PRB...Not for me

[Claude Mathis]

So now to be politically correct to all peoples we can not respond to a post unless they ask a question?

That's not what I said. People are free to respond to whatever they like. When and how we respond, however, does say a lot about us as individuals.

I do think that, sometimes, when we read something that runs contrary to what we think or do, we see it as a challenge to set the world right, rather than just letting it pass. Raising kids taught me to let some things slide. :v

 

[tg]

" Unless I have my history wrong, didn't some conicals exist back in the 1800's and weren't they shot from time to time in a front loader?"

This has been covered..those conicals back then are not the conicals we are talking about.

 

[Walks Alone]

:thumbsup: Very well said Pork Chop. :thumbsup:

 

[tg]

". I think that is a poverty as that treatment does nothing but bolster the belief among non-traditionalists that the traditionalists are elitists."

it would seem to me that it was not the traditionalist that were the elitists this time around, the snobbery (neat word) came from the other side of the fence as I read it..and from the traditional side there is a big difference twixt being elite and putting forth an accurate account of the facts concerning a piece of gear or equipment.Now you will have to excuse me I must find some "real hunters" and "real ML shooters" to spend my time with...

 

[Dave Rosenthal]

I hope that nothing I said offended you. If it did, I think that I was taken out of context. Your history of hunting bear intrigues me. That's why I spoke of the Kodiak Double as the ultimate NEW YORK RELOAD. I understand that you're just looking for a new "Rush" in your vast actual hunting experiences. I can deal with that.

At this point it really doesn't matter who threw the first stone, just that we all agree to put the stones down! You were attacked and shouldn't have been, in my opinion. Then you responded.

THIS IS FOR EVERYBODY ON THIS THREAD:

Since we can chat about C&B revolvers in the pistol forum, does that mean that it's O-K to give someone that uses conicals a hard time? I hope not, because as I've already stated I use them things too! We need to work a little harder on our communications skills and listen a little better. I think that ANYBODY with as much hunting experience as Tweesdad has some valuable insights that could be gleaned and used in a more primitive style hunt as well, and I'm willing to read what he has to say about what he does with his "Tools", so long as they are allowed to be spoken about on these threads. If he posted this as what his powerbelts did, how many of you would care? The title is what grabbed you by the short hairs and started your blood pumping! Perhaps if the title was a little less in your face this thread wouldn't have all of the :bull: that it does! Respect is a two-way street.

I hope that I haven't lost any friends by typing this...only time will tell.

Dave

 

[Pork Chop]

Another non-directional post here...

A couple of years ago (before I found this forum) I used to get quite worked up over the goings on on some forums that I frequented. Then one day a good buddy of mine (also on the forum in question) said something that really hit home. does it really matter what some faceless name on a computer screen thinks about your or does? Do you lose any sleep if they don't see the world exactly as you do? When I thought about it, I realized he is right. No offense to the fine members here, but with the exception of one person, I have not laid eyes on anyone else on this forum. That being the case, it really does not affect my life if someone on the internet disagrees with my thoughts or ideas. I try to be civil in my posts, and I hope that comes through.

Tweesdad, I reread your early posts on this thread, and you mentioned that you are slower loading the roundballs than the powerbelts. Have you tried a "speedloader" device? The one to which I am referring is basically a small paddle with several holes corresponding to the bore of your rifle. In each bore, you put a patched roundball. To load, you pour in the powder, center one of the balls in the speedloader over the bore and push it in with a ball starter. Pretty quick.

 

[Dobson]

You hit the nail on the head there Mike Brooks. One shot and thats it, gets my vote every time otherwise let em walk on by! Keep it up.
Regards
Dobson :wink:

 

[Walks with fire]

I have several rifles of various twists and they all do the job with the projectile intended for the twist. It just seems that the slow twist rb rifles are the ones that get the most use and the ones I don't want to put down. I usually spend 3-4 hours at my range shooting rb's but the other guns don't get near the use. I use my fast twist barreled flintlocks in the general firearms season but when the after season flintlocks only season comes in it's my rb rifles that get the use. I hope they never change or modify our PA flintlock season. I use all types of firearms but the traditional rifles hold a special place and interest for me.

 

The PA primitive firearms season is the best one in the country, IMHO. :thumbsup:

 

[Stumpkiller]

Gentlemen,
After reading and taking all advice to heart, I went to the range today and tried numerous shots with a patched round ball. The results were a bit disappointing, but I learned a few things. Firstly, it takes me about twice as long to load a patched ball as it does to load a Powerbelt. With the ball, I have to clean every other shot, while with the P'belt, I can go 5 between cleanings. Accuracy is just about the same with both projectiles. There was no appreciable difference in accuracy with either 2F Black, or Pyrodex RS. Energy is much greater with the 295 gr. P'belt. P'belts are much more expensive than round balls and patches. So, for me it does not seem to be worth my while to be using PRBs. I use my M/L as a hunting tool, and given the loading time and energy factors, I think I will stick to Powerbelts. I just wish they weren't so darn expensive.
Thank you all for your advise. I really appreciate it.

I didn't see a question. I can usually tell 'cause they got these little snaky things "?" at the end. My response was to point out that is he had to wipe between every shot with a patched round ball he was doing something wrong.

No mention that we had to have killed multiple large animals or boars. I've knicked 34 whitetail fatally but I specialize so my opinion don't count. Got zero interest in bears and I won't hunt over bait or at dumps so I never see them, anyway.

You said your round ball testing was all at "the range today". Wow, exhaustive three hours or so of testing on paper - so it's worthless by your own measure of worth.

When he doesn't get a good struggle he yanks a little hearder.

I came to this site in what appears to be the mistaken belief that I would be treated decently, as a neophyte, with a desire to learn. WRONG.

What would you like to learn? How about: "How can I be more effective with traditional weapons and projectiles" as a lead in instead of "your stuff sucks" as a start? Yes, boo hoo, you're persecuted. Wonder why? I actually thought most responses were pretty level headed, but again, you interpreted as you liked.

Your mind seems to have been made up before you started the initial post so where can we go from there?

Elsewhere. Now where did I put my coonskin cap?

 

My cap is gonna be a silver badger one. :rotf:

 

[Stumpkiller]

Here you go. One gin-u-wine authentic Eastern Silver Badger cap.

One person picks up a primative weapon and says "how can I change this design to suit me better?"

Another picks up the same weapon and says "how can I improve my skills and learn to use this better?"

I guess neither is right nor wrong, but certainly they'll be able to stand toe-to-toe and never see eye-to-eye.

I choose to learn about the weapon and how to use it even though it has limitations. I think that is more of a challenge. But I'll admit it's not my right or duty to try and foist that opinion off on everyone who comes along.

It's just worth a try.

 

[pmwest]

I have watched this thread with great interest for several days now. Even posted once, although rather ineptly. It captured my interest because I love the study of the history of pre-civil war small arms, both percussion and flint, their make, use and accoutrements. Although I did find some useful opinion here, mostly what I find is a great injustice toward Tweesdad and the forum community as a whole. The man is taking a step from modern muzzleloading firearms into the realm of traditional replica firearms with the specific use for hunting. He asked questions (in other threads) and made a statement here that ruffled a lot of feathers. I see a lot of comments here that isolate on a particular time period of history and are backed with a lot of attitude saying “that if you do not do it my way, then you are wrong”. If we define “Traditional” as pre-civil war, then the discussion of projectiles other than the round ball are certainly appropriate in that the Harper’s Ferry bullet was adopted by the US Army in 1855. The dreaded Powerbelt even has nearly identical geometry to a Lewis Base Band Bullet that was supplied, along with the molds and swage needed to make them, with the N. Lewis muzzleloading caplock target rifles made in the 1850’s. It could be considered a replica however certainly not “Traditional”. To Tweesdad I say congratulations on your step into traditional style hunting. To the rest of the forum, let’s help him along his journey as best we can even if his final destination is not the same as ours.

Tweesdad ”“ with your level of experience and accomplishments, you would be welcome in my hunting camp anytime, no matter what you drop down the bore.

 

[Stumpkiller]

Well stated, but . . .

If we define “Traditional” as pre-civil war

There's the problem! Traditional is generally accepted to be "Fur Trade and prior" or pre 1840 in my circles. That's the date of the last Rendezvous. Minié (who died in 1879) had his hollow base bullet by 1848. What we accept as a Minnie - lacking the wood base plug of the original Minié - is a design by American James H. Burton, by the way. Both well after the Fur Trade. The Civil War was, after all, the first "modern" war by most accounts.

One French Lieutenant-Colonel by the name of Poncharra is credited with the sabot & conical combination; who improved an 1825+/- concept created by Captain Gustave Delvigne. The Poncharra bullet was used in combat in Algeria in 1840. Delvigne’s bullet required a shoulder in the breech plug and that the bullet be pounded via the ramrod enough to upset the lead into the rifling. Very doubtful either of these ever saw the inside of an animal prior to the 1840's and probably never in the United States.

 

[Blizzard of '93]

you ain't been slipping around 'SkunkSkinner's place have ye? :haha:

 

[gmww]

By definition of this forums rules,

Ӣ The main focus of this site is "Traditional Muzzleloading"; The history of the people, the weapons and battles, up to and including the American Civil War.

 

[Stumpkiller]

1823 Norton's bullet

He must have been born with one in his pocket. :wink: That's the year James H. Norton was born. He didn't start to work at the Armory at Harper's Ferry, WV until 1844, became Master in 1849 and developed his version after that. The Army adopted it in 1855, so it would have been "experimental" and probably unknown outside West Virginia until then.

http://www.nps.gov/archive/hafe/burton.htm

 

[Stumpkiller]

Never said it was outside the rules to discuss the Civil War - we have a whole section just for it. Wonderful history of late muzzleloaders and their use just before they became second-string.

Traditional for hunting or what the military had on hand? Different topics. I hunted in 1980 and the military had LAWS shoulder-fired rockets at that time. I didn't hunt with a LAWS rocket. I didn't hunt with an M-16 either. And nobody hunted in the U.S. with M2 heavy machine guns during the 1940's. They probably didn't even use M-1 Garands for deer in 1940, although they could have. Civilians just didn't have access to them. Maybe 150 years from now folks won't know that wasn't so, either.

Back to Tweesdad. It's wonderful that you can hunt with conicals. Good for you. You could also use round balls and that would be more traditional and more in spirit of a primative season.

 

[gmww]

Don't know what to tell you. Seems like our two web site links need to talk to each other and get their stories strait.

Royal New Zealand Artillery Old Comrades Association. Isn't the internet wonderful. :rotf:

In 1823 Captain John Norton of the 34th Regiment provided the obvious solution. He took a cylindro-conoidal bullet slightly smaller in diameter than the bore down which it could be easily slid for loading, then hollowed out the base so it would expand into the rifling on firing. But the Board of Ordnance, having found it worked perfectly, rejected it on the grounds that spherical missiles were the only types acceptable for military purposes. And most members of the Board were Gunners!

The reason I posted a copy of the rules is I believe there is this misconception by some that we stop at 1840 for discussions here. Therefore conicals are :nono: . I wanted to post the obvious by quoting the rules. 1840 represents one era of several era's that are allowed. So when I read "traditional" it seems the rules on this forum include Civil War era.

I would be concerned if this was posted in one of the other era specific boards. However he posted it in the General ML area.

I happen to enjoy the historical information I read here. Most of you are quite knowledgeable. However it becomes disheartening when I see some of the negative things that get posted. This is a great forum and it's appeal to me is the comrade.

 

[bwhoffman]

not posting to GMWW's post, merely robbing the hook-up....


This is classic....

What we have here, is a failure to communicate!


I'm thinkin' we need to put this one to bed.