I have a CVA 50cal mountian rifle and was looking at using something harder then pure lead balls. Does anyone know if some one preduces a harder ball? Just getting started and don't have tools to cast my own ammo. Might be using on moose and could use the penetration.
-
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
50cal Hard cast balls?
- Thread starter Sjfriend
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
Black Hand
Cannon
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2005
- Messages
- 9,348
- Reaction score
- 896
I think you're barking up the wrong tree.
A pure lead roundball will do all the damage you need. Shot placement is far more important as all the vital organs (lungs, heart and liver) are 1-2 inches below the surface and damage to these will put down anything...
A pure lead roundball will do all the damage you need. Shot placement is far more important as all the vital organs (lungs, heart and liver) are 1-2 inches below the surface and damage to these will put down anything...
I agree with Black Hand. You want the ball soft enough so the rifling will engrave it and impart spin. I don't know of a harder-than-lead substitute. Lead has been doing the job since rifles were invented.
Some people do like and use harder Lead RBs for better penetration.
Black Hand
Cannon
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2005
- Messages
- 9,348
- Reaction score
- 896
But why, if it isn't necessary?
One also takes the chance of the harder ball not engaging the rifling, thereby losing efficacy. The reasons for using a soft lead ball are expansion and the hydrostatic shock it causes...
One also takes the chance of the harder ball not engaging the rifling, thereby losing efficacy. The reasons for using a soft lead ball are expansion and the hydrostatic shock it causes...
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2013
- Messages
- 20,091
- Reaction score
- 1,023
Ball hardness is really irrelevant when talking penetration....Energy is what is important.. Energy is the relationship between mass and velocity. The lower velocity of a muzzleloader can't take advantage of a hard ball.. A soft ball will expand, creating a bigger wound channel and transferring more energy to the body.
Mass and velocity are the 2nd most important factors...Shot placement is #1
Mass and velocity are the 2nd most important factors...Shot placement is #1
:metoo:shotgunner87 said:
You may have to adjust what patch you use for a harder ball. Harder RBs can b just as accurate as soft. When casting they usually come out .001/2 larger because of the alloys.
You guy's need to read the section Patching the Round ball here: http://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/Shooting_TC_Guns.pdfBearkiller said:
Last edited by a moderator:
Black Hand
Cannon
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2005
- Messages
- 9,348
- Reaction score
- 896
The ball engages the patching and the patching engages the rifling. There needs to be a tight fit which pushes the patching into the lead (I can clearly see an imprint of my patch weave in the balls I've recovered). The patch makes a gas seal and prevents leading of the rifling but the the ball still plays an essential role. If you believe there is no deformation of the ball at the rifling (even with patching), I'm afraid you may be mistaken...shotgunner87 said:
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2004
- Messages
- 14,767
- Reaction score
- 319
Black Hand said:
It's necessary if you're casting your own and pure lead is expensive or in short supply. It's pretty common as a matter of fact among moose shooters too for added penetration.
We have a local indoor pistol range with high tech backstops for lead, and they accumulate a lot of it. Can't really sell the stuff on the scrap market any more than there are cheap sources of pure lead on our island, so I got lots of it from them absolutely free. I got literally a ton of the stuff for use in making heavy halibut weights and jigs. Naturally I was going to try it in my assorted black powder molds right along with all my molds for centerfire shooting.
It's "range run" in terms of hardness, what with the array of handguns people shoot including everything from 22 rimfire to hardcast bullets. I melt it in large batches to kinda "uniform" it, at least for that single batch. Works out to be about as hard as wheel weights most of the time.
And it works just fine in round balls, while not in conicals that have to be stuffed down the muzzle. Just as accurate as pure lead and kills game just as well. Only difference with round balls is I generally have to use slightly thinner patches or drop down a little in mold diameter- e.g., using a .490 mold rather than a .495.
Oh yeah, one other big difference. I got it for free rather than over $2/pound PLUS shipping.
Black Hand
Cannon
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2005
- Messages
- 9,348
- Reaction score
- 896
Yes, I understand.
But my question still stands - why do something if it isn't really necessary...? Pure lead roundballs will kill a Moose just fine.
But my question still stands - why do something if it isn't really necessary...? Pure lead roundballs will kill a Moose just fine.
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2013
- Messages
- 20,091
- Reaction score
- 1,023
Bottom line is, ....if the OP want's hard balls he's going to have to cast them himself....For what ITX balls cost he could buy casting equipment. All you need is a lee mold, a lyman dipper, and a garage sale cast iron pot. You can melt it over a campfire.
Folks there are a lot of misconceptions in the thread...,
Rifling & Patched Round Ball..., the patched round ball normally does not obdurate (squish into) the rifling on a muzzleloader.
Lead v. Alloy..., the traditional metal is all lead, and it deforms upon impact given sufficient velocity at impact. It is possible for an all lead ball to deform very little and still harvest an animal. Any deformation of the round ball enlarges the area which the ball damages as it travels within the animal. The deformation can also cause a deflection of the bullet path, causing it to have a longer than expected wound channel. However, when the ball deforms it increases its friction going through the target animal.
A harder, alloy ball will resist deformation, so create less damage by comparison to the all lead ball, if the two projectiles go equal distances through the same animal. BUT..., because the alloy ball often has a higher velocity due to being slightly lighter than the all lead ball, AND because it does not deform and increase its friction..., it has the potential to go deeper into the animal. On one side of the equation then, you have more damage but faster slowing, on the other you have a smaller hole BUT deeper penetration and you get a longer hole in the animal.
So consider two patched round balls. Say both are .490 round balls that hit a deer, and both hit the same rib. They have equal energy because the faster speed of the alloy ball (in this example) balances against the slightly higher mass of the all lead ball. The all-lead ball deforms upon hitting the bone, and like a sky-diver popping a parachute, it's friction increases and it slows down faster than the other ball, while the harder alloy ball punches a nice hole in the rib, and isn't deformed...,
But is this moot? So the first projectile, the all lead one, we'll say has enough velocity that although it deformed, and is slowing down at a faster rate than the alloy ball, it still has enough energy to completely pass through the animal...and the alloy ball also has enough energy to pass through the animal..., so the all lead ball damaged more tissue because it deformed, but the alloy ball did enough damage simply by it's size..., so that both caused the deer to drop in its tracks. Does the difference then matter? Did one ball make the deer "deader" ??? Are the results significant to the point that one must choose one type of ball over another?
:idunno:
Hydrostatic Shock and Terminal Ballistics...,the last time I checked ME's published papers for information on what bullets do upon impact with animals (game or people) hydrostatic shock which causes immediate incapacitation, consistently takes place when the bullet impacts at 2000 fps or more. At lower impact velocities of 1100 fps up to 2000 fps tissues may be effected, as shown in test animals. Meaning the animal was sometimes, severely impaired, and some of those impaired animals died, but the effects were not always present even though the test animals were hit in the same place by the same test round, AND..., when tissues (usually brain but sometimes other organs) were effected, the results were not always immediate.
So for the lab data, it looks like for our projectiles, go for the common lung damage and blood loss, or the less common nervous system hit like the brain or spine.
Unfortunately, the actual lab data has been done on animals far smaller than Moose (deer and dogs were used). Although a minor gathering of data was done on cape buffalo before 2006, it wasn't nearly as controlled as in a lab setting..., and even with heavy bullets at high velocities hit the same way, the cape buffalo didn't always drop. The ones that did were found to have brain damage although all were shot in the heart/lung area. The theory developed that in those cases where the cape buffalo dropped, the shooter was lucky to have hit the animal at the peak of a heartbeat, and the cardiovascular system of the animal was at full pressure, thus allowing the added pressure of the high velocity round to create brain damage.
Black powder projectiles in the vast majority of cases don't exit the muzzle at 2000 fps or faster, so they are not impacting at that speed. THUS..., without a "lucky hit" one should not depend on "hydrostatic shock", and should only depend on what damage is inflicted by contact with the projectile. The damage that is done 100% of the time is by the projectile itself acting upon the tissues of the target animal. IF you get a body hit that also gives you brain damage, that's a blessing...,
Which is probably why with black powder patched round ball shot placement is very important.
I personally think a .490 round ball is a bit light for moose, BUT I've never hunted moose with a patched round ball. So that's just my armchair quarterback idea. I've hunted moose with a 320 grain conical, though I did not get a shot. The guide when he saw my flintlock was very concerned, until he saw the conical bullet, and my powder load. That's anecdotal, and may not really apply, so again purely armchair quarterback. On the other hand I've read where a fellow dropped a moose in its tracks with a heart/lung shot from a .44 magnum handgun..., while at the same time expecting the animal to leave the shallow pond where it was standing and after a few seconds to die upon dry land.
So it's up to you. I'd look at as heavy a powder load as gives you good accuracy, and that ball with which you are confident.
LD
Rifling & Patched Round Ball..., the patched round ball normally does not obdurate (squish into) the rifling on a muzzleloader.
Lead v. Alloy..., the traditional metal is all lead, and it deforms upon impact given sufficient velocity at impact. It is possible for an all lead ball to deform very little and still harvest an animal. Any deformation of the round ball enlarges the area which the ball damages as it travels within the animal. The deformation can also cause a deflection of the bullet path, causing it to have a longer than expected wound channel. However, when the ball deforms it increases its friction going through the target animal.
A harder, alloy ball will resist deformation, so create less damage by comparison to the all lead ball, if the two projectiles go equal distances through the same animal. BUT..., because the alloy ball often has a higher velocity due to being slightly lighter than the all lead ball, AND because it does not deform and increase its friction..., it has the potential to go deeper into the animal. On one side of the equation then, you have more damage but faster slowing, on the other you have a smaller hole BUT deeper penetration and you get a longer hole in the animal.
So consider two patched round balls. Say both are .490 round balls that hit a deer, and both hit the same rib. They have equal energy because the faster speed of the alloy ball (in this example) balances against the slightly higher mass of the all lead ball. The all-lead ball deforms upon hitting the bone, and like a sky-diver popping a parachute, it's friction increases and it slows down faster than the other ball, while the harder alloy ball punches a nice hole in the rib, and isn't deformed...,
But is this moot? So the first projectile, the all lead one, we'll say has enough velocity that although it deformed, and is slowing down at a faster rate than the alloy ball, it still has enough energy to completely pass through the animal...and the alloy ball also has enough energy to pass through the animal..., so the all lead ball damaged more tissue because it deformed, but the alloy ball did enough damage simply by it's size..., so that both caused the deer to drop in its tracks. Does the difference then matter? Did one ball make the deer "deader" ??? Are the results significant to the point that one must choose one type of ball over another?
:idunno:
Hydrostatic Shock and Terminal Ballistics...,the last time I checked ME's published papers for information on what bullets do upon impact with animals (game or people) hydrostatic shock which causes immediate incapacitation, consistently takes place when the bullet impacts at 2000 fps or more. At lower impact velocities of 1100 fps up to 2000 fps tissues may be effected, as shown in test animals. Meaning the animal was sometimes, severely impaired, and some of those impaired animals died, but the effects were not always present even though the test animals were hit in the same place by the same test round, AND..., when tissues (usually brain but sometimes other organs) were effected, the results were not always immediate.
So for the lab data, it looks like for our projectiles, go for the common lung damage and blood loss, or the less common nervous system hit like the brain or spine.
Unfortunately, the actual lab data has been done on animals far smaller than Moose (deer and dogs were used). Although a minor gathering of data was done on cape buffalo before 2006, it wasn't nearly as controlled as in a lab setting..., and even with heavy bullets at high velocities hit the same way, the cape buffalo didn't always drop. The ones that did were found to have brain damage although all were shot in the heart/lung area. The theory developed that in those cases where the cape buffalo dropped, the shooter was lucky to have hit the animal at the peak of a heartbeat, and the cardiovascular system of the animal was at full pressure, thus allowing the added pressure of the high velocity round to create brain damage.
Black powder projectiles in the vast majority of cases don't exit the muzzle at 2000 fps or faster, so they are not impacting at that speed. THUS..., without a "lucky hit" one should not depend on "hydrostatic shock", and should only depend on what damage is inflicted by contact with the projectile. The damage that is done 100% of the time is by the projectile itself acting upon the tissues of the target animal. IF you get a body hit that also gives you brain damage, that's a blessing...,
Which is probably why with black powder patched round ball shot placement is very important.
I personally think a .490 round ball is a bit light for moose, BUT I've never hunted moose with a patched round ball. So that's just my armchair quarterback idea. I've hunted moose with a 320 grain conical, though I did not get a shot. The guide when he saw my flintlock was very concerned, until he saw the conical bullet, and my powder load. That's anecdotal, and may not really apply, so again purely armchair quarterback. On the other hand I've read where a fellow dropped a moose in its tracks with a heart/lung shot from a .44 magnum handgun..., while at the same time expecting the animal to leave the shallow pond where it was standing and after a few seconds to die upon dry land.
So it's up to you. I'd look at as heavy a powder load as gives you good accuracy, and that ball with which you are confident.
LD
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2004
- Messages
- 14,767
- Reaction score
- 319
Black Hand said:
As will hard cast. To turn your question around, why chase down expensive pure lead when alloys work as well?
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2013
- Messages
- 20,091
- Reaction score
- 1,023
Where are you guys coming up with this "pure lead is expensive "nonsense.......Even if I had to buy my lead the price would still be less than 2 cents per ball...
Black Hand
Cannon
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2005
- Messages
- 9,348
- Reaction score
- 896
I have a stock of lead collected for free and cast my own balls. Going out and finding recovered lead or buying alloys would be a complete waste of my time and money. If you look around, there is pure lead to be found for little to nothing...BrownBear said:
