NDR-T/C Omega??? Help!!!
- Thread starter Phil
- Start date
Geoff Pike
Active member
Phil,
I would try the T/C sabots without any questions.
I havent dealt with them since Smith & Wesson bought them out, But they used to have the best
customer service I ever dealt with. If the new sabots dont fix your problem, call them again, they
will want to know and will help.
I would try the T/C sabots without any questions.
I havent dealt with them since Smith & Wesson bought them out, But they used to have the best
customer service I ever dealt with. If the new sabots dont fix your problem, call them again, they
will want to know and will help.
Given that you are using a clean new barrel, the sabots could not have been the right size for the weapon.
With pyrodex pellets I find the need to run a water damp patch after every third shot to keep reloading easy but the first shot in a clean barrel ought to load very easy.
I prefer sabots to Powewrbelts because I like to use the lightest possible bullet, but maybe powerbelts will work well for you. Go ahead & try them.
For a typical Eastern deer hunting 50 to 125 yard shot it doesn't matter all that much.
With pyrodex pellets I find the need to run a water damp patch after every third shot to keep reloading easy but the first shot in a clean barrel ought to load very easy.
I prefer sabots to Powewrbelts because I like to use the lightest possible bullet, but maybe powerbelts will work well for you. Go ahead & try them.
For a typical Eastern deer hunting 50 to 125 yard shot it doesn't matter all that much.
Nate Grace
Well-known member
Phil, get in touch with PRbullet.com and order one of their Super Rats. It has a head that turns to meet the lans and grooves of the barrel. Makes it a lot easier to seat the round. The extension that comes with the rifle is junk.
Nate
Nate
Wispete
Well-known member
Rate of twist 1-60 1-45 1-22
The rate of twist for round ball 1-60 is best how ever 1-45 will work too.
The rate of twist for a conical best is 1-45
The rate of twist for some barrels for sabots is 1-22
I don't want to swim up river here but it is like the spinning wing decoy thing. I don't care what any one uses that's a personal choice.
However their is a lot of Manufactures hype. Inlines have been around for a hundred plus years. Are they better ? a milosec. Is percusion better than flint lock 2 milosec. From a practical point of view no difference between the three. Hype is one is more accurate than the other. Just hype. This I think is the kicker Sabots are more expensive and less effective than a conical. How so ? Since this a duck site think of shooting 6's in you shot gun Vs BB's which has at 30 yards more knock down power. Same is true in black powder a 54 cal has more than a 50 cal than a 45 cal. than a 40 cal. Now this is where the consumer is shorted. Price of pellets Vs a can of pyrodex or black powder. A sabot shot in a 50cal. that is only a 45cal. The price of a sabot Vs a conical or even cheaper yet a round ball. Point is people are getting ripped off..... Now I am off my soap box..
The rate of twist for round ball 1-60 is best how ever 1-45 will work too.
The rate of twist for a conical best is 1-45
The rate of twist for some barrels for sabots is 1-22
I don't want to swim up river here but it is like the spinning wing decoy thing. I don't care what any one uses that's a personal choice.
However their is a lot of Manufactures hype. Inlines have been around for a hundred plus years. Are they better ? a milosec. Is percusion better than flint lock 2 milosec. From a practical point of view no difference between the three. Hype is one is more accurate than the other. Just hype. This I think is the kicker Sabots are more expensive and less effective than a conical. How so ? Since this a duck site think of shooting 6's in you shot gun Vs BB's which has at 30 yards more knock down power. Same is true in black powder a 54 cal has more than a 50 cal than a 45 cal. than a 40 cal. Now this is where the consumer is shorted. Price of pellets Vs a can of pyrodex or black powder. A sabot shot in a 50cal. that is only a 45cal. The price of a sabot Vs a conical or even cheaper yet a round ball. Point is people are getting ripped off..... Now I am off my soap box..
Matt Moore
Active member
I'm not familiar with the twist on an omega, but I've acurately shot round balls out of a 48'' twist, it took some testing to find the right load though. It's a misunderstanding that slow twist is required for round ball, you just don't gain any performance by spinning it faster, you just end up restricting maximum powder charge, and make the barrel fussier about the correct powder charge. Conical bullets do require faster twist, the longer the bullet compaired to bore, the faster twist required to stabilize the bullet. If you keep lengthening the bullet, at some point you can't put enough powder behind it to attain good velosity without stripping the bullet on the rifling. Jacketed bullets allow higher velosity because they don't strip as easily, and smokeless powders have been designed to burn slowly enough to allow the bullet to start moving down the barrel before reaching maximum pressure. As for saboted bullets, they're too light to retain energy at long range in my opinion. I have to claim ignorance on sabot weight, but I'm guessing 150 grains? Our ancestors generally used bullets in black powder guns, both muzzleloader and black powder, that started around 200 grains and up. There are some exceptions, some of the long rifles were small bore, but I belive these were primarily for small game, but barely good enough for the rare shot at a deer. The earlier long rifles were certainly larger bore.
I understand the desire to try the zip guns, and some of the features are undeniable. The easy to remove breachplugs, stainless steel is more rust resistant, inline ignition, plastic stocks that don't swell when wet. Although frequent cleaning is still a requirement no matter what the barrel is made out of.
I'll argue better stability for pistol bullets shot out of a plastic sabot though. The round ball is very stable with even minimal rotation, and the minimal rotation means you can put a hell of a lot of powder behind it without worrying about stripping through the rifling. I'll also agree you need to go bigger diameter if you're shooting round ball, but big balls perform better at reasonable black powder range on game, and are less effected by wind.
My last rant on factory guns is I don't have to chase down factory made, expensive components from limited outlets. Powder being one exception, but even there, 2F or 3F powder, or even pyrodex powder is generally available. Patching I can buy by the yard at any fabric store for a very reasonable price. The powder pellets I've looked at pretty hard, they look very convenient, and I suppose you could find a pet load for a gun by adding a small amount of loose powder. But with premeasured loads I can reload my gun very fast.
I've probably gone on too long on this already. Shoot what you want, I do. I just don't see much advantage in the zip guns, and I think they're ugly.
I understand the desire to try the zip guns, and some of the features are undeniable. The easy to remove breachplugs, stainless steel is more rust resistant, inline ignition, plastic stocks that don't swell when wet. Although frequent cleaning is still a requirement no matter what the barrel is made out of.
I'll argue better stability for pistol bullets shot out of a plastic sabot though. The round ball is very stable with even minimal rotation, and the minimal rotation means you can put a hell of a lot of powder behind it without worrying about stripping through the rifling. I'll also agree you need to go bigger diameter if you're shooting round ball, but big balls perform better at reasonable black powder range on game, and are less effected by wind.
My last rant on factory guns is I don't have to chase down factory made, expensive components from limited outlets. Powder being one exception, but even there, 2F or 3F powder, or even pyrodex powder is generally available. Patching I can buy by the yard at any fabric store for a very reasonable price. The powder pellets I've looked at pretty hard, they look very convenient, and I suppose you could find a pet load for a gun by adding a small amount of loose powder. But with premeasured loads I can reload my gun very fast.
I've probably gone on too long on this already. Shoot what you want, I do. I just don't see much advantage in the zip guns, and I think they're ugly.
Richard Feustel
New member
I've been shooting a Omega for 2 years now nad love it.Ishoot .50 cal powerbels in 295 gr.backed up with 130 gr of triple 7.I have no trouble loading,but I clean after every 3 shots.I can shoot mickey mouses at 100 yards,but it took a year at the range to find the right powder and bullets.Enjoy the gun it's great!!
Scott Farris
Well-known member
Ugly? Heck yes! If buying to hang over the mantle I want a birdseye flintlock. I think side-lock percussion leaves a lot to be desired cosmetically. And I believe flintlocks are the primitive arm that a hunter can truly brag about taking game with it. Dealing with weather, keeping the flint in good condition, dealing with the lock time, developing the right load, etc, can all be handled, but it takes commitment like archery does. The ugly inline gets stuffed with a few store bought ingredients and it's ready, reliable and is basically a one shot 44 or 45 cal carbine. Scope mounts are pretty standard for old eyes and ignition with shotgun primers should be as quick and reliable as we are used to out of a center-fire rifle. I think it was a TV add for Knight where a man rises up out of a calm pond and takes the shot. Total submersion and the muzzle loader still shoots.
I believe most of my friends who hunted much with side-lock percussion rifles generally have stories of misfires on game. Can they be avoided? Sure, with meticulous care but I believe everyone had their own "best" way to insure a clear flash hole before loading up for the hunt. With the Omega, simply open the action, point the barrel at a light, and look up the flash hole from the breach. You will be able to see any potential problems. Think of the high tech in-lines as muzzle-loading for dummies. They are great for those of us who simply want to extend the season without the commitment required by the true primitive arms. Nasty? Maybe but the venison tastes great and the deer population continues to grow even with our very liberal limits here in CT.
To keep practice costs down I shoot loose pyrodex, sabots bought by the 100, and swaged SWC left over from my pistol shooting days. Not as inexpensive as round ball and pillow ticking but it doesn't break the bank either. I do have molds for a 50 cal Maxie ball and a number of 44 cal and 45 cal pistol bullets if I get the urge to cast.
You commented on bullet weights, as noted earlier Phil was shooting a .45 cal (my assumption), 250 gr and I shoot .44 cal 240 gr. bullets. Hornady lists their .50 Cal (.490"), Lead Round Ball at 178 Grains which calculates into a 0.07 ballistic coefficient. Muzzle velocities for the pistol bullets can be pushed to 2200 & 2250 ft/sec based on T/C Omega manuals. The closest comparison I could come up with quickly was the Remington 444 rd with it's 240 gr bullet at 2350 ft/sec with a ballistic Coefficient of 0.146. From the Remington site:
View attachment cartridge.jpg
Compare to a round ball program with the .490 ball taking off at 2000 ft/sec
View attachment RBall.jpg
Note: the round ball energy drop off 1575 ft-lbs at muzzle, 760 ft-lbs at 50 yards and only 435 ft-lbs at 100 yards.
With the pistol bullet using 1600 ft/sec (conservative 200 ft/sec less than table) energy at 100 yards is 1365 ft-lbs.
Heavier, better ballistic coefficient bullets are available to push the capability of the Omega even further. The 240 gr pistol bullets are simply a nice 125 yard choice at a relatively low cost with no special tuning required.
But no doubt, fancy muzzle loaders are way prettier!!!
Scott
I believe most of my friends who hunted much with side-lock percussion rifles generally have stories of misfires on game. Can they be avoided? Sure, with meticulous care but I believe everyone had their own "best" way to insure a clear flash hole before loading up for the hunt. With the Omega, simply open the action, point the barrel at a light, and look up the flash hole from the breach. You will be able to see any potential problems. Think of the high tech in-lines as muzzle-loading for dummies. They are great for those of us who simply want to extend the season without the commitment required by the true primitive arms. Nasty? Maybe but the venison tastes great and the deer population continues to grow even with our very liberal limits here in CT.
To keep practice costs down I shoot loose pyrodex, sabots bought by the 100, and swaged SWC left over from my pistol shooting days. Not as inexpensive as round ball and pillow ticking but it doesn't break the bank either. I do have molds for a 50 cal Maxie ball and a number of 44 cal and 45 cal pistol bullets if I get the urge to cast.
You commented on bullet weights, as noted earlier Phil was shooting a .45 cal (my assumption), 250 gr and I shoot .44 cal 240 gr. bullets. Hornady lists their .50 Cal (.490"), Lead Round Ball at 178 Grains which calculates into a 0.07 ballistic coefficient. Muzzle velocities for the pistol bullets can be pushed to 2200 & 2250 ft/sec based on T/C Omega manuals. The closest comparison I could come up with quickly was the Remington 444 rd with it's 240 gr bullet at 2350 ft/sec with a ballistic Coefficient of 0.146. From the Remington site:
View attachment cartridge.jpg
Compare to a round ball program with the .490 ball taking off at 2000 ft/sec
View attachment RBall.jpg
Note: the round ball energy drop off 1575 ft-lbs at muzzle, 760 ft-lbs at 50 yards and only 435 ft-lbs at 100 yards.
With the pistol bullet using 1600 ft/sec (conservative 200 ft/sec less than table) energy at 100 yards is 1365 ft-lbs.
Heavier, better ballistic coefficient bullets are available to push the capability of the Omega even further. The 240 gr pistol bullets are simply a nice 125 yard choice at a relatively low cost with no special tuning required.
But no doubt, fancy muzzle loaders are way prettier!!!
Scott
Last edited:
Matt Moore
Active member
Scott, I consider myself appropriatly flamed. It does sound like you're very familliar with your rifle, and that's good. I think too many that buy zip guns don't shoot enough to know what they really do. I shoot a double barrel .54, cap lock for hunting. I've replaced the standard nipples with musket size, although I didn't have any problems with #11 caps. The big caps handle easier. I've never had a misfire with a side lock with proper preload prep, but the inline should be more reliable.
I like wood stocks because I can make the gun to fit me easily. On all my homemade guns the sites are lined up as soon as the gun hits my shoulder, just like a shotgun. Any factory guns require building up with bondo, or some equally ugly solution. I like the idea of plastic stocks for a hunting gun, especially since I live where we get 80 inches of rain a year, but any I've tried the comb is too low for me, and sometimes too thick. I've had 3 factory guns that fit me off the shelf (wood stocks), all others needed fitting. Maybe I'm fussy about this, but most of my shooting I don't have alot of time to take the shot, and plastic is ugly.
I wasn't aware of the bullet weights you talked about, it sounds like they're reasonable. I've shot one deer with a .45, and it died within 20 feet, but I hit it in boiler room from 20 yards away, but I've gone to bigger bore since. All the big game I've killed has been inside of 50 yards, the woods I hunt this is common. If I lived somewhere where longer shots prevailed, I might look at conical bullets, but I still think I'd just go with a bigger bore. Round balls start out punching a larger hole than a similar weight conical, and get even bigger from there, I still think they're the best bullet to shoot out of a muzzleoader. I did try some minis in my double rifle, but the acurate load was very slow, not suprising though in a slow twist barrel, not a fair test for the bullet, but just seeing what it'd do in my gun.
Some time in the future I plan on rifling the chokes on a 16ga double, put in breach plugs, and build an elk rifle. And yes, I'll be shooting round balls out of it, and it'll fit like a shotgun.
Last of all, I didn't call them nasty, but they are ugly. I don't like AR15s for the same reason, even if they are well made. It sounds like you're happy with yours, and you're familiar with it, that's what counts. As I said before shoot what you want, I do. I do build wall hangers, but I'll hunt with them too, and yeah I baby them more than I would if it was ugly.
I like wood stocks because I can make the gun to fit me easily. On all my homemade guns the sites are lined up as soon as the gun hits my shoulder, just like a shotgun. Any factory guns require building up with bondo, or some equally ugly solution. I like the idea of plastic stocks for a hunting gun, especially since I live where we get 80 inches of rain a year, but any I've tried the comb is too low for me, and sometimes too thick. I've had 3 factory guns that fit me off the shelf (wood stocks), all others needed fitting. Maybe I'm fussy about this, but most of my shooting I don't have alot of time to take the shot, and plastic is ugly.
I wasn't aware of the bullet weights you talked about, it sounds like they're reasonable. I've shot one deer with a .45, and it died within 20 feet, but I hit it in boiler room from 20 yards away, but I've gone to bigger bore since. All the big game I've killed has been inside of 50 yards, the woods I hunt this is common. If I lived somewhere where longer shots prevailed, I might look at conical bullets, but I still think I'd just go with a bigger bore. Round balls start out punching a larger hole than a similar weight conical, and get even bigger from there, I still think they're the best bullet to shoot out of a muzzleoader. I did try some minis in my double rifle, but the acurate load was very slow, not suprising though in a slow twist barrel, not a fair test for the bullet, but just seeing what it'd do in my gun.
Some time in the future I plan on rifling the chokes on a 16ga double, put in breach plugs, and build an elk rifle. And yes, I'll be shooting round balls out of it, and it'll fit like a shotgun.
Last of all, I didn't call them nasty, but they are ugly. I don't like AR15s for the same reason, even if they are well made. It sounds like you're happy with yours, and you're familiar with it, that's what counts. As I said before shoot what you want, I do. I do build wall hangers, but I'll hunt with them too, and yeah I baby them more than I would if it was ugly.
Scott Farris
Well-known member
Matt,
I apologize for making you feel flamed, I'm just an engineer talking tools and ballistics with I hoped would come across as a bit of humor. You very much sound like you are doing it "right", and I know round balls work. Getting the right combination powder, ball dia. and patch thickness takes work which is part of doing it right. I admire archers, and real "primitive arms" hunters. My personal priorities just don't line up to become one. I did put my time in shooting large bore competition both National Match and 4 position slow fire, and the "Zip" gun allows me to take advantage of my shooting skills and participate in muzzle loading season if my freezer isn't full.
I'm pleased to read your emphasis on gun fit as I too feel it's of great importance. All my hunting guns must mount with my eyes closed and when I open my eyes the sites better be on target. My 870 slug gun has the comb from a M1 Garand fitted to it, to raise my eye to the scope. The stock is painted camo making that gun pretty ugly too :^) Sure works well though.
Respectfully,
Scott
I apologize for making you feel flamed, I'm just an engineer talking tools and ballistics with I hoped would come across as a bit of humor. You very much sound like you are doing it "right", and I know round balls work. Getting the right combination powder, ball dia. and patch thickness takes work which is part of doing it right. I admire archers, and real "primitive arms" hunters. My personal priorities just don't line up to become one. I did put my time in shooting large bore competition both National Match and 4 position slow fire, and the "Zip" gun allows me to take advantage of my shooting skills and participate in muzzle loading season if my freezer isn't full.
I'm pleased to read your emphasis on gun fit as I too feel it's of great importance. All my hunting guns must mount with my eyes closed and when I open my eyes the sites better be on target. My 870 slug gun has the comb from a M1 Garand fitted to it, to raise my eye to the scope. The stock is painted camo making that gun pretty ugly too :^) Sure works well though.
Respectfully,
Scott
Last edited:
Matt Moore
Active member
I'm not offended Scott, and I hope I didn't sound like I was. The flaming comment was with togue in cheek. Printed comments always seem more advisarial than two guys talking.
I just feel that advertizing for modern muzzleloaders has brainwashed many beginers into thinking they're shooting something slightly less than there 30-06. One of the many reasons I like round balls is there's so much less to go wrong, especially at usual hunting ranges, and people shooting ball guns seem to make the mental connection this gun won't perform the same as a centerfire.
I used to shoot a muzzleloading target rifle, called a slug gun. If your not familiar with them, they're a bench gun weighing 30-50 pounds. Mine is 50# .45 that shoots a 500gr. conical, that's swaged from 2 pieces, a soft lead base, and a hard lead point. It'd take all day to shoot a 30 round match, and it was very frustrating. The number of things you could do wrong, from bullet swaging, loading and cleaning proceedure, wind doping, etc. etc.... Nobody shoots slug guns where I live now, or I'd probably still be doing it. I wouldn't recommend slug guns to beginers though, unless they're very stubborn.
We've gotten way off the original thread, but it's been interesting.
I just feel that advertizing for modern muzzleloaders has brainwashed many beginers into thinking they're shooting something slightly less than there 30-06. One of the many reasons I like round balls is there's so much less to go wrong, especially at usual hunting ranges, and people shooting ball guns seem to make the mental connection this gun won't perform the same as a centerfire.
I used to shoot a muzzleloading target rifle, called a slug gun. If your not familiar with them, they're a bench gun weighing 30-50 pounds. Mine is 50# .45 that shoots a 500gr. conical, that's swaged from 2 pieces, a soft lead base, and a hard lead point. It'd take all day to shoot a 30 round match, and it was very frustrating. The number of things you could do wrong, from bullet swaging, loading and cleaning proceedure, wind doping, etc. etc.... Nobody shoots slug guns where I live now, or I'd probably still be doing it. I wouldn't recommend slug guns to beginers though, unless they're very stubborn.
We've gotten way off the original thread, but it's been interesting.