Handgun Hunting?

[Bad Karma]

I’ve seen something much like it but concerning much older wide meplat bullet designs and predominantly the .45-70 Gov’t, which had the same type of results.

Funny that the few ball loads in ballistics gels from revolvers always seem to produce roughly caliber sized permanent wound tracks. Apparently it’s not blunt enough.

They act much the same in actual shootings too. But in spite of that the round ball is a very deadly projectile, more so than the typical 1860’s style conical bullets. IMO.

 

[rodwha]

They act much the same in actual shootings too. But in spite of that the round ball is a very deadly projectile, more so than the typical 1860’s style conical bullets. IMO.

Absolutely. It’s understandable how the few soldiers we’ve read about preferring a ball to a conical for use on men as the pointy nose allows the flesh to stretch creating a smaller than caliber permanent wound.

It’s crazy to me how even the slightest increase/decrease in nose design can have a tremendous impact. Traveling at the same 900 fps a .370” meplat is said to create a .833” hole whereas a .360” meplat creates a .810” hole.

And we see the Lee RN, like most others, isn’t round like a ball. I’ve seen a couple of modified molds that took a ball mold and elongated it to create a conical. And I see the benefit to that as the plunger doesn’t modify the nose as I see with mine. Once I’ve created a specific mold for my guns I intend to modify the rams.

 

[45man]

Blunt bullets are best if slow. Once velocity gets too high the flat meplat will move tissue out of the bullet path. A secondary wound path will collapse. Does a flat nose have better then a ball? NO. A RB will do it all. I have much experience with a 45-70 revolver that is just too fast. A WLN lost deer with a hole because the bullet went through too fast. I changed to a WFN and it was worse, deer was found well over 300 yards with pink lungs. Just a clean hole. Velocity is the key and too fast does not kill better. I do not think any gun will kill better then the old ML's whether the cap and ball or a flint lock. Hundreds of deer kills has shown me a ML still works best and a RB is not to be denied.

 

[rodwha]

Blunt bullets are best if slow. Once velocity gets too high the flat meplat will move tissue out of the bullet path. A secondary wound path will collapse. Does a flat nose have better then a ball? NO. A RB will do it all. I have much experience with a 45-70 revolver that is just too fast. A WLN lost deer with a hole because the bullet went through too fast. I changed to a WFN and it was worse, deer was found well over 300 yards with pink lungs. Just a clean hole. Velocity is the key and too fast does not kill better. I do not think any gun will kill better then the old ML's whether the cap and ball or a flint lock. Hundreds of deer kills has shown me a ML still works best and a RB is not to be denied.

Hmmm... There’s a bit written about the WFN design in the .45-70 and it doing quite well, and from a rifle.

 

[nkbj]

With soft lead and black powder it's the rate of displacement that makes such a great impression on what gets hit. Blunt noses, velocity and expansion are all trade offs while also being factors that run up the displacement. That's why big round balls do a great job until they slow down. Which reminds me of the time a fella shooting a .54 had to keep a straight face while telling a range officer that "everybody knows falling shot caint hurt nobody".

 

[Bad Karma]

Absolutely. It’s understandable how the few soldiers we’ve read about preferring a ball to a conical for use on men as the pointy nose allows the flesh to stretch creating a smaller than caliber permanent wound.

It’s crazy to me how even the slightest increase/decrease in nose design can have a tremendous impact. Traveling at the same 900 fps a .370” meplat is said to create a .833” hole whereas a .360” meplat creates a .810” hole.

And we see the Lee RN, like most others, isn’t round like a ball. I’ve seen a couple of modified molds that took a ball mold and elongated it to create a conical. And I see the benefit to that as the plunger doesn’t modify the nose as I see with mine. Once I’ve created a specific mold for my guns I intend to modify the rams.

My Lyman book has all of those great pictures of bullets breaking the wire to trigger the high speed camera and you can see the pressure wave pushing in front of the bullet or ball. Interesting stuff... and also a reminder of how far technology has advanced since the manual was published.

 

[Stony Broke]

A fairly stout load pushing a prb out of a muzzleloader pistol will do a pretty good job on most critters. I like the longer sight radius from the single shots and overall I think you are getting a more accurate pistol than a C&B revolver.

 

[rodwha]

A fairly stout load pushing a prb out of a muzzleloader pistol will do a pretty good job on most critters. I like the longer sight radius from the single shots and overall I think you are getting a more accurate pistol than a C&B revolver.

Agreed. I have in mind to get a Lyman Plains Pistol in .50 cal as a dedicated hunting pistol. I even bought a used 250 grn REAL mold for it, though I intend to work with a ball as I feel it’s plenty for most things and situations since, for me, it’s a short range ordeal.

Quite frankly I’m not accurate enough too much further than 15 yds with my revolvers, though I’d use a rest were it a primary weapon, which I wasn’t at the range. Maybe 25yds and more is doable, but my revolvers are meant as secondary guns anyway.

It’s because my revolvers are sidearms and hogs are on the menu that I’d prefer a WFN to a ball. Larger hole and greater mass.