Mike in FL
50 Cal.
Hawken, not Hawkin.
Powder load for whitetail deer
- Thread starter steve bliss
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
A clean kill is a ball in the right place. There isn’t enough power in more powder to effect anything but trajectory.
The ball pushing through the animal in the right place does the job. Let out warm blood, let in cold air.
Trev
36 Cl.
Per TC load recommendations, for my Hawken, with .530 round ball the difference from 60gn to 100gn is more than double the muzzle energy, from 815 ft lbs to 1758 ft lbs. I don't know much about these things but surely 943 ft lbs difference at the the muzzle must have more penetration at 100yds? Must do something more than just flatten the trajectory?
How many deer have you killed?
A hole punched through is a hole punched through. That energy exits with the ball out the other side…
A bigger hole is better. Terminal effect is not as much about energy as the action of the projectile. Round balls flatten, then they drive through. They don’t fragment or rapidly expand like modern bullets. That’s one of the reason there are modern bullets…and lead has its spot on the periodic table for a reason.
Trev
36 Cl.
So in ft lbs how little energy does it take to punch a hole through at 100 yards?
it is all about location, location, location, not much else. to hear people say different shows how much experience killing critters they really have,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Mike in FL
50 Cal.
I feel certain 60 grains under a 54 prb will go all the way thru a deer at whatever distance he can hit it. People place too emphasis on what will kill a deer.
steve bliss
32 Cal
You're right. I'm working on a good load for 100 yards.
justinoldguy
32 Cal
T/C's published ballistics is, errrrrr, very optimistic. So optimistic, that it borders on the incredulous. I have a T/C Hawken in .54. and I have never gotten anything close to the 1900 fps that would be required to obtain that kind of muzzle energy. I suppose it's possible, as I am old enough to never speak in absolutes. However, in over 40 years of shooting over chrono, I have never seen a reasonable load in my 28" barrel .54 that approaches that number. It can be done in longer barrels, including my Pedersoli RMH and Frontier Rifles. Nevertheless, as I stated in a previous post on this same thread, 60 grains of Swiss 3f is my "GoTo" load. That load will smite the largest buck that ever walked the earth with plenty of authority. Ballistic tables don't kill critters, but large hunks of lead tearing thru vital organs sure does. Just for reference, I have killed 9 bucks with 9 shots from a .50 cal CVA Deerhunter. That .490 ball is going maybe 1400 fps, for about 750 ft./lbs of energy at the muzzle. My longest kill with that rifle was at 125 yards. I let kids use it during Youth Deer Season, and a ball thru the ribcage kills deer like double-forked lightning.
Ah yes, you'd think that and so would I, until I found out a few facts about the round ball, which makes it very different than a pointed projectile.
The Ballistic Coefficient of the round ball, to not be too technical, sucks. The round sphere encounters a great deal of air friction. So with the ballistic information provided by TC, what TC doesn't tell you is that 100 grain load moving at 1855 fps and carrying 1712 ft.lbs. of energy at the muzzle is moving at 1113 fps at 100 yards carrying 616 ft.lbs. That's a reduction of muzzle vel of 742 fps BUT the bullet has shed 1096 ft.lbs. of carried energy.
Meanwhile, that 60 grain charge starts out at 1263 fps carrying 794 ft.lbs. of energy..., and at 100 yards that ball is going 909 fps carrying 411 ft.lbs. of energy. The 60 grain load only shed 383 ft. lbs. of carried energy.
WAIT the slower projectile lost less velocity and shed less ft. lbs. ? YES because it's going slower, it's also not creating the same amount of friction against the air. WEIRD RIGHT?
THEN upon impact the more velocity and "energy" the ball has the more it deforms. It increases friction as it flattens, so the faster it's going the faster the friction builds due to deformation and the faster it slows down while passing through the body of the animal.
Well that's very tough to say. How wide is your deer in your question? I've always chunked a .530 ball through the deer when I've shot a deer broadside, using 70 grains of 3Fg, and farthest shot was 110 yards. IF my deer are 24" wide, but not very robust because they are normally does and don't go much over 100 pounds, that's a bit different from your Midwest Kansas or Missouri deer, which my be 50% larger in bone and muscle if a doe, and even larger when a buck.
Popping both lungs and also having an exit hole works pretty well on doe, but is less effective than a shoulder hit on a buck that's quartered toward you. Either shot works but the shoulder hit seems to give faster results on all deer IF the deer presents you that shot.
That's why the folks here will tell you it's more about having a very accurate load, that allows you to actually choose the spot on the deer that you want to hit, rather than getting too involved in energy and muzzle velocity. The round ball is quite different than a modern projectile.
LD
Trev
36 Cl.
Thanks for that reply, @Loyalist Dave, my interest in ballistics is very new and I've not found any info on what happens downrange with round balls. Obviously some loss of speed and resultant loss of energy, but how much? I ordered a "Lyman Black powder Handbook" hoping that it will answer some of my questions. In the past, with modern (1930s) guns, I just shot my guns with the belief that the deer would fall down and they did. Reading recently about "humane" kills and the need for 1000ft lbs etc. has made me curious.
I know very little about ballistics, but I know that I can do more damage using a hammer with a harder blow than with a softer blow.
I guess that all you guys using "XX grains of 3F" are using volume measures sized to 2F? so effectively about 10% greater charge? or does everyone actually mean that they weigh the powder when they say that?
Are the volume measures sized to 2F as i have always thought or are some sized to 3F?
Not at all weird. But the fact is the ball that shed more energy still maintains more energy, using your numbers not quite twice as much but close, now I don't know if that makes any difference in number of bones broken or not, but it seems that it could. Doesn't the greater deformity and faster slowdown upon impact mean more of the energy potential is applied to the target rather passing through and being absorbed by the backstop?
I know very little about ballistics, but I know that I can do more damage using a hammer with a harder blow than with a softer blow.
I guess that all you guys using "XX grains of 3F" are using volume measures sized to 2F? so effectively about 10% greater charge? or does everyone actually mean that they weigh the powder when they say that?
Are the volume measures sized to 2F as i have always thought or are some sized to 3F?
The hammer analogy breaks down when you realize that excess energy exits the opposite side of the target.
I had a custom Mississippi Rifle built with a Benton sight as a clone of the early Confederate sniper rifles. Sold it here, still miss it. But, for deer hunting it shot to the sights with a .58 patched round ball with 40 grains of 3F. Killed many deer with that gun/load from 60-90 yards. Recovered one ball once from a big buck…the rest may still be flying for all I know.
Lead balls kill very well, and the results are not the result of energy calculations.
My .62 rifled guns all shoot well at 70 to 85 grains of 3F. 75 for my .54’s mostly, 60 for my .50’s and also 60 for my .40’s…but that’s more about flat than power.
I had a custom Mississippi Rifle built with a Benton sight as a clone of the early Confederate sniper rifles. Sold it here, still miss it. But, for deer hunting it shot to the sights with a .58 patched round ball with 40 grains of 3F. Killed many deer with that gun/load from 60-90 yards. Recovered one ball once from a big buck…the rest may still be flying for all I know.
Lead balls kill very well, and the results are not the result of energy calculations.
My .62 rifled guns all shoot well at 70 to 85 grains of 3F. 75 for my .54’s mostly, 60 for my .50’s and also 60 for my .40’s…but that’s more about flat than power.
Trev
36 Cl.
Does not flat also aid in accuracy?
