the woods, or even use them for re-loads after shooting at a deer/bear/elk. They are for EMERGENCY use only.

My observation that they are far more accurate in my pistol, than I expected, was just that, an observation. Not a suggestion that I would use them for normal use. I did not observe that they were as accurate as a cloth patched load. I think I said "almost", which perhaps was vague.

Everything in your post is absolutely true, but again, very confused that you so misinterpreted mine. ???

I certainly realise that a paper patch is unable to function as well as a cloth one, as Loyalist Dave pointed out quite well. I use the Civil War musket-type of pre-measured, pre-loaded paper "cartridges" as a sort of poor man's speed loader. I always use a lubed cloth patch. I was thinking along the lines of what Ugly Sauce was describing for use in extreme circumstances. While my GPR is a tack driver (I know: said that before), It's because I "feed" it what it seems to prefer. A departure from that "diet" then would be an interesting experiment in eliminating extra time-consuming steps. How much accuracy would be depleted by using a paper patch, for example? I suspect, as Dave said, the rifling would sever the paper even though it's lubed, plus it wouldn't form around the ball as a lubed, cloth patch would do. I highly respect the knowledge you guys have & how you've meticulously researched various operational situations -- a wealth of information!

 

[Loyalist Dave]

Dave I'm a bit confused that you so misinterpreted my post, and suggest I suggested something I did not suggest! Have I offended you?

Heavens no...,

But, while you understood that you were only writing about a "combat" situation..., you mentioned "patching" and "grouping" and "accurate"...., only after that did you mention it's accurate enough for self defense vs a pack of hungry wolves, so it read as though you might be suggesting using a paper patched ball instead of a cloth patched ball in all occasions.

I was pointing out that a "paper patched round ball" ..., really isn't patched.

LD

 

[Jackrabbit1957]

If you're that concerned about wolves maybe a trade gun loaded with #4 buckshot would serve you better, just saying.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

My concern about wolves has grown. ! I am now that concerned. I'm seeing them more and more, noticed them being more bold, and now a pack did close in on a guy. So. But I used to laugh at people being concerned about wolf attacks, and would say: "there hasn't been a wolf attack in 100 years".

Actually I have a Brown Bess carbine, which I sometimes take up North, although it's mostly my turkey gun now. However, I think I'd prefer a handful of .375" balls over #4. ! 99% of the time it's me, my .62" Jeager, and the Remington Navy when hunting. When exploring/trekking, then I might be packing anything, the Jeager, Bess, or even a Winchester. Maybe a Monkey Mauser! Sometimes, a bow and my Plains Pistol. At any rate, if I'm hunting deer/elk/bear, it would not make a lot of sense to have Bessie loaded with buckshot. She's good out to 50yards at least with a patched ball. And, I have them there speed loads for her too. If one wanted to, a similar buckshot load could be devised. All things considered, I prefer ball.

I think, believe, assume, that if you drop one wolf, the pack will scatter. That's what happened last October, dude shot the one that was closest and closing in. But, don't know if that's always the case, and just want a fast reload for that purpose.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

Heavens no...,

But, while you understood that you were only writing about a "combat" situation..., you mentioned "patching" and "grouping" and "accurate"...., only after that did you mention it's accurate enough for self defense vs a pack of hungry wolves, so it read as though you might be suggesting using a paper patched ball instead of a cloth patched ball in all occasions.

I was pointing out that a "paper patched round ball" ..., really isn't patched.

LD

Okay my Bad. Grumpy old Man Moment. ("GOMM")

 

[KennBarrett]

Since the subject heading of this thread is the Lyman GPR, I have a puzzle that I believe has been solved regarding the breech plug face. As a double-check, I always shine a flashlight down the bore after my patches are coming out clean. I have a .32 cal brass cleaning jag that I use for reaching into the smaller patent breech area. However, upon lighting up the bore, I view a sparkling, silver mirror leading from muzzle to breech (a lovely sight!), YET the breech plug face remains black. I thought perhaps it was caked-on powder, so I went to work with a .38 cal wire brush & wrapped steel wool around it & over its end. After allowing powder solvent to soak for a bit, I inserted the steel wool & wire brush & rotated the cleaning rod. Then inserted a clean patch, & it came out just as clean. This procedure was repeated several times with the same results. I even used some carb cleaner on it followed by the wire brush & steel wool. Still nothing changed -- clean patch. This was somewhat frustrating. My other rifles don't have a patent breech, & the breech plug face on them is as sparkling clean as the bore.

Even a generous amount of shooting followed by a thorough cleaning as we always do failed to change the colour of that breech plug face. "Golly!" I thought, "I sure hope that's not congealed powder & whatever!" After "attacking" the plug's face as I did though, it would seem the clean, dry patches (even some wet ones with powder solvent) would reveal something, but all that did nothing.

I floated this situation past a helpful chap at another forum who suggested it was merely the colour of the hardened breech plug which implied to me that some makers polish theirs & others may not. It made sense, & it alleviated some concern for what to me is a rugged, dependable, accurate rifle. Perhaps I'm a victim of my own over-zealous curiosity using that flashlight after each cleaning. They wouldn't have had that convenience back in the 18th & 19th centuries. Clean patches = clean bore. I hope someone reading this can corroborate what seems to be a most logical conclusion.

 

[Black Jack Shellac]

I have a breach from a GPR. It isn't hardened. It is blued just like it is on the inside. In case you need to remove it,mine unscrewed very easy. It was near new and had no rust. I used this barrel on a CVA mountian rifle. Shoots good too.
Black Jack Shellac

 

[KennBarrett]

I agree, Black Jack. If I do my part, the rifle will place that ball right where it's aimed every time. I couldn't say that about the TC Hawken with which I began muzzleloading over three decades ago. It's a nice rifle, but it's not been a tack driver with me. My dad was the last to fire it back in 1988, & he did very well with it. Perhaps the GPR's weight & balance are more agreeable for me as are those of the 1853 Enfield musket I've had for more than twenty years.

Regarding the breech plug being blued, I bought the kit version so it was in the rough white. I haven't unscrewed mine. What's good to read though is that yours was free of rust & like new. I live in south central Arizona with its predominant, single-digit humidity, so unless I relocate to a region with full four seasons, rust shouldn't be much of an issue (with proper care).

If I wasn't so inquisitive in using a flashlight to further inspect the bore, I'd never know the breech plug appears black. Joke's on me, right? This is the first patent breech I've owned; as a result, I'm super attentive to keeping the flash channel clean. I've not had a misfire -- hopefully all the meticulous attention is paying off. Thanks for your comments

With the conditions under which these rifles & smoothbores were owned & used during the 18th & 19th centuries, I surmise they often weren't given the scrutiny we today take for granted. They didn't have bore scopes, flashlights or even pipe cleaners, so like I said, a clean patch would have equalled a clean bore or flash channel, eh?

 

[Black Jack Shellac]

It's a wonder that any of these old guns are with us today. Using corrosive caps and powder and long gaps between cleanings. I use homemade and corrosive caps along with pyrodex.Let me tell you you have to bring your A game when you clean the guns. Since I found Ballistall my life is made easy. The sub chamber in my two breaches are .350 dia and pretty deep. For cleaning something like that. I use a ordinary cleaning rod with a slotted tip. I cut out a long inch or so wide strip of old bead sheet. Put that in the slot with one end draped over the tip. Wet it down with cleaner and down the barrel she goes . When down to the sub chamber turn the cleaning rod a few times and back out.repeat as wanted. .I also use the flash channel screw.Remove that and used pipe cleaners. You cant get away with a slap-dash cleaning when using pyrodex.
Black Jack Shellac

 

[KennBarrett]

"A game." I like that. And you're spot on! Ballistol's great stuff, I agree. Yeah, the ol' patent breech. I've often wondered if it really does provide better ignition. I've read of others having problems that were later resolved with a thorough cleaning. It does demand some extra care, but hey, that's okay. I'll be bringing my A game when it's time to clean it! And I see you don't forget the cleanout screw which is an asset. I always re-coat the threads of that screw & of the nipple with anti-seizing lubricant. Makes cleaning so much easier. Yes sir: "A game" all the way!