Big Bore Hunting Rifles

[oldwood]

Both my .62's did well with 90 Gr. FF. One was 32 " and the longrifle was a 38" .

 

[Art Caputo]

Interesting. That’s what I shoot in my .54. I would have thought it would be more like 90-100 grains

I have shot as much as 100gr of FFG. I concluded that the trade off between the accuracy, “recoil”, and the 100-200FPS velocity increases wasn’t worth it, particularly when the difference in MV shrinks disproportionately out past 70 yards or so with a LRB. The 80gr of 3F gets me very close to 90gr of FFG with the advantage of a cleaner burn, and better accuracy in my rifle.

 

[BS]

I finally got a look at the chronograph data from the magazine article. Rifle is .62 cal, assuming 30" of barrel, 340gr .610" ball and ffg Goex.

50gr Goex ffg 1103fps
80gr Goex ffg 1381fps
100gr Goex ffg 1520fps 139fps increase
120gr Goex ffg 1637fps 117fps increase
160gr Goex ffg 1793fps 126fps increase for 40gr, so an obvious case of diminished return

Switching to Goex fffg, Olde Eynsford ffg, or Swiss ffg should make even more velocity. so the .62 isn't as slow as one might think. 100-120gr Goex fffg is comfortable to shoot in my 7-1/2# gun, but it has 2"x5" buttplate and about 2-1/2" drop to the heel. I'll have to give ffg a serious try in the Colerain barrel and see how it does with 100gr+ of ffg. I currently use Goex fffg because it leaves less fouling.

Did the article say what the accuracy was with these loads?

 

[excess650]

Did the article say what the accuracy was with these loads?

It did. The 96" twist Moody barrel shot sub 3" with 80gr and averaged about 2" for the heavier charges. The 90" gaintwist barrel shot a little tighter, all 3 shot groups at 100 yards with a scoped, percussion platform.

 

[BS]

A cow elk hunt just popped up on Facebook for $950........a bull , $6000.

All I could see is big round ball testing and elk meat!!

 

[excess650]

A .62 should be plenty big for elk. In a story in BP Hunting Magazine, a hunter is in Zimbabwe and shoots a Livingston Eland (1600#+) with a .62 at 110 yards with 150gr ffg. The ball traversed the width of the chest and was found under the skin on the off side. While 150gr ffg sounds like a big powder charge, the roundball loses quite a bit of velocity in 100 yards, so I'm surprised at the penetration.

 

[BS]

Hard lead?

 

[BS]

I was shooting some hard lead yesterday, I got a good group with a small ball, thick Patch at 50 yards,[1.1/8"]

This was with 125FF, going to see how 100FF groups in this 104 twist.

 

[excess650]

I’m interested in your findings, excess

I took the little .62 out to the range last week. It was mostly cloudy, temp in the mid '80s, and humid. After several days of mid '90s, it seemed tolerable.

I put a target up at 50 yards, 2" square aiming point, and shot with just a wrist and elbow rest. The first shot was was loaded since the end of October 2020. 100gr Goex fffg under a .605" wrapped in heavy cotton duck lubed with mink oil. That shot was IN the aiming point at the top right corner, so confirmed what I had already known, mink oil doesn't dry out and the first shot shoots to point of aim.

Since this was to be a ffg test, I switched to a can of Goex leftovers from my BPCRS days. The lot number was 96MY, so Pa production prior to their plant explosion and relocation. Seyfried's article was summer of '98, I'll assume his Goex was Pa production as well. I loaded 120gr ffg, and the first shot was 2" higher, and slightly right of the fffg shot. The next 3 shots of 120gr ffg printed beside the aiming point. Upping the charge to 140gr, 3 shots went into the same group. Upping the charge to 160gr, the first shot went 2" low of the group, 2nd shot IN the group, but the recoil had increased noticeably. The barrel was pretty warm, and a thunderstorm was approaching so stopped there. I did not experience heavy fouling, and did not clean between shots.

With the exception of the 2 flyers mentioned, all of the shots were in 2" vertical and 1" horizontal, so the 66" twist seemed pretty forgiving in regard to powder charge on this day.

 

[nkbj]

My .62 is a flintlock, 32" Green Mountain smooth bore barrel with rifling cut in it.
With .600 round ball, 40 ounce cotton patch, LOOB and 80 grains FFg I get 1314FPS.
120 grains gives 1533FPS.
I've since gone to molding .595 ball but haven't chrono'd it again.

 

[hanshi]

Back when I got into BP the .40 was considered a deer caliber, the .45 was simply for "big game" and the .50 (not many around) was looked upon as a cannon. Having killed deer with the .54 and the .62 I have to say they do impress me substantially. My .62 is a smoothbore and 70 grains of Goex 3F and a prb does around 1300 fps, if I recall correctly. They are fun to play with but not, IMHO, needed for deer when a .45 or .50 works so very well. If I hunted elk I'd prefer something bigger, .54 or larger. I love the jaeger and if I could have one built it would be a .54 or more likely a .62.

 

[pamtnman]

Thank you to everyone for the helpful posts here, particularly to Excess for your range reports. I don’t know why this website does not notify me when people post here. I had to return here and “manually” check the thread.

 

[R.J.Bruce]

I think that the only reliable way to test penetration at distance with large diameter patched balls is to spend the money and do it the way that the pros do. Which can be expensive. Which is why most shooters never bother with it.

Which is to say, cast fresh adult cow shoulder blades in ballistic gelatin, place a piece of freshly harvested cowhide over the gelatin block, and shoot through all of it to see how your rifle's ignition system, barrel's rate of twist, weight of the powder charge, weight of the ball, patch material, & lube perform at the maximum range that you feel comfortable pulling the trigger at. In addition to your ability to handle the recoil, and keep the ball on target for a kill shot.

Anything else is just guesswork, working off of ballistic tables, and hoping the animal doesn't move after you pull the trigger.

It's really the .62, .66, & .69 caliber patched balls that have the ability to retain velocity at distance. And, only with slow rates of twist. Which means heavy powder charges.

If I was younger, didn't have osteoarthritis in both shoulders, and had sufficient cash to fund a custom English Sporting Rifle; & after reconsideration of some of my past posts I think I would send Jason at Rice enough money to convince him to fabricate me a .66 caliber, Forsyth rifled, 1:96" twist, 4140CM steel, double-taper, octagon-round barrel measuring 33" long. 1.330" diameter octagonal breech × 1.270" diameter transition to round (8") w/wedding bands × 0.970" diameter round muzzle. The barrel wall thickness in the breech is heavy enough to allow for machining Talley scope ring dovetail bases directly into the top flat of the octagonal breech. Add a Rice, CNC, flint, hooked, Manton breech plug and 6" long beavertail tang.

Put a LR Customs 0.672" diameter MZ REX2 muzzle brake on the barrel to help control recoil. Also has the advantage of not being any louder to the shooter's ears than a stock barrel as ALL of the gases are directed away from the shooter.

Build a contemporary English Sporting Rifle around such a barrel. Contour the stock to send the recoil impulse as straight back into the shoulder pocket as possible. Perhaps, even with a negative comb angle to allow for co-alignment of the iron sights and the scope. Install a Magnum recoil pad designed for African big bore rifles. Install modern, flush mounted, push button sling swivel bases for use with real shooting slings. Install a modern, brass, flush mounted, Spartan, Classic Gunsmith Adapter at the balance point so as to allow for use with sitting & kneeling neodymium magnet bipods, and standing neodymium magnet tripods.

The above combines the best of 21st Century technology, with 18th Century technology.

 

[appalichian hunter]

Why not just go buy a mag center fire and get it over with. Never seen a traditional rifle with a muzzle brake or all that other mentioned fu fer all.

 

[R.J.Bruce]

Why not just go buy a mag center fire and get it over with. Never seen a traditional rifle with a muzzle brake or all that other mentioned fu fer all.

Anything labeled traditional is only that because a group of people got together and decided to divide their hobby/sport/activity apart to separate the older form from the newer form. In almost every case because the older form was/had been eclipsed by the newer form. And, the people addicted to/in love with the older form needed an outlet for getting attention back to the older form so it wouldn't die out. And, I am sorry to say, it tends to make those folks kind of an ain in the pass. I know this because I used to be one until I realized I was a total jerk, started meditation, cooled my jets, and let go of my narcissism.

Don't get me wrong, I started with flintlocks at age 17 in 1971, and I dearly love longrifles. The originals no matter how plain, or ornate. And the new ones, no matter how poorly made, nor how expertly made.

Boys & Girls!! Ladies & Gents!!! Grams & Gramps!!!! Step Right Up & Listen!!!!!

I paid my dues back in '71 & '72. I listened to so much manure about that first longrifle from age 17 right up until I had to sell it prior to enlisting in the military. No one was sympathetic. NO ONE.
So I am a proud card carrying member of the traditional muzzleloading community. I'M JUST NOT A FANATIC. Been there. Done that. And, I am NOT PROUD of those days.

Everyone will notice that I have taken great care not to use the word traditional when I describe one of my collaboration/imagination rifles that meld the early 19th Century style flintlock ignition system**an early 19th Century style Manton flint breech plug**a mid-19th Century style Forsyth rifled barrel**late 20th Century sling swivel bases & Rhodesian sling**late 20th Century recoil pad**late 20th Century aluminum ramrod that won't break**early 21st Century bipod/tripod adapter**early 21st Century monopods, bipods & tripods**late 20th Century style iron sights**late 20th Century machined in place scope bases** late 20th Century scope rings**mid-20th Century used Lyman Alaskan fixed power 3x scope** and a early 21st Century, patched ball capable, muzzle brake that actually attenuates the decible level heard by the shooter by approximately 5 decibles.

Why don't I just purchase a centerfire rifle with a scope on it? Because there's no romance in it. There's no challenge in killing an animal at 800 yards with a .338 Lapua round, nor a .40 caliber smokeless muzzleloader.

Neither hold any interest for me.

A .66 caliber (actual bore diameter 0.672"), Forsyth rifled hunting rifle, equipped as described above would be capable of hunting all but elephant, rhino, and hippo. A 0.667" diameter ball weighing 444.8 grains in pure lead over 150-200 grains of ffg Swiss black powder is nothing to sneeze about.

Does the average muzzleloading shooter need one? No. Would I like to own one, and shoot it were I healthier? Absolutely. I'd have three barrels made if I ever built one. All .66 caliber.

1. 1:48" twist with 0.012" deep square bottom grooves for shooting out to 75 yards & practice shooting.
2. 1:72" twist with 0.006" deep square bottom grooves for shooting out to 125-150 yards.
3. 1:126" twist with 0.006" deep square bottom grooves for shooting out to 200 yards.

The last thing I'll mention is that I have had lousy, stinking, rotten eyesight since I was 7 years old. It would be nice just once to shoot a flintlock rifle and be able TO ACTUALLY SEE MY TARGET FOR A CHANGE. Not have that 18th Century front sight completely cover what I was trying to shoot at. The ONLY WAY that's ever going to happen is when I look through a modern telescopic scope that magnifies the object that I'm trying to shoot at. I have tried everything else. Peep sights work out to about 25 yards for me. How many people here are WILLING TO LIMIT THEMSELVES to never shoot past 25 yards, when there is an alternative?

That's where all the traditional muzzleloading shooters get on my last nerve. They might pay lip service to the ageing shooter that NEEDS a scope, a seat, or standing cross sticks because of infirmities. But, let someone actually scope a flintlock, and the howls of dismay can be heard on the moon. These people want the ageing shooter to jump through hoops trying all kinds of optical gimmicks to trick their eye into believing that it can actually see better than it can. And, that's OK, up to a point. Because, all those tricks are just short term fixes for what happens to everyone as their eyes age.

Why doesn't our community start facing reality? Our mean average age is over 70 years old. The elders with the most accumulated knowledge are dying off week-by-week, month-by-month, year-by-year. Not only do we need to encourage anyone who shows the least amount of interest as much as possible, young & old alike; but we need to start treating anyone with an infirmity with respect.

ALL clubs, shoots, & matches need to start taking age & it's corresponding infirmities into account by having separate categories for those that need to sit to shoot, are wheelchair/scooter bound, need cross sticks when sitting or standing, that need aperture rear sights in order for their shooting eye to focus, or simply require a scope in order to see to shoot.

While I am the last person to disagree that offhand shooting can make for a better shooter, I will be the first person to step up and say that going to a club to shoot, and have every shot be taken from the offhand position is just plain wrong. And, in my opinion, does a great disservice to club members, & visitors alike.

I think that it's time to come to grips with the fact that our ancestors ONLY shot from the offhand position if necessary. Like at turkey & ham shoots. In everyday hunting I am sure all but the most extraordinary shots used a rest whenever possible.

Why not just stop howling at the moon, and let modern, and I don't mean inlines, muzzleloading shooters scope their sidelocks, flint or percussion, without all the criticism? Especially, if it's a Thompson/Center, or an import. Even if it's a custom longrifle?

 

[appalichian hunter]

I do understand your take on the situation, I am no spring chicken myself, Also do not think anyone would berate a dis-advantaged shooter and have seen and helped folks in those situations as much as possible, but as I stated traditional is a order that brings back the golden ages of the rifle and the fraternity that follows that is keeping old traditions alive as well as the weapons and such that is incorporated in the use of said weapons. No one is howling at the moon just attempting too keep traditions alive, Sure there are situations where the need for enhanced sights, cross sticks and such are required and I would bet that most here have no problem with that, the muzzle breaks and other modern additions are seen by some as a big step away from traditional, If thats your thing go for it perhaps find a discussion board relating too those sort of weapons. I competed for years in un-mentionable pistol matches and have a few very well built pistols dedicated too that type shooting there is a real difference between those and the same weapon they began as, So I stand bye my post.

 

[Griz44Mag]

Thank you to everyone for the helpful posts here, particularly to Excess for your range reports. I don’t know why this website does not notify me when people post here. I had to return here and “manually” check the thread.

It's in the profile settings - take a look - there are a lot of options there to make your forum presence the way you want it to be.

 

[pamtnman]

It's in the profile settings - take a look - there are a lot of options there to make your forum presence the way you want it to be.

Thank you, Griz. I think it’s fixed

 

[BS]

This is from my Carleton Rifle, it is a 58 with Alexander Henry rifling. Slow twist 1-90.

It is an odd creation with a sliding under hammer.

The first shot was with .022 Levi over a 1/16 felt wad, and it shredded.

Switched to .024 canvas, lubed with 50/50 Washer fluid and Simple Green. Seemed to work well.

I had been using 115 and 125FF loads, but upped it to 135FF and a .575 hardened scrap lead ball.

Looks like a good start.

 

[pamtnman]

View attachment 86746
This is from my Carleton Rifle, it is a 58 with Alexander Henry rifling. Slow twist 1-90.

It is an odd creation with a sliding under hammer.

The first shot was with .022 Levi over a 1/16 felt wad, and it shredded.

Switched to .024 canvas, lubed with 50/50 Washer fluid and Simple Green. Seemed to work well.

I had been using 115 and 125FF loads, but upped it to 135FF and a .575 hardened scrap lead ball.

Looks like a good start.

With that slow twist, your charge is going to have to be substantial. If that were my shot pattern, I’d think I was on to something but had a way to go. Thank you again for posting. I believe that when I get started with my own .62, your posts and those by Excel will be constantly checked.