Ball or conical

[crockett]

For those of you have have killed large (Moose, Elk, Buffalo) game at 100 yards or less with BOTH PRB and Conical- obviously on different occasions- how did each preform. I was of the mind a conical gave better penetration but the ball starts out a lot faster, was one better than the other?

 

[greyghost]

I don't think I would use a PRB on anything that size. Depending of course on caliber, but back when our forefathers shot elk and moose with a PRB, they didn't have any conicals. The more bullet weight you have the more smack you get and the more smack you get the more humane for the animal. I'm not saying it can't be done considering the many variables, but I don't think I would do it. :nono: :shake: :nono:

 

[Little Wattsy]

I don't think I would use a PRB on anything that size. Depending of course on caliber, but back when our forefathers shot elk and moose with a PRB, they didn't have any conicals. The more bullet weight you have the more smack you get and the more smack you get the more humane for the animal. I'm not saying it can't be done considering the many variables, but I don't think I would do it. :nono: :shake: :nono:

I agree.
I shoot a .54 round ball at 200 lb deer and that 239 grain ball is adequate but the same gun slinging a conical at say 390 to 460 grains is going to hit ALOT harder and penetrate ALOT deeper. When tackleing critters that will hit 1000 pounds and more you want to get-er-done. Brownbear and others might set me straight but on a moose sized anilmal you will need to get though 12+ inches of fur, fat, bone, and mussel JUST to enter the chest cavity....IF you hit a bone on the way in will you still have the energy to take care of business?

 

[longcruise]

For those of you have have killed large (Moose, Elk, Buffalo) game at 100 yards or less with BOTH PRB and Conical- obviously on different occasions- how did each preform.

For me, the prb worked better than the conical. I've shot deer and elk with .50 cal 370 grain MaxiBalls and deer with .50 and .54 prb and elk with .54 prb.

On deer, the .50 and .54 prb were both very effective. My kills were more in the 35 to 75 yard range. I have observed mule deer kills with .54 prb to as far out as 180 yards. The 180 yard shot placement was completely comparable to a 30 yard shot I made the day before and to a 35 yard shot I observed the after. The only pass through was my own 30 yard shot which was powered by 100 grains of 2f. The 35 yard shot and the 180 yard shot were both powered by 80 grains of 2f. All were .54 guns with 32 inch barrels.

The 180 yard and 35 yard shots with 80 grains of 2f both were near identical double lung shots and both balls stopped against the skin on the far side.

On the maxi score, the elk I killed did not travel far but only because it engaged in typical elk behaviour when it was confused. It simply milled around for nearly a minute and then dropped. It was a perfect double lunger. If it had made an all out run it would have covered plenty of ground before dropping. The deer was an average mulie buck hit quartering on through the onside lung and the rear of the offside lung and then through the liver. That deer walked 150 yards and then layed down still needing a coup de gras.

But, before you write off conicals, consider that the maxi is a rather pointy projectile that, IMO, does not create a good wound channel. Other conicals with flatter points would probably be a better choice. The Lee Modern Minie in .58 cal worked very well for my wife over only 60 grains of 2f.

Consider that the possibility of the conical moving off the powder charge is a reality. I've seen threads where it was argued considerabley, but I have seen it happen. :shocked2: This happened with the .58 modern minie I mentioned above and a hunting partner had it happen with a renegade loaded with a buffaloe bullet.

A conical that I never hunted with but that provided the finest accuracy of any conical I ever used was a 450 grain 50-70 govt bullet sized from .515 down to about .502 and shot from a tc .50 with 1/48 twist. Anything over 80 grains of powder made one wish to give up shooting and take up knitting!

So, that's my take on it. some will and some will not agree. for those who agree :thumbsup: . For those who don't :blah: . I got no more to say, let the debate begin (again). :haha:

 

[crockett]

Thanks. most of us use either conicals or PRB but not both. I always just assumed the conical was the more killing but that's because I was applying modern jacketed bullet theory. I got wondering if the pure lead ball at the faster speed might do as well/better.
The other issue is what we expect from the projectile. One reads stories of mountain men hunting buffalo and waiting for the animal to turn sideways so they could get a shot.

 

[chuck-ia]

So what is wrong with waiting till the animal turns sideways? All this talk of higher energy and such using a conical, more penetration, and such, why not just use a modern gun? I really think most people underestimate the power of the round ball, I admit it is a shorter range projectile, but it is a muzzleloader.... flinch

 

[hawk]

where I hunt moose the bush is rather dense ,the longer shots are over swamps or closed down overgrown logging roads.
most of the moose we have harvested where well within 50 yards .
you can't pick the spot the moose is going to come out at...
but you can always pass at the long shots and get closer.

we have 2 .50cal rifles,a .54smoothrifle,a .62 smoothrifle and a .75cal bess in the gang
closes shot was 15 yards fatherest was 45 yards
the camps concensus is that a big ball is good but a good shot is even better.
never had the need to use conicals so have no data for them
I have thought that a mississippi rifle or a zovae .58 would make a nice moose gun...or maybe a 60 cal jagger or an underhammer... so many guns, so little time.

 

[tg]

I know a .50 ball will take Elk, Ipersomaly would kep the range at 75yds or less, I now use a .58 amd .62 smoothbores I would nothesitate to take Buff or Moose out to 50 yds, the ML is more of a short range gun woth PRB when compared to using bullets, at least bepfore all the modern wham bam thank you mam generation of ML's vcame on the scene many states limited deer hunting to archery or shotguns and then added ML's as they became popular this was to limit long range projectiles in more habitated areas, now most allow ML's ML's which have ranges out past 200 yds if you believe the hype,this alone pretty much tells the story about what was excpected of a ML at the time the regs were set,PRB will do quite well if common sense toward range is used and shot placement is good, (does not include smashing thru the bones of both shoulders) I don't know what shool of hunting that one comes from, every hunter I know who uses PRB and matches bore size and range to the animal and makes responsible choices has taken game on a regular basis without hight long tracking or loosing animals, some can use the PRB andhunt with the traditional gear and some cannot, I guess those who cannot have nowhere but the modern connicals to lean on, some use period styles which shows a true desire to keep with the traditional ways, more of this practice would go a long ways toward keeping the tradition alive with bullets and balls.For the ones who have , or feel they have to use modern bullets and sight types to reach out past the typical ML range (talking about typical everyday hunting gear of the past)and gain an advantage over the typical iron sighted gun useing PRB, I don't see a real dedication to the traditional aspect of the sport, just the need to toss the term traditional around rather loosely.Getting closer is part of the draw the sport has after lobbing magnum rilfe slugs across seven canyons, granted there are some sitoations and types of game tat a shot uner 100 yds may be hard to come by, if there is absolutel no way to get close a period type bullet would be a way to go that one could be proud of particularly if one has spent sometime and research finding a suitable bullet from the past.

 

[doulos]

Go to Nitroexpress.com forum and there is a discussion about using PRB for large game. Some of the fellas there have a lot of experience doing that. Read some of the discussions there. They are usually talking about larger calibers though, 62 caliber and up.
I would also think that if you were using a hardened PRB made of wheel weights you would be probably be surprised at the balls penetration on a large animal. Heck someone on this forum i beleive just penetrated a BUFFALO all the way though with a .62 cal with what I thought was a pretty light charge.

 

[longcruise]

we have 2 .50cal rifles,a .54smoothrifle,a .62 smoothrifle and a .75cal bess in the gang
closes shot was 15 yards fatherest was 45 yards

How do those .50 cals and round balls do on the moose? I've always been nervous about going down to a .50 even for elk. Am always looking for factual experience of the .50 and prb on larger animals. Willing to change my mind about the capabilities of the .50 but have never felt comfortable using the .50 as an experiment.

 

[schmidt]

I shot two roes last week with .54 PRB and 90grain WanoPP, the first one at 43m shoulder-spine with exit, yesterday the second at 15-20m, heartshot and the bullet stopped at the opposite hide. I would have expected the opposite result.

 

[paulvallandigham]

Do some comparative penetration testing with the .50, and with a .54 or larger bore gun, using pure lead, and wheelweight balls in both, to test depth of penetration, and the amount of distortion.

I think you will find( based on my own testing( that the Wheelweight balls penetrate much further than do the pure lead RB, and that they are only slightly flattened, compared to the much greater damage done to the Pure lead balls. The other difference you will find is that while the pure lead ball tends to flow backwards, and mushroom evenly, the harder balls will develop cracks and splits, and shed bits of lead along the primary wound channel. But, NOT VERY MUCH lead is lost. Always weight the spent balls to see how much weight is retained.

Then, you can decide if you want to use a .50 RB on Elk, or Moose.

My penetration box, FWIW, was made of one inch pine lumber( actual dimension=7/8") spaced 1 inch apart. I wanted to try to emulate what a ball crashing through ribs or shoulders would experience as it tore through the chest of an animal. I also didn't want to have to go chasing the balls, so decided to set up 12 boards for the test. At 20 feet, my .50 pure lead ball went through 6 boards and splatted against the 7th. I used two loads: 60 grains FFg, and 100 grains FFg. Both achieved the same penetration. Altho I didn't participate, I later watched as another member conducted a similar test with his gun and wheelweight balls. I don't recall how deep the balls went, but they were far less deformed than my earlier lead balls were.

 

[Idaho Ron]

My penetration box, FWIW, was made of one inch pine lumber( actual dimension=7/8") spaced 1 inch apart. I wanted to try to emulate what a ball crashing through ribs or shoulders would experience as it tore through the chest of an animal. I also didn't want to have to go chasing the balls, so decided to set up 12 boards for the test. At 20 feet, my .50 pure lead ball went through 6 boards and splatted against the 7th. I used two loads: 60 grains FFg, and 100 grains FFg. Both achieved the same penetration. Altho I didn't participate, I later watched as another member conducted a similar test with his gun and wheelweight balls. I don't recall how deep the balls went, but they were far less deformed than my earlier lead balls were.

I am not sure that 7/8" think pine boards are ANY kind of a measure of a bullet on game. The fact that pine is very soft but splits extremely easy is a problem. Ribs are more elastic or to a point bendable. Meaning that the rib can bend before it is punctured. This bending affect can REDUCE penetration. Skin is also very tough and elastic which would also reduce energy and penetration. The flesh factor is also not a part of your test.
Now if you were just comparing soft lead vs hard lead and that was the only test ok any media would work. You just compare them side to side. The test you did was to recreate the bones a hit on an animal. Your test was not a valid or reasonable test for penetration on a game animal. Ron

 

[Kentuckywindage]

pure lead conical, 225gr. It mushrooms easy but still gave me complete penetration through BOTH front shoulders. Patched round ball kills just as good and as fast as any bullet out there on todays market.

These ribs did not stand a chance. Nor did the front shoulders.

 

[paulvallandigham]

Ron: NO test medium exactly replicates hits on live tissue. You miss the point of my suggestion.

I know you have hunting experiences, and I am going to assume that somewhere along the way you recovered a bullet or two from an animal and figured out what it passed through. I know I have done this.

In doing the tests in my pine boards, I first shot them with a couple of calibers of bullets that I know the performance of on game. That gave me a standard for this testing medium. I have done the same with Sand Bags, dry wall( Gypsum board) water, tree trunks, railroad ties, telephone poles, and all kinds of other things I have shot balls and bullets into.

The testing I am suggesting is ONLY a test to determine how much more penetration is achieved by using a harder alloy lead to make your Round Balls. If Marmotslayer has prior experience shooting deer or larger game with his .50 caliber using a pure lead ball, this comparision test will give him needed information on how much better ( or worse) the harder lead balls will do to something he already knows will kill game.

Climb down off your mountain, and be a bit more civil. It will go a lot longer way around here. You are not the only member here with experience killing game.

 

[Idaho Ron]

Ron: NO test medium exactly replicates hits on live tissue. You miss the point of my suggestion.

No I read your first post, maybe you should.
before you said.

I wanted to try to emulate what a ball crashing through ribs or shoulders would experience as it tore through the chest of an animal.

Then you said.

The testing I am suggesting is ONLY a test to determine how much more penetration is achieved by using a harder alloy lead to make your Round Balls.

You first posted your test would "emulate what a ball crashing through ribs or shoulders would experience" then you said NO it was a lead hardness test. Which is it? If you would have said it was a lead hardness test to start with I have no problem with that. It would have been a valad test. But you were posting it that your were trying to "emulate what a ball crashing through ribs or shoulders would experience"
That is NOT a valid test and you know it.

Climb down off your mountain, and be a bit more civil. It will go a lot longer way around here. You are not the only member here with experience killing game.

People post questions because they want to know the facts or the truth. I found no truth in what you posted about it being a test to "emulate what a ball crashing through ribs or shoulders would experience" To not call you on the carpet would be letting the people down that wanted the information.
Paul, When I posted that I was being civil, and i still am.
How about this. When someone makes a post that you have no personal, and actual experience with don't worry about posting. Someone else might have the right answer and you don't end up looking fooloish. Read for a change you might learn something. You don't have to answer every question that is posted. Ron

 

[Idaho Ron]

pure lead conical, 225gr. It mushrooms easy but still gave me complete penetration through BOTH front shoulders. Patched round ball kills just as good and as fast as any bullet out there on todays market.

These ribs did not stand a chance. Nor did the front shoulders.

Looks good! just what I would expect. What conical did you use, and what was the yardage? Ron

 

[crockett]

Thanks everyone for all the information. I would never expect a muzzle loading weapon to crash through heavy bone, etc on a really large animal. I have always assumed a broad side shot through the ribs was needed.

A fellow at a local shop had been out to Colorado Elk hunting with a PRB either 50 or 54- I forget, and he kept the ball. It had flatted out the size of a quarter and you sort of have to ask yourself what does more damage, a conical that penetrates deeply or the flatten ball spinning around and cutting up both lungs. That's why I asked for some real life experiences.
An analogy on this question would be arrows, what does more damage, a high speed arrow that penetrates the entire animal or an arrow where the sharp head is in the lungs and as the animal runs the arrow just tears up the lungs?
I keep thinking in terms of modern ballistics rather than thinking exactly what type of muzzle loading projectile is doing what when hitting a game animal. All real life field experience appreciated. Thanks to all.

 

[Kentuckywindage]

Looks good! just what I would expect. What conical did you use, and what was the yardage? Ron

225gr Powerbelt Aerotip. 80gr triple 7 3f and an 80 yard shot.

 

[longcruise]

Paul, I appreciate your attempt to answer my question. You did not really address the question i asked, but in your defense, I'll say that when I re-read my question it was not posed very well.

What prompted my question was the fact that while .50 prb is legal in my state for elk, I have always felt a twinge of apprehension over using the .50 on elk. I have killed elk with the .50 and conical and the .54 with prb. I have observed a good many kills of mule deer and elk with .54 prb but have never had any direct (as in there on the spot) experience with the .50 and prb on elk. I know the .50 prb is more than adequate for mule deer, but the difference between even a large mulie and a large elk is significant. Ya really gotta kill a big elk and then stand over it all alone and far from camp or road to really appreciate their size. :haha:

So, penetration of lead versus hard balls, while interesting, does not get to the point of my question.

What I am looking for are first hand stories from those who have been there and done it or seen it done with their own eyes (Paul, empahsis is not aimed at you, am trying to get my question seem by as many forum readers as possible).

Thanks everyone for all the information. I would never expect a muzzle loading weapon to crash through heavy bone, etc on a really large animal. I have always assumed a broad side shot through the ribs was needed.

A fellow at a local shop had been out to Colorado Elk hunting with a PRB either 50 or 54- I forget, and he kept the ball. It had flatted out the size of a quarter and you sort of have to ask yourself what does more damage, a conical that penetrates deeply or the flatten ball spinning around and cutting up both lungs. That's why I asked for some real life experiences.

Crockett, don't be too quick to assume that the rb won't penetrate bones etc. When it comes to killing game with an rb, it's very much about ball size. That's why I posed my own question regarding the .50 prb on elk. I know the .54 prb does the job but would like more first hand info on the .50 rb on elk.

Your buddies ball probably looked a lot like this. Both pics are the same ball. The side with the striations on it is showing bone from a rib embedded in the impact side of the ball. The other side shows the impressions of the patch. This went across the top of an elks heart and stopped under the skin on the far side. The heart had a huge slice in it, the top end heart plumbing was disconnected and both lungs were wrecked.

It was a bit larger than quarter size.