[AndyF]

Originally Posted by Hawg

With a patched ball it will never touch the rifling. Zinc may be a worthwhile substituts and there was a guy had good luck with glass marbles awhile back.

Hawg:

Thanks for the post. Actually I was going to get into that. Glass would be safer has it would break up if it encountered any narrow portion of the barrel.

Initial high heat may be a problem on detination. Glass is simply a hard liquid anyway.

I still think a tinned bearing would be the best has the bearing is an absolute sphere. A tinned surface would be a problem to get the solder to flow even , gravity being the problem, so I think some type of drop system where the ball fell and cooled naturally through an airflow then caught on some wet wicking would be the ideal.

If the ball were made to roll between 2 plates spaced the desired distance would create the perfect lead coated ball.

Andy

[AndyF]

Originally Posted by freefall

I think tinning the ball with solder would be an incredibly bad idea.

Why?

Andy

[AndyF]

Correction, the lee enfield was a .303.

(What, no eat crow smilie.!!!)

Andy

[AndyF]

Originally Posted by canebrake

to the FTF community. We are glad to have you as a new member!

All you need here is a thick skin and the ability to laugh at anything, including yourself!

FTF Newcomer's Guide << Click Here

How To Post Pics on FTF << Click Here

Join the Gun Owners of America, a worthy 2nd Amendment protector.

Gun Owners of America << Click Here

Thanx for the invite!

AndyF

[AndyF]

Originally Posted by Rick1967

Just curious why you would want to do it. Most people who shoot black powder are really into the traditional aspect of it all. They like to do it the way it was done back then. Most people that are into power and want to have a more destructive round are shooting modern firearms. At least that is my opinion anyway.

I recall has a young Tom Sawyer we had a log raft. We'd float down the river and we had regular pipes set at an angle along the side. This was our battleship of sorts. We'd drop a wick lighted 1/2in canon cracker to the sealed bottom and a marble on top of that. If we got the angle too high we lost sight of the marble. We tested and found it penetrated plank an inch, so it was a formidable weapon, not that we were looking for weapons, just adventure. We'd like to see the "rounds" hit the mud and anything else along the shore. Every once in awhile we'd feel the need to go to battle stations and set off a salvo, watchin out for the ladies of course.

If the cops found out, the crackers would have been outlawed. We just were kids who liked to experiment and see how things worked. I guess that's where invention starts.

To your question, I really don't know. Seems plausable to me. All the talk about getting form ridges off the balls after molding seemed to cry out for need of a better method or alternative. Even if you used that trimmer gizmo, you still have a deformation.

The bearing doesn't have the mass for sure, but trajectory should be improved. Effective range would be slightly improved too, but stopping power would be less. Getting the right science formula that creates a projectile rather than a bomb needs to be worked on.

Frankly, I'm chompin to try it out one day.

Andy

[AndyF]

Originally Posted by c3shooter

First, if steel or iron worked better than lead, we would be using that. Difference in density will reduce retained energy sharply. You can throw a doughnut further than a cheerio- it's the mass.

Second- if is not possible to strike a spark from lead. It IS possible to strike a spark from a ball bearing. BTW, black powder + sparks= bad ju-ju.

Ask a waterfowl hunter how he likes steel shot. Since lead shot cannot be used when hunting waterfowl, you have to go to a larger shot size for the same effectiveness- and it still sucks.

C3:

Wow!, one of the best movies ever made. Liked the egg scene, Newman's best.

Ok, shot I agree, but a single ball may hold promise if we do some mods. I'm talking smooth bore here, not rifled. You'd end up with no rifling after awhile sending #5 or #8 hard steel balls down a med hard barrel.

Andy

[robocop10mm]

Originally Posted by AndyF

Hi Robo:

Sorry for the late response.

I can see where an expanded end would be an advantage in a rifled barrel. A deformed end in a SB would create a problem I think in that we have a less than spherical projectile in flight, which probably explains the inaccuracy.

In the service the rounds for our 4.2 track mortars had the brass expansion sleeve that engaged the lans of the barrel.

Andy

The problem with this concept is the perfectly spherical ball WILL touch the bore of the barrel. It will effectively rattle down the barrel, touching at random intervals. The last place it contacts will determine the angle of departure from the barrel. Because the angle will change each shot, the accuracy from shot to shot will be dismal at best. A perfect sphere will fly truer than a squashed sphere, but you would never be able to predict the departure angle.

Many years ago men experimented with all sorts of materials. Lead was chosen for a reason. It works.

[freefall]

So. You've obviously given this a lot of thought and are more knowledgeable about the subject than the rest of us here, so go for it Buckwheat. Send us a range report. Good luck.

[Hawg]

Originally Posted by robocop10mm

The problem with this concept is the perfectly spherical ball WILL touch the bore of the barrel.

Not if it's patched. The patch is all that touches the bore and it's the patch that makes the ball spin. Even in a smoothbore the ball never touched the barrel.

[AndyF]

Originally Posted by robocop10mm

....A perfect sphere will fly truer than a squashed sphere, but you would never be able to predict the departure angle....

Good point. Thats a problem for sure.

Andy