Printable View
Ive been playing with a CVA bobcat this weekend. Only gun I have that's not dialed in..Im running low on RWS caps and they are not easy to find around here..Yesterday I bought a tin of standard CCI caps..I noticed my groups started opening up...Same gun, same load clean bore between shots...I switched back to the other cap and groups shrunk back down..ill admit this is the first time Ive seen caps make a different but in this little gun it sure does..Anyone else ever noticed this?
I do know that RWS makes the best musket caps. They are consistent and powerful. CCI started marketing a "Re-Enactor Musket Cap" and they suck. Under powered and inconsistent in use with live ammo.
Maybe their regular caps are also weak.
I do know that about their musket caps..Since they went to that 4 pedal design its been pretty weak.I tried them and I can tell a difference for sure.I Ive heard countless shooters complain about them.Now Im not one to take an occasional complaint on the net as the gospel but, well they get more than the casual complaint.Im not going to lie, I love RWS and may be a bit biased..
CCI musket caps work great in my parker hale musket.mine are an older lot,so maybe they are different?they are winged type. On my nipples they fit tight. If you don't push them down onto the nipple they are seating when the hammer hits and will cause weak ignition.
As to standard CCI #11s? The current ones seem the same as the older ones and I've had no problem with accuracy nor problems with ignition using them. I also have used the CCI #11 Magnum and have noticed no advantage over the standard #11.
The CCI musket cap is a different issue.
There are most certainly 2 different types of CCI musket caps. A few years ago, due to shrapnel incidents or legal concerns?, CCI reduced the charge in their musket cap. They call the new musket cap "Multiple Use" and they are of 4 wing design. The old CCI musket cap has 6 wings. The new CCI 4 wing Multiple Use cap is fairly weak. IMO, the old cap is equal in quality to the RWS cap.
pic of old and new types of CCI musket caps. Old on left and new on right.
Think of primers and caps as spark plugs to an engine, and yes they do make a difference.
Change the caps, completely work up a new load.
I have a lot of 5k CCI standards for my Gibbs target rifle and buy powder by the case for it.
Mine are the left ones.
When I was shooting on the USIMLT I had a .32 caliber Fisher bullet rifle (similar to a Gibbs or Rigby) that was incredibly accurate. My load was 42.5gns of Swiss 1.5Fg with a 208gn bullet & RWS #55 caps. After retiring from the team I moved to a new part of the state & didn't have much time to shoot for a year or so, & the next time I took the rifle out I was getting erratic groups of 4-6" at 100yds when it would have typically shot MOA or less. After checking for loose sights, etc, it occurred to me that I'd bought a batch of the new RWS #55+ ('magnum') caps, so instead tried some of the older #55 & also some standard CCI #11 & my groups with both shrank back to normal immediately.....another try with the #55+ confirmed that the groups would open up with those, so sold those off to a hunting buddy who wasn't so particular!
Both the shooter and the gun have to be capable of shooting groups consistent enough and small enough to determine what little difference there would be using different caps. I did find however with the low-powered 4 wing CCI musket caps that when shooting long strings without swabbing, my musket groups tended to open up. When that happened I also noticed some short hang fire issues- probably from fouling in the flash channel. The hotter caps seemed to be better at blowing though that fouling and reducing the hang fire phenomenon.
Also interesting that for BPCR, many shooters (or most?) currently prefer the lowest power primers. While some still use magnum primers, I also found a little better accuracy with the lower powered primers. No point to this other than there is more to accuracy than the strength of the ignition alone. Could be that sometimes the primer impulse is too powerful, pushes the load column up the cartridge or barrel various lengths before the main charge ignites- causing inaccuracy.
AMEN to that for sure. BvtQuote:
Originally Posted by Doc Highwall
Ned Roberts, the author of the Muzzleloading Caplock Rifle book of many years ago clearly stated that a cap with sufficient power to reliably ignite the charge would provide the best cap to use for accuracy. This was in the day when there was numerous cap makers, and before "magnum" caps were invented.Quote:
Originally Posted by bonza
Get the book on inter-library loan and enjoy a fine book.
Bvt
Im going to try several just for curiousitys sake..I picked up some Winchester mag's today on clearance. They are "suppose" to be rebadged CCi mags...Im a big fan of RWS but mostly because they are so bullet proof..They can be soaked and still go off reliably.Ive had others get wet and not go bang(My fault I know but I like that I can be a bit more carefree with the RWS in the wet weather).They seal very tight on my rifles too..they are getting harder to find locally now. I guess ill have to bite the bullet, order a 1000 and foot the hazmat charge. I trust them more..
Im a firm believer that you shoot better with a firearm that you have supreme confidence in..