paper patching ???

[Idaho Ron]

We have one 'myth busting' post above that says "I can shoot up to 5 shots in a SUB 1” group before I need to clean." This is supported by a 4 shot group fired using Pyrodex. So is it sometimes 4 sometimes 5 shots; what happens when black powder is used? That does not appear to provide the consistency that I need. What is being achieved is good accuracy and in the hunting environment should yield excellent results. How does it stand up over long strings of shots though?

David, The picture I posted was only a 4 shot. Here is a 6 shot group it is with a different rifle but the same concept was followed. I shot until the group degraded. My statement that I can shoot up to 5 shots was probably more of an average than anything. Both of the guns I shoot paper patch in the most are going to put 5 shots in a sub 2" group without cleaning. I do this test for my own peace of mind. If I am hunting and I need to shoot follow up with other shots I am assured that I can shoot up to so many shots before I need to clean. I have never shot true black powder through these guns. To be honest it is too hard to get here in Idaho. To get it I would have to mail order it. With the extra cost involved I just don't mess with it. I only use powder I can get locally. :thumbsup:

I shoot long range target rifle out to 1200 yards with paper patched bullets. Course of fire is 15 match shots and 3 (or 5 depending on event) sighters. I need consistency across a long string of shots shooting 530+ grain bullets with 90-100 grains of black powder. I don't have the option to shoot short strings of shots until the group starts to open; that is throwing away points in a match.

Cleaning between shots permits the rifleman to maintain consistent barrel conditions across all shots.... It is about controlling fouling and eliminating variables. Without cleaning there is risk of pushing the bullet through the patch when seating the bullet. Similarly variations in muzzle velocity make a difference in elevation at long range which may not be apparent at short range.

I agree with you 100% No way would the loading practices that will work for me at 150 yards or less work at 1200 for you, or like I said even 300 yards. My point as you know, was at MY normal hunting ranges. I wanted my loads to be such that cleaning between shots in a field condition while following up a wounded animal was not needed. I also want to point out that for hunting, Paper Patching is not as usless as another post had thought it was.

I read other peoples posts with care and understanding and avoid making reactionary statements. If I am ignorant of a subject I will seek to learn. If I have knowledge of a subject I will express my experience.

If you re-read my message above and apply some understanding you will note that I was referring to long range target shooting. Idaho Ron's experience seems to accord with my views on this subject:

Thanks David for clearing that up. :hatsoff:

I am talking about shooting at 150 yards or less for hunting accuracy.
When I start shooting out to 200 to 300 yards I clean between each shot, this is for target accuracy.

Study the reports of the 19th century long range matches and the international series at Creedmoor, Dollymount and Wimbledon. There you will learn what 19th century riflemen shooting paper patched bullets from muzzle and breech loading rifles did to wring out the best accuracy from their firearms. Come along to the World Long Range Championships at Camp Butner, North Carolina, next September and watch the riflemen shooting PP bullets and see what they do.

David

Man I would love to do that. Some day I will try to get that done. I would love to watch and learn about realy long range shooting. What you guys do at 1200 yards makes the 300 yard shots I do look like a chip shot. Thanks for clearing some things up. :thumbsup: Ron

 

[silent sniper]

well I would be trying them out in my t/c 50 cal hawken flinter, t/c 50 cal hawken caplock, cva 50 cal hawken, and maybe the 32. all the 50's have 1-48 twist. i tried pping a couple GP maxi hollow points and it worked except the the top grove in the bullet after pped was to big to fit in the barrel. so should i order some undersized bullets from buffalo bullet co. and try them ? thanks sniper

 

[roundball]

"...the the top grove in the bullet after pped was to big to fit in the barrel..."

Don't know if you've used GP conicals in the past, but by their design, the top groove around the bullet "IS" larger than bore size...it is basically groove size.

It is referred to as the "driving band" and is designed for you to slide the slip fit conical down into the muzzle until it comes to rest on that large band, then you sharply 'punch' the bullet the rest of the way into the muzzle using a short starter.

At short start time, the ends of the lands cut through this driving band, and the rifling remains engaged with the bullet this way, both while being seated down and while being fired back up & out. Its how the rifling rotation gets transferred to the bullet.

If you buy .50cal Hornady GP bullets or TC maxi-hunters, they are designed correctly for those calibers

 

[paulvallandigham]

YOu can trim the PP just below the driving band, and they work just fine. Just use a razor blade to trim the paper patch AFTER you have finished the wraps around the bullet. The driving band is the secret to these bullet's success.

Otherwise, you will need to size any conical to below your bore diameter, so that with the patching, the diameter of the bullet is at or slight less( .001) than the bore diameter, to ease loading. Bullet sizers are made in all calibers, and in all sizes by specialty companies. Unless you are reloading cartridge guns, you will need to invest in a reloading press to make full use of the bullet sizing dies.

Remember, that what you are trying to do is shoot a conical in a rifle with deep rifling ( grooves) intended for shooting the PRB. The paper is to fill in those grooves to seal gases behind the PP bullet. Otherwise, gas cutting will cut the paper, and the lead of the bullet, making it unstable in flight, and unpredictable as to where it will fly. (Inaccurate!) Conicals are better shot in shallow grooved barrels designed to shoot them.

Whenever I meet someone who wants information about shooting conicals in a MLer, I ask them what they are going to hunt with it? Its totally the WRONG projectile to use when hunting Whitetail deer. :hmm: :hatsoff:

 

[mike alexandre]

Hi SS. Try this info sitehttp://members.shaw.ca/bobschewe/
hope it helps. JM

 

[Idaho Ron]

Whenever I meet someone who wants information about shooting conicals in a MLer, I ask them what they are going to hunt with it? Its totally the WRONG projectile to use when hunting Whitetail deer. :hmm: :hatsoff:

So now once again a thread will be hijacked for the old PRB vs Conical fight. Seems like about every thread that has anything to do with a conical ends up going this way. I don't see anyone going to the PRB threads and talking smack about the PRB, at least you won't see any of my posts bashing PRB's on a PRB thread.
Paul, can you explain why a conical is totally wrong in every hunting instance for whitetail?
I feel that your statement is incorrect. The reason I give are that conicals can be very accurate, and depending on the gun even more accurate than a PRB in the same gun. Conicals carry enough energy to kill a whitetail. Some people will argue that the magical killing power of the PRB can’t be measured by humans. But in almost every instance when a person is asking about hunting big bears, and sometimes moose, a lot of you guys say go with the conical. Why?
So that leads me to wonder. Why is a conical the wrong projectile for whitetails? Is there such a thing as too dead? Does the whitetail deer have skin that is impervious to conicals?
Nowhere in the original post was the question asked, what would be better a PRB or a conical for whitetails? But yet here we are again about to wade through another 10 pages of what is better. Thanks Paul. Ron

 

[paulvallandigham]

Conicals rarely, if ever, expand on a deer sized game animal. The PRB expands even at low velocity, making a bigger hole as it expands, even in the rather thin chest of a deer. That process of expansion contributes to the shock delivered to internal organs, and contributes to the quicker kill.

Conicals kill by punching a caliber hole through the animal. If the hole is placed accurately, the animal dies as fast as if it were hit with a PRB. If not, then it races off, often dying where the hunter can't find it.

That deep penetration is needed on thick skinned animals, or animals with hard, thick bones, like Wild boar, or ELK, or Bear, Moose, Caribou.

The conicals recoil much because of their extra weight, compared to a similar diameter PRB. Because of the short range at which Whitetails are shot- under 50 yards-- using a conical is NOT necessary.

Considering the problems shooters have with flinching and shooting any gun off-hand accurately, use of a conical for deer hunting contributes to bad hits, and mamed animals. Yes, it happens with PRB, but people who shoot PRB tend to anticipate its limitation, as bowhunters do their gear, and pick their shots wisely. Just look at the Hunting Topic on this forum to see the performance of the PRB on deer.

Traditional MLers use side actions, either percussion or Flint, and open sights. Not scope sights. The shooter is restricted by the range he can reliably shoot iron sights on his gun and still make accurate ball placement on his game. That makes passing on 100 yds shots through trees and brush very easy to do, when hunting with any PRB.

With conicals, shooters want to try to " Brush Buck" their deer, and will take "iffy" shots that wound and mame animals, if they hit them at all. After all, why shoot that heavy bullet that knocks your shoulder all the time, if it won't bust through that screen of branches and twigs and still kill that deer way out there?

The heavier slugs have a higher trajectory curve, making range estimation beyond 100 yards critical to bullet placement. If all shooters were good range estimators, this would not be a problem. However, they aren't. I haven't met one shooter in 10 that can estimate 100 yards and be within 10 yards of the actual distance, without the aid of a range finder using laser technology. Go beyond 100 yds, and the estimates get even worst.

The PRB, being lighter in weight, can be fired at a faster velocity and shoots flat enough out to 50 yards, in any caliber, and even from a smoothbore, to be used to kill Deer in edge brush, or wooded cover.

My entire life, I have read articles in gun magazine about some guy who kills a whitetail deer at 300 yards across an open meadow, with his 7mm Magnum rifle. That is NOT real life. Sure, such shots do occur, every year. But the vast majority of deer are killed at under 50 yards, with shotguns firing shotgun slugs, or Mlers using a PRB. Its still not a rare sight to meet a hunter who is using the same shotgun he hunts rabbits with, and the occasional pheasant, that has NO REAR SIGHT on it when hunting deer. He is going to be the hunter who knows this country, and where the deer are, and he hunts ravines, where his shots are every more than 25 yards.

When I was a deer checker, I met a man who had killed his deer on opening morning, within 10 minutes of the season beginning, from a tree stand, on the back of his property. Distance to deer was about 6 feet! He had killed 4 deer over the past 4 years from that same stand and the longest shot was less than 10 yards. All were one shot kills. He had a Browning Semi-auto with the first scope sight I have ever seen on a shotgun. He had bought 3 boxes of slugs the year he put the scope on the gun. He used the first box of five rds. to sight in his scope. Then he used one shot each from the second box for the 4 deer. He still had one cartridge left from that second box, and the unopened third box of slugs.

He told me he was going to buy a CVA kit and build a MLer rifle to use for deer hunting next season. It was too "easy " to kill his deer with that scoped shotgun!

Now, I can't imagine what he thought would happen shooting that MLer, and I didn't ask him. I turned away to keep from appearing to be laughing At him. He did say his family operated a goose blind pit business, and the deer he shot each year was processed and made into venison chili for the hunters. He shot the first deer that came by that tree on opening morning, every year, and then got back to the family business of guiding goose hunters.

 

[roundball]

Ron, anybody can use anything they want to that's legal for deer, and you have the real hands on experience with conicals to back up what you're talking about...as do I...all posters on this subject do not.

Years ago when I was hunting with a .45cal Hawken, I experimented with T/C's .45cal Maxi-Hunters and they without a doubt left nothing to be asked for in terms of accuracy, and were simply devastating on deer...filled 3-4 tags with them each year for a couple years then moved on to a different caliber and got away from them...but once into Flintlocks, I pretty quickly set up a .45calx1:48" Hawken Flintlock with them and keep it handy in a case...have several boxes of those maxi-hunters on the shelf.

I've often posted that if I could only have one all around "rifled" muzzleloader I think it would have to be the .45cal with a 1:48" twist barrel. The .440"/128grn balls shoot out of that twist like a house afire, they're reasonably economical for everything from practice to small game to deer at modest distances...and the 255grn maxi-hunter for big game at distance.

:thumbsup:

 

[Idaho Ron]

Paul, conicals don’t expand. Please we have went over this time after time. Here is proof that yes they do open up. I have showed these bullets before. I guess I have to again. Both of these bullets came out of a mule deer shot in the flank and the bullets were dug out of the shoulder.

Paul, you have obviously forgotten what you have been writing on this very subject. Countless times you say ML bullets do NOT have a hydrostatic shock value.
Now you are saying yes they do. Which is it? I have read you talking about a primary and a secondary shock wave BLA, BLA, BLA. Now only a round ball has shock value and a Conical doesn’t. Lets look at the PRB vs the CONICAL on drop.
All of the following information on velocity was from my OHLER 35 chronograph. The two conical loads I shot ARE my hunting loads. The PRB load was 110 gr of pyrodex select RS. While the two conical loads are wicked accurate, the PRB load was not an accurate load. In fact at 100 yards I had only 2 holes in my target out of 5 shots, but they were FAST. Forget they can’t hit the broad side of a barn. The barrel used in the PRB shots were a TC Renegade barrel with 1-48 twist.

I am looking at my Ballistics program right now at a 50 yard zero for the following info. A 177 gr 50 cal PRB launched at 1998 FPS has the drop at 100 yards of 2.47” and 516 foot pounds of energy. At 150 the PRB is at 11.49” low and 366 foot pounds of energy.

My 410 gr hornady bullets launch at 1500 FPS and they drop 3.17” at 100 yards and they have 1417 foot pounds of energy. At 150 yards they drop 11.92” and they have 1206 foot pounds of energy.

Lets look at a real heavy weight. My 50 cal 460 gr bullets at 1310 FPS, and the have 4.42” of drop at 100 yards, and 1307 foot pounds of energy. At 150 yards, this load is 15.61” low and has 1164 foot pounds of energy.

Paul you said.

The heavier slugs have a higher trajectory curve, making range estimation beyond 100 yards critical to bullet placement.

So the PRB is superior because it only drops .7” less at 100 yards than the 410 gr Hornady? The same loads at 150 yards, the PRB only drops .42” less than the 410 gr Hornady. So how is the PRB better for poor range estimation? If you compare it to the 460 gr load at 100 yards the 460 is only 1.95” lower than the PRB. At 150 yards the 460 is only 3.69” lower than the 177 gr PRB. Again how is the PRB going to help the poor slob that can’t do range estimations?
The fact is I doubt many guys are shooting 110 gr of powder with the PRB but some might so that is what I used for the test. I also don’t think that the average PRB heading for a whitetail is going 1998 FPS. So I can say that the difference in the actual drop would be much less than what I posted. So again PAUL PLEASE, tell me how the PRB is a WAY better bullet for guys that can’t estimate range?
If you look at the foot pounds of energy which you don’t want to look at. The Conical wipes the floor with the PRB. In fact they are not even in the same league.

So conical shooters shoot iffy brush shots. Please don’t even go there. You are not looking over everyone’s shoulder so you don’t know ANYTHING. I can say that same thing and worse about a PRB. PAUL, ranting that conical shooters only take iffy shots is BS and you know it.
PAUL, I am a Reservist for the IDF&G. I check deer too. Actually I have done it for about 14 years. That doesn’t give you any extra believability in my book.
You said

I turned away to keep from appearing to be laughing At him.

That is what I am doing to you right now I am turning away. I have gone as far with this thread as I am going to.
It makes no sense for me to argue ballistics with a guy that believes that deer can make the conscience decision to administer first aid to themselves after they have been shot.
Ron

 

[gjkershul]

You did not ask about roundballs but paper patching works for them too.
My load in my Pedersoli Bess for trailwalks, military shoots, and whitetail is 80 gr of 3f. with a .735 Lyman ball ball in a computer print out paper cartridge.
The computer paper mikes at .0035 and two wraps bring the paper patched ball to close to the .749 muzzle diameter. Before puting the powder in the cartridge I dip the cartridge with the ball in place in hot paraffin (sp) wax to just cover the portion of the cartridge were the ball is.

To load, the cartridge is torn, the powder is poured and the cartridge is reversed and thumb loaded waxed portion first into the barrel. The portion of the cartidge now above thge crown of the barrel is then torn off leaving a waxed-for lubrication- paper patched ball which is then rammed home on top of the powder charge. If permitted by the event, it is advisable to reload with this type cartridge immediately after firing when the barrel is warm from the previous discharge.
This protcol is something like the British drill for Enfield cartridges.
Tomorrow, at a trailwalk in Vale Oregon I going to add an 11 ga. wad down the bore before the paper patched bullet as suggested in the smoothbore forum. I will advise if it makes a difference.

When my son was young-10 to 12- and got very tired using short starter on woodswalks-I made up some .58 cartridges using the same method as above with .570 balls for use in a slow twist shallow groove JP Murray Carbine. He could shoot an entire 10 to 25 target course without getting too tired.
I think I got the idea from a Rev War book that mentioned American riflemen using paper roundball rifle cartridges sometimes. The only problem was that he often out shot me and my adult buddies.

 

[paulvallandigham]

YOu have your experiences, and I have mine. I looked at hundreds of deer killed with shotgun slugs- the older foster style, that resembles a minie ball, as a deer checker. I saw about a dozen dead deer at the station that were killed with PRB.Almost no one was using conicals back in the late 1960s. Since the 1970s, when I began my interest in MLers, and deer hunting, I have examined both deer and wild boar killed with both PRB and conicals. My comments are based on those observations, and confirmed by my discussion with other experienced shooters.

There are always excepts, of course. I can't know how fast someone drives a conical, nor what alloy he may cast it from. Softer conicals are going to act differently in tough tissues, than hard conicals. I believe you made the point earlier that hard cast RBs don't expand.

I don't ever recall writing that a conical does not leave a secondary wound channel. I have always believed that it does. Its the PRB that leaves only a primary wound channel in deer. This is based on my own careful examination of the wounds in the internal organs, after they were removed from the deer's torso. I have done this many times, on my own deer, and on those killed by other hunters, who I have helped field dress their deer. The secondary wound channel is physical quite evident in the form of blood shot tissues that extend well beyond the primary wound channel.

What has impressed me about RB wounds is the fact that they begin to be bigger than the entrance hole almost immediately on entering the body cavity. Contrary to this, the conicals leave a very even primary wound across the entire track of the wound, unless the bullet hits bone(s). My first deer with my .50 RB saw a broken rib on entry, and another broken rib on exiting. The break, and missing bone on the exit rib was much larger than that of the entry rib. In fact, I took another .50 caliber RB out to line it up with that broken rib, after getting the hide off, and the hole through the rib was caliber size on entry. It coned a bit as it traveled through this old doe's rib.

I had plenty of wounds to examine as a deer checker. The first year I worked that job, the Department wanted detailed information on the number, location, and caliber of the wounds. The one-shot kills were balanced out with deer brought in with more than 6 holes in them. One was a yearling doe that weighed 35 lbs, and had 13 holes in her.( two slugs went out the same hole). The next year, they Department didn't ask for so many questions to be asked, and we were relieved, as the number of deer killed in that county my second year was almost double the previous year's kill total. We were almost too busy to be asking all those darn questions of the hunters.

I still recommend conicals if you are hunting wild boar. The second boar hunt I went on a couple of the men were using MLers, and they took that advice. Both had one shot kills. .50 and .54 caliber guns. I don't believe either slug was recovered. You should see the secondary wound channels on those hogs. I saw the boars hung up from a pole rack at the hunting cabin when I came down off the hill at the end of the first day. I was not present when they were gutted, but did get to talk to both hunters about the wounds, and got to examine the carcases with the hides still on to see the entry and exit wounds. The exit wounds had tears, but other than that did not seem to be much larger. I did find the gut piles the next day before the other hogs ate all of them, and that is when I poked around and saw the secondary wound channels. I think I was the only hunter in the group that didn't kill a boar the first day, so they slept in while I took my time going back up the hill. I used information from the two hunters to find where the kills took place. Only my friend, Don, would have understood my interest in examining the wound channels, as he was the only hunter there for the second hunt, that was also along for my first boar hunt.

Its not that I am unimpressed with conicals performances on deer: rather, I am simply very much more impressed with the performance of the PRB on deer. That is the reason I recommend the PRB for deer hunters, and ask shooters who want to use conicals Why they are doing so. Now, I understand that mule deer are heavier than whitetails, and some of those deer have some very heavy bones. If you hunt mule deer, a RB cast from Wheelweights, of at least 50 caliber, or any conical, would make perfect sense to use. The same for Elk. For any animal that goes 700 lbs. and more, I think you have to be thinking conicals. That is for thin skinned game. For Bear, boar, and other predators, I think a conical is also called for. I would not want to tackle a mountain lion with only a PRB in my .50. I know they have been killed with less, but animals that fight back deserve a bit more respect.

 

[Dphar]

You did not ask about roundballs but paper patching works for them too.
My load in my Pedersoli Bess for trailwalks, military shoots, and whitetail is 80 gr of 3f. with a .735 Lyman ball ball in a computer print out paper cartridge.
The computer paper mikes at .0035 and two wraps bring the paper patched ball to close to the .749 muzzle diameter. Before puting the powder in the cartridge I dip the cartridge with the ball in place in hot paraffin (sp) wax to just cover the portion of the cartridge were the ball is.

To load, the cartridge is torn, the powder is poured and the cartridge is reversed and thumb loaded waxed portion first into the barrel. The portion of the cartidge now above thge crown of the barrel is then torn off leaving a waxed-for lubrication- paper patched ball which is then rammed home on top of the powder charge. If permitted by the event, it is advisable to reload with this type cartridge immediately after firing when the barrel is warm from the previous discharge.
This protcol is something like the British drill for Enfield cartridges.
Tomorrow, at a trailwalk in Vale Oregon I going to add an 11 ga. wad down the bore before the paper patched bullet as suggested in the smoothbore forum. I will advise if it makes a difference.

When my son was young-10 to 12- and got very tired using short starter on woodswalks-I made up some .58 cartridges using the same method as above with .570 balls for use in a slow twist shallow groove JP Murray Carbine. He could shoot an entire 10 to 25 target course without getting too tired.
I think I got the idea from a Rev War book that mentioned American riflemen using paper roundball rifle cartridges sometimes. The only problem was that he often out shot me and my adult buddies.

This three shot group was fired with my 16 bore rifle with .008 grooves and an 80" twist. One ball was a W-W alloy (far right), one was pure lead (far left) and one was in a paper cartridge that was pretty sharply tapered, glued at the side seam and "point". 140 gr of powder is poured in and the ball dropped in and the top twisted shut (I run these through a vibrating tumbler to beat down the sprue).
Tear the point off, dump in the powder as I stick the point in and ram it all down.
The problem is that fouling gets to be a problem after 2 shots or so.
I carry these as back up loads, 1 or 2 in the pouch.

Paper picked up after firing shows excellent rifling marks.

Seem to shoot well enough to kill deer to 80 yards at least. But I have never used one on game. Once with a .662 ball has been enough so far.

Dan

 

[Dphar]

Paul, conicals don’t expand. Please we have went over this time after time.

This is going to depend on a number of factors.
Velocity is important as is bullet shape and alloy. I found this in BPCRs. RN bullets of 1:20 are very poor expanders, more like AP. The same weight bullet with a good sized flat point at 1:40 alloy will make wound channels 3-4 times as large or bigger.

The service load with a Minie ball was not known for great expansion. This from surgeons reports from the Crimean War on.
A soft lead, blunt conical *will* expand.
The Maxi has been reported to not expand due to the large front grease groove.
Remember that early on (in our context here late 1960s early 70s) there were basically 2 "bullets" for MLs. The Minie and the Maxi. Neither have a real good track record from the reports I have received.
I also have it on what I consider very good authority that in slow twists, 48" for the Maxi and 72 +- for the minie, they do not always track straight on striking the animal. This and poor expansion lead these hunters to abandon the 54 Maxi and use a RB which they found to be more effective on Canadian Moose. Their ultimate answer was the .62-.69 caliber RB rifle.

I know that conicals in MLs is the "hot tip" with many shooters and more power to them. But they do not have a spotless record historically on game. This *may* be due to bullet shape but still they did have problems and this is detailed by Greener in "Gunnery in 1858", Sir Samuel Baker in various writings (VERY experienced hunter) and James Forsythe in the 1850s (he hunted in India).
Now some modern designs are better I am sure and in faster twists they likely track better.
But I shoot a 437 grain round ball (either soft or hard) in my 16 bore flintlock rifle and I seriously doubt that a 440 grain conical can consistantly out perform it to 150 yards on game. But then it is only possible to kill something so dead. Past 150 yards it does not matter much. This is about the practical limit for traditional MLs (and many BPCRs) regardless of bullet type.

Paper patching.
No you don't "need" a false muzzle to shoot bullets, PP or otherwise.
But without the false muzzle accuracy suffers. (before puffing up and disputing this statement see "The ML Caplock Rifle" by Roberts and look at the slug gun groups). Your groups are good, really, but not in the class with the false muzzle guns. But its really comparing apples and oranges.

The problem with PP bullets in MLs is fouling control (I don't shoot p-dex, several reasons) thus for hunting they are not especially practical. Fouling CAN be dealt with but needs felt wad (like hat felt) with something on it to soften the fouling as an over powder wad (yes I have BTDT but with GG not PP).
Still historically, they were not used for this purpose. People used the cloth patched picket if they used elongated bullets. I am *sure* there were exceptions but this was "typical".
If you want to see the Picket and other bullets discussed by a bullet advocate find a copy of Chapman's "Improved American Rifle..." its from the 1830s-40s.
Roberts hunted with the flat point picket bullet. Even though the "minie" style bullet and other "naked" bullets were well known being in wide use in various breech loaders by this time. The pickets being cloth patched worked better than the "bullets".

We are really from two different schools of thought and neither is actually wrong. It depends on the perceptions of the individual. I feel that if I need more power I need a bigger ball. The bigger ball will increase the killing power without increasing breech pressure or risking having a bullet move off the powder.
Since .66 (16 bore) rifles were considered by Forsythe to be dangerous game (circa India) I can't see needing any more power in NA.
I have a rifle that provides fast ignition, I can shoot 20 rounds or more with a oiled ticking patch with no fouling problems and it will shoot small enough at 150 yards (actually more like 200) to kill deer sized animals and has adequate penetration at that distance. I can shoot very hard round balls if I choose. With hardened balls Baker stated that a 14 bore rifle would shoot completely through an Elephants head from side to side. So I suspect that my 16 bore will penetrate adequately for anything in NA.
Others feel that the conical is better.
This is personal choice.
But the conical is not the requirement the many seem to think it is for shooting ANY sized game.

This is entrance wound (the actual hole was over .75) in the brisket of a grown Mule Deer doe shot at about 40 yards with a pure lead .662 ball with a 140 gr of FFG Swiss. 1600 +- at the muzzle.
Deer was facing me when I fired.

This is the heart and lungs from the doe, ball past through the top of the heart making a large permanent cavity. Penetration was about 30" the ball stopped just short of the hind leg.

This buck dropped in his tracks at 90 yards (laser). Entrance wound is visible on the shoulder. Missed all major bones but passed just under the spine. Full penetration broadside shot.

Rifle weighs about 10 pounds and is by far the best ML hunting rifle I have ever owned.

Dan

 

[Dphar]

I've use PP a lot in black powder cartridge guns and certainly don't need convincing of their value or effectiveness. I haven't used them in my MLs to any degree because I usually shoot round balls with PC Walmart cloth patching. I've also been a little concerned about loading difficulties, or even problems.

I'm getting set to cone one each of my 50, 54 and 58 caliber rifles to test that process.

It occurs to me to wonder if coning will resolve the potential need for a false muzzle with PP conicals, maybe even work about as well.

Anyone tried it, or am I crossing too many PC nerve endings with my curiosity?

If the bullet is sized properly to the bore coning should not be needed and I would not cone a barrel for use with cylindrical bullets.
I would let someone else try it first. :grin:

The need for the false muzzle is dependent on several things. Its not iron clad but it works better that way.
If you want to really try this make up about a 12-14 pound rifle in 45 caliber but have it cut with a .456-.457 BORE and grooves about .004" deep narrow lands. Will allow loading standard 45 caliber BPCR bullets with no starter at all.
I would use a 18 or 20" twist.
Percussion but you will need a platinum lined nipple.
Use FG powder 70 grains or more to start.
Under hammer or such action should work OK.
BREECH IT FOR HIGH PRESSURE.
Or buy one of the Italian made long range ML rifles.

Dan

 

[Flint62Smoothie]

... I looked at hundreds of deer killed with shotgun slugs- the older foster style, that resembles a minie ball, as a deer checker ...

FWIW those Foster-type slugs did NOT expand as they are NOT driven to the velocities that conicals are driven to. Their average velocity was 1200fps or less, as per Winchester's own data, plus Lyman's 40-year old manual data, for such early generation slugs.

Slower projectiles with larger diameters? Give me a break ... no wonder they disn't expand. Now if those slugs were driven to velocites akin to those that concicals are typically driven to ... you would have witnessed vastly different results.

I myself would not proclaim your experience as a deer checker of slug-taken game as a defacto statement of conical terminal ballistics. That's a stretch to say the least :hmm: ...

 

[roundball]

:grin:

 

[paulvallandigham]

Actually, some of the slugs DO expand. It all depends on their design. The older models I saw in the late 1960s didn't as a rule. But they were punching a .72 caliber hole through the animal. You can't say that for these pistol bullets cased in plastic shoes. The bore diameter conicals I have examined tend to be made from alloys, not pure lead. Because they are harder, they tend not to expand, either, unless they hit bone. MY friend Jim keeps up on all the current developments with slugs, and he will know which commercial slug is made of pure lead, today, if anyone will. I will ask, and post another message.

Hi, Bill.