conicals or round balls

[Idaho Ron]

Physically white tails are a LOT smaller then mule deer. Ron

 

[roundball]

I'm amazed you said Whitetails were tiny deer!

I thought the same thing... IMO, edgy / provocative comments are usually intended to :stir:

 

[longcruise]

Conicals probably do have a place out West, and if I were hunting out there, I would not think twice about working up a load for some conical for my guns. Our largest Whitetails are about the size of smaller Mule Deer bucks, and about half the weight of a mature Elk buck. Either a larger caliber RB, or a conical seems reasonable to use on these larger animals.

Paul, Your conclusions on the size of a mature elk "buck" (bull is the correct term) are not quite accurate. A asmaller mule deer buck is going to go about 200 to 225 pounds. A mature bull elk can easily hit 700 or 800.

Regardless of the projectile preferences of western hunters, it is clearly demonstrated each year that a prb is plenty adequate. Most of us who hunt elk out west prefer a .54 as a minimum. The .50 has always made me a bit nervous. OTOH, the more this is discussed over the past few months on this forum, for example, the more I see that many hunters are using the .50 to good effect on elk.

Given The difficulties of estimating range, the conical does not really give the hunter any advantage for the long shots that may present in the western mountains. At a certain point, errors in range estimation as small as ten yards make those shots undoable with prb or conical.

experienced bow hunters and ml hunters have learned that the effective way to hunt elk is to go where they hide in the thick stuff. All but one of the elk I have killed were 45 yards or less and that includes those shot with suppository guns.

 

[Vaino]

I and my son only shoot PRB but others in our elk camp shoot a variety of conicals and we all get along fine because no one is dictating rules on "what to shoot". The hunt is why we're there and to make the stay enjoyable, all keep their opinions of controversial subjects at home including what they shoot. Oddly enough, when we leave camp in the early AM all the conical loads are "incognito", hiding deep in the bbls not knowing that some would disapprove of them being there......Fred

 

[Idaho Ron]

Given The difficulties of estimating range, the conical does not really give the hunter any advantage for the long shots that may present in the western mountains. At a certain point, errors in range estimation as small as ten yards make those shots undoable with prb or conical.

I disagree. The conical DOES give an advantage it is called, Foot Pounds of ENERGY. I know most of you don't believe in it and call it a myth but it is a fact.
Range estimating is not easy. When I bow hunted and competed in 3D target archery I learned to judge yardage accurately under 100 yards. Now I rely on a range finder for shots over 100 yards. Ron

 

[roundball]

I and my son only shoot PRB but others in our elk camp shoot a variety of conicals and we all get along fine because no one is dictating rules on "what to shoot". The hunt is why we're there and to make the stay enjoyable, all keep their opinions of controversial subjects at home including what they shoot. Oddly enough, when we leave camp in the early AM all the conical loads are "incognito", hiding deep in the bbls not knowing that some would disapprove of them being there......Fred

For what its worth, I don't think THE USE of conicals for hunting meets with any disapproval here at all...people should would use what they want.

The common theme through most conical vs. PRB dicsussions seems to be that the conical attempts to be placed on the same footing as the PRB, in terms of it being..."a commonly used traditional projectile during the whole of the early American traditional muzzleloading era"...and of course it was not.

People should use whatever they want...just need to be careful not to try and make something appear to be something it never was. For example, I've used a variety of T/C Hawken Flintlocks for the past 10 years but you'll never find even a hint of a comment from me that they are some sort of actual replica of a particular muzzleloader from any point in time...they're simply a 1970's manufacture of a loose traditional style that right or wrong T/C happened to name a Hawken...I know it, everybody knows it.

Just like everybody who knows anything about muzzleloading knows that the round lead ball was the commonly used traditional hunting projectile during the early American traditional muzzleloading era spanning multiple centuries.

 

[Idaho Ron]

what its worth, I don't think THE USE of conicals for hunting meets with any disapproval here at all...people should would use what they want.

The common theme through most conical vs. PRB dicsussions seems to be that the conical attempts to be placed on the same footing as the PRB, in terms of it being..."a commonly used traditional projectile during the whole of the early American traditional muzzleloading era"...and of course it was not.

People should use whatever they want...just need to be careful not to try and make something appear to be something it never was. For example, I've used a variety of T/C Hawken Flintlocks for the past 10 years but you'll never find even a hint of a comment from me that they are some sort of actual replica of a particular muzzleloader from any point in time...they're simply a 1970's manufacture of a loose traditional style that right or wrong T/C happened to name a Hawken...I know it, everybody knows it.

Just like everybody who knows anything about muzzleloading knows that the round lead ball was the commonly used traditional hunting projectile during the early American traditional muzzleloading era spanning multiple centuries.

I don't and have never said that the conical is a HC/PC projectile. I don't remember anyone saying that a Hornady Great plains bullet is a HC/PC bullet or trying to pretend that it was.
But like you said the TC hawkens is a "loose traditional style" Many of us conceder our self’s to be " traditional" when using a TC rifle and a conical of pure lead. The term Traditional is being morphed into meaning HC/PC in the minds of many people here. I think that traditional is different than HC/PC but that is just my opinion. If someone asked a question. What would be the HC/PC bullet for an 1836 fur trapper we all know that the PRB would be the logical choice. If a HUNTER asked what would be a bullet to use in a Traditional only hunt in Idaho? The answer would be either PRB or a Conical made of lead only. I am sure that other states have definitions when it comes to the use of traditional weapons and gear. In Idaho a TC Hawkens, Renegade, White Mountain carbine, and many others are traditional rifles. Conicals like the Maxi hunter, maxi ball, Great plains, and yes even a paper patched 500 S&W bullet made of lead only is considered to be a traditional bullet. Ron

 

[Vaino]

"Splitting of hairs" is a common malady of "purists" and even in the company of other "purists" there would still persist the "splitting of hairs" over some very miniscule, obscure so called difference of opinion. I really don't care how people portray or "hype" their opinions....life is too short to concern or worry about "opinions" and whether PRBs are more "traditional" than the various conicals is a "getting nowhere" discussion. Me thinks that if it loads from the muzzle and whatever projectile used, comes from the same hole, it's an acceptable load. Lest we forget...all the posts so far are "opinions" which aren't a substitute for facts in spite of the premise that any history is always seen through the "eyes" of the chronicler who because he/she is human, has biases. Anecdotal experiences don't produce "facts", only that "something happened" at a certain time in someone's life. Perhaps I could have said all this in a much shorter sentence... "No matter the subject, humans will always differ on some minor point"....Fred

 

[longcruise]

I and my son only shoot PRB but others in our elk camp shoot a variety of conicals and we all get along fine because no one is dictating rules on "what to shoot". The hunt is why we're there and to make the stay enjoyable, all keep their opinions of controversial subjects at home including what they shoot. Oddly enough, when we leave camp in the early AM all the conical loads are "incognito", hiding deep in the bbls not knowing that some would disapprove of them being there......Fred

You may have read something into my post that was not there! We too have both "camps" in our camp. . Interestingly, our only regular member who shoots a plastic and you-know-what gun prefers to load a round ball.

Just trying to make a point to Paul that going west to hunt elk does not call for working up a conical load at all.

 

[Vaino]

Just "picked" you mainly because you were the last post, although 2 of your remarks weren't pro conicals, but from what you later wrote, you're fair. No intended criticism....Fred

 

[lonehunter]

ive got a lyman gpr. im going to use in the wisc. muzzle loading season next week.i have both barrels.......1/60 & 1/32.....after hearing of the loss of energy of round balls at a distance im wondering if i should go with the conicals....the powerbelt bullets seem to have a bad rep. for not leaving blood trails.......but the ballistics are a lot better......any thoughts......

Seven pages later! :dead: :dead: :dead: Is this damn horse EVER going to die????
oneyedik, shoot the one you have the most confidence with! That IS the load that you should hunt with. :v

 

[tg]

If after scores of pages about the PRB being a very good performing projectile at open sight ranges, if one still does not trust them then they should not use them,never hunt with a piece of gear that you cannot trust to do the job,whether the reluctance to embrace is supported by fact or not.

 

[tg]

"The common theme through most conical vs. PRB dicsussions seems to be that the conical attempts to be placed on the same footing as the PRB, in terms of it being..."a commonly used traditional projectile during the whole of the early American traditional muzzleloading era"...and of course it was not."

good points but probably lost on most,though it my be possible that the modern connicals used today were widely used back then even though they had not yet been designed or invented so to speak.But if they would have had them they would have used them :idunno:

 

[longcruise]

I disagree. The conical DOES give an advantage it is called, Foot Pounds of ENERGY. I know most of you don't believe in it and call it a myth but it is a fact.
Range estimating is not easy. When I bow hunted and competed in 3D target archery I learned to judge yardage accurately under 100 yards. Now I rely on a range finder for shots over 100 yards. Ron

Ron, Ron, Ron... . You are responding to a statement about trajectory and range estimation with a statement about energy.

And, my remarks are generalized and not about your or my ability to estimate range, but rather what the consequences of a mistake in range estimation.

Inputting a .535 round ball at 1800 fps and your favored .500 S&W slug into Point Blank pretty much proves my point, IMO. Using a BC or .075 for the RB and .296 (from Lee Precision) for your slug and a velocity of 1800 fps for the ball and 1300 fps for the S&W, one comes up with the following.

Both Dead on at 100 yards:

At 150 yards, the S&W slug is 8.68 Inches below the 100 yard zero and 11.2 inches below at 160 yards.

At 150 yards, the RB is 7.64 inches below the 100 yard zero and 10.05 below at 160 yards.

The RB obviously has a better trajectory but who's gonna split a one inch hair?

If either of our mathematical shooters truly know the their trajectories and if either one of them figures a 140 yard shot on a deer when it is actually 160, they are both going to be shooting five or six inches low. Factor in shooter ability, field conditions, shooter physical condition at the time of the shot, rest available, etc. etc. both shooters are primed for a miss or worse a badly placed shot.

That's what I mean about the lack of advantage in the conical (your conical ) over my round ball.

Now, before you jump me on my velocity input, realize that boosting your velocity to 1400 fps (per my memory of your statements in other threads, etc.) does not do squat. We still end up with a difference of about .33 inch and now favoring the S&W. But then, to be fair, I can and have boosted my ball to 2000 fps. I don't any more because it just is not necessary. When boosted to 2,000 the two change places by about .75 inch.

As to Energy; It's not a matter of belief. Ft Lbs. of energy is a fact. I don't think anybody here thinks it does not exist. The point we RBers have been trying to make is that energy is not a measure of adequacy when it comes to the ability of a projectile to kill an animal.

The gun rags have bombarded us for years with the use of energy requirements, etc. and blah blah blah but they are obviously off track. If not, there would not be example piled upon example of elk hunters killing game at 100 yards and even more with their piddling .54 caliber round ball guns.

Several years ago i witnessed the longest ml big game shot I've ever seen. I would not have taken this shot. The discussion of the ethics of it are food for another thread but OTOH, a search of the archives would suffice. I saw a hunter take a 230# mule deer at a measured 180 yards with a .54 rifle and a round ball at a muzzle velocity of 1650 fps (80 grains of ff goex). The ball centered the lungs, broke a rib going in, penetrated completely and came to rest against the hide on the opposite side. The deers ears dropped and it folded on the spot. Two days later I saw an identical deer taken with the same setup (but different gun) at less than 30 yards. Ironically the hit was identical :shocked2: . The deer walked about 15 yards and fell dead. Same exact hit! Ball was against the hide on the opposite side. Energy meant nada! Both balls penetrated and made a wound channel that let the air out of the deer immediately.

I'm not attacking you or your use of conicals to hunt. I particularly think that of all the conicals you could possibly use, you have fallen upon one of the very best. More power to ya! Just trying to illustrate that neither projectile has any particular advantage over the other when it comes to killing game.

When it comes to whether or not your projectile fits within the parameters of this forum, I have to agree with others who think not. Most of the members here, including me, have rather thin skin when it comes to the intrusion of modern projectiles and modern fast twist guns into the designated ml seasons. We have seen what was once an exclusive club deteriorate into an arms race fueled by manufacturers. In some states, the spirit of the ml hunt has been better retained than in others.

Some of that thin skinned irrtation spills over on the more modern oriented hunters (especially you it seems ). You just have to keep in mind where you are and who you are associating with here. Sometimes you get bashed! Sometimes you seem to think you are being bashed when actually you are not. There are probably a bunch of silent members here who are busy trying your pp'd conical system.

Don't take this as an invitation to go away, as far as I'm concerned you are welcome here as long as Claude makes it so. But, there is no reason why you can't broaden your experience by visiting and participating in some of the modern ml boards. Only problem you might run into is they may look upon you as too traditional what with no plastic stock, no 209, no sabot, etc.

Guess you are just a man without a country!!!

Did not mean for this to turn into a tree of tangents. My apologies.

 

[lonehunter]

Fact!#1 prb will kill dead
Fact!#2 conicle bullets will kill dead
Fact!#3 the human mind is the strongest weapon we carry into the woods.(most people)
opinion! If you have doubt about what you stuff down the bore of your rifle, it makes #3 the weakest link, and that can cause problems. im not going to get in the prb vs conicle BS I used conicles for years, both home casted pure lead and copper plated store bought. Never had a deer say which one they preferred to be shot with(due to early deaths)! I have switched to prb myself due to trad. reasons, the deer i killed this year with prb did not gripe alot either. All I am saying is confidence is more importaint than projectile, from a hunting point of view!
Just one mans OPINION!! :v

 

[longcruise]

We have seen what was once an exclusive club deteriorate into an arms race fueled by manufacturers. In some states, the spirit of the ml hunt has been better retained than in others.

Can't believe Im adding an addendum to the above post!! :shocked2:

In trying to understand more about this thin skinned attitude, I'll add that the manufacturers of the modern stuff have taken many pro-active steps in various venues across the country to actually have the round ball outlawed in the ml seasons! :shocked2: The efforts are always put forth by the shills (not to be named here) for the manufacturers and have only one purpose; to sell more of their stuff. Their efforts always seem to be couched in the "energy" argument which is unfortunately widely accepted among game commissions and regulators. Where laws do not allow the full extent of their equipment (as in CO), they attack the rules in an effort to create an anything goes set of regulations.

Ron, go to one of the boards where the zip gun and the shills reign and throw out a post extolling traditional gear and round ball hunting (I did it once :haha: ). I think you would return here feeling like you just got home from Afghanistan.

I swear to (insert your higher power of choice) that the best thing that could happen to traditional ml hunting would be the complete loss of all special ml seasons. The whole term "traditional" came about because of the modern equipment intrusion into the special seasons. Take away the season and the zip guns and the differentiation will go away.

 

[rabjr]

Physically white tails are a LOT smaller then mule deer. Ron

Ok, that I understand but tiny was the wrong word. I took one that hogged out at 223 another at 200. Had a couple of 197 and 190's hanging in the cooler. Smaller than a mulie yes but please our deer are sensitive, they don't like being called "Tiny".

 

[paulvallandigham]

That's the way I hunt deer, and If I were to hunt Elk, its the same way I would hunt them. I was simply acknowledging the fact that there are different conditions out West, caused by altitude, and terrain that can affect the choice of projectiles. I understand why IdahoRon, for instance, prefers using conicals for the kind of hunting he does. He's Not shooting minie balls, but Paper Patched bullets. There is a difference, both in shape, and how accurate they can be shot with open sights at distances to 200 yds.

Our less than 50 yards game shots, taken anywhere, can be handled marvelously by using the PRB we do. And at those distances, a .50 Cal. PRB would be adequate for Elk, too. As for mule deer, I understand that some get as heavy as 300-400 lbs., and stand about a foot taller than a good sized Whitetail. At least that is what I saw 50 years ago when I was in Colorado, and Wyoming. If Mule Deer have gotten smaller, I stand corrected! :grin: :thumbsup:

 

[tg]

'


". Smaller than a mulie yes but please our deer are sensitive, they don't like being called "Tiny". "

I dunno Swampy, some animals can fool ya, I just saw a mouse scamper across the far side of the room, and he looked pretty intimidating, I am going to try and find that proper .62 bullet tomorrow to make sure I can get the better of him, he's big....gnarly teeth, evil in his eyes,pure hatred in his heart...damn I may just hire someone to take him down, bet he hitchhiked over on an Idaho spud truck :shocked2:

 

[Idaho Ron]

So I am the sensitive one :idunno: . So please tell me why is it when someone posts a kill with a conical the PRB boys start harping about it not being traditional :yakyak: . Soon the talk is DON’T allow them conical shooters to post in the TRADITIONAL HUNTING forum because there is NO HISTORIC data that can PROVE a conical EVER killed a deer before 1873 or some stupid time frame :surrender: . The point is, NOT ONE of the posts about shooting an animal with a conical was ever portrayed as a Historically or Period correct kill that I can remember but I might be wrong :idunno: .
MS, I do post once and a while on modern boards. As you might very well guess I am thought of as a traditionalist. I am the next thing to Daniel Boon on those boards :thumbsup: . No I don’t get whipped up on there for having traditional guns. In fact when I post to those forums a lot of guys including guys here are private messaging me about how to set up there guns or make the paper patched bullets. You are right if I was to say how a PRB was the best thing sine sliced bread I would get the old :youcrazy:. My own personal experiences have lead me away form the PRB. But I do respect that other guys have good luck with them. I don't care if they use them or not.
I DON'T BASH them here and never have. I do hear a lot of half-truth and flat out lies here about conicals. When I call them out on their :bull: then I am the one that is thin skinned :hmm: .
If I said in most of my posts that the PRB was as effective as a ping-pong ball, would the PRB boys be the thin-skinned ones or would I be a jerk for belittling the PRB? My guess is if I bashed the PRB as much as I see others bash conicals I would have received my walking papers a long time ago. If others want to use PRB’s I don’t care. If I don’t want to read about PRB’s I just don’t click on the subject. If I don’t want to see yet another “tiny” whitetail on the ground I don’t click on the thread. If the PRB boys would like maybe we can have a warning on the post header. WARNING this post contains CONICALS. That way the PRB boys can just not click on the post. Any way you look at it the fighting about PRB vs CONICAL is not doing anything but cause hard feeling between guys that probably would enjoy eachothers company in another setting. I have never kicked a guy out of my camp for using a PRB. I am sure I would not be welcome in most of the camps here, and that is not being thin skinned that is being truthful. Ron