Long ago, now, I read a story about the famous Mountain man, and Explorer, Jim Bridger,and his gun. Its either a .54 or .53 cal. Hawken, depending on source, and possible typos. His hunting bag and gear are in a museum display, and the author was permitted to examine and test the antler Powder "measure" that was part of the gear. Using both an adjustable measure and a powder scale, he determined that the antler measure held 60 grains of FFFg powder.
In a biography of Bridger, he was quoted as saying that he used one measure of powder for deer, antelope, and cats, 2 measures for Elk, and Black Bear, and 3 measures for Buffalo and Grizzly bears. Bridger was known in his old age to tell bigger and bigger tales, and I took this information with a great deal of "salt".
Most hunters may PLAN to hunt one species, ( and you can therefore Load your gun accordingly). But, running to cougars, or Bears is usually a matter of chance happenings, and therefore you have no way to change the load in your rifle for the most part. For Buffalo, you can plan to hunt just them, and load the gun accordingly.
I just would not want to be firing that gun with 180 grains of any black powder. I am sure the gun can take the pressure, but I am not so sure about my shoulder. :shocked2:
:nono: :idunno: :surrender: I can't imagine any need to load a .54 cal. rifle with more than 120 grains for any animal.
I think much of these discussions today about powder loads for a particular caliber or particular kind of hunt is a luxury that our ancestors rarely had. You made due with what you had.
They worked up an accurate load, tested it for penetration, and then went hunting. Powder was expensive, and hard to come by. Lead was even more difficult to find, the further you were away from "Civilization."
60 grains behind a PRB in any .54 sounds like a pretty weak charge. These men knew how to shoot, and wanted that ball to stay inside the carcass. They were accurate enough shooters, and even better trackers that they would be able to find wounded game where most of today's hunters can't. AND, They WOULD RECOVER THE BALL FROM THE ANIMAL so that it could be melted down, and re-cast to use again.
Today we are more concerned with pass-thru shots, and double blood trails to make it "easier" to follow the animals we shoot, since we have little to no training in seeing and reading tracks. We have tracking schools in this country, but few hunters now avail themselves of this education.
:shocked2: :hmm: