Energy foot pounds, velocity

[The Hungry Hunter]

I have a 50cal GPR. Which is very accurate 1.5 inches 50yards from a rest, for this ole 68 year old I do not think that is bad. Okay my question. I am using 75 grains 2f Goex powder, according to the Lyman book 70 grains will give me 1471 MV and 851 ME then it states what it is at 100yards,with the 80grain charge. Is there that much difference in the 75grain charge and the 80 grain charge. Is there any where that tells what the ME and the MV would be at 50 yards?? .490grain RB

 

[George]

Is there any where that tells what the ME and the MV would be at 50 yards?? .490grain RB

Shooting a .490" ball with a MV of 1471, at 50 yards the velocity will be 1125 fps and energy 496 ft./lb. That's according to the ballistics calculator by Hornady.

Spence

 

[Rifleman1776]

Fretting about numbers goes against the grain of enjoying old style muzzle loaders.
All that is important is: does it hit where you point it?
Will it kill a deer within effective range?
To answer yer question: not significantly.

 

[George]

Fretting about numbers goes against the grain of enjoying old style muzzle loaders.

You slept through math class, too, heh. :haha:

Spence

 

[crockett]

Dear Hungry: all that muzzle velocity and footpounds of energy stuff.....save that for your modern firearms with plated bullets that need help to expand. No one, to my knowledge, has ever really come up with a good test data (foot pounds energy) for muzzle loaders. The best is to just take in all the field evidence and go with that. I think the pure lead ball is a big difference, it can flatten out like a quarter and cut a really big path through both lungs of a game animal and bleed it out pronto but its more like and arrow than the lnockdown effect of a 30-06, etc. 70 grains and a patched round ball? at 70 yards or so- and placed through both lungs- the evidence it that has killed deer, black bears, and elk for many years.

 

[Idaho Ron]

The only guys on this forum that don't like to talk about foot pounds of energy are the guys that shoot PRB's. They think their PRB's somehow defy math and logic and are magic.
They can think what they want but foot pounds of energy is a fact. Ron

 

[Lonegun1894]

I happen to disagree. Foot pounds of energy is a fact, but it doesn't do any good and doesn't translate to performance in the field. That useless formula is great is you want to waste time, waste paper, get a headache, and congratulate yourself on how much faster your bullet is going than your buddys. This FPE math is so skewed that is can "prove" that a .223 is leaps and bounds better than a .45-70.

If you insist on using up your time with a pencil and paper instead of at the range or in the field with a gun, then a much better picture of performance can be obtained by using the Taylor Knockout Formula instead. Personally though, I would just develop an accurate load, practice, and then go hunting with it.

 

[F.G. Ford]

Sorry Ron,
You couldn't be farther from fact & truth.
A round ball and buble bee are creatures that defy principle and math......they both work real good, and fly pretty darn good as well.
A .50 cal. round ball can't even come close to a .243 Win. in velocity and energy, but a .50 round ball really proves it's self on deer, caribo and black bear.
Fred

 

[Flash Pan Dan]

I agree with Lonegun. FPE maybe a fact, but if it is a fact, it is an irrelevant fact.

 

[nkbj]

By the end of the seventies I'd figured out that rate of displacement was the best indicator of what you'll be looking at when you're dressing out. It's the mathematical first cousin to FPE but pointedly accounts round ball and black powder cartridge velocities performance because you have to account for how the displacement is accomplished. Just figuring FPE never explained a .243, a .50-90 or a .440 round ball.

 

[RedFeather]

There's also the Taylor's Knock Out Formula (TKO). Or maybe that's what is meant by "displacement"? Sometimes big and slow truly whups small and fast. As said, those slow roundballs have proven vastly effective on deer, etc. Go figure.

 

[nchawkeye]

70-90grs FF or FFF black powder in .45, .50 or .54s shooting round balls is plenty for whitetail deer hunting out to 100 yards...

 

[Claude Mathis]

The only guys on this forum that don't like to talk about foot pounds of energy are the guys that shoot PRB's. They think their PRB's somehow defy math and logic and are magic.
They can think what they want but foot pounds of energy is a fact. Ron

Yes, foot pounds and velocity are facts. But...

For some people, once they work up the most accurate load for a particular gun, it doesn't matter what the velocity or foot pounds are. For them, foot pounds and velocity are not the goal - accuracy is.

Targets and animals don't care about the numbers either. :wink:

 

[Loyalist Dave]

I prefer the empirical data gleaned from my own rifle. 70 grains of 3Fg pushing a 225 grain, all lead, patched round ball, from a 38" Colerain barrel, goes through the whitetailed deer when they are hit broadside in the lung area, out to 110 yards.

Are the deer in my area a good sample of the common whitetail in Maryland? Are they a good sample of the common whitetail in North America? Would the same results be observed on the larger mule deer at the same distance? Would it work on elk or moose at the same distance?

Who knows? Folks can make predictions, especially if I put some rounds through a chronograph, but nobody will really know unless I actually test the rifle, and do the test several times under varying conditions. Since I am not apt to go for mule deer, elk, or moose anytime in the predictable future...

LD

 

[daniel collums]

i read what you asked. i'm not going to give a answer that says the speed and power that a prb has on paper doesn't matter. i will say there are so many different combinations of prb loads(powder,type grade,lead,patch,lube,barrel fouling,length of barrel,time of day,heat,coolness,wind,etc. that there really ain't nothing defining that can give you more than a less than close figure that would be of help. the thing that should be on paper is you shot. the power of a prb with a average powder charge at a range of 50 yards is just as deadly as any center fire deer rifle or in some cases more because of lead softness.

 

[nkbj]

There's also the Taylor's Knock Out Formula (TKO). Or maybe that's what is meant by "displacement"? Sometimes big and slow truly whups small and fast. As said, those slow roundballs have proven vastly effective on deer, etc. Go figure.

Never read of Taylor's TKO. Displacement is cubic inches per second, the frontal surface area (inches squared) of the projectile interacting with the animal, displacing tissue and making the displaced tissue disrupt the tissue surrounding the bullet's path.
As the saying goes, there is no projectile as effective on game as the soft lead bullet. That's because of how the frontal surface area rapidly increases upon striking. Round ball does the same thing at shorter ranges being easier to accelerate and having diameter to start with. Doesn't matter how you do, the job is the same. Arguing a box end versus a crescent doesn't mean the bolt is any tighter.






That there is Sheba. Got a new bead front blade and got a tang peep on the way. Looking forward to hunting season, hoping I get a break and get to go. The yard deer all have names and just wouldn't taste as good.

 

[crockett]

Idaho: foot pounds is a fact but I've never been entirely comfortable with it and that extends to modern arms as well as muzzle loaders. I used to read Elmer Keith's stuff a lot. He was a big fan of a large bullet that by necessity was slower than some of the smaller calibers. He felt that regardless of the foot pounds formula- which highly favors the high velocity round- there was something about the heavy bullet that killed better. Keith said he started to change his opinion somewhat after the Nosler partition was developed as that bullet stayed together better.
Which, is why I mentioned the pure lead on the PRB. According to the foot pounds formula a PRB isn't much and yet, in the field, it just keeps on killing. As I said, no one to my knowledge has come up with a good formula or chart to compare PRB's or why they kill as well as they do. They kill better than the math on the foot pounds would indicate.
I, for one, remain confused. You can compare foot pounds on a 30-06 versus a 338 Win, etc but what about the muzzle loaders? The only thing I have come up with so far is to consider what is the experience in the field. If a lot of guys kill elk with broadside shots at 70 yards or so using a 50 or 54 caliber PRB, then I pretty much accept that. It's a fly by the seat of your pants approach for sure but I'm not certain the charts yield anything better. On another thread we are talking about some really small stuff like 40 caliber on deer. There are hunters that routinely kill deer with a 40 caliber PRB but once again- how do you compare the effectiveness against a 50 or 54 PRB? I don't know.
I wouldn't shoot a PRB through a shoulder although some hunters do. I'm wondering if PRB's are usually used with a broadside shot that takes out both lungs. In other words, maybe it is HOW it is used that has accounted for its record.

 

[Little Wattsy]

El-Pardono Amigos but I think most of you's have completely missed the mark and are not even sure what you are arguing against...

1. There are multiple reasons a person gets into BP and the journey to "traditional shooting for the sake of making smoke can take a period of time IF it ever happens. Some people get into traditional BP shooting specifically for the hunting VS say for the costumes, attire, Rendezvous, etc.

2. Say a person comes into this BP sport/community with hunting as a primary focus (like my own self did) then the learning starts where previous hunting left off which often involved a center fire rifle.

3. One of the 1st things a "new to BP" hunter wants to know is that this contraption will ethically kill the game and under what parameters.. (How far, how big, how much, etc.) Its not exactly like there is tons of positive affirmation on the subject ANYWHERE much less in the hunting community at large... After all I personally count it imperative that my weapon is adequate (a .22 short is enough gun for a grizzly "if you do your part" is NOT part of my motto)
I felt the same way when I fist took up bow hunting some 30 years ago and it took awhile getting my 7mm Mag head wrapped around how a razor blade kills..

3. To the point, We (I) started with what we/I knew; FPE, FPS, trajectory, etc. Perfectly logical when moving from a known weapon to an unknown - antiquated - antique - outdated concept that rumor has it might or might not kill a deer under certain conditions..
Now time heals all wounds and after several range sessions and hours perusing the treads on this forum I was able to start putting away the comparisons between modern and traditional but it wasn't until I had killed my first deer that I really started to believe in the ML/BP ability and not until I killed my 1st buffalo that I no longer needed to question its effectiveness but that was not day one or even during the first several months...

4. So when a new guy has the word hunter in his user name and he is asking questions to get assimilated to the leathality and usability of our fine traditional arms I think we could do a little better then say in our best inbred - southern accent "it jist doan matta" we could instead help draw the lines between where the new guy is starting at and where we might currently be info/knowledge-wise....

5. All THAT being said, new guy(s), these guns do get-er done and are fun to hunt with. Idaho Ron is one of the more accomplished hunters on this forum and worth listening to. Others have a lot to share as well. Personally I have settled on a .54 cal shooting a round-ball over 90 grains of Pyrodex RS powder using a .535 ball and a .015 patch knowing that it will kill an elk to 100 yards as that is my maximum effective range.
A paper-patched conical will extend that range a tad (read Idaho Ron's threads on said topic)
WELCOME to the sport and get ready to have a GREAT Time!!

 

[gearheart]

A ten pound bowling ball dropped from 40 feet up has 400 foot pounds of energy. Believe me it can and will kill. Tiny little projectiles fired from modern rifles need huge energy to mushroom the bullet up to the size that a round ball already has. The huge energy that the modern gun gurus say is required is not so much to kill the deer as to make the bullet function properly.

 

[rodwha]

Nice response!

I was one of those not long ago, and still find myself looking at ft/lbs of energy. It's what I know...

Initially I felt the need to use a conical as those puny little spheres couldn't possibly be enough to kill it DRT. But having read way too many accounts of exactly that I've let go of that perception, and have been working with nothing but patched RB's.

I do want a side lock that I can put a Malcolm scope on to use conicals for shooting beyond 75-100 yds. The RB may be able to do it still at/beyond 100 yds, but the wind drift is just too high for me. I still want to be able to hunt across fields as I did before I found how awesome these BP guns are.