| Tom_H |
| (.333 member) |
| 02/01/22 02:18 PM |
|
Jaeger Stutzen!? and looking for suggestions on loading
|
I tend not to make impulse purchases but this was one of them.
I had seen this
Video from capand ball
Upon having it in my hands, it was actually in better condition than the pictures portrayed.
Carriage gun?!
Upon getting it home, I gave it the once over and it managed to check the boxes.
Plain gun but well built. Laminated steel barrel with a hooked breech (nice surprise)
Flip rear site with point blank and 50 meters?
An extra safety. It is the pin at the breech that when pushed to the right, blocks the hammer from falling.
With an 11" barrel, the center of balance is exactly where your hand is.
Twist is around 24" but it is an 1840 gun and I don't think that they had it figured out yet (although a fast twist should work with a low powder charge)
Bore takes a .610 ball with a groove of .640.
I fired it and consider myself lucky. The breech has a metal stud that sticks up high enough to require a 70gr charge. Lucky because my first try was with 50gr (I didn't know about the stud).
And what is up with that?
What is the correct charge for this? Takes standard caps.
Anybody have any insight on this thing?
Thanks and Happy New Year.
Tom
| DarylS |
| (.700 member) |
| 02/01/22 03:09 PM |
|
|
Re: Jaeger Stutzen!? and looking for suggestions on loading
|
Ahhhhh - a Tige breech! The correct charge is whatever it takes to just barely to the top of the tige(peg). A "ball", possible conical in shape, & very close to bore size is dropped down the bore and the rod it 'thrown" 3 times upon it to expand the "ball" into the rifling.
A patched ball with 70gr. charge would be my load, unless it shot more accurately with even more powder.
I just goggled Tige Breech and came up with this diagram which suits.
https://www.historicalfirearms.info/post...ned-by-a-french
Happy New Year Tom.
| Tom_H |
| (.333 member) |
| 02/01/22 11:57 PM |
|
|
|
Re: Jaeger Stutzen!? and looking for suggestions on loading
|
Thank you Daryl.
That was the type of answer that I was looking for.
This has now become a more interesting project...
Range report to follow.
Tom
| 93x64mm |
| (.416 member) |
| 03/01/22 08:18 AM |
|
Re: Jaeger Stutzen!? and looking for suggestions on loading
|
Fingers crossed for you Tom!
| DarylS |
| (.700 member) |
| 03/01/22 08:37 AM |
|
|
|
Re: Jaeger Stutzen!? and looking for suggestions on loading
|
Yes - very interesting project.
The previous system of enlarging an undersized projectile was called the Delvinge system. In that, the breech plug was hollowed out to hold the charge, then the shoulders of the plug were used to slug up the "ball" to fill the rifling, again, with 3 blows of the rod ie:"throwing the rod upon the charge".
At the start of the civil war, the War department bought military rifled muskets from Austria (& maybe France?) some of which had either the Tige or Delvinge systems.
Since both rifles needed 3 throws of the rod, it was felt that the standard system then used by the US military would suffice as they, at that time had the same loading practice, when loading muskets.
I suspect there would have been problems with projectile type as well as size & the charge size (paper ctgs) as well.
A logistical nightmare.
| 260rem |
| (.375 member) |
| 03/01/22 09:26 AM |
|
|
Re: Jaeger Stutzen!? and looking for suggestions on loading
|
Great little fun, I'd love one of them, if it's legal in my state due to its stubby nature.
| Tom_H |
| (.333 member) |
| 07/01/22 01:47 PM |
|
|
|
Re: Jaeger Stutzen!? and looking for suggestions on loading
|
So I shot it.
It takes 75 to 80gr of fff to cover the top of the pillar (thank you Daryl).
With that load it is potent to say the least but I noticed a few things.
Apparently it handles round ball well, shooting slightly high at 50ft with the low rear sight.
Strangely it also shoots to the left by around 1.5" consistently.
Would the inertia and drag of a conical cause it to shoot to the right? The sights are fixed so I can't imagine the point of impact changing in the last 180 years.
Also, if you look at the pics, the rear sight has two positions. If this thing is shooting high at 25 yards, the high position on the rear sight is nearly .300 greater on the 11" sight radius. That adds up to a 17" correction at that range.
What could that sight setting possibly be for?
Curious as to your thoughts.
Tom
| Tom_H |
| (.333 member) |
| 07/01/22 01:48 PM |
|
|
|
Re: Jaeger Stutzen!? and looking for suggestions on loading
|
So I shot it.
It takes 75 to 80gr of fff to cover the top of the pillar (thank you Daryl).
With that load it is potent to say the least but I noticed a few things.
Apparently it handles round ball well, shooting slightly high at 50ft with the low rear sight.
Strangely it also shoots to the left by around 1.5" consistently.
Would the inertia of a conical cause it to shoot to the right? The sights are fixed so I can't imagine the point of impact changing in the last 180 years.
Also, if you look at the pics, the rear sight has two positions. If this thing is shooting high at 25 yards, the high position on the rear sight is nearly .300 greater on the 11" sight radius. That adds up to a 17" correction at that range.
What could that sight setting possibly be for?
Curious as to your thoughts.
Tom