greetings... before I get to the real subject of this post, I will preface with how I develope a load in my l.r. m/l.  I take a new bullet style and shoot 10 shot groups using 70-75-80-85-90 grains of the powder of choice. nothing changes but the weight of the powder charge. see which load shoots the smallest group, then try a different powder brand, bullet style or cap etc. to see if I can shrink the group even more. Most of you probably do something very similar to work up the best load.  here is what happened to me when I tried CCI #11 magnum caps. The series of loads I shot with CCI #11 STANDARD caps gave me ROUND groups of varying size. When I switched to CCI #11 MAG. caps and ran through the EXACT same series of loads, all of the groups were at least twice as ltall as wide. [vertical stringing]. This indicates to me that the velocities were varying considerably more than with the standard caps. I tried 2 different bullet styles [one paper patched and one grease grooved]  and used the mag. caps again and encountered the same thing with both bullets. by the way, all testing is done at 200 yds. There is some talk that the mag. caps "boost" the charge foreward a little before complete ignition takes place. If this is what is happening I could easily see how varying ignition/velocities would occur, hence, vertical stringing. I might add that ignition seems instantaneous with no delay between the cap going off and total ignition.  Any of you thoughts or experiences on mag. vs. standard caps would be appreciated.  cheers

I'll just pass on something I've been told and not experimented with.   The source is someone who has shot a lot during his lifetime and I've found his advice to be usually very reliable.

I asked my friend if he would advise that I switch out a rifle nipple for a musket nipple.   My thinking was "bigger boom, better ignition."  His advice to me was to stay with the rifle nipple as that would give more consistent ignition.

Now I realize, if you are using platinum lined nipples, as I do, your nipple aperture is probably the same no matter whether the nipple is designed for a musket or a rifle.   However the cap would still be different.

It seems to me the same principle may be at work, i.e., as a general rule ot thumb, use the least primer that gets the job done.  I believe that holds (in general) in the smokeless world as well.   For my 6PPC and .222 benchrest rifles I use Federal Match Primers which are not loaded as hot as magnum primers and from some pictures I've seen, years back, in Precision Shooting magazine they appear to have a more consistent and well formed flame than do hotter primers.

I wonder if anyone has made a comparison of the performance of a PH Whitworth and/or Volunteer rifle using both platinum lined rifle and musket nipples.   My guess is that the platinum lined rifle nipple would give better accuracy than the platinum lined musket nipple when using caps from the same manufacturer.

Anybody tried it?


Pat

who is Rick Weber and how do you contact him?

Rick Weber was recommended to me from a muzzleloading forum to make a platinum lined nipple for my P. Gibbs. I had him make 2 and they exceeded my expectations. He is a long range muzzleloader competitor and a member of the US team. His email address is rweber@cvs.com. He is a great guy to deal with.

I gave the CCI standard caps a try in my .54 custom built Hawken that has a 1-34 twist for conicals. Same great results as with my Gibbs---no vertical stringing---very accurate. I'm starting to think the CCI standard cap is the best one available rght now.

Sounds a little too complicated to me. I shoot 1-2 days a week at a local club. I try to keep careful notes in a log book so that I don't lose my place. Save the better targets with load info written on them for reference. Warmups and fouling shots are essential. I only give credit for consistency not anomallies.