Pistol Projectiles

[rodwha]

I intend to carry my Old Army as a backup while hunting with my .50 cal Deerstalker. My main concern is hogs, and I originally bought several of Kaido's 240 grn version of modern conicals.

My thoughts were that I'd want the flat nosed profile and extra weight for the penetration I'm told I'll need when dealing with the heavier of these guys.

As I'm considering how it was said by Civil War vets that RB's were much better as man stoppers and conicals for game animals (they were talking of .36 cal projectiles if I'm not mistaken) it got me to thinking that the reason being is that the velocity with the lighter RB's makes it expand more readily, which gives a larger wound cavity, but reduces its ability to penetrate as deep. The conicals, on the other hand, being heavier and slower, wouldn't expand as large, and with the heavier weight, penetrate deeper.

At close range (

 

[swathdiver]

The fellas who hunt over at the PRG say the roundball is great and actually better inside of 25 yards give or take. Then the edge goes to the conicals and that Kaido you have is one of, if not the best to use beyond that distance or on a 400lb monster.

 

[rodwha]

Quite frankly I consider 200 lbs to pretty big, and would likely opt for the heavier conical over a RB for that.

Though I really like the Kaido conical (240 grn is all I've tried, though he also gave me a few of his 255 grn version as well), but they are too pricey. I'll be giving some resized 45-70 230 grn FN projectiles that he will make a reduced base like on traditional conicals for ease of loading. They are 1/3 the cost.

Kaido also sells the custom molds (Lee), which I'd consider if I had the equipment for casting. One of these days...

 

[zimmerstutzen]

I got an Ideal 457127 mould that casts a short little conical of 210 grains. It is only .5 inches long. (Leaves more room for powder.)

I also have a 190 grain wad cutter bullet mould that throws .456. It has a slight raised cone in the center but, I flip them over and load them back wards, so they are totally flat. It is basically a .456 cylinder shape with two grease grooves. The max powder charge with this is only about 4 grains less than the max with a round ball.

While all this is nice, I suspect the round ball's extra velocity outweighs the benefit of a conical at ranges under 40 to 50 yards.

 

[rodwha]

"...I suspect the round ball's extra velocity outweighs the benefit of a conical at ranges under 40 to 50 yards."

Why? And why so far out?

I kinda figure that at close range the RB might be the better projectile as it'll mushroom much easier, and penetration may still be adequate, but that RB loses steam very quickly. And for hunting beyond 25 yds I felt that anything with a higher sectional density/BC would be better. But I've been told that I need to quit thinking in terms of modern understandings when it comes to the performance of RB's.

In terms of tracking a wounded hog I figure 15 yds may be long range, and it could easily be 7 yds on right on my knee cap! :shocked2:

 

[crockett]

rodwha:we are mixing apples and oranges here. You can't take what was written about the Civil War conicals for revolvers and apply that to the modern type conicals that can be loaded in a revolver.
The Civil War conical had a long tapered point and the length of the base- the part that would engage the rifling- was very short. This meant the conical could get twisted out of alignment when it was being rammed/seated AND that long pointed tip didn't provide much knock down power. To make matters even worse the power charge on a lot of 44 combustible ammo was only 17-18 grains because the long bullet in effect reduced how much powder a combustible cartridge could hold.
So that's the type of "conical" the old timers were describing.
Now, the round ball...
Today's round ball is actually round and theoretically flies true. The old time round balls had a sprue cut off on them. If you loaded the ball so the sprue faced forward, the flat surface of the sprue was sort of akin to a semi-wadcutter. This ball could also be loaded with a lot more powder so.... as far as the old timers were concerned, the round ball with sprue forward was a whole lot better than the military conical stuff.Those old time conicals also didn't have that much more weight than the balls. To a certain extent the reason for the conical was the combustible cartridge needed a projectile with a rebated flat base over which the case could fit.
But today you have choices like the buffalo bullets, etc. These conicals look like a barrel. They are shorter so you can use more powder than the old time conicals, the new conicals have a flat front surface and hit hard and the greater mass drives deeper and the longer bearing in the bore makes them more accurate.
Meanwhile today's round balls are round without the sprue.
Everyone has their opinion but it would seem to me on hogs you would be better armed with a short, stubby type conical and max powder charge.

 

[FishDFly]

"...I suspect the round ball's extra velocity outweighs the benefit of a conical at ranges under 40 to 50 yards."

Why? And why so far out?

I kinda figure that at close range the RB might be the better projectile as it'll mushroom much easier, and penetration may still be adequate, but that RB loses steam very quickly. And for hunting beyond 25 yds I felt that anything with a higher sectional density/BC would be better. But I've been told that I need to quit thinking in terms of modern understandings when it comes to the performance of RB's.

In terms of tracking a wounded hog I figure 15 yds may be long range, and it could easily be 7 yds on right on my knee cap! :shocked2:

Hogs run in the direction they are facing when shot. You have not tracked many hogs it appears when mentioning distance tracked. My wife would argue with you about distance.

In all honesty unless you buy a trailer load of feral hogs and shoot them with the projectiles mentioned, you will never know what each pojectile does. I have never heard of anyone conducting such a test nor anyone with the experience needed to make such a call.

Each hog is different when shot. Folks dream of being attached by a hog, it just does not happen very often, their eye sight is just to poor to single a person out with a bullet hole in them.

If I was really worried about being attached by a hog, I would buy a Pedersoli Kodiak, cheaper than a rifle and back up pistol and much quicker for a follow up shot.

 

[zimmerstutzen]

I figure the round ball does a better job to 50 yards because it starts faster and stays faster until about that distance. Round balls do lose steam fast, but sub sonic balls don't lose it in that short a distance.

Just judging by the Lyman tables for slow moving round balls, a 45 cal ball loses about half it's ME when it reaches 100 yds. (probably actually about 55%) That loss is probably about constant, so at 40 yds, the round ball would have lost only about 20% of its ME.

Since ME is a factor of velocity squared, the difference in velocity results in an exponentially increased ME.

 

[swathdiver]

A 200lb hog is big but a round ball fired with SWISS or 777 inside of 30 yards will destroy his heart and lungs if the shot is placed right. Those fellas use Walkers, ROAs, Dragoons and 12" barrelled NMAs.

 

[Flash Pan Dan]

I have had a little experience with p***ed off hogs and I can tell you that the only thing that works is a calm individual putting a shot in the head/neck/spine area. Having said that; a high velocity projectile has a stopping effect a human being because of out nervous system. Hogs don’t have our nervous system and therefore the high velocity shocking effect doesn’t work as well.

 

[rodwha]

"You have not tracked many hogs it appears when mentioning distance tracked."

I have not tracked a hog. I've shot only 1 (~150 lbs) at very close range (~15 yds) and he was planted as I broke both shoulders.

The range I mentioned was not tracking distance, but the distance at which it would likely be that he'd bust through the brush once I got close. There's no telling how far they may run, but it would be much further than 25 yds!

 

[rodwha]

"I have never heard of anyone conducting such a test nor anyone with the experience needed to make such a call."

I was asking about field experience.
Has anyone shot a good size hog (>200 lbs) with a RB from a pistol? If so how did it perform? Did you hit bone? Did it exit? How large did it expand, etc.

 

[rodwha]

"...their eye sight is just to poor to single a person out with a bullet hole in them."

I'd likely be alone. And, for that, they can see well enough.

 

[FishDFly]

I will kindly back out of this discussion.

I am in the woods year round, hunt and trap hogs all year and do not fear them.

I do not need a BP pistol to protect myself after they have a 50 cal hole properly placed.

Have a nice evening.

 

[rodwha]

But you are exactly the kind of guy I'd like to talk to. You have been there and done that.

Hopefully I won't need anything once I've put a .490" RB through one, but I've seen videos and have read of encounters in which things have gone poorly for the hunter when dealing with a wounded hog.

Maybe I am being a bit fearful, but I suppose I'd like to call it a bit of extra respect. Mostly because I've also heard the stories of what ought to have been a powerful enough modern pistol not working well. A big part of that I assume is due to poor shot placement.

As was mentioned a calm demeanor and proper shot placement is what is called for. I'm not sure if I'd be calm enough to tell the truth.

A brown bear I'd be fearful of...

 

[Blizzard of '93]

proper shot placement is what is called for

yes it is. myself I have used the Lee conical mold slugs 2x on feral hog.
one drt other ran off a nephew in the ground blind w/me could not get off a shot of his 20ga mag h&r #3 buck it whirled so fast. found it in thicket about 400yds distance. tracked thru light snow. then shot it again with ROA in head.

 

[swathdiver]

I was asking about field experience.
Has anyone shot a good size hog (>200 lbs) with a RB from a pistol? If so how did it perform? Did you hit bone? Did it exit? How large did it expand, etc.

Have you been over to the Yahoo Percussion Revolver Group? Those guys kill lotsa hogs with black powder revolvers with regularity.

 

[rodwha]

"Have you been over to the Yahoo Percussion Revolver Group?"

Yes. I haven't used it much though.

But I kinda wonder if they aren't a bit swayed to Kaido's conicals as they use his regularly, and are his friend.

I think his conicals work quite well, and am happy with them up until it's time to order them. At $40/100 + shipping it's quite pricey.

I wonder if their hardness (7-11 BHN) is good or bad. I kinda feel as though being a heavy conical and traveling fairly fast that they have more than enough penetration power, and could probably benefit from softer lead so as to expand easier. But I don't know this.

The higher section al density/weight will help it penetrate much better than a RB, but is it necessary? I think that a bigger wound channel would be better.

Shot placement is key, and I wonder if I'd have the time, as well as the cool composure to make such a shot at something moving so quickly. Another reason why I figure a larger wound channel might be beneficial. But what does an extra 0.25" make when you were off the mark anyway?

 

[crockett]

Maybe I didn't read your original question correctly. On the "man stopper" issue. I might be wrong but today everyone aims for the chest area on a man whereas during yesteryear on a man the head shot was a lot more common, so a 36 ball between the eyes on a man usually killed someone before they hit the ground. Body shots were different. I think Mark Twain in his book "Roughing It" speaks of some guy in carson City shot 6 times but none of the rounds hit a vital area and the guy survived.
If what you are talking about is an emergency arm to stop a charging hog, it still seems to me that the heavier conical would be best. If that is your concern I'd spend the money for the conicals.

 

[swathdiver]

I think the Kaido conical is given a fair shake over there, some say it's not all that better than the Lee 220. Didn't Duelist's tests show that too?

If and when I finally get to hunt, it will be with round ball and then the conicals.