PRB vs Connical vs Minnie etc..

[07Kingpin]

Sorry if this has been covered before-

Looking at getting into shooting and eventually possibly hunting with a traditional ML.

To start will be using a .50 with a 28" 1:48 barrel.

Lots of info re the effectiveness of a PRB, obviously it served our forefathers well.

What are the pros/cons of going with a PRB vs a connical or a minnie(sp?) ball for hunting?

With the 1:48 twist accuracy should be decent with any of the above correct?

Any and all feedback welcome.

 

[brewer12345]

What are you hunting? Deer?

I have a 50 and a 54 in a 1 in 48 twist. I have yet to find a charge the 50 will shoot PRB satisfactorily with, but that rifle shoots every conical I have tried in it from well to excellent. The 54 shoots either well, albeit mostly at higher charges. Both rifles really seem to want a wad under the ball/bullet. I find the recoil from heavy charges and big conicals to be objectionable.

As for terminal effectiveness, if we are talking about deer at reasonable ranges, it probably doesn't matter which one you use as long as you pick your shot and use whatever is accurate. I shot a yearling doe yesterday with PRB in the 54 over 110 grains of powder. The shot was about 50 yards. I suffer badly from buck fever and was shooting it unsupported and hit a little bit farther back than I would prefer. Hit a lung, the liver, a kidney, etc. The deer ran off after the shot but maybe lived another 2 minutes. That was with a less than ideal hit. If we are talking about bear or elk I might suggest a conical.

 

[DaveC]

As you probably know already, the 1 turn in 48 inches is a "compromise twist" between patched round balls--which tend to do best with very slow rates of twist, from 1 in 66" to 1 in 72" to the old Baker rifle's 1 turn in 120 inches! Conicals are great in a faster rate of twist, as a general rule.

 

[Ames]

I prefer a 1 in 60 or 1 in 70 for a prb. My 50's like about 85 grains FF, the 54's 90 grains FF. At nominal Northeast woods hunting conditions.

 

[07Kingpin]

Interesting thanks-

Would a conical tend to be more accurate with this twist?

What are some good ones to try?

 

[brewer12345]

I would try to lay your hands on some Lee REALs, Maxi Balls, Hornady Great Plains, perhaps a Buffalo Ball-et.

 

[Kansas Jake]

I’ve had a Thompson Center with a barrel similar to yours, 07kingpin. I’ve killed deer with a patched round ball in front of about 70 grains with a tight mattress ticking patch. It is accurate. The tc barrels seem to like a tight patch for accuracy. I don’t think you need a bullet as the ball will do the job.

 

[07Kingpin]

https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1002234681

https://leeprecision.com/mold-d-c-50cal-320.html

Others?

 

[brewer12345]

Maxi ball:
https://www.midwayusa.com/product/100228159?pid=962562

 

[SDSmlf]

Accuracy will depend on depth of rifling. Shallow rifling tends to be for conicals.

As you probably know already, the 1 turn in 48 inches is a "compromise twist" between patched round balls--which tend to do best with very slow rates of twist, from 1 in 66" to 1 in 72" to the old Baker rifle's 1 turn in 120 inches! Conicals are great in a faster rate of twist, as a general rule.

Many originals had twists in the 1-48 range. I believe that is what the Hawken brothers used in many of there creations. The slower twists work, but usually require heavy powder charges for accuracy.

 

[fleener]

Your rate of twist will lean towards a shorter conical for stabilization. I like conicals and shoot them for hunting quite a bit, however the rifles I shoot them in have a faster twist that are made specifically for conicals.

If you want to shoot them, try some of the them that have been suggested and see what you like.

Fleener

 

[Sparkitoff]

PRB v. Conical:
Pros - 1) - readily accessible 2) - low price 3) - less lead (to make your own) 4) - more velocity comparatively so flatter trajectory) 5) - potentially less recoil 4) - only two or 3 sizes per caliber to try (patches are another thing but they're cheap) 5) - legal for most application in most places 6) not too complicated to extract a stuck ball

Cons: - 1) - you need patching material and may have to experiment some 2) - need lube of some sort that also may require experimenting 3) - occasional laughing and ribbing from the uniformed

The 1:48 twist doesn't mean as much as some would like you to believe. The depth and cut of rifling has a lot to do with accuracy and tolerance for powder charges. The rifle may really determine this for you. I do not have a rifle that shoots PRB and Conical equally with corresponding loads. They all tend to heavily favor one or the other. One rifle might have a decent accuracy load with PRB and another load for Conical but one will be noticeably more accurate than the other. Best of luck!

 

[07Kingpin]

Good to know thanks-

Guess I'll have to do some experimenting

 

[longcruise]

Keep your conicals at 3/4" long or less and there should be no stability problems. Any accuracy load should be adequate with a conical.

For perspective, I killed an elk with a. 50 caliber maxiball at 130 yards with 70 grains of powder. Also a mule deer at 80 yards with a. 50 ball and 60 grains of powder from a 24" barrel.

Trying to convey that its easy to overcomplicate this. The secret is to just enjoy the process.

 

[renegadehunter]

I find as Spark does. My .54 1:48 TC was very easy to find a conical that it would shoot well, in fact the very first one I tried was a Hornady Great Plains bullet with 100 grains of 2f and it remains to this day the best grouping load I've found at a 100 yards.
It can take a bit of experimenting with patch thickness, different lubes, and lube amounts to find a RB load that shoots well. Recoil is MUCH nicer with PRB compared to the 425 grain conical. Like most newbies I started with too thin of a patch and it shot poorly because it was burning the patch to shreds. My suggestion on finding a PRB load that shoots well is to find a RB and patch combo that loads very snug into the bore and then experiment with a few different patch lubes, as well as the amount of patch lube on the patch. Start at a lower end powder charge and then go up 5 grains at a time to find what it likes. As an example on lube, I bought some of the TOTW mink oil a while back and went to the range. I lubed the patches by rubbing them around on the lube and then rubbing it out to the edges with my thumbs. I'd say enough lube to fill the weave of the patch, not really an excessive amount or anything. 3-1/2" groups from sandbags at 50 yards. A few weeks ago I decided to give it another chance, but lubed up a few patches by passing the patch over the lube one single time and then rubbing it into the patch. You can barely tell there is lube on the patch at all. 1-1/4" group from sandbags at 50 yards. Quite a difference for everything being exactly the same except for the amount of lube on the patch. I firmly believe that Dutch Schultz's theory on minimal lube is true. I swab between every shot, but the rifle will shoot two accurate shots without swabbing before I start getting fliers. It will shoot some other loads decent too, but the above has become my go to hunting combo. Also be aware that POI can change quite a bit just by simply changing lubes, I've seen up to a 4" difference at 50 yards with everything exactly the same except for the type of lube used. Hopefully you don't find that your rifle is as finicky as mine.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

From What I've observed from shooting approximately 10 different muzzle loading rifles over about 45 years...,

1:48 twist is rather common. It's a complete myth that it was/is a "compromise" twist. Prior to conical bullets coming on the scene, 1:48 twist was popular. In fact you will find that it may be hard to find any modern factory muzzle loading barrels under .45 caliber that are not 1:48... even though factory conical bullets are not made for all of the calibers under .45. 1:48 twist was found to work for both conicals and patched, round ball in the larger calibers, and marketing in the 1970's is to blame for the reoccurring claim that the manufacturers chose it as it shot both projectiles well....

Conical bullets were designed to give the rifleman a fast reload, in combat. The original Minnie bullets from the ACW era were not favored by hunters of big game, especially dangerous big game. The patched round ball was favored for hunting. Most common hunting distances from the ML era to now for the folks using traditional muzzle loaders has not changed. The vast majority of shots are under 100 yards.

Never choose a conical bullet because you think you will need a super fast reload and a follow-up shot (imho)

The slower twist rate barrels have lost some of their previous advantage with the patched round ball and large loads as the machine rifling used in the barrels is done in such a way to negate the advantage. There was a time when it was possible to cause the ball and patch to skip-across the grooves in the rifling with a large powder load. Today you need a very large powder load to get this to happen. Folks shooting large caliber 1:48 twist rate barrels report using 90 grains of powder without ill effect with patched round ball.

In addition to the lower recoil of a patched round ball, the slower twist rate barrel does impart less torque against the shooter when using large powder loads. Thus the perceived recoil is further reduced.

Conicals give you more mass on impact, but for most deer in the United States, this is a moot point. One can, if one absolutely needs it, get deeper penetration by using a hard lead alloy, and a different thickness patch, on the round ball.

Conicals are a bit simpler, and as some have written, some rifle simply love them better than the patched round ball. You will need to figure it out for your rifle. I have a caplock rifle that for some reason like a specific style of conical, and none other. It shoots round ball pretty well too but the conical is king for that rifle.

Finally you have some of the odd examples.... for example the slower twist rates, 1:60, 1:66, 1:72 and slower normally do not stabilize conical bullets well. However, the Pedersoli 3-Band Enfield rifle is a 1:78 twist, and is known to shoot minie ball very well. Another example is the Baker rifle, which is a British combat rifle, not a hunting rifle. The British chose a 1:120 twist rate because they determined the minimum twist needed to stabilize a .600 ball was 1/4 turn for the length of the 30" barrel...hence 1:120. The slower twist rate was chosen as it increased the number of rounds that could be fired before the bore needed to be swabbed, a great advantage in combat.

LD

 

[Christophero]

Here are my observances from over 3 decades of enjoying muzzleloaders and hunting:
Conicals work very well to kill game if they are accurate out of your rifle. My 1/48" Thompson/Center rifles group them quite nicely, as does an inherited 50 Caliber Blue Ridge Longrifle. 65 grains of FFFg pokes holes through deer without issue. Paper, too. I began using 80 grains of FFg but 65 grains of FFFg fouled less, gave me more shots per pound and chornographed just under 1,200 fps, as does the 80 grains of FFg, so I stuck with it for the 50 cals. When I tried 70 grains of FFFg the accuracy suffered. At 75 Grains of FFFg the pure lead stripped out of the shallow lands of the TC barrels and flew everywhere except where they should have. I have been quite content with the 65 grain loading ever since.

Not too many years ago I started using PRB's for hunting deer. They, too, kill deer well. Magically the 65 grains of FFFg is accurate and I didn't see the need for more powder. Remember though, the roundball is half the weight of 370 grain Maxi Ball. I recieved a 355 grain TC MaxiHunter mold 30 years ago for Christmans and was quite fond of that bullet for hunting, even getting a pass through on an 8 pointer at 175 yards on crisp December morning. The extra heft of the conical will get where a PRB may not make it to inside a large bodied deer.
Example, a few seasons back I had a broadside shot on a mature doe at 100 steps. My aim was true but the heavy breeze pushed the PRB into the front leg bone instead of the chest behind the leg, shattering the femur just under the shoulder. She ran off on 3 legs into the woods. Though there was a skiff of snow on the ground no blood trail presented itself. That leg bone must have flattened that ball because when I did find her, with the LORD's help, I'll add, the only entry of size into the body cavity was a slit in the armpit region. I didn't find the ball, but the lungs were perforated enough with lead/bone splatter to cause her to die on run well into the woods. One perfect hole in the hide with no exit wound. A conical would more than likely continued on through, leaving a better chance at a blood trail. Roundballs leave the muzzle faster but decelerate much quicker. Weight has an advantage in penetration.

I like them both and will hunt with either. Just know the pros and cons for both. This is a wonderful sport and give many hours of fun, frustration and reward. Welcome aboard.

Sorry if this has been covered before-

Looking at getting into shooting and eventually possibly hunting with a traditional ML.

To start will be using a .50 with a 28" 1:48 barrel.

Lots of info re the effectiveness of a PRB, obviously it served our forefathers well.

What are the pros/cons of going with a PRB vs a connical or a minnie(sp?) ball for hunting?

With the 1:48 twist accuracy should be decent with any of the above correct?

Any and all feedback welcome.

 

[brewer12345]

I think chritophero makes a good point: round ball often shoots very well out of a 1:48 twist, but compared to conicals they have a shorter effective range. The Lyman black powder manual has illustrative ballistic data, but basically a charge that will send a ball out with over 1000 foot pounds of energy ends up with 500 and change at 100 yards. A conical retains around 1000 at 100 yards. The actual amount of energy isn't really important, but it shows that a round ball at 100 yards has a lot less oomph than a conical and your shot has to be really on and through the ribcage with the ball. I had a chance at a doe first thing in the morning on Sunday, but she was 114 yards away. I knew that I could make a 100 yard shot based on performance at the range, but I decided to pass because it was just a little too far for comfort. At 75 yards or less I think you have a lot more margin for error with a ball.

 

[tenngun]

I’ve killed elk pronghorn and a deer or two with ball. I’ve never killed any thing with a conical.
Ball near wiped out Eastern buffs, bear and elk and put a big hit on moose.
When you make a half inch hole through the boiler room of most animals inAmerica they won’t walk away from it. At least not very far.
Conicals make big holes, and hold velocity better then a ball.
They ain’t a modern gun, and around a hundred yards is max reasonable range. If you get your required accuracy and you like your load it will put meat on your table.
Learn your gun it will serve.

 

[longcruise]

My son in law killed a full grown mule deer at 180 yards with .54 RB over 80 grains of powder. Ball stopped under the skin on the far side. Look up the probable ballistics on that ball and then compare it to the opinions of the "experts".

The next day my other son in law killed another full size deer with the same load at 25 yards. The shots were uncanny in their similarity and his ball stopped under the skin too.

He had killed a 5X5 bull elk a few days previous with the same gun and load. Seventy yards and the elk was down in 25'. unfortunately he slid to the bottom of a deep gully but that was it's own separate adventure.

If you wonder about identical loads having the same results at such differences in range, you have to understand a peculiarity of Round balls performance on game. Up close and personal the impact expands the ball a lot so it loses velocity faster after impact. At longer range with lower velocity at impact the ball deforms less and penetrates better than a deformed ball.

Just my opinion, but I think with a 50 cal RB over 70 or more grains of powder you should be fine as far out as you feel confident in placing your shot.