[Skygee]

Originally Posted by c3shooter

Musket balls were not iron- too light, too hard. Lead is the metal of choice for several reasons- ease of casting a round ball, softer than the iron or steel of my barrel, dense enough to retain energy over distance, plentiful, and CHEAP!

Sorry... I've seen mention of them with metal detectors finding iron musket balls. Someone said they are early Spanish origin.

[orangello]

But, is there a reason you would prefer not to use lead?

[Hawg]

Originally Posted by Skygee

Sorry... I've seen mention of them with metal detectors finding iron musket balls. Someone said they are early Spanish origin.

Those aren't musket balls, they're case shot.

[robocop10mm]

AKA canister shot or grape shot

[lotsoffreetime]

they are made from Powder tungsten and Iron.It's called ITX roundball. It's from Ballistic Products Ballistic Products.com made in calibers 32 to 62 I assume it is made for all the lead free zones .

[Hawg]

Originally Posted by robocop10mm

AKA canister shot or grape shot

Grape would be too big to get confused with a musket ball.

[quigleysharps4570]

Originally Posted by lotsoffreetime

they are made from Powder tungsten and Iron.It's called ITX roundball. It's from Ballistic Products Ballistic Products.com made in calibers 32 to 62 I assume it is made for all the lead free zones .

Same thing I heard about them.

[attaunser]

Originally Posted by c3shooter

Musket balls were not iron- too light, too hard. Lead is the metal of choice for several reasons- ease of casting a round ball, softer than the iron or steel of my barrel, dense enough to retain energy over distance, plentiful, and CHEAP!

Not true. Iron balls were used to some extent in the early matchlocks. They had big bores and were relatively short-ranged anyhow. Recently saw a fascinating TV documentary about the Inca. The earliest documented firearm kill in the New World is an Inca skull with a bullet hole about an inch in diameter. Analysis showed no lead, but did find particles of iron around the hole. Incidentally, some brave conquistidor shot the guy in the back of the head.

[orangello]

Originally Posted by attaunser

Not true. Iron balls were used to some extent in the early matchlocks. They had big bores and were relatively short-ranged anyhow. Recently saw a fascinating TV documentary about the Inca. The earliest documented firearm kill in the New World is an Inca skull with a bullet hole about an inch in diameter. Analysis showed no lead, but did find particles of iron around the hole. Incidentally, some brave conquistidor shot the guy in the back of the head.

Interesting, got a link to the program?

Not calling you a liar, but it doesn't make sense to fire an iron round from a steel barrel, at least not without one hell of a patch to get a seal. I could understand during the experimental phase of firearms development, but not later. Lead is HEAVY, relatively formable, and probably more common than quality iron even then. Or so it would seem to me, but i have certainly been wrong before.

[attaunser]

Originally Posted by orangello

Interesting, got a link to the program?

Not calling you a liar, but it doesn't make sense to fire an iron round from a steel barrel, at least not without one hell of a patch to get a seal. I could understand during the experimental phase of firearms development, but not later. Lead is HEAVY, relatively formable, and probably more common than quality iron even then. Or so it would seem to me, but i have certainly been wrong before.

You are not calling me a liar; you just doubt that I am telling the truth
The early cannon fired stone balls. Cannon fired iron balls until mid-19th century. Smooth bore small arms, especially military, fired very much undersized balls, lead or otherwise. How do you suppose they managed to "get a seal" all those centuries? Hint: they did not, for the most part, use patched balls.

In re the program: There is no link; it was on cable TV. I think it was a NOVA prorgram, but would not swear to that for fear of being called a liar -- again.