Thanks to everyone for the thoughts. My next question (although answered strongly if you read between the lines in many posts elsewere) is if a .50 prb is really adequate at 175g for reliably harvesting deer. Wasn't the concept of the .54 really evolved because of the exponential mass increase with slight change in cal? I'm old school where the idea was to hit as hard as you could (in my previous life I was a 12ga 3" slug shooter) even in the short range hunting I do (never taken an animal at further than 40 yards due to the cover I hunt). I have the .50 (for now), is mass really the important consideration at the short ranges I am talking about? It does seem though that I need to find out what works for my gun and what I am comfortable with. Thanks again all.
Well, remember, one of the whole points of getting into early American traditional muzzleloading is to relive the way they did...and it puts a premium on practice, patience, and shot placement.
I've take several deer now with just the relatively lightweight .45cal 128grn ball, one at 60yds, and the ball flattened out to a dime/nickle size and stopped, bulging out the hide on the far side...nicked the hide with the tip of my knife and it fell out.
But in every case I waited until I got a clear shot straight into the boiler-room, most were broadside, one through the front chest...as long as you put it into the heart, they'll drop within sight of the stand.
It's not an approach to hunting where you think in terms of "tons of energy and shock power"...it's almost like a longer range form of bow hunting...shot placement is everything...that's the challenge.
The larger, heavier .50cal ball is a bigger hammer and carries energy further, extending the range...and then the the .54, .58, etc just keep extending the range...every deer I've ever shot with a patched ball either fell where it stood or sprinted 25-30yds and dropped.
I'd take a rested 100yd shot at a standing deer with a .50cal round ball without hesitation, and he wouldn't run more than 25+ yds.