Patched roundball range day

[HighUintas]

Barrel was cleaned with hot water this morning. Swabbed as before and then 3 patches.

View attachment 1005420



After the 15 shots today, heavy spit patch swabbing. Left to right-
View attachment 1005421



Then reloaded and out one more for the head at 100y. Aiming 6 o’clock, a bit too much. Brown head against a brown background is tricky.

View attachment 1005422

Good shooting. What's your POA if your aiming 30" high? Another silhouette/target on top of that one?

 

[Formidilosus]

Good shooting. What's your POA if your aiming 30" high? Another silhouette/target on top of that one?

Yes sir. For now using a second aiming point. I’m trying to see if PRB’s can be consistent enough for distance shooting. If/when the Kibler comes in, I’ll put Jeager style flip up sights on it zeroed for distance.

 

[HighUintas]

Yes sir. For now using a second aiming point. I’m trying to see if PRB’s can be consistent enough for distance shooting. If/when the Kibler comes in, I’ll put Jeager style flip up sights on it zeroed for distance.
View attachment 1005745

How much do you think a globe crosshair and peep would increase your accuracy at 200?

 

[Formidilosus]

How much do you think a globe crosshair and peep would increase your accuracy at 200?

A bit, but my group shooting is pretty solid with regular irons. Most of the size of initial 10 round group was wind. The biggest issue I am having, is the sights themselves. The rear notch was opened up pretty wide, and the brass front is tricky to tell where you are elevation wise if there is any light on it.
The brass front is nice in low light as you can aim with it due to the glint well i to twilight, but on light colors- like the white of the paper, or the cardboard it’s very easy to be off the edge of the black and into the paper without realizing it.

 

[mtnwrunner]

A bit, but my group shooting is pretty solid with regular irons. Most of the size of initial 10 round group was wind. The biggest issue I am having, is the sights themselves. The rear notch was opened up pretty wide, and the brass front is tricky to tell where you are elevation wise if there is any light on it.
The brass front is nice in low light as you can aim with it due to the glint well i to twilight, but on light colors- like the white of the paper, or the cardboard it’s very easy to be off the edge of the black and into the paper without realizing it.

Wait till you get old........

 

[Formidilosus]

Wait till you get old........

I’ll get one of them glass eyes like Tanya.

 

[NDHUNTER24]

I’ll get one of them glass eyes like Tanya.

Not sure if this is what your referring to, but Scleral lenses do help a lot. I didnt realize what i was missing until i got mine.

 

[HighUintas]

A bit, but my group shooting is pretty solid with regular irons. Most of the size of initial 10 round group was wind. The biggest issue I am having, is the sights themselves. The rear notch was opened up pretty wide, and the brass front is tricky to tell where you are elevation wise if there is any light on it.
The brass front is nice in low light as you can aim with it due to the glint well i to twilight, but on light colors- like the white of the paper, or the cardboard it’s very easy to be off the edge of the black and into the paper without realizing it.

Ya getting those iron sights dialed for the conditions you're in most takes a bit of doing, or at least it took me awhile to learn what works best.

I cut the rear facing part of my front post (nickel silver) at a very slight angle towards me so that no light reflects back. Then file and polish the tiniest 45* bevel at the top of the post so you can get some light reflected back in low light and it's always a reflection from the same point on the post rather than what happens when the whole rear is a convex curve. If in real bright conditions, a matte black marker helps eliminate the reflection if needed. I ended up just going without that bevel because I don't want to fiddle with the marker and it seems I'm able to see nearly to end of shooting light without it.

I prefer my rear pretty wide rear notch so I have a better view of the target on each side of the post, and it seems to work better for me, but not totally sure. It makes keeping elevation consistent a little harder I think.

 

[Natty]

The biggest issue I am having, is the sights themselves. The rear notch was opened up pretty wide, and the brass front is tricky to tell where you are elevation wise if there is any light on it.

This is my struggle with the "traditional" sights found on most guns. Shaders will help some with this. Shift in POI due to lighting/vision is a thing with these types of sights. So is eye strain if shooting in volume in less than ideal lighting conditions.

 

[Formidilosus]

Ya getting those iron sights dialed for the conditions you're in most takes a bit of doing, or at least it took me awhile to learn what works best.

I cut the rear facing part of my front post (nickel silver) at a very slight angle towards me so that no light reflects back. Then file and polish the tiniest 45* bevel at the top of the post so you can get some light reflected back in low light and it's always a reflection from the same point on the post rather than what happens when the whole rear is a convex curve. If in real bright conditions, a matte black marker helps eliminate the reflection if needed. I ended up just going without that bevel because I don't want to fiddle with the marker and it seems I'm able to see nearly to end of shooting light without it.

That’s exactly what I plan to do. Just smoking this front sight would drastically help I think.

I prefer my rear pretty wide rear notch so I have a better view of the target on each side of the post, and it seems to work better for me, but not totally sure. It makes keeping elevation consistent a little harder I think.

The way these are now is actually really good for hunting, especially in lower light.

 

[Dust Rider]

Unobtainium in North Central WY and all the usual internet places. Atleast what I've found.

Scheels seems to have them in stock. Do not know if they will ship.

 

[30338]

Buddy's new Kibler hawken in 58 is doing this out of the blocks at 33 yards. He'll stretch it out soon hopefully. 80 grains of fffg.

 

[HighUintas]

Got out and shot my 58 flintlock today.

I'm 2 weeks post vitrectomy in my right eye. I thought I'd be able to see well enough to shoot and although I could see the iron sights ok, the black bull seemed to disappear when trying to aim so I couldn't actually shoot normally worth a hoot.

100yds, 100gr 2f swiss

5 shots, and I gave up right handed haha


So I switched to left hand/eye and unfortunately only had 7 more balls. Not too bad considering I flinch like hell shooting my flintlock. First time ever shooting left handed. Maybe I should switch permanently

 

[Formidilosus]

Finally-




I’ll start a new thread about it.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Finally-

View attachment 1018052


I’ll start a new thread about it.

Looks great! If it shoots as well as it looks…

 

[Sponge]

I think I want an Edward Marshall in 40cal, but that seems hard to get in kit form.

I suspect that may be doable. I believe Jim Chambers kits use Rice Barrels that are dovetailed for tenons & sights at Rice or via an intermediary. Rice lists an Edward Marshall Profile barrel to fit Chambers kits, and lists 40 as an available option (although not available in the drop down, may be a special order).

Dunlap woodcrafts also has an Edward Marshall kit, and lists Rice as the barrel supplier.

I will be at Dunlap this weekend shopping for a stock blank, and at the Contemporary Longrifle Association show later this month. I'd be happy to make inquiries and pass along if you are genuinely interested.

As an aside, I get 40 from a shooting economics standpoint, and the Edward Marshall is a cool rifle - both historically and aesthetically - any reason for that particular gun in 40 cal? It may end up a bit front heavy with that barrel profile in 40, and lose some of the good handling characteristics vs the 54 or 58 most people build it in. I believe the original is 56 or 58 cal.

 

[Formidilosus]

I suspect that may be doable. I believe Jim Chambers kits use Rice Barrels that are dovetailed for tenons & sights at Rice or via an intermediary. Rice lists an Edward Marshall Profile barrel to fit Chambers kits, and lists 40 as an available option (although not available in the drop down, may be a special order).

Dunlap woodcrafts also has an Edward Marshall kit, and lists Rice as the barrel supplier.

I will be at Dunlap this weekend shopping for a stock blank, and at the Contemporary Longrifle Association show later this month. I'd be happy to make inquiries and pass along if you are genuinely interested.

I am genuinely interested.

As an aside, I get 40 from a shooting economics standpoint, and the Edward Marshall is a cool rifle - both historically and aesthetically - any reason for that particular gun in 40 cal? It may end up a bit front heavy with that barrel profile in 40, and lose some of the good handling characteristics vs the 54 or 58 most people build it in. I believe the original is 56 or 58 cal.

Mainly that I don’t have a desire to deal with the recoil and extra expense of a 54-58cal. I want to shoot it a lot, and a smaller caliber makes much more sense. 40 or 45cal is where I think I want to be.

 

[HighUintas]

No kidding. I am going to have to buy or build a 36 or 40 sometime soon

 

[Sponge]

I am genuinely interested.

ill let you know what i find out

Mainly that I don’t have a desire to deal with the recoil and extra expense of a 54-58cal. I want to shoot it a lot, and a smaller caliber makes much more sense. 40 or 45cal is where I think I want to be.

i hear ya. the build im planning will likely end up 45 cal for similar reasons.
A consideration for the Edward Marshal in a smaller caliber (with its resulting heavier barrel) will be the balance point shifting forward of the entry pipe a decent amount. may be a PITA, may be a non-issue.

 

[Formidilosus]

ill let you know what i find out

i hear ya. the build im planning will likely end up 45 cal for similar reasons.
A consideration for the Edward Marshal in a smaller caliber (with its resulting heavier barrel) will be the balance point shifting forward of the entry pipe a decent amount. may be a PITA, may be a non-issue.

Yes sir, I have given it thought. I’m not opposed to getting two barrels fitted at the same time- one 40 or 45cal, and one 58cal.