How much powder?

[longcruise]

I recently posted the chrono data below on another thread. It got me thinking about the data in a new context. Original intent of the test was to compare velocities for different powders. In that regard, the data was pretty interesting (at least to me! ). The new context is on a subject that we see come up rather frequently especially with new shooter/hunters. We often get asked "how much powder will I need to kill (insert animal here) with my (insert caliber here).

The questioner gets answers all up and down the scale, just depending on what is prefered by those who respond. Typical answers state a charge and a granulation. Generally, all of the responses are good suggestions and will work.

Then I got looking at my data in terms of hunting loads for deer. For my own purposes, I would not select the Elephant load, but the rest of those 50 grain loads would probably work just fine on deer at reasonable ranges. In fact, I would feel comfortable with the Swiss load for elk out to 50 yards!

The reason I find this interesting is because rarely do we see anyone here advocating a 50 grain charge in a .54 for big game. I'm not "advocating" it but just saying that within the parameters prescribed here it would seem perfectly adequate.

Not disregarding that for longer ranges, heavier charges are advantageous in terms of momentum and trajectory.

So, take a look below. What do you think?

_______________________________________________________________

Average velocities for various powders with charges thrown from 50 grain volumetric measure. and shooting a .530 patched ball from a 32" .54 caliber barrel



Graf 3f

1405
1388
1370
1391
1396
Avg 1390


Elephant 2f

1135
1208
1215
1215
1238
Avg 1201


Swiss 2f

1546
1531
1574
1558
Avg 1552


Goex 2f

1349
1362
1376
Avg 1362

 

[Little Wattsy]

OK so I went to puiblik skool which ALMOST makes me as smart as a government employee :wink:
Can you (or someone) do the "math" for energy at the muzzle, 25 yards, 50 yrds, 75 yrds, 100yrds.?
Is that realistic?
I understand that thinking in terms of energy and velocity are not exactly the same as with CF guns BUT it would help me visulize how quicjkly that ball is loseing its ooomph.
Then if someone were REALLY ambitious we would get that same chart in 10 grain increments to 100 grains of powder or untill Davneport started to spasam. But seriously it WOULD help determine an ethical killing load based on how far you might resonable expect to take game.
ALSO anyone thats done actual penetration tests with these lighter loads...THAT would be usefull info too....Ive only done that with 90 grain loads.

 

[rabjr]

I want to be prepared for more than 50 yard shots and the animal isn't always standing perfectly broadside. I feel much better having 90gr of 3F under my ball than 50gr.

 

[roundball]

If you set aside Swiss because its really a different animal, and look at all the others, without specifically checking on it they strike me as being generally all around the .44 Special / .44 magnum / .45 Long Colt sort of velocities with a 240-ish grain bullet. And at typical, relatively close handgun distances, IMO the 50grn load would certainly get it done under good field conditions and shot placement that would also be required for a handgun.

On two different occasions I've been sitting squirrel hunting with a little 30grn charge & Hornady .440" in a T/C Flintlock...had a 5 pointer, and another time a doe...each come meandering into the oak flat not 18-20 yards in front of my outstretched legs...shot each one in the heart and they each fell in sight.

BUT...that's not typical deer hunting of course...and I don't intentionally GO deer hunting loaded with only 50grns. My deer loads are all in the 90-110grn range depending so I don't have to worry about being stuck with a powder-puff charge if I get a clear 100yd shot at a deer.

(PS: my comments are not theoretical...they're the result of experiences over the years proving them to be extremely efficient / effective deer loads in spite of mysterious formula claims to the contrary)

 

[dbutch]

My hunting load formula = the most accurate load in the largest load-charge..54-58-62 range 90-105 gr.fff-goex..would not even think of hunting with less!... this is in my rifles with me shooting.

large game here

One hole in animal good..2-holes better... seeing light through both best....ventilation works!

Why would you want to hunt with a light load?

adequate is for people that like to track game.
There is nothing like seeing your game hit the deck.
As a hunter I prefer not to have the game(meal) lost or prolong the inevitable.

Rant over!.....Thanks for pushing my button!...Dan

 

[BrownBear]

Oh heck yeah, and not a spec of theorizing or theory. Over 20+ years of handgun hunting I made reliable one-shot kills on a whole truck load of deer with bullets ranging from 150 to 250 grains and velocities from 750-1400fps. Even made one shot kills on an elk and a moose with a 240 grain bullet at 1300 fps.

A 54 cal ball weighs nominally 225 grains, and even unexpanded has more frontal area than most expanded pistol bullets. With the great performance of those hard cast pistol bullets with large meplats, how can a ball with a .530 "meplat" not kill well?

Why would a guy load hotter? It would be all about trajectory rather than any need for more killing power. My usual 54 cal hunting load of 90 grains of 3f isn't from any worry about power, rather it's because it gives the trajectory I want.

 

[peter hawbaker]

I use 100 grains of 3F Goex in my .54s, have for nearly 20 years. It is accurate in my rifles, at a chronographed 1780 FPS, and does the job on deer, no problem. I am sure that a lighter load would work, but on longer shots it is nice to have the flatter trajectory. The longest shot on deer I attempted with a flinter, a doe on the farm back in PA at 120 yards, went down quick, and the ball went through both shoulders and exited. I did not know she was quite that far when I took the shot, figured it to be 90-100 yards, but the load did the job, no problem.

 

[longcruise]

OK so I went to puiblik skool which ALMOST makes me as smart as a government employee
Can you (or someone) do the "math" for energy at the muzzle, 25 yards, 50 yrds, 75 yrds, 100yrds.?
Is that realistic?

Indeed it is! I'll run those numbers using the British Round Ball table and post them in this thread when completed.

As far as the ethical considerations go, I ain't goin there!!! :shocked2: :haha: My only comment will be to quote an often revered and often reviled well known member of the hunting community; "Ethics are in the heart, not in the hand."

 

[Stumpkiller]

I load 85 gr Goex FFFg in my .54 for whitetail . . . and I AM a govermnent employee!

City, not federal. Maybe that helps. ;-)

 

[Little Wattsy]

I load 85 gr Goex FFFg in my .54 for whitetail . . . and I AM a govermnent employee!

City, not federal. Maybe that helps. ;-)

THAT changes EVERYTHING! The States and more so the Feds have stolen so much authority that I almost dont even count City AS government anymore. :wink:

 

[longcruise]

Here is the data for the various powders. I also added the same ball at 2000 fps for comparison. This is probably going to format badly so get ready for eyestrain!

Graf 3f
Velocity: 1390
Target Distance: 100


Ballistic Data
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Range Elevation Velocity Energy
0 yds -0.70 in 1390 fps 957 fpe
25 yds 2.03 in 1213 fps 729 fpe
50 yds 3.28 in 1085 fps 583 fpe
75 yds 2.71 in 999 fps 494 fpe
100 yds -0.00 in 935 fps 433 fpe




Elephant 2f
Velocity: 1201
Target Distance: 100


Ballistic Data
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Range Elevation Velocity Energy
0 yds -0.70 in 1201 fps 714 fpe
25 yds 2.58 in 1077 fps 574 fpe
50 yds 4.00 in 993 fps 488 fpe
75 yds 3.22 in 930 fps 428 fpe
100 yds 0.00 in 879 fps 382 fpe




Swiss 2F
Velocity: 1552
Target Distance: 100


Ballistic Data
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Range Elevation Velocity Energy
0 yds -0.70 in 1552 fps 1193 fpe
25 yds 1.63 in 1344 fps 894 fpe
50 yds 2.76 in 1178 fps 687 fpe
75 yds 2.33 in 1062 fps 558 fpe
100 yds -0.00 in 982 fps 477 fpe



Goex 2f
Velocity: 1362
Target Distance: 100

Ballistic Data
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Range Elevation Velocity Energy
0 yds -0.70 in 1362 fps 918 fpe
25 yds 2.11 in 1192 fps 703 fpe
50 yds 3.38 in 1071 fps 568 fpe
75 yds 2.79 in 989 fps 484 fpe
100 yds 0.00 in 927 fps 425 fpe

Velocity: 2000
Target Distance: 100
Scope Height: 0.700
Temperature: 70
Altitude: 500

Ballistic Data
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Range Elevation Velocity Energy
0 yds -0.70 in 2000 fps 1980 fpe
25 yds 0.96 in 1694 fps 1421 fpe
50 yds 1.86 in 1427 fps 1008 fpe
75 yds 1.67 in 1214 fps 729 fpe
100 yds 0.00 in 1068 fps 564 fpe

 

[paulvallandigham]

I hate to nitpick, but can you give us the Caliber of the gun, the diameter of the ball used, and the powder charge used for this data??? It would also help to know barrel length, and ROT, if you have that. Is this just a PRB used, and if so, what is the thickness of the patching, and the lube used?

Thank you. :thumbsup:

 

[longcruise]

I hate to nitpick, but can you give us the Caliber of the gun, the diameter of the ball used, and the powder charge used for this data??? It would also help to know barrel length, and ROT, if you have that. Is this just a PRB used, and if so, what is the thickness of the patching, and the lube used?

Paul, see my original post opening this thread. All is there except the lube, twist rate and patch. Those are long forgotten. But, guessing what I probably used at that time I'd say Joannes #40 and hoppes #9 Lube. The gun was a Lyman GPR with 32" 1:66 twist (that's correct, they went to a 1:60 twist sometime in the '90s. This barrel dates from about 1982)

Below is the info provided with the original post. This chronograph data is around 6 or 7 years old. I produced the Ballistic Data from a ballistics program using the data derived in the original chrono testing (see above post by Wattsy where he wondered about these figures). The 2000 fps ball is hypothetical and added on for curiosity sake.

Average velocities for various powders with charges thrown from 50 grain volumetric measure. and shooting a .530 patched ball from a 32" .54 caliber barrel

 

[paulvallandigham]

Thanks for the information. What seems to be lacking is Actual down range chronographed reading to confirm or deny these programs. This is No criticism of You, much less the Lyman researchers. However, all of us have found that the numbers listed in reloading manuals tend to be a bit "different" than what we get from our guns. That fact, repeated many times, with many different kinds and caliber of guns, makes most of us old timers more than a bit skeptical about relying on " Program Data.".

I guess now that we can own our own chronographs, its up to us to do the work, and publish our own results. I personally expect things to be close, and truly hope the data IS close to the Program Data. :thumbsup:

 

[Johnny Tremain]

I have two loads for my 45 cal.

55gr Goex f3 @ 1610fps
75gr Goex f3 @ 2030 fps

covers just about anything I care to shoot

 

[shootemup]

I use 70 grains of 3f Goex under a .490 roundball in a .015 patch for my .50; 80 grains of 3f Goex with a .530 prb for my .54.

My shots are usually under 50 yards, almost never beyond 75.

Works for me.

:hatsoff:
Spot

 

[Bill Hall]

I believe part of the responsibility we have when taking an animal's life is to do it as ethically as possible. No matter what weapon we choose, we owe it to our quarry to make that weapon as effective as possible. For me, that means getting the best balance of energy versus accuracy as I can from whatever caliber I am using. So, even if I do cause a delayed death due to a less than perfect shot, it wouldn't be because I intentionally under-powered the load.


I think the example Roundball gave of taking deer with light loads still falls under the ethical catagory, since I'm sure he would've passed on the shots if conditions were'nt perfect for a quick kill (an assumption based on his character :thumbsup: ). But, of course we all know situations like that are rare, with many hunting shots being taken as split second decisions. Honest mistakes in shot placement can (and do) happen. An optimum load helps to offset those mistakes by offering flatter trajectory and/or greater power.

This is just my opinion and I'm not saying it can't, or shouldn't be done. My point is that hunting deer, and especially elk, with an intentionally light load (50 grains in a .54) should only be done by someone who can accept the limitations and has the self-discipline to adhere to those limitations. I doubt many of us care to hunt under those conditions (not me :grin: ). Bill

 

[longcruise]

Thanks for the information. What seems to be lacking is Actual down range chronographed reading to confirm or deny these programs. This is No criticism of You, much less the Lyman researchers. However, all of us have found that the numbers listed in reloading manuals tend to be a bit "different" than what we get from our guns. That fact, repeated many times, with many different kinds and caliber of guns, makes most of us old timers more than a bit skeptical about relying on " Program Data.".

I guess now that we can own our own chronographs, its up to us to do the work, and publish our own results. I personally expect things to be close, and truly hope the data IS close to the Program Data.

Well, first off I want to clarify that this is not loading manual data or Lyman data. The listed muzzle velocities are from my own tests done a few years ago. The velocity/trajectory/energy charts are derived using my original muzzle velocity data and entering it into a ballistics program.

I originally told Wattsy that I would run the data through Frenchu's Ballistic 4.13. 4.13 allows for the selection of one of six ballistics tables. One is a rarely found or used table called The British Round Ball table. It requires calculating a ballistic coefficient specifically for that table. I have a spreadsheet that will readily calculate the weight of any size ball and will also calculate two BCs, one for the Brit Round Table and one for the popular and useful G1 table. The nice thing about the Brit Round table is that is useful with calculating the ballistics of shot right on down to #9 and smaller if one ever used anything that small. The down side )not a big down side) is that it's max velocity is 1900 fps. In fact, I would not have been able to prsent the 2000 fps data using the Brit Round table.

Long story short, (I guess it's way too late for that :haha: ) 4.13 is pretty much a DOS based program and since I upgraded to XP, I have not figured out how to display it so that I can copy and paste data. Therefore, I used the Point Blank program with the G1 table and appropriate BC. In the past I have run data through both and found that they differed by insignificant amounts.

You and others may feel it necessary to split the hair so fine as to fire over your chronographs at the specific ranges out to, say, 100 yards or so. It seems as though it would be more definitive but I would rather do it with your chrongraph than mine! Feel free to send me your chrongraph (postage paid of course) and when I'm done I'll return what is left COD .

 

[The German]

Thank you for all the work. Very helpfull!!!!

 

[longcruise]

You are welcome.

Another thing that might stand out for some hunters is the trajectory figures. Notice the difference in the 50 yard trajectory point between the fastest and slowest velocities.

One of the reasons some hunters prefer heavy charges is to improve the trajectory for longer shots. The increased velocity does not hold up very well at longer ranges but by that time it has done it's work in improving trajectory.