Popular mountain man loads?

[Travis Gregory]

I havent done any reading on the subject but it came up at work the other day. What were some of the more popular ball and powder loads the mountain men used during the fur trade era of the rockies? Im looking for their every day load for big game and self defense.

 

[54mountain]

from what I've read, I believe that many used a 50 or 60 gr. measure for normal use and when shooting longer distance or at a particularly large or mean critter they just doubled the charge. kept it simple that way. :grin:

 

[CoyoteJoe]

That rather presumes one will know both the quarry and the distance before they load. How often would that happen? :grin:

 

[paulvallandigham]

Jim Bridger was quoted as saying that he used one powder measure to shoot deer, antelope, goats, etc. 2 measures of powder to shoot Elk, Moose, and Black Bear, and 3 measures to shoot Grizzly bear.

Now, whether he was just Yarning in his old age or telling the truth is for you to guess. It seems rather unlikely that He, or Any mountain man would move around with an unloaded gun, and then load it when he saw game. If I am correct, how was he to know in advance what kind of game he might stumble upon? Its one thing to set out to kill a particular animal, tracking it to close the distance for a shot, and quite another to anticipate running across a given animal in the wild.

His powder measure for his .54 Hawken threw a measured 50 grains. Its apparently still in a Museum out West along with his Rifle. I read an article in Muzzle Blasts about it many years ago, now, in which a writer was doing research on possible bags, and had the opportunity to examine Bridger's bag. While doing so, he found the powder measure attached to the bag strap, and talked the Curator into allowing him to use some Black Powder he had in his car to find out how much the powder measure threw. I believe the measure was made of horn.

I read a lot of Mountain man history when I was very young, and have a rare copy of Winfred Blevins, " Give Your Heart to the Hawks: A tribute to the Mountain Men", Published by Nash Publishing, Los Angeles, just before it went into receivership, and Bankruptcy. I just don't find much detail about actual loads used in all the books I have read.

I don't think the people at that time considered that information important enough to detail in books. No one was using Balance Beam scales to accurately measure Black Powder in Grains. It was poured by volume. When you made a measure for a particular gun, you worked the antler, or horn, or wood until the amount of powder "felt " right, and shot balls to the same POA at a chosen distance. Distances were paced off- not measured with Tape rulers, or Laser beams.

We are obsessed with these things because of later developments in the 20th century which gave us not only inexpensive, but very accurate means to measure powders, but made weighing powder charges much more important for both safety and accuracy with the development of nitro-cellulose "smokeless" powders.

We now know that a 50 grain charge with a .54 caliber RB is a fairly light load. 100 grains would be considered a heavy hunting load for shooting out past 100 yds, at Elk, moose or Black Bear. 150 grains sounds a bit much even now, but might well be justified if facing a large grizzly bear.

I believe those early explorers and mountain men were interested in conserving their powder and lead balls, and using light loads assured them that they could recover the ball from inside the body of the game they shot, and re-melt and cast it again. Cutting back on the powder charges conserved a very scare resource, which had to be carried hundreds of miles from the nearest source to where it was used in the mountains.

Until the advent of man, particular western man with his firearms, there were no true predators that would attack Grizzlys. The large bear was the top of the food chain, then. So, when the first Mountain men entered the Western Mountains, they did run into very large, and older grizzly bears, in much larger numbers than can exist today.That an old man who had survived those adventures could remember a special loading he used JUST for Grizzly Bear is noteworthy, and a sign of respect that Bridger held for those large bears.

 

[Travis Gregory]

I agree. Today we have the luxury of leaving our safe warm homes and going out after deer or turkey or squirrel or bear ect. We know what were after before we leave and load accordingly because for the most part we dont "depend" on what we kill for survival. When the mountain man loaded up he never knew if he would encounter grouse or Grizz for his supper so I would expect he would have a load that would cover about everything. It would probably be to heavy for grouse or light for grizz but would work for any occasion in a pinch. What do you guys think?

 

[Bob Miller]

My standard hunting load {deer} in my .54 long rifle is 100 gr. FFG My target shooting load is 60 gr FFFG.
50 gr in a .54 seems light to me.

 

[tg]

"That rather presumes one will know both the quarry and the distance before they load. How often would that happen? "


Let's not foul up one of the great romantic notions of the life of the Mountain Man with logic

 

[roundball]

Well, IMO, not knowing distances ahead of time wouldn't be that big of a deal, considering the inherent limitations of a muzzleloader's distance in the first place.

Seems like I recall seeing more than one post and/or article over the years about finding original powder measures tied to bags or horns that held 50 or 55grns and the supposition always was that for a more powerful load two measures could have been used.

Looking at my typical uses, I know that year round I normally use approximately "the caliber" amount of powder for use at the range and as it turns out my deer hunting loads are basically twice the caliber...ie: 50 and 100grns respectively.

For typical muzzleloader distances, just using two simple loads..."the caliber" and 2X the caliber...would be very workable and doesn't seem far fetched to me at all...

 

[flaming canvas]

Jim Bridger was quoted as saying that he used one powder measure to shoot deer, antelope, goats, etc. 2 measures of powder to shoot Elk, Moose, and Black Bear, and 3 measures to shoot Grizzly bear.

Hence the phrase, "Loaded for bear"

 

[Blizzard of '93]

Hence the phrase, "Loaded for bear"[/quote]
this is still done today.
it's been some some years back since I went out bear hunting with hunters that ran dogs but 2 of them carryed muzzle load rifles, .45's they were. they carried them 'loaded fer bear'. other firearms were present also pistols and rifles.
we didn't get a bear either time I went but I had a blast with them ol' boys. I carryed my ROA stoked to the max with Lee mold slugs. we had a good fire on a frigid night and good chow to eat and listened to the hounds running.

 

[nchawkeye]

We don't really know...The problem with all this guessing is that a guy with a .54 and a 50gr measure could just as easily use a measure and a half as his favorite load...

I seem to remember that Lewis & Clark carried their powder in lead canisters that weighed twice as much as the powder in them...After emptying the canister, they would melt it down for ammo...

 

[LeMat1856]

. oct 18 / 18:45


here's a quote from ned roberts' "the muzzle-loading cap lock rifle, chapter vii, the hunting rifle":

"...thus i know from actual experience that the double barreled muzzle-loading rifle of 44 or 45 caliber with a soft lead picket bullet weighing from 275 to 350 grains backed by 75 to 90 grains of good black powder, in the hands of an experienced hunter-rifleman is a very effective killer on deer, black bear, caribou and moose, all of which i saw uncle alvaro kill with the billinghurst double rifle..." (written 1880).

that's the real mccoy, if you ask me.

~daniel~

 

[tg]

"that's the real mccoy, if you ask me."

true, it is pretty much the same load for some of the bp cartridge guns of the day, I am sure the one scoop or two was a pretty common thing, you could even guess the third dump at half of a measure if you want a bit more, it would be interesting to know how what the most common useage/ load was,I recall reading that an average load might be some where around a cal and a 1/2 or 75 gr for a .50 this is a moderate load now days but for most shooting/hunting battle would be sufficient and save powder.

 

[paulvallandigham]

By 1880, the .50-70, and .45-70 cartridges had set a standard for " Hunting loads". Both were used extensively by Buffalo Hunters. So, I don't think this information reflects accurately what the Mountain Men did before 1840, when the age of the Mountain men ended. Picket Bullets came into existence in the 1840s, and bullets were just too much lead for the MM to be using when they were 4-5 months of travel time, round trip to return to the settlements for resupply and return to the mountains.

 

[Zonie]

"Popular mountain man loads"?

Well, we've heard about Jim Bridger but nothing about Joe Meek, Zenas Leonard, John Colter or Livereating Johnson yet.

The question wasn't about the "Unpopular Mountain Mans loads" so I guess we also won't hear about old Fartin' Bob, Stink Foot Jones, Dung Breath McCoy or Crazy Coot Joe.
Just funnin'. :rotf: :grin:

As with a lot of our history the folks envolved forgot to mention the common things like favorite powder loads, favorite bore size, or favorite material for wiping after the morning "constitutional".

Speaking of the Lewis & Clark powder kegs I suspect that the lead powder canisters actually might have been carrying a bit more powder than was necessary for shooting a canisters weight of lead balls.
A little extra powder could always be counted on for starting tinder for a fire or repriming a damp pan.
If my guess is right the typical powder load for hunting may have been a bit less than 1/2 the ball weight.
When out in the wilderness a flintlock can make due with certain rocks for flints and a number of things for a projectile but they don't work at all without gunpowder.

 

[redwing]

There were no game laws in the day of the Mtn. Man. They shot and killed to eat mostly at close range. The 50 gr. charge would have done the job on young mule deer. The Elk calves and fawn deer, does with young. This game is easy by todays standards a .22 Mag. would work.

The Big Bears were mostly avoided when possible. There are a number of stories about squads of Mtn. Men hunting and shooting the Grizz until it fell over. With modern fire arms the hunter of today is often prey to the Grizz when hunting alone. It is little different today when Elk hunting in Grizz country.

The lesson taught by history would tell us that the trapper didn't hurt the Grizz population. The early settlers to the Rockies had constant problems with the big bear.

The US Army with the introduction of the 30-06 rifle did make a difference. The Army was in charge of the Yellowstone country. The troopers made good use of the new 06 rifle. The new 1903 rifle was a much better killer than the old 45-70 black powder or the 30-40. It was the the 30-06 that really changed the bear population not the .54 Hawkens. :thumbsup:

 

[Mountainman56]

If I am aware I am hunting in grizzly country the norm for me is to "carry enough gun". While I've never shot a grizzly with a muzzleloader I have hunted elk in grizzly country. I can tell you with certainty that I felt quite undergunned while carrying a .50 TC with a 110 grain charge.

When hunting elk or moose in grizzly country with a centre fire rifle I nearly always carried my 375 H&H. I certainly didn't need that calibre for elk but there was a great deal of "peace of mind" involved.

I think if I was huntin grizzly a-purpose with a muzzleloader back in the early days it would have a LARGE charge and a pair of .54, or better yet, .58 calibre round balls. Mostly I believe it would be a hunt I would have avoided. All the time I spent in the mountains up north and all the grizzly I saw there was only one time when there was an old silver tip sow who was very un-impressed with me. We had a very intense conversation at about 40 feet before she decided I wasn't worth the bullet hole. I was VERY relieved to see her change her mind. I don't believe I would want to be in that position with a muzzleloader no matter how much I enjoy them.

 

[redwing]

Yes, that is a given for some folks. I prefer my old .338 Win Mag. That being said folks in this part of the country its just a fact of life. Many carry their .270 or 30-30. If you have been in big bear country you know the handgun is almost always carried.

If you visit the Mtn. Man Museum in Pinedale, Wyoming you will see Bridgers will worn .40 caliber rifle. They were more skilled in woods craft and could avoid confrontations weather it be man or beast. Most of the rifles from that era seem to be .50 or less in caliber.

Modern day hunters enter the land of the Grizz not looking for a fight. They use every bit of knowledge to avoid it. It happens to not work some times. In those cases it is close and quick, even the modern magnum is not enough. I am sure the trappers of old new the risk all too well. I think as some pointed out they carried a light hunting load as a standard practise.

 

[44-henry]

I have a hard time buying that the 45-70 cartridge would have proved inferior to a 30-06 at close range. If this was the case than why are the lever action Marlin Guide Guns so popular in 45-70? Anything that can push a 500 grain bullet at better than 1300 fps isn't something to be belittled.

 

[paulvallandigham]

I agree: The military adoption of the .30-40, and later the .30-06, also coincided with the adoption of the box magazine, bolt action. This was " keeping up with the Joneses", because the European Powers had already adopted bolt action, box magazine rifles for their militaries beginning in the late 1880s. The Krag, adopted in 1896,and later the Springfield, adopted in 1906, were actually " Johnny-come-lately's" to the scene. Its main competition eventually evolved into being both the Enfield rifle used by the British, and the Mauser, adopted by Germany.

I doubt that anyone seriously believed that the .45-70 round was inferior to the .30-06. Using the Killing Power formula of bullet diameter, times, bullet weight, time velocity, divided by 100, the .30-06, 150 grain, 2700 fps round clocks in a KP of 1215. The .45-70, 500 grain, 1300 fps round clocks in a hefty 2925 KP! The real problem with the round was it was designed to use Black Powder, had a rim, and the balloon head casings of that period were not very strong. The military wanted to try a rimless casing, that was stronger, and used the Smokeless powders coming into vogue, to fire a smaller round for less felt recoil, but which would travel long distances in a fairly flat trajectory. The .30-06 beat the .45-70 on those fundamentals.

Having given the nod to the military choice of the .30-06, I have to say I strongly agree with Mr. Johnson. At closer ranges, the .45-70 is a terrific cartridge, and people regularly reload the casings( stronger webs today) to much higher velocities. With newer, bonded bullets, all that velocity delivers terrific energy on target at the short ranges involved. Yes, Marlin brought out the Guide Rifle, but the company was at least 20 years late.

Marlin 1895 rifles had been modified, ported, and loaded with " rhino rollers" way back in the 1980s by hunters. It was the guides who saw how well this old warhorse cartridge worked when properly loaded, who begain buying their client's guns, and ammo, and reloading dies, and retiring their .375 H&H Winchester Model 70 bolt action rifles. Try working the KP formula for a .45-70 loaded to 1900 fps. with a 300 grain bullet, for instance.( KP= 2565.) I have fired hotter loads, but this one will keep your attention, to be sure. These guns can still be loaded with Black Powder, BTW, for more modest velocities, and those heavy slugs will still kill Black Bear.

Since this forum is about Traditional MLers, and guns developed before 1865, or so, I digress, but not by much. The KP formula can be used as a measure of " Whompability" however, in either cartride or MLer guns. Mlers were being used by hunters well into the 20th century to kill big game, before the resurgence of interest in them in the 1950s. Today, plenty of bears, and moose, caribou, and elk are killed every year with BP MLERS. If you own a strong barreled percussion rifle, like the T/C Hawken, or Renegade, Or the Lyman Great Plains Rifle, they can easily handle 70 grains of powder, and more, and with some of the faster ROT rifled barrels, the will fire heavy conicals just as well as the Black Powder Cartridges of the mid 19th century did.