As another Lame Cherry exclusive in matter anti matter.......
I enjoy history and the interesting things of life. It is why I dislike all modern writers in they have not one whit of comprehension in the necessities of life. Jerome Corsi could not more bile a kettle of tea in the Canada bush no more than Michael Savage could relate how best to kill an elephant while straining river sand through his teeth drinking coffee.
I have a great appreciation for those who have experienced actual life. The passing of V. M. Starr was a great loss in his knowledge of the muzzleloading shotgun. His treatise still found online concerning 11 gauge shotguns in their loading and use are some of the best paragraphs around.
So when I come across things of interest they are interesting in Sir Samuel Baker, while blasting away at Asian elephants and Asian stags, he noted that a 10 bore was all the rifle anyone would require. His loading was the interesting part in he loaded 6 drachms of English powder for his elephant gun charge and four for the stags.
A drachm is an English unit of measurement of 1/8 ounce. So he had 3/4's of an ounce of black powder for elephants or 360 grains of powder as a drachm is 60 grain dry measure. This will not mean a fiddle without a bow to you, but it does to me as this is my weave, and as this progresses it will make more sense for the stag load would be 4 drachms or 240 grains of powder.
English powder was of a different blend than American powders. The Americans powder burned hot and dry, while the English powders burned hot and wet, meaning the fowling was less hard. This process also produced a better transfer of energy and more generated energy for hunting or war.
The modern deer loading would in blackpowder be in a 50 caliber gun, which is much smaller than the 10 bore in size, about 100 grains of powder.
In loadings though for black powder, a square load was attempted in meaning that the size of the powder charge matched the size of the shot or bullet charge, not by weight, but by volume.
It is why shotguns in the modern 28, 16, 12 and 10 shoot well in their shot charges match well with the powder charges, so the patterns do not blow or in meaning, the patterns are not disrupted by too much speed causing individual pellets to fly off on their own out of the pattern.
There are those life saving experiences too in simply keeping the gun loaded correctly in making certain the percussion caps are in a carrier and not the pocket as the tropical heat would neutralize the explosive effect of the caps.
Powder was to be dried in the sun before loading, and all lumps shaken out or they would lodge in the loading flask and this would be a deadly problem in having a wounded elephant rising to kill you, and your rising with a gun with no powder in it.
This I found interesting in the patches were not bed ticking as the Americans utilized, but were of silk which had soaked in a 1 part hogs lard to 2 parts beeswax, and free from salt. Using only lard would melt out in the heat and of course the salt would rust the firearm, and blackpowder has enough problems with corrosion once fired.
Silk was not cut like linen, and it also had the advantage of being thinner to ram the bullet home easier to seat it on the powder. The entire purpose of the patches is to form a gas seal, so the full force of the burning powder is transfered to the bullet being projected down the rifle barrel. It also forms the buffer against the rifling so the lead ball is not engaged directly upon the lands of the rifle which spin the ball for stability in flight.
The Americans always utilized a hardening mixture of tin in one part to 7 to 10 in lead, but Sir Samuel has a most interesting discourse on this for elephant hunting. I post the quote:
"All balls should be made of pure lead, without any hardening mixture. It was formerly the fashion to use zinc balls, and lead with a mixture of tin, etc., in elephant-shooting. This was not only unnecessary, but the balls, from a loss of weight by admixture with lighter metals, lost force in a proportionate degree. Lead may be a soft metal, but it is much harder than any animal's skull, and if a tallow candle can be shot through a deal board, surely a leaden bullet is hard enough for an elephant's head."
Sir Samuel White Baker
Granted modern blackpowder firearms use not patches and balls, but maxi balls with lube in the base of the bullet for the seal as the lead skirt expands, but his experiences are not to be lost as they are something not to be lost to antiquity.
He conducted experiments in pure lead, zinc mixtures, pure zinc and pure tin, but nothing with a tin zinc mixture, and found in shoothing through iron, the lead was superior and zinc had no effect at all.
His greatest penetration was with what would become the future in a steel tipped conical bullet.
In that case, he was shooting a rifle with 240 grains of powder and it the bullet went through 14 inches of elm planks. Such is the full metal jacket or steel bullet of the military. It penetrates well, but has no transfer of power for killing effect.
As a historical note, the above gun was meant to be fired with a full ounce of powder with a quarter pound ball. It was deemed a small artillery piece in weighing 21 pounds, and it still kicked the shoulder too hard.
He did deem that rifle capable of shooting 6 to 8 soldiers if marching in file with one shot.
There were in those days 2 groove to 8 or 12 grooves for the rifling. The larger number of groves meant easier loading, but the 2 groove though harder to load in what Sir Samuel shot, was a harder hitter and handled longer distances better. That historical fact is of importance as it is never discussed in modern firearms, in once upon a time, the best guns had only two lands in them.
The two grove rifles had to be "shot in" as when new were almost impossible to be loaded quickly. This is why the multi groove rifles came to be.
Heavy charges are what Sir Samuel advocated in 1/5 the powder by weight to the weight of the ball. There is always a problem with novices in mixing up volumes at times and weights. Square loads are volume and not the same as weight loads.
That should be enough information in this file in my private journal of information. Sometimes things appear here for the few in condensed recipes and knowledge. It is always good to be familiar with the intricacies of the past, as on this one can only form a knowledge of the present or the future.
agtG
