Hierophant
32 Cal.
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2013
- Messages
- 30
- Reaction score
- 0
Toomuch said:
I'm new to muzzleloader hunting, but it sounds similar to the current fad in the centerfire world. "You're going to use the .270? Be better off with a .300 mag..."
-
Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.
We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.
Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103
.45 or .50
- Thread starter Buckskin Jake
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
I'm new to muzzleloader hunting, but it sounds similar to the current fad in the centerfire world. "You're going to use the .270? Be better off with a .300 mag..."
kopfjaeger
40 Cal.
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2012
- Messages
- 369
- Reaction score
- 4
Hunting deer and bear I say go with the .50 caliber. :2
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2005
- Messages
- 439
- Reaction score
- 46
I agree also. A .45 is an absolute minimum. It will do the job but bigger is better. Muzzleloaders are not like modern firearms. When you want to increase killing efficiency, you increase the size of the projectile; you don't "magnumize" the velocity.58 caliber said:
Alden said:
UHhhhh.... Well....yes, no, sorta, kinda. :wink:
I have a TC 'not really a hawken-hawken'. But it has a Douglas barrel and Redfield Olympic peeper sights. Never used for hunting. My deer were taken with my flint longrifle.
hanshi
Cannon
Don't fall for the "magnumitis" trend. I've killed oodles (a scientific term) of deer with two different .45s; and the most DRTs were from the .45s. I've also taken lots of deer with various .50s and see no difference. Also don't fall for the "a .45 will get her done" either. A .45 will plaster a deer like wallpaper on a church wall! I like .54s a lot but a .45 is simply great. If you just want to make sure then get a .50. It will be all the gun you'll ever need - actually a .45 will too. :stir:
No.WillametteT said:
The larger diameter will cause more damage because it pokes a larger hole.
With muzzleloaders (IMO) the size of the wound channel is as important if not more important than velocity or energy.
With both roundballs and slugs the larger caliber will also lose less velocity as it travels downrange because of its increased mass.
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2005
- Messages
- 439
- Reaction score
- 46
No.
nchawkeye
58 Cal.
[/quote]
I'm new to muzzleloader hunting, but it sounds similar to the current fad in the centerfire world. "You're going to use the .270? Be better off with a .300 mag..."
[/quote]
I'm not new to muzzleloading, started in 1975...Hunted with a .45 from then until 1990...Killed plenty of deer with it...I was thinking of moving up to a .50 when I had a run in with a black bear...A big black bear, at 30 yards...At that moment, I decided on a .54...Took me 2 years to build her and I can tell you right now a .54 drops them quicker and puts more trailing blood on the ground...
With the swamps and cutovers we have in NC putting them on the ground quicker is better...We don't normally get tracking snow...It's no fun to track a deer on your hands and knees in the dark with some of the critters that we have in the woods...
As far as balls, I haven't bought a store bought ball since the 70s...I can't imagine a fellow shooting flintlocks and not wanting a mold to make his own balls, it adds to the experience...
I rebarreled the .45 to a .40 and use it for squirrels...
It's not bigger is better, my centerfire deer rifle is a .243, been using that one since 1980...
It is what works from someone who has been there...
I'm new to muzzleloader hunting, but it sounds similar to the current fad in the centerfire world. "You're going to use the .270? Be better off with a .300 mag..."
[/quote]
I'm not new to muzzleloading, started in 1975...Hunted with a .45 from then until 1990...Killed plenty of deer with it...I was thinking of moving up to a .50 when I had a run in with a black bear...A big black bear, at 30 yards...At that moment, I decided on a .54...Took me 2 years to build her and I can tell you right now a .54 drops them quicker and puts more trailing blood on the ground...
With the swamps and cutovers we have in NC putting them on the ground quicker is better...We don't normally get tracking snow...It's no fun to track a deer on your hands and knees in the dark with some of the critters that we have in the woods...
As far as balls, I haven't bought a store bought ball since the 70s...I can't imagine a fellow shooting flintlocks and not wanting a mold to make his own balls, it adds to the experience...
I rebarreled the .45 to a .40 and use it for squirrels...
It's not bigger is better, my centerfire deer rifle is a .243, been using that one since 1980...
It is what works from someone who has been there...
"Magnumitis" in a blackpowder rifle?
I like .54 but loaded moderately at 85 grains FFFg or FFg depending on the rifle.
Remember also - whitetail vary considerablly throughout the U.S. regarding body mass. A good NY/PA whitetail buck dresses out over 200 lbs.
I wouldn't hesitate with a .50 - have killed several good bucks with mine - but I prefer the .54. It carries 27% more ball mass than a .50 and 65% more than a .45! Not inconsiderable.
I'd use a .45 if I had to but would not specifically pick one as a deer rifle.
I like .54 but loaded moderately at 85 grains FFFg or FFg depending on the rifle.
Remember also - whitetail vary considerablly throughout the U.S. regarding body mass. A good NY/PA whitetail buck dresses out over 200 lbs.
I wouldn't hesitate with a .50 - have killed several good bucks with mine - but I prefer the .54. It carries 27% more ball mass than a .50 and 65% more than a .45! Not inconsiderable.
I'd use a .45 if I had to but would not specifically pick one as a deer rifle.
nchawkeye
58 Cal.
You're not going to be pushing one much more than the other...Black powder simply doesn't have that much power...
When I used a .45 for deer, my favorite load was 75grs FFF...I use 80grs FFF in my .54 and she smacks them harder, breaks bones better and they leave more blood on the ground...They go down quicker...
A .45 is fine, a .54 is simply better...
When I used a .45 for deer, my favorite load was 75grs FFF...I use 80grs FFF in my .54 and she smacks them harder, breaks bones better and they leave more blood on the ground...They go down quicker...
A .45 is fine, a .54 is simply better...
galamb
58 Cal.
Some of your choice may be restricted by what rifle you are choosing.
Nowadays it's fairly tough to find an entry level gun "off the shelf" in anything but 50 or 54 cal.
I live/hunt in Eastern Ontario. Our deer are certainly as big as upstate NY, Penn etc and I have taken many with a 40 cal.
My 50 cal also comes into the woods with me depending on which rifle I want to carry.
Depending on "how you hunt" a 45 is MORE than you ever need to take down a deer. I have never lost a deer shot with my 40 BUT I wouldn't shoot further than 75 yards, never at a running deer and never anything but a broadside or quartering away shot.
In all the years I have hunted, the longest shot I have had to take is 27 yards. At that distance, a 32 right through the heart/lungs would have dropped them (as evidenced by numerous deer taken down with 00 buckshot).
So NO you don't need anything larger than a 45 unless you are trying to (never will happen) mimic the performance of a center fire rifle.
If you practice and find the correct load combo so that you can get a consistent "tight" group and "shoot smart", just about any legal caliber is more than you need.
You hear alot about kinetic energy, foot pounds required to take down a deer etc.
I am also a bow hunter and my 58" recurve bow makes a "whopping" 37 lbs of energy at 25 yards and that has taken down bambi many times - I guess the deer don't know that the experts say that is about 20 times below the KE required to kill a deer...
Nowadays it's fairly tough to find an entry level gun "off the shelf" in anything but 50 or 54 cal.
I live/hunt in Eastern Ontario. Our deer are certainly as big as upstate NY, Penn etc and I have taken many with a 40 cal.
My 50 cal also comes into the woods with me depending on which rifle I want to carry.
Depending on "how you hunt" a 45 is MORE than you ever need to take down a deer. I have never lost a deer shot with my 40 BUT I wouldn't shoot further than 75 yards, never at a running deer and never anything but a broadside or quartering away shot.
In all the years I have hunted, the longest shot I have had to take is 27 yards. At that distance, a 32 right through the heart/lungs would have dropped them (as evidenced by numerous deer taken down with 00 buckshot).
So NO you don't need anything larger than a 45 unless you are trying to (never will happen) mimic the performance of a center fire rifle.
If you practice and find the correct load combo so that you can get a consistent "tight" group and "shoot smart", just about any legal caliber is more than you need.
You hear alot about kinetic energy, foot pounds required to take down a deer etc.
I am also a bow hunter and my 58" recurve bow makes a "whopping" 37 lbs of energy at 25 yards and that has taken down bambi many times - I guess the deer don't know that the experts say that is about 20 times below the KE required to kill a deer...
I hope you're not using a round-nosed blunt on your arrows. A bow kills by hemmorage and lung collapse from the sharp and cutting point severing blood vessels. No comparison to a round lead ball.
I can poke you with my fingertip or a sharp hunting knife wth the same force - your choice.
Gotta go with Stumpkiller. I've noticed that black powder hunting is on about the same level with handgun hunting. Knockdown seems to be in a similar level, as regards effect and results. One of the earliest hunting buddies I ever had in muzzleloading made a similar remark and told me if the deer ran, he sat still and rolled a smoke, waiting a while before he started trailing. His take was that if you didn't push them that they would soon 'sicken' and lay down. For whatever reason, I've found it to be true. As stated, arrows work on hemorrhage from cut blood vessels or collapsed lungs or both.
galamb
58 Cal.
I agree with what you are saying - yes, my broadheads kill by ultimately causing the deer to bleed out and if it's a heart or lung shot (or both) that occurs quickly.
But thousands of deer have been killed with buckshot - yes, probably at somewhat less than 50 yards, but the velocity and retained energy of those 30'ish caliber "round balls" are significantly less than even a 40 caliber round ball.
It's simply a matter of using the caliber within it's limitations.
For a bow hunter who is used to a 30 yard "field of fire", even a 40 cal which is more than effective at 60 (with similar shot placement) doubles their killing range.
For a shooter that has always shot center fire even a 54 cal is going to seem like a severe handicap and if they try and take the long shot or their shot placement is poor it will still result in lost game.
That's what makes questions like "what caliber" so difficult to answer. Unless you know the mind of the person asking the question - what's their motivation and what their style of hunting is, there is no right answer.
Will a 40 cal take down a deer - yes, without issue if you put the ball through the vitals and the range is not excessive. I've shot a half dozen and the ball has gone completely through and the longest recovery was about 100 yards.
Will you recover a deer hit with a 54 if you hit it high without severing the spine - maybe/probably not.
But thousands of deer have been killed with buckshot - yes, probably at somewhat less than 50 yards, but the velocity and retained energy of those 30'ish caliber "round balls" are significantly less than even a 40 caliber round ball.
It's simply a matter of using the caliber within it's limitations.
For a bow hunter who is used to a 30 yard "field of fire", even a 40 cal which is more than effective at 60 (with similar shot placement) doubles their killing range.
For a shooter that has always shot center fire even a 54 cal is going to seem like a severe handicap and if they try and take the long shot or their shot placement is poor it will still result in lost game.
That's what makes questions like "what caliber" so difficult to answer. Unless you know the mind of the person asking the question - what's their motivation and what their style of hunting is, there is no right answer.
Will a 40 cal take down a deer - yes, without issue if you put the ball through the vitals and the range is not excessive. I've shot a half dozen and the ball has gone completely through and the longest recovery was about 100 yards.
Will you recover a deer hit with a 54 if you hit it high without severing the spine - maybe/probably not.
nchawkeye
58 Cal.
In theory you are right, with everything perfect, it works...I've killed plenty of deer with buckshot as down here in the South we run deer with dogs so buckshot has a long tradition...I've killed them with a .22 rimfire, a 22-250, started hunting with a recurve in the 60s...
They work when everything happens perfectly...But, when the rut is in and bucks are moving and jacked up, I prefer a little more...
Tracking is another challenge down here...I notice you are in Canada, blood shows up good in snow, not so good in swamps...
As I mentioned, what swayed me were when black bears got more common here in NC...
They work when everything happens perfectly...But, when the rut is in and bucks are moving and jacked up, I prefer a little more...
Tracking is another challenge down here...I notice you are in Canada, blood shows up good in snow, not so good in swamps...
As I mentioned, what swayed me were when black bears got more common here in NC...
Agree...or trying to track a blood trail on the red & orange colored leaves of fall.nchawkeye said:
These threads come up every year and understandably, people typically advocate that the caliber they have experience with is best or take the position that "all one needs is"...but as you correctly pointed out the "all one needs" position usually mandates perfect, close, conditions which don't always occur when deer hunting.
Taking deer over the years, experimenting with the various calibers (.40/.45/.50/.54/.58/.62), my first was a .45 and thought it was the best thing since sliced bread...until I began to use and see first hand the better capabilities from larger calibers regardless of hunting conditions encountered, and the .58cal stood out above all the rest for me...as a result my .58cal Early Virginia became my all around preferred "deer rifle" based on those actual field results / performance...hands down a power house if there ever was one and the outcome is never in question, regardless of the angle, or needing them to be close, etc.
I also think there is wisdom in the old saying:
"better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it"
Considering the general realm of deer hunting conditions (possibly misjudged distances, angles, big bones, slight animal movement at the last second just as the sear trips, etc) that we encounter while deer hunting...plus, in the Pennsylvania woods where shots might possibly be on the long-ish side, IMO at least a .54cal, or worst case a .50cal, would be a far better choice than the little .45cal.
Just on guys experience...
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2013
- Messages
- 23
- Reaction score
- 0
I have been looking on line and I think after Xmas I am taking a trip to Cabelas. They got Pedersoli in the Kuntucky and Blue Ridge. They both come in .45 and .50 in 1 in 48 and a .54 in a 1 in 66 wood one of these be a good one to start with. Thanks Jake
SgtSchutzen
45 Cal.
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2008
- Messages
- 626
- Reaction score
- 6
I don`t have any experience with a Pedersoli rifle but whatever gun you buy just make sure you actually pick it up and handle it befor you spend your money. In my opinion having a gun that feels good in your hands and handles and points well is more important in deer hunting than if it`s a .45 or .50 caliber.
I have three different deer caliber rifles, two are 45`s and one a .50cal. Never noticed any difference in "killability" between the two bore sizes. A deer hit in the right spot is dead, hit in a not so right spot and you`ll end up looking for it. Pick a gun you like and can shoot well. Most of my muzzleloader deer have been shot with a .45cal because the rifle I like best happens to be one of my .45`s. If however I were picking between two rifles that handled and shot the same and one were a .45 and the other a .50cal I`d pick the 50 because there`s never anything wrong with throwing a little more lead at a deer.
I have three different deer caliber rifles, two are 45`s and one a .50cal. Never noticed any difference in "killability" between the two bore sizes. A deer hit in the right spot is dead, hit in a not so right spot and you`ll end up looking for it. Pick a gun you like and can shoot well. Most of my muzzleloader deer have been shot with a .45cal because the rifle I like best happens to be one of my .45`s. If however I were picking between two rifles that handled and shot the same and one were a .45 and the other a .50cal I`d pick the 50 because there`s never anything wrong with throwing a little more lead at a deer.
