45 caliber opinions

[Homesteader]

Seems to me this topic would lead to one wondering how any deer was ever taken by a bow & arrow.

Much like with real estate and kisses: location, location, location. (Placement, placement, placement.)

 

[roundball]

"...would lead to one wondering how any deer was ever taken by a bow & arrow..."

Not at 100 yards... :wink:

 

[Homesteader]

Granted...
:surrender:

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

They make flintlock bows now? :rotf:

The principal is different between the effect of the ball and the arrow, and the range is less with the bow. But to my mind, the same set of hunting skills apply, and the man with the bow isn't necessarily at a big disadvantage. Both hunters deserve each other's respect. Especially when the bow is a self bow... :v

 

[hanshi]

My opinion of the .45 prb on deer is, of course, based on it's successful use over the years. But some other considerations should be acknowledged. Specifically deer that I've taken with .357, .41 & .44 mag revolvers. One deer was taken at 90 yards and all taken with one shot. The energy of all three - particularly the .357 mag - pale in comparison to a .45 prb. Even a pistol bullet holds up better at long range that a prb but both are at their best at close to medium range.

Would I take a shot at a deer at 100 yards with a .45 prb? Probably, if conditions were ideal. My limitation now is my ability to shoot with open sights. My average shot is likely in the 30 - 40 yard range due to the fact I mostly woods hunt. I'm also willing to pass up any shot I'm not confident taking.

I've taken more deer with .50s than any other size prb but for the past few years have preferred the .45. I admit it has something to do with my favorite rifle being .45. If it was a .54 I'd probably be singing the praises of the .54, maybe. If I were basing my preference on just a couple of deer I wouldn't be willing to recommend a .45. But after quite a number of deer I do feel comfortable recommending it. Is the .50 "better"? More powerful, true, but a flattened deer is a flattened deer.

I am in no way criticizing other preferences. I just still think the real problem is marksmanship not raw power. I will be using a .62 smoothie for my deer hunting fairly soon but won't necessarily be retiring the .45, just maybe "resting" it. :surrender: :surrender:

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

I think we all have to agree that placement is the critical component here. And as Hanshi says, his choice is partly based on his favorite rifle being a .45. No doubt for a lot of reasons--accuracy, fit, it's style and most importantly--because he has taken a lot of deer with it.

This got me thinking about ALL my guns and which one is my favorite and why. And the one I keep pulling out of the safe lately is a very plain, very skinny poorboy style rifle. It has a 43" Douglas barrel and one of those little Maslin locks that Russ Hamm used to make--the one CVA copied and used on a lot of their Spanish made guns. Good little sparker. Almost 40 years old, but still in good shape and weighs around seven pounds. And before I forget, it's a .45 caliber. A tight one as it seems to prefer a .435 ball and a .015 linen patch. 70 grains of FFFg and it shoots to its sights at 100 yards. Maybe I'll try it on deer this year...

 

[Dphar]

I can tell you about 45-70 penetration. At 1000 yards a 525 grain grease groove lead bullet will go THROUGH a 6 inch pine tree. I have seen this many times when sitting in the pits at long range matches held at camp grayling michigan. The bullets impact in a pine forest. The energy that those bullets have after traveling that far is downright scary! paul

This is true, the 45-70-500 will penetrate several inches of wood at terminal distance of 2900+- yards. However, once past the point blank range, which is pretty short for the above load, unless you have a range finder and a book full of sight settings its not much use for hunting even though it will likely shoot through a buffalo at 400-500 yards.
The RB provides a flat trajectory and *adequate* penetration to 120-140 yards so long as its sized for the game being hunted. Thus the penetration of the conical/bullet is not a valid measure of its *usefulness*. In fact the heavy RN bullet in 45-70 driven by BP is a pretty poor killer of game a 400 is better.
If we use the 500+ GR RN at 100 yards a 45 RB will likely provide about as good a stopping power on deer maybe even better. A RB of equal weight will kill/stop BETTER than the heavy 45 bullet at BP velocities. The large capacity 45 caliber BP rifles did not exceed the killing/stopping power of a 16-12 bore ML until the advent of HV smokeless powder loadings. Then they would exceed 4 bore on heavy game.
The trajectory of the 45-70 will not equal a round ball at the velocities the 45-70 will obtain with typical bullet weights & BP until past normal hunting ranges for open sighted BP firearms.

So the heavy elongated bullet was largely relegated to military and target use aside from the American Bison hunters. The heavy game (Africa and India) rifles in cartridge were often 12 to 4 bore and shot round balls or very short bullets.

For most hunting situations *in our context* the RB is actually pretty darned good.
It provides adequate penetration, flat trajectory, moderate recoil, good accuracy and low breech pressure. Whats not to like?

And yes I have hunted extensively with BPCRs in 40-44-45 and 50 caliber.
No, I have never hunted with a bulleted ML.

Dan

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

I have hunted with bullets--not sabots--in muzzleloaders and the broad meplat bullets are pretty effective in .45 and .50 caliber and almost as good as the cartridge versions. Wouldn't give a penny for a ton of round nose bullets in these calibers for hunting.

But in truth, I don't really see a need for them in most hunting situations. Recoil goes up as does trajectory, and the old patched ball does just fine. And a bullet out of my flintlocks just seems wrong anyhow. The flatter shooting ball has gotten the job done splendidly for hundreds of years and still does the job for me. Dan

 

[Frank/Pa]

I see these discussions all the time, and modern ballistics listing velocity, muzzle energy, penetration do not apply when shooting lead roundball.

 

[hanshi]

As an aside but still pertaining to the subject, my all-time favorite deer cartridge is the .250 Sav. (250/3000). I have taken (in the past) many scores of deer with this tiny but wonderful round. I've only taken several with my 45/70 (400 grn at 1800fps) but enough to make a comparison that lends itself to the prb discussion. The little .250 drops deer DRT! Never had that happen with my hot-loaded 45/70. The reason; you don't need that much penetration on a deer. My 45/70 would be perfect for elk, moose, grizzly, etc. The .250 wouldn't do as well though on deer it is much superior. Same with .45 prb. It penetrates well and hits hard enough to have the qualities of the .250, relatively speaking, as a deer dropper.

 

[tg]

" And a bullet out of my flintlocks just seems wrong anyhow."

Now that cannot be, there were minnie balls in the Civil War and pointy arrows (long projectiles)were shot from early ML guns,and peep sights were on crossbows during the Crusades. most anything one uses in or on a flintlock has to be "proper" :shake: