Food for thought on smaller calibers for hunting big game.

[Kmcmichael]

Please elaborate regarding the“45 rifle is more versatile than the smoothbore.”

 

[smokepolehall]

I have shot ML's for many years. My G'pa's .45 my Pa had n i learned with it. As my younger years passed i ran with the Crowd & not what i learned. I had a .58 at one time, my .54 was just as good. Then a few years later i got a .50, its really just as good as the .54. Then a .45, a .40, a .36 & a .32..So i these .58 & .32 & .36 down the road. Then i got the Flintlock bug, i got a factory .50 & a kit .45 & a kit .40 but its a capper. I am sure in a few years i will give the .54 & .50 & one of the .45's to my grand children. All 6 of them hunt & fish, of course when i pass all of mine will go to them. My favorite cal.'s are the .40 n .45.

 

[IsMackinac North]

You are correct in your conclusions and incorrect on some assumptions.

First, you can cleanly kill medium and even larger game like elk with a small to medium caliber with well placed shots. Lots of game are what is call thin-skinned and non-dangerous. You can afford to have them live after a shot until they either bleed out internally or the damage to their lungs prevents them from going further. You my lose a few more if your tracking skills aren't "Boone" quality. Elk, in particular, can cover LOTS of ground before they die from those types of shots. If you want to avoid that potential for loss, you will likely want a through and through shot that breaks some bones. Example below many have seen posted already:

Elk (she wasn't overly big) taken with a 54 cal 375 gr bullet over 100 grains of pyrodex at 85 yards.......That had more retained energy and MV than the old 45-70 405 gr bullet (45 cal, 405 gr, 70 grains BP). The bullet broke a leg bone, passed through heart, lungs and lodged on the far side between ribs under the skin. NOT ONE DROP OF BLOOD WAS FOUND AT THE ENTRY WOUND AND THERE WAS NO EXIT WOUND. I first thought "What the hell? Did I scare her to death?" If she had needed tracking much further than the 20 yards she did go, it would have been some serious work as fresh elk tracks were everywhere.

Picture of her and the bullet

View attachment 187378

View attachment 187379

So "In the olden days" tracking skills were likely better and more game was lost than we imagine. Additionally, they took 200 yard shots routinely, hardly even fretted about clean kills, and usually hunted in groups or at least pairs. Having read hundreds of contemporaneously written books and journals, I can attest to that. What was acceptable then, doesn't apply now.

I submit, for your consideration, that a through and through passage of a bullet after breaking some bones will make for a better blood trial and reduce game loss with much cleaner kills. That we, today, do not hunt in groups and do not routinely take the long shots without care to whether we cleanly kill or not.

So for the smaller whitetail strains, shot in the woods up close, you are absolutely correct. A smaller caliber bullet can and will get the job done. Out west in the open and with bigger game, something more is needed.

There was a reason and it wasn't by accident that as Americans moved west, the calibers got bigger and the loads stouter.

Weapons are tools, you likely don't use a framing hammer to nail a brad on a picture frame and conversely use a brad driver to frame a house. One size does not fit all.

See I just gave you a perfect excuse to get some more guns. I personally have them to hunt squirrels to water buffalo from 10 yards to 1000 yards. Now if I can just find the time, money and location to do that. ROTFL!!!!!!

You make good points!

 

[Sparkitoff]

I want a large projectile that is easier to find, feel and handle with gloves and has a lot of surface area to push it down into the muzzle when reloading. For me that starts at .530 and gets even easier as the diameter increases.

 

[IsMackinac North]

No doubt those work!

 

[appalichian hunter]

Use a BB gun and see how good you really are.

 

[ETipp]

You are correct in your conclusions and incorrect on some assumptions.

First, you can cleanly kill medium and even larger game like elk with a small to medium caliber with well placed shots. Lots of game are what is call thin-skinned and non-dangerous. You can afford to have them live after a shot until they either bleed out internally or the damage to their lungs prevents them from going further. You my lose a few more if your tracking skills aren't "Boone" quality. Elk, in particular, can cover LOTS of ground before they die from those types of shots. If you want to avoid that potential for loss, you will likely want a through and through shot that breaks some bones. Example below many have seen posted already:

Elk (she wasn't overly big) taken with a 54 cal 375 gr bullet over 100 grains of pyrodex at 85 yards.......That had more retained energy and MV than the old 45-70 405 gr bullet (45 cal, 405 gr, 70 grains BP). The bullet broke a leg bone, passed through heart, lungs and lodged on the far side between ribs under the skin. NOT ONE DROP OF BLOOD WAS FOUND AT THE ENTRY WOUND AND THERE WAS NO EXIT WOUND. I first thought "What the hell? Did I scare her to death?" If she had needed tracking much further than the 20 yards she did go, it would have been some serious work as fresh elk tracks were everywhere.

Picture of her and the bullet

View attachment 187378

View attachment 187379

So "In the olden days" tracking skills were likely better and more game was lost than we imagine. Additionally, they took 200 yard shots routinely, hardly even fretted about clean kills, and usually hunted in groups or at least pairs. Having read hundreds of contemporaneously written books and journals, I can attest to that. What was acceptable then, doesn't apply now.

I submit, for your consideration, that a through and through passage of a bullet after breaking some bones will make for a better blood trial and reduce game loss with much cleaner kills. That we, today, do not hunt in groups and do not routinely take the long shots without care to whether we cleanly kill or not.

So for the smaller whitetail strains, shot in the woods up close, you are absolutely correct. A smaller caliber bullet can and will get the job done. Out west in the open and with bigger game, something more is needed.

There was a reason and it wasn't by accident that as Americans moved west, the calibers got bigger and the loads stouter.

Weapons are tools, you likely don't use a framing hammer to nail a brad on a picture frame and conversely use a brad driver to frame a house. One size does not fit all.

See I just gave you a perfect excuse to get some more guns. I personally have them to hunt squirrels to water buffalo from 10 yards to 1000 yards. Now if I can just find the time, money and location to do that. ROTFL!!!!!!

That, sir, sums it up perfectly.

Good post!

 

[ETipp]

Won't argue any of the above, but it is a strawman argument to say that a 45 is better because with a 58 you will flinch. It is like saying a 58 is better because the wind might blow and it isn't as affected by the wind.

Neither of which we were talking about.

To say a 45 may be better for a smaller, recoil sensitive person I will buy, but on an apples to apples comparison it doesn't wash.

Absolutely. I never feel recoil from any rifle during a hunting application. Not even from the big magnum(s) unmentionables I used to own.

 

[SwampBilly]

I took a feral hog with my 1858 with a 451 round lead ball and a 25 grain load of pyrodex from roughly 90 ft away once, years ago.

It was a broadside shot and went high behind the shoulder punching through a rib bone and both lungs and the ball came to a stop just under the hide on the far side.

I never weighed the hog but I'm confident it was easily a bit north of 100 lb. It ran about 15 ft and squealed very loudly twice and gave up The Ghost and dropped right there.

 

[ETipp]

Big bore=big hole, big hole= better loss of blood and more structural damage if a rib or shoulder blade is hit, kind of like the old pistol gun fight rule, never go to a gun fight with a pistol where the caliber doesn't start with a 4, the 50s are nice the 54s are better and the 62s well like I said big hole lots of blood. Now if your deer are the size of collie dogs the 40s and 45s should suffice as long as you do your part.

Well said!

 

[BS]

Ask yourself, would I shoot an animal with 1 piece of buckshot?

It will kill them but, it needs to be well placed and there may not be a blood trail.

I use to think a 50 was big, but now a 58 is looking a little small.

I like 60 and 70 cal round ball shooters for hunting.

 

[IsMackinac North]

That, sir, sums it up perfectly.

Good post!

All good points. But remember, blood is not the only means of tracking an animal. They leave countless other signs that tell you everything that's going on with them.

 

[TTT]

I love the conversation here and again I hunt with large and small calibers. What I don't get in all of this is " you have to put the bullet where it belongs " statements. A lower leg shot deer is the same crappy hit whether it be a .72 cal. round ball or a .32 cal round ball. I'm sure we all agree that shot placement is critical with any caliber we shoot. But foe the sake of new shooters and BP hunters, just because you shoot a large caliber muzzleloader does not mean you can skimp on accuracy!! Weatherby said at the launch of his new 300 unmentionable was so powerful that you could hit a big game animal anywhere in the body and get a quick clean kill. well we all know that's not true! Hunt with the caliber you have confidence in and put it where it belongs.
Sorry just felt I needed to throw that in. I M still enjoying the conversation ! thank you all.

 

[okawbow]

I think a round ball kills more by tissue destruction, leading to massive blood loss, than by shock. The farthest I have had a deer run after a good hit from a round ball, was with a .69 caliber through the heart. That deer ran over 100 yards. The only deer I ever dropped on the spot with a round ball that didn’t hit the spine or head, was with a .45 cal. A soft lead round ball typically flattens out to a much larger diameter and causes a large wound channel.

 

[mikesto44]

Couple of things we all need to learn. We all hunt for different reasons. I've been hunting for over 60 + years. In that time I've learned to not rush my shots. Don't take low percentage shots at animals and to use a caliber I'm comfortable using and I'm accurate with.
But before all that I was taught how to track a wounded animal. But on my previous post when I stated I don't take low percentage shots is that's what I do. What you choose to do is your business .

 

[Nuthatch]

Couple of things we all need to learn. We all hunt for different reasons. I've been hunting for over 60 + years. In that time I've learned to not rush my shots. Don't take low percentage shots at animals and to use a caliber I'm comfortable using and I'm accurate with.
But before all that I was taught how to track a wounded animal. But on my previous post when I stated I don't take low percentage shots is that's what I do. What you choose to do is your business .

I still recall taking a shot with an unmentionable several years ago that taught me about low-probability shots. It was a cartridge that was ideal, if not more than adequate for deer. Had the bullet stayed on its straight-line path inside the body, I would have taken out both lungs & likely exited around the off-side shoulder. At close range (about 60 yards), I thought it would be "good enough." But, as it happened, the bullet spun off about 90 degrees & turned the steeply quartering away shot into a gut shot. The deer buckled, spun around & galloped into the timber. Lucky for me, I was able to get a follow up shot in an opening between the trees and dropped him as he ran. I vividly remember how the crosshairs were aligned at those shots and saw that my entry on that first shot was exactly where I had expected. But the exit was something completely different. Now I wait for better shots. I got lucky once but won't count on that again. And with front stuffers, I won't be getting a second chance anyway -- there's only one shot to do it right.

 

[ETipp]

All good points. But remember, blood is not the only means of tracking an animal. They leave countless other signs that tell you everything that's going on with them.

Yeah, I know. Been killing critters since the 60's. Being an avid long time bowhunter, I have learned how to track. But no one can deny that the more blood on the ground the better. The more an animal bleeds, the sooner it expires. Anyone that denies this simply has not spent enough time in the woods tracking hit critters. No one knows this better than seasoned bowhunters.

Also, as good of shots as some people "think" they may be, things do not always go as planned.

Do strange things happen...........yes in deed. But they are not the norm.

 

[ETipp]

I think a round ball kills more by tissue destruction, leading to massive blood loss, than by shock. The farthest I have had a deer run after a good hit from a round ball, was with a .69 caliber through the heart. That deer ran over 100 yards. The only deer I ever dropped on the spot with a round ball that didn’t hit the spine or head, was with a .45 cal. A soft lead round ball typically flattens out to a much larger diameter and causes a large wound channel.

Many stories of deer running 100 yards after having their hearts shot out with high power unmentionables. I have personally seen recovered .50 caliber RB that were as flat as a pancake. I have yet to prove this but my guess is, if one can even recover a .54 RB that it would be quite flat as well, considering the shot distance.

The one thing I do know for a fact is, out of all the critters I have killed with a .50 Maxi Ball, none went more than a few steps. And Maxi Balls do not expand.

 

[pamtnman]

I worship the crushing overkill of the .62 round ball rifle. I don’t care much about the efficient use of powder or lead, because I might get just a few shots at big game all season/ year. I want every shot to be the best it can be, not be “probably good enough.” This .45 talk sounds like that Titan submersible…”it’ll work.” Nah. Not good enough. Give me instant back-flipping death of every bear and deer I point this at. Having a .62 flintlock rifle made, so i can retire the .54 and rest easy.

 

[smokepolehall]

Thought process is good but total function is better. Those who like large prb's more power to you. Those of us that shoot well even in our older age comes wisdom of when to shoot n how far. Myself i use a rest when i shoot yeah support. I do not shoot offhand at game, so .40 cal is bigger than modern .24/25/26 n so on. I have heard the high velocity cry all my life n don't buy into it. Main thing is shoot n use what your comfortable with. Just don't tell me mine caliber won't do the job. I have killed 2 dz. dump truck loads of tick toters in my life so far.