• 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

54 vs 58 chart

shop deals on amazon
L & R
Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
My reason for posting my comment on the Ballistic Coefficient was with regard to the comment that seemed (to me) to say modern ballistic formulas couldn't be used for roundballs. It can.

As for whompability or knockdown power, I'll be the first to say that the frontal area of the projectile is a major player. Bigger is better, even IMO at the cost of some ballistic energy.
As an example of this, a .22 caliber bullet can be driven at extremely high velocities and when it is, its energy is very high. For instance a 50 grain bullet at 4200 FPS has over 1900 Ft/Lbs of energy but I believe a .54 or a .58 caliber ball with only 600 Ft/Lbs of energy will bring down a Moose while the .22 I mentioned would just create a horrible wound and one lost Moose.

I am a big believer in Whompability. :grin:
zonie :)
 
I think both are great calibers. Roundballs are not bullets. Ballistics are for measuring the performance of bullets and loads. The roundball is not a bullet so we can not use ballistics.

Think of it this way:

A Honda Civic hits a house going 50mph
A Ford Excursion hits a house going 40mph

What is going to do more damage. The Ford weighs a lot more than the Civic. So the Ford will probably do more damage. That is and example of Whompability.
 
Sharp Shooter said:
A Honda Civic hits a house going 50mph
A Ford Excursion hits a house going 40mph

What is going to do more damage?
Click to expand...

They both pale in comparison to the Ford Pinto. :grin:

cloudqc0.jpg
 
:rotf:
You're telling your age you know...

I'll never forget that...Ford weasled and crawfished for years claiming there was nothing out of the orinary, while Pintos with their rear gas tanks continued to go up like your photo :shake:
 
Sharp Shooter: I'm afraid I disagree with you.
Ballistics is the study of a fired projectile while it is in motion and a round ball fired from a muzzleloader (or anything else for that matter) qualifies as a projectile in motion.

It is not limited to elongated bullets.
zonie :)
 
He found that .45 cal. bullets were more likely to stop an agressive assailant faster
Click to expand...

That is one of the resons the military went to 45acp , to stop the drugged up chinese. The standard 38 was not stopping the attackers & did not penetrate their armour well.
The 45 however knocked them down.

Bpb
 
That is one of the resons the military went to 45acp , to stop the drugged up chinese. The standard 38 was not stopping the attackers & did not penetrate their armour well.
The 45 however knocked them down.
Click to expand...

I also believe in the ''bigger is better'' saying, but when did the chinese wear armor and the .45 is a horrible body armor penetrator if not the worst.
If you want to penetrate armor you need fast spitzer projectiles with not much frontal area, the very difference of the .45. If you want to break bones and penetrate flesh with maximum of damage you need a heavy bullet with a lot of frontal area.
As example .357 magnums penetrate body armor, 9mm +p penetrates body armor, but .45acp and .45ACP +p does not.
 
I believe the reference was to the drugged up Filipinos and I don't believe they used any body armor. The .38's didn't have any effect on them however the .45 did a great job of stopping them.
zonie :)
 
The following link gives some great comparisons between different projectiles. Kinetic energy, Momentum and Sectional Density are discussed. Tell me what you think of it !
[url] http://www.thudscave.com/npaa/articles/howhard.htm[/url]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Actually it was the Philipino muslims that were causing problems after the Spanish-American war. The same bunch that are causing all the problems there now.

In those days the officers carried a .38 revolver. The enlisted men that carried a pistol carried the older single action .45 long colt. When an officer was attacked by a drugged up bolo swinging muslim, he would get off one or two shots but would not knock the man down. The native would get in a couple of swipes before his body discovered it was dead.

The same native attacking an enlisted man would be knocked flat by the .45 and take a couple of more shots while he was trying to get up before his body died.

Both weapons would kill the attacker but the larger slug would put the attacker in a position to preclude further attacks.

This lesson wasn't lost on the military. They wanted a large, slow moving, slug that would knock an attacker down. This is essensially what you have in a .45 ACP.
 
"...Both weapons would kill the attacker but the larger slug would put the attacker in a position to preclude further attacks..."
---------------------
Which kinda gets us back to the original thought behind this post.
Most folks agree that a large, slow moving projectiles will have a greater knock down power than a smaller projectile with similar energy.

zonie :)
 
Zonie said:
Which kinda gets us back to the original thought behind this post.
Most folks agree that a large, slow moving projectiles will have a greater knock down power than a smaller projectile with similar energy.
Click to expand...
When you're right, you're right... :grin:
 
I think everyone can agree that an Icepick in the chest is going to kill you. But being hit by baseball bat in the chest will not only kill you, it will knock you down. So, the size of the projectile that hits you does enter into any " knock down " evaluation.
 
While many of you think that my load of 120 grains of swiss is to much. You all say to work up a load that is most accurate. It just so happens that a 120 grain charge of ffg swiss is the most accurate in my gun. It may be to much for some of you but it works just fine in my hawken.
 
.58 Cal. Boomer: I don't care what you shoot. This is America, and its your gun and your shoulder.

Have you run that load over a Chronograph? Have you done any kind of comparison penetration testing? What exactly do you consider " Your most accurate load", measured in inches for group size? A .58 is a huge bullet, and if it hits anywhere in the torso of a deer, elk, caribou, or moose, you are going to have a dead animal. And that using only a PRB. Using the heavy conical you are choosing to shoot, you can probably expect to kill two deer with one shot, if they are lined up.

When any bullet completely penetrates a living target, all the extra energy and " power " that is expended in a tree, or on the ground is simply wasted, as its doing nothing to kill the animal faster. So, please tell me what " better accuracy ( ie. Groups size improvement) does it take for you to decide you have to shoot that much powder under a conical? And, how do you take advantage of that extra accuracy shooting open sights at targets at 100 yds and beyond? Just curious, because I must be doing a lot of things wrong for the past 50 years.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top