conicals or round balls

[roundball]

I took one that hogged out at 223 another at 200. Had a couple of 197 and 190's hanging in the cooler.

All this talk about western deer being bigger is to imply that they need big heavy conicals to bring them down...nothing could be further from the truth.

There's not a deer, Elk, or Moose on the planet that requires anything larger than a patched round ball...

 

[larry wv]

A big enough round ball might be better wording? Don't think a .45 prb would be a good idea. On the other hand a.45 with a good dose of powder and a maxie would do a better job. BUT still not big enough for my taste. Larry

 

[longcruise]

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!

Jeez Paul, how the heck did you weight them? :haha:

Seriously, a mule deer that stands exactly as high as a whitetail will weigh a bit more than the whitetail. They are a bit blocky. Mulies in the 300 to 400 pound range are out there, but they are incredibly rare. And indeed, you were certainly more likely to have seen one 50 years ago than today. I have never had a chance to weigh any of the largest bucks I've seen or seen shot. Just guesswork, but the biggest one I ever saw (and dragged :shocked2: ) probably hit about 350 to 375. That one was killed by my dad in 1964.

Altitude is not much of a player in ballistics. Some small effect, but not much. I practice and sight in at 5500 to 7500 ft elevation and hunt at 7000 to 12000 ft and have never felt there was any effect to worry about.

 

[longcruise]

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

I can't speak for anybody else, but in our camps we are only interested in the charachter of the company and their willingness to participate in the all around camp life. We all tend to drop what we are doing and go help the guys who just made a kill (I have had the misfortune of hunting with guys who refused ) We regularly have round ball shooters, conical shooters and zip gun shooters. It's more important what kind of food and beer they bring with them! :rotf:

So, I suspect you would be welcome in our camp. OTOH, we also have a nasty MilSurp hunting habit that you may be to traditional to abide! :shocked2:

 

[Idaho Ron]

Seriously, a mule deer that stands exactly as high as a whitetail will weigh a bit more than the whitetail. They are a bit blocky. Mulies in the 300 to 400 pound range are out there, but they are incredibly rare. And indeed, you were certainly more likely to have seen one 50 years ago than today. I have never had a chance to weigh any of the largest bucks I've seen or seen shot. Just guesswork, but the biggest one I ever saw (and dragged :shocked2: ) probably hit about 350 to 375. That one was killed by my dad in 1964.

Years ago I used pack goats for hunting. My biggest goats were 300 pounds and I weighed them on a scale. Most of the trophy Mulies I killed at that time were all bigger than my goats. The deer I killed this year had the biggest body of any deer I have seen in a while. I would not have surprised me if that buck went close to 400 pounds on the hoof.
This is a buck that my friend killed. I would guess this buck with a live weight of about 250 to 275 pounds. John weighs over 200 pounds and the deer was bigger than he was.

This is the deer I killed. His body mass was WAY bigger then John's deer.

When I am working the fish and game check stations I see a lot of BIG bodies on Mule deer. For mature mulies I would say that a lot of the fully mature bucks will easly go over 300 pounds. Ron

 

[paulvallandigham]

WE have 300-400 lb. Whitetails here in Illinois, altho they are old and rare! I have tracked a buck that was over 300 lbs, and saw the big guy the next day when my wife missed him! He stood at least 6 inches taller than any other whitetail I have ever seen, either at a check station, or live.

I didn't suggest that Mule Deer commonly get to weigh between 300 and 400 lbs. But, they are larger animals, generally, age compared to age of whitetails.

The choice of using a RB or a conical stays always with the hunter, and part of the decision depends on the caliber he chooses to use, and the hunting style he uses. A .45 RB would be illegal to use in some of the Western States, where mulies are hunted. But a .45 Conical, fired from a fast twist, shallow grooved barrel, would be both legal and desirable.

 

[longcruise]

The choice of using a RB or a conical stays always with the hunter, and part of the decision depends on the caliber he chooses to use, and the hunting style he uses. A .45 RB would be illegal to use in some of the Western States, where mulies are hunted. But a .45 Conical, fired from a fast twist, shallow grooved barrel, would be both legal and desirable

No doubt as regards the choice matter. I only entered into this exchange with you after you made the comment that somehow the conical would be a better choice out west due to distance, terrain, etc. I simply disagree with that pov and that was why I posted the chart output as regards trajectories, etc. It's pretty clear that:

1. There is no advantage to the conical in terms of trajectory.

2. The greatest limiting factor in making long shots with a conical or a rb is the ability judge distance.

3. While there is less energy in the round ball it is up to the job of killing game when the size of the ball is up to the size of the game.

That number three we can and have (on this forum) kicked around to the point that there is little left to say. I accept #3 based on my own experience, observations of other hunters shots and kills and the related experiences of the members of this forum. Number three will never be settled, IMO.

You only have to look at Ron's posted photos to get an idea of the nature of the mulie habitat in Idaho. Same holds for a large part of CO. But, I still contend that when it comes down to the shot, an adequate sized ball is going to provide all the oomph needed within the shooting ability of the hunter.

A .45 RB would be illegal to use in some of the Western States, where mulies are hunted. But a .45 Conical, fired from a fast twist, shallow grooved barrel, would be both legal and desirable.

I think that falls in the choice category. I could not hunt mule deer in CO with a .45 rb but could with a conical as long as it weighed at least 170 grains and did not exceed .90 inches in length. My TC .45 and any of the commonly available conicals would fill the bill I suppose but I would not consider it any more desireable than a .50 or .54 rb. Then again it's that choice thing again.

 

[roundball]

:hmm: :hmm: almost sounds like the settlers out west never took any big game until conicals became available in the 2nd quarter of the 19th century... :wink:

 

[rabjr]

:hmm: :hmm: almost sounds like the settlers out west never took any big game until conicals became available in the 2nd quarter of the 19th century... :wink:

You never read the Journals of Lewis and Clark? Or "Undaunted Courage?"

They ran into some area's where the Elk and Deer were thick and basically unafraid of man at that time. Most of the way, not all of it, but there was an abundance of game. It wasn't until we started shooting them, that they woke up and saw man as a threat. It only got worse as more people went west and the distances between humans and animals grew more and more.

Oh they took game with roundballs but eventually they needed something that shot further as distances grew.

 

[BrownBear]

:hmm: :hmm: almost sounds like the settlers out west never took any big game until conicals became available in the 2nd quarter of the 19th century... :wink:

Actually, there were darned few settlers out west in the classic era of the round ball. And considering the short duration of the fur trade and lots of trappers unwilling to farm, I'm betting the best ended up as guides for the wave of settlers that came behind them, scouts for the army, and especially as buffalo hunters.

I'd bet that the move of the military to cartridge guns and the advent of the buffalo trade did more to kill off round balls than anything. For pioneers-turned-farmers back east busting clods and hoping to see a deer every year or two, the RB was just fine.

But with all the Indians chased out west, the beaver gone, and buffalo hunting about the only viable living for someone who didn't want to hang with sod busters, the move to conical bullets would be quick and final. And especially for warfare and buffalo, the move to cartridges would have happened about as fast as folks could get their hands on them. Even if old RB guns still dominated with eastern farmers and gentlemen, all but the holdouts out west had moved on.

There was a huge difference between east and west following the fur trade and before the civil war. And holding westerners to eastern rules of play made about as much sense then as it does today.

 

[longcruise]

You never read the Journals of Lewis and Clark? Or "Undaunted Courage?"

They ran into some area's where the Elk and Deer were thick and basically unafraid of man at that time. Most of the way, not all of it, but there was an abundance of game. It wasn't until we started shooting them, that they woke up and saw man as a threat. It only got worse as more people went west and the distances between humans and animals grew more and more.

Whoa, Swampy, you are treating the arrival of Lewis and Clark as though they were the first humans to arrive in the west! The elk, deer and buff had been hunted hard by native americans for centuries before L&C showed up. I expect the big game of the west was terrified of humans long before a white man arrived. On top of that, there were of french trappers and traders in the west long before L&C showed up.

Oh they took game with roundballs but eventually they needed something that shot further as distances grew.

They were whacking all the game of the west handily with the rb long before their was any other option. After the end of the mountain man era those who remained in the west continued to arm themselves with round ball loaded ml guns. Distances at which game was taken would not have grown, IMO. The change from rb to conical came with the arrival of the breech loading suppository gun. And, of course many switched to them if they could afford it. Especiallyn if they were proffessional buff hunters. It was not the ability to shoot that much further that was attractive though; it was the ability to quickly reload. It was all about practicality and economics! Well into the cartridge era settlers headed for the west were arming themselves with "trade rifles" that loaded a patched ball.

We always seem to talk about the fur trade era as something that took place between L&C and the mid to late forties. While the heyday of the western beaver trade died at that time, the fur trade continued for many years and actually began with the first arrivals of white settlers on the continent. The American mountain man era was only a very small slice of the North American fur trade. I like to think of the American mountain man era as being book ended by John Colter seeking and gaining permission to leave the L&C expedition to seek his fortune and up to the time that Meek decided that Oregon might be more prosperous than the beaver trade.

 

[rabjr]

You never read the Journals of Lewis and Clark? Or "Undaunted Courage?"

They ran into some area's where the Elk and Deer were thick and basically unafraid of man at that time. Most of the way, not all of it, but there was an abundance of game. It wasn't until we started shooting them, that they woke up and saw man as a threat. It only got worse as more people went west and the distances between humans and animals grew more and more.

Whoa, Swampy, you are treating the arrival of Lewis and Clark as though they were the first humans to arrive in the west! The elk, deer and buff had been hunted hard by native americans for centuries before L&C showed up. I expect the big game of the west was terrified of humans long before a white man arrived. On top of that, there were of french trappers and traders in the west long before L&C showed up.

Oh they took game with roundballs but eventually they needed something that shot further as distances grew.

They were whacking all the game of the west handily with the rb long before their was any other option. After the end of the mountain man era those who remained in the west continued to arm themselves with round ball loaded ml guns. Distances at which game was taken would not have grown, IMO. The change from rb to conical came with the arrival of the breech loading suppository gun. And, of course many switched to them if they could afford it. Especiallyn if they were proffessional buff hunters. It was not the ability to shoot that much further that was attractive though; it was the ability to quickly reload. It was all about practicality and economics! Well into the cartridge era settlers headed for the west were arming themselves with "trade rifles" that loaded a patched ball.

We always seem to talk about the fur trade era as something that took place between L&C and the mid to late forties. While the heyday of the western beaver trade died at that time, the fur trade continued for many years and actually began with the first arrivals of white settlers on the continent. The American mountain man era was only a very small slice of the North American fur trade. I like to think of the American mountain man era as being book ended by John Colter seeking and gaining permission to leave the L&C expedition to seek his fortune and up to the time that Meek decided that Oregon might be more prosperous than the beaver trade.

I never said they were the first whites to travel there. We know trappers did and traded with some of the tribes but guns weren't that prevalent there at that time. Lewis and Clark in fact tried their best not to hand out guns to the Indians.

Did you read any of the journals? Didn't they talk about walking amongst game as if they unafraid in some areas?

You cannot compare hunting by Indians to those of the Corps of Discovery.

 

[William O.]

What happened during your hunt? Did you use RB, conicals or both?

 

[longcruise]

12/14/09 06:45 PM - Post#795504
In response to marmotslayer


marmotslayer Said:Quote:You never read the Journals of Lewis and Clark? Or "Undaunted Courage?"

They ran into some area's where the Elk and Deer were thick and basically unafraid of man at that time. Most of the way, not all of it, but there was an abundance of game. It wasn't until we started shooting them, that they woke up and saw man as a threat. It only got worse as more people went west and the distances between humans and animals grew more and more.





Whoa, Swampy, you are treating the arrival of Lewis and Clark as though they were the first humans to arrive in the west! The elk, deer and buff had been hunted hard by native americans for centuries before L&C showed up. I expect the big game of the west was terrified of humans long before a white man arrived. On top of that, there were of french trappers and traders in the west long before L&C showed up.


Quote:Oh they took game with roundballs but eventually they needed something that shot further as distances grew.




They were whacking all the game of the west handily with the rb long before their was any other option. After the end of the mountain man era those who remained in the west continued to arm themselves with round ball loaded ml guns. Distances at which game was taken would not have grown, IMO. The change from rb to conical came with the arrival of the breech loading suppository gun. And, of course many switched to them if they could afford it. Especiallyn if they were proffessional buff hunters. It was not the ability to shoot that much further that was attractive though; it was the ability to quickly reload. It was all about practicality and economics! Well into the cartridge era settlers headed for the west were arming themselves with "trade rifles" that loaded a patched ball.

We always seem to talk about the fur trade era as something that took place between L&C and the mid to late forties. While the heyday of the western beaver trade died at that time, the fur trade continued for many years and actually began with the first arrivals of white settlers on the continent. The American mountain man era was only a very small slice of the North American fur trade. I like to think of the American mountain man era as being book ended by John Colter seeking and gaining permission to leave the L&C expedition to seek his fortune and up to the time that Meek decided that Oregon might be more prosperous than the beaver trade.





I never said they were the first whites to travel there. We know trappers did and traded with some of the tribes but guns weren't that prevalent there at that time. Lewis and Clark in fact tried their best not to hand out guns to the Indians.

Did you read any of the journals? Didn't they talk about walking amongst game as if they unafraid in some areas?

You cannot compare hunting by Indians to those of the Corps of Discovery.

The description of walking among game that was unafraid is very much a subjective observation. Buff, for example were never inclined to spook very much. The prof buff hunter would take a stand as close as he could get to a herd (much closer than most might think) and then take out the leader of the herd. The rest would stand there waiting their turn to be shot.

It does not take a gun to instill fear of humans into wildlife. Even though the guns were their in lesser numbers than later, the indians hunted with their bows to great effect. Both the fur trappers and the indians concentrated on buff as a food source. Deer and elk served as well but did not provide as much nutrition as a buff even though the time and energy required to bag a deer or elk might be the same as needed to hunt and kill a buff. When you consider that it took about nine pounds of meat per man per day for the members of the L&C group, it pretty much made buff what was prefered. Of course they killed and ate whatever presented itself including at least one pelican.

 

[tg]

An interesting note not to far off topic, a search for "bullet" in the Mt. Man site indicates that the term ball and bullet were used interchangebly, pouches were often called bullet pouches but would hold balls.

 

[rabjr]

12/14/09 06:45 PM - Post#795504
In response to marmotslayer


marmotslayer Said:Quote:You never read the Journals of Lewis and Clark? Or "Undaunted Courage?"

They ran into some area's where the Elk and Deer were thick and basically unafraid of man at that time. Most of the way, not all of it, but there was an abundance of game. It wasn't until we started shooting them, that they woke up and saw man as a threat. It only got worse as more people went west and the distances between humans and animals grew more and more.





Whoa, Swampy, you are treating the arrival of Lewis and Clark as though they were the first humans to arrive in the west! The elk, deer and buff had been hunted hard by native americans for centuries before L&C showed up. I expect the big game of the west was terrified of humans long before a white man arrived. On top of that, there were of french trappers and traders in the west long before L&C showed up.


Quote:Oh they took game with roundballs but eventually they needed something that shot further as distances grew.




They were whacking all the game of the west handily with the rb long before their was any other option. After the end of the mountain man era those who remained in the west continued to arm themselves with round ball loaded ml guns. Distances at which game was taken would not have grown, IMO. The change from rb to conical came with the arrival of the breech loading suppository gun. And, of course many switched to them if they could afford it. Especiallyn if they were proffessional buff hunters. It was not the ability to shoot that much further that was attractive though; it was the ability to quickly reload. It was all about practicality and economics! Well into the cartridge era settlers headed for the west were arming themselves with "trade rifles" that loaded a patched ball.

We always seem to talk about the fur trade era as something that took place between L&C and the mid to late forties. While the heyday of the western beaver trade died at that time, the fur trade continued for many years and actually began with the first arrivals of white settlers on the continent. The American mountain man era was only a very small slice of the North American fur trade. I like to think of the American mountain man era as being book ended by John Colter seeking and gaining permission to leave the L&C expedition to seek his fortune and up to the time that Meek decided that Oregon might be more prosperous than the beaver trade.





I never said they were the first whites to travel there. We know trappers did and traded with some of the tribes but guns weren't that prevalent there at that time. Lewis and Clark in fact tried their best not to hand out guns to the Indians.

Did you read any of the journals? Didn't they talk about walking amongst game as if they unafraid in some areas?

You cannot compare hunting by Indians to those of the Corps of Discovery.

The description of walking among game that was unafraid is very much a subjective observation. Buff, for example were never inclined to spook very much. The prof buff hunter would take a stand as close as he could get to a herd (much closer than most might think) and then take out the leader of the herd. The rest would stand there waiting their turn to be shot.

It does not take a gun to instill fear of humans into wildlife. Even though the guns were their in lesser numbers than later, the indians hunted with their bows to great effect. Both the fur trappers and the indians concentrated on buff as a food source. Deer and elk served as well but did not provide as much nutrition as a buff even though the time and energy required to bag a deer or elk might be the same as needed to hunt and kill a buff. When you consider that it took about nine pounds of meat per man per day for the members of the L&C group, it pretty much made buff what was prefered. Of course they killed and ate whatever presented itself including at least one pelican.

Those animals didn't see the likes of anything compared to the Corps of Discovery.

 

[nw_hunter]

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......


Getting back to the original question?
What distance are we talking about, and I thought the discussion of modern bullets (Powerbelts) for muzzleloaders on this forum was taboo

As far as a blood trail!, the deer I have shot with ML'S using RB left a good blood trail, and the one I killed this fall with a 62 RB bled out very quickly.He only went a few yards.

If you are hunting in WI with open sights, the RB should have plenty of energy for a quick kill, if you put the RB in the right place.

One of my friends hunts with a 62 cal smoothie, and has taken several elk with the RB.That said! I think the conical is a better long range projectile. Just leave the copper and plastic out of the equation :grin:

 

[tg]

"I thought the discussion of modern bullets (Powerbelts) for muzzleloaders on this forum was taboo"

It seems that items need not be traditional to be a correct topic in the traditional forums.

 

[longcruise]

Those animals didn't see the likes of anything compared to the Corps of Discovery.

In what respect?? There were only a few designated "hunters" in the Corps. There were tens of thousands of native americans scattered through the Louisiana Purchase area and areas to the south included. All of them except for a few of the puebloan tribes were pure hunter and gatherers. They slew thousands of buff from horseback and killed every deer or elk they could get within range of for 365 days out of the year. A few guys showing up on a mission to explore the NW did not bring any sudden education to those animals. Neither did the ongoing years of the fur trapper make much difference given that there were probably never more than 3000 to 3500 mtn men in the west at any given time right up to about 1840

 

[jethro224]

"I thought the discussion of modern bullets (Powerbelts) for muzzleloaders on this forum was taboo"

It seems that items need not be traditional to be a correct topic in the traditional forums.

You are correct. The discussion of modern bullets (Powerbelts) is taboo on this forum. We moderators try to be lenient and probably let a bit too much slide past. Trying not to be too strict when possible. A bit of honest discussion can be useful sometimes.

There are over 16,000 members here now. Claude only knows how many new topics/posts every day. There are only 6 moderators, including Claude. It ain't easy keeping up with everything and everyone and every post. :surrender:

Every member here has read and agreed to the rules. Every member here should try and stick to the rules. Please. Claude doesn't have too many rules. Basically just keep it family, friendly, and traditional, and don't use the forum for a free advertisement. :thumbsup:

That said, I think this topic has already been allowed to continue longer than it probably should have.