Wonderwads causing change in POI?

[knoydart]

Hi, I'm still new to the dirty fun that is BP firearm ownership & wanted to know if anyone has also had this problem.

When I started shooting my Pietta Rem 1858 I used Crisco on top of the ball. I was pleased with the results, with a fair bit of power & it was quite accurate. I then started using Wonderwads & noticed an immediate change. POI is low & to the left & felt recoil is noticably lower. There's also a slight increase in smoke.

I use the same powder, load & ball on each occasion. This effect is also apparent on my latest addition, a Pietta Colt 1860. I hope to try my Uberti Walker Colt this weekend, my guess is it will do the same.

Any ideas

 

[frontiergander]

yes the wads will change POI. Without wads, REAL bullets are all over the place for me.

 

[DD4lifeusmc]

wonder wads

question :
How long are you leaving the chambers loaded with wonderwads?
The lube can and will degrade the powder even in an hour or less.
Not say it does or will but can.
Try using a dry wad instead.
PM me for more info if you want.
I have never used crisco as it is way too soft.
I have never used over ball lube.
I used to use a dry lube wad.
Now I cut my own and use dry or a homemade lube.
If lubed shoot as soon as loaded.
My primary load last 15 or 20 years.
30 gr of FFFG either holy Black, Pyro or 777.
In a paper cartridge with prelubed conical.
I normally stand a 4x4 up on edge, gives me a left to right target area of 3 1/2 inches and up and down however tall it is, but normally all 6 rounds are with in 4 inches vertical at 15 to 20 yds offhand.

 

[mec]

Ive had mixed results with velocities with and without treated wads. Sometimes higher with and sometimes higher without. One phenom. Ive noticed with my 61 navy and a really full chamber of goex is that the addition of the wad prevents me from being to seat the bullet (deep enough) firmly in the chamber. Even though a ring of lead from the .380 balls was sheered during seating, the ball was still loose in the chamber and prone to walk under recoil. With 20 grains of fffg goex and that ball I was getting velocities in the low 800s but with 25 grains and the loss of effective obturation, I lost 100 fps. This has not happened with several .44s I have used with very full charges with or without wads.

 

[BowerR64]

The wads can stick to the projectile and sometimes will fallow it right to the target.

If you want accuracy use filler insted of a wad between the powder and ball. Or just use powder and the ball.

If your just shooting to make smoke and could careless about hitting what you are aiming at use a wad.

I have a pretty good system now im SUPER happy with. Powder and ball in pre measured tubes and then cream of wheat in a flask i can put my finge rover the spout and tip it. Loading times are fast, accurate and safe.

I shot this last night, crazy thing is ive NEVER had a colt shoot this accurate! It actually outshot the remington! i couldnt believe it.

20g 3F swiss, 12G filler, rem .451 rb, Colt .457 rb @ 15yards

 

[dickydalton]

I have never had any of the above problems and I use wads lubed with gatefoe # 1 in all of my revolvers. I have found the wad stuck to the bottom of the ball in the backstop (sand pile), after the ball went through the bullseye and it exhibited zero gas blow bye in the rifling marks.

 

[Fingers McGee]

I've always used lubed wads & have no problems with accuracy. I have a pair of Uberti '61 navies that will consistently cut playing cards at 12 yards. I've done five in a row on more than one occasion. The only accuracy problems I have are induced by the operator.

 

[BowerR64]

Im making it all up

 

[mec]

"I made it all up.." Not really. Results may vary (frequently).

dickydalton mentioned Gatofeo lube which sent me on a search for the ugly cat. That lube really does work and it is probably what got me to using the treated wads from Eastern Maine Shooter's supply and others. When I don't have wads, I run a damp patch through the bore after every six shots and this maintains accuracy. I've used wonder wads but they seem too fluffy to do anything to decrease fouling
Finding the last post by the Gat in 2013 he was talking about historic use of the wads saying that the first reference he saw was in the American Rifleman from 1928.. This was likely from Elmer Keith who said that old gunfighters he knew- still alive from the mid 19th century told him they would use tallow-lubed wads cut from old felt hats and using these combined with blowing across the muzzle after shooting kept the bores clean all day.

This was shot using Eastern M wads after three full cylinders. It is likely three to four times as big as the revolver might produce from a bench.

 

[BowerR64]

I shot these last year when i questioned the accuracy.

Left is without wads, (wonder wads) right is with it.

SO then i tried it again WITHOUT the wads and the groups got good again.

This is only 15 yards but how much it opened up the group at 25 they would be all over the place.

Ive heard people say not every gun is the same that just because mine doesnt shoot well with wads doesnt mean every gun will shoot bad with them.

Well im not wasting the money on them any more, nor the lead to do any more testing.

Part of the fun is finding what works so i guess try everything.

Dont be scared to try just powder and a ball though.

 

[BowerR64]

"I made it all up.." Not really. Results may vary (frequently).

dickydalton mentioned Gatofeo lube which sent me on a search for the ugly cat. That lube really does work and it is probably what got me to using the treated wads from Eastern Maine Shooter's supply and others. When I don't have wads, I run a damp patch through the bore after every six shots and this maintains accuracy. I've used wonder wads but they seem too fluffy to do anything to decrease fouling
Finding the last post by the Gat in 2013 he was talking about historic use of the wads saying that the first reference he saw was in the American Rifleman from 1928.. This was likely from Elmer Keith who said that old gunfighters he knew- still alive from the mid 19th century told him they would use tallow-lubed wads cut from old felt hats and using these combined with blowing across the muzzle after shooting kept the bores clean all day.

This was shot using Eastern M wads after three full cylinders. It is likely three to four times as big as the revolver might produce from a bench.

That looks pretty good, im going to need to move mine back i guess. I have a hard time seing the bull at 15.

The first target i posted is with wonder lube over the ball, i dont see anything wrong with the lube over the ball.

 

[mec]

I checked my tables after noticing your targets were shot with conicals. All of my wad loads were with ball and I don't recall using them with any conical- traditional or modern design. That could make a difference ( shouldn't but Bumble Bees aren't supposed to be able to fly either.)
The standing recommendation everywhere is to put some non petroleum grease over the balls to keep fouling soft and prevent chain fires. A guy named bear tracker posted here years ago that he had never had a chain fire with a projectile that actually fit the chambers- with no grease.
We checked this out and found no difference in the amount or quality of the fouling in the bore and a great deal less gummy,caked fouling sticking to the outside of the revolver. Fouling with bore butter and other products including crisco caused such a build up that it interfered with function after a short time.
The only chain fire we had after many hundreds of rounds occured when we reloaded a ball that had already been in the chamber once and was swagged undersize.

these were shot with not wad or over-ball lubricant:

 

[Crawdad1]

It not up to you, the revolver will tell you what it likes and what it doesn't like. They're all individuals and there aren't two the same.

 

[dickydalton]

I also use the Eastern Main wads bought through the Possible Shop., and haven't tried them under a conical as I think I'd rather have more powder then. I pan lube conicals with the same #1 I use on the wads.

 

[XD 45acp]

my 58 goes haywire with conicals. Balls are the most accurate out of mine. I use wonder wad between powder & ball.

 

[mec]

Originals tended to have the bullet seating ram coned for a reasonable fit to the bullets while this is less likely with replicas. I've used a dremel tool to do this with several replicas and it helps to keep the bullets aligned as they enter the chamber. This takes away at least some of the accuracy advantage that balls seem to have. Don't remember if this uberti remington needed it or not but it shot reasonably well with these bullets cast from a Dixie Gun works iron mold. The lousy shot off to the left seems to be my error. group off-hand.

This Lee conical percussion revolver bullet mould throws a nose profile close to a ball and they usually are pretty accurate. group from bench

 

[BowerR64]

Im shooting at 15 yards yours is just 5 feet further back. The lee conical is what i used but i had the same results with a ball.

I guess im just at a point that the wad for me is just extra wasted money. If i could get the same results with out filler i wouldnt even use it but ive found that the filler is helping my accuracy and after finding a good method to get it into each chamber quickly that is a plus.

Im more about accuracy, speed in loading and the least amount of equipment in that order. Safty comes with the tubes where your only holding 20 grains of powder at a time.

Chainfires are a different subject

Mec in your post you say dixie conical? is that a bullet you can buy? or is it the mold?

 

[mec]

its the Iron tong-shaped scissors mold with no sprue cutter. They cast consistently and at a favorable diameter.The've been around like, for ever. I remember a friend had one that threw circa .357 balls back in the 60s You do have to nip off the tale and file them flat but they work ok for low volume production.

 

[BowerR64]

Have you tried weighing them?

 

[mec]

dixie - 180 grains after filing down the sprue/nub
Lee -200 grains
pure lead

 

[BowerR64]

I mean weigh them from bullet to bullet.

I have 4 bags that my conicals are in, the majority of them are 201 grains, then 202 grains then a bag of 200 and 203

I had some that were up in the 205 grain and i shot those all up just plinking around.

Phil had these .454 balls he sold me about 500 of them and i saved my hornady balls for when i really wanted accuracy. When i got my scale i started weighing a bunch of em.

I was shocked when i found out the balls i got from phil were all dead on the same weight. I had 2 packages left and i kid you not they were all the same.

I figured they were just plinking balls because they had this big nub on the side from the cast. I have a feeling those little nubs is how they were adjusted to be so consistant from ball to ball.

 

[mec]

No. I would expect some minor variation from inconsistencies in my reduction of the base sprue from one to the next though I believe that it would take a very wide variation in weight to affect accuracy. Most modern commercial bullets and home cast ones are very consistent to weight but these century -old .44 special black power loads had bullets that varied a grain or so. Still the accuracy was pretty close to what I expect with modern loads in this revolver.







link:
http://www.leverguns.com/articles/44special.htm

 

[jgh4445]

Somebody has scratched that fine old revolver all up!!!! I'm feeling generous, just send it to me and I'll send you a new revolver with no scratch marks on it! Now. I use wads and sometimes I don't. My thinking is, if you find a load you and your sidearm likes, why, then it ain't broke and you shouldn't waste time and money to fix it trying to emulate what someone else is doing.

 

[Crawdad1]

I know one of my experiments this year with my 1860 Army is to drop the powder charge by increments down from 30 grains AND now to see if she shoots better (tighter groups) without a wad.

Good information!!!