-
Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.
We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.
Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103
range of balls
- Thread starter chowell
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
Maximum range for KILLING a deer? Maximum range for injuring someone/something?
I am not sure what you are asking but I'm assuming you mean maximum range for hunting/shooting at game such as deer.
In a traditional muzzle loading gun I think you really are actually more limited by the iron sites and accuracy than you are by MAXIMUM KILLING Range. I would say a creature hit by a 50 cal round ball at 300 yards could be quite injured severely, although I would argue that 140-150 yards would be about the maximum any hunter would shoot game at with any degree of confidence.
I prefer to be even more cautious and limit my shooting to under a hundred yards for iron sights, and my eyes are not getting any better with age either
I am not sure what you are asking but I'm assuming you mean maximum range for hunting/shooting at game such as deer.
In a traditional muzzle loading gun I think you really are actually more limited by the iron sites and accuracy than you are by MAXIMUM KILLING Range. I would say a creature hit by a 50 cal round ball at 300 yards could be quite injured severely, although I would argue that 140-150 yards would be about the maximum any hunter would shoot game at with any degree of confidence.
I prefer to be even more cautious and limit my shooting to under a hundred yards for iron sights, and my eyes are not getting any better with age either
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2004
- Messages
- 15,602
- Reaction score
- 19
Over The Hill said:
Way I see his post, if you hold a .50 cal gun either straight or an angle,(I don't know as he didn't say) just how far would a .50 cal ball fired at 1800 fps go?
Joel/Calgary
50 Cal.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2004
- Messages
- 1,251
- Reaction score
- 6
Do a search on the forum and/or the web for "Journee's formula". For a lead sphere and in English units, it is that the maximum range in yards is approximately 2200 times the diameter in inches - the muzzle velocity has only a secondary effect on this due to the scuzzy ballistic coefficient of round balls.
Regards,
Joel
Regards,
Joel
So, using this value with one of my .440 inch diameter balls I get .440 X 2200 = 968 yards.Joel/Calgary said:
That would be about 9/16 of a mile maximum.
A .530 diameter ball would be .66 mile or a little over 5/8 of a mile.
I believe the math, but I have a hard time believing my .54 will only lob a ball a little more than a half mile :bull:
A goog search found the formula and it is/was developed for shot shell. Interesting info was to military rounds and actual field measurements. A noted fact there; was about the degree of elevation the gun was held. It said any hold above 35' and the projectile actually began falling shorter .
http://www.loadammo.com/Topics/May01.htm
Now I understand the differance between round and elongated projectiles, but I'm not going to stand at 6/8 of a mile and dare someone to take a shot at me :blah: .
Wasn't the shot at Adobe Wells(?), albeit an arguably lucky shot, something over a 3/4 mile? And that knocked a man off his horse.
Just found this; qoute
"The second day after the initial attack, fifteen warriors rode out on a bluff nearly a mile away to survey the situation. Some reports indicate they were taunting the Adobe Walls defenders but, at the distance involved, it seems unlikely. At the behest of one of the hunters, Billy Dixon, already renowned as a crack shot, took aim with a 'Big Fifty' Sharps {it was either a .50-70 or -90, probably the latter} he'd borrowed from Hanrahan, and cleanly dropped a warrior from atop his horse. This apparently so discouraged the Indians they decamped and gave up the fight.
Two weeks later a team of US Army surveyors, under the command of Nelson A. Miles, measured the distance of the shot: 1,538 yards, or nine-tenths of a mile."
A goog search found the formula and it is/was developed for shot shell. Interesting info was to military rounds and actual field measurements. A noted fact there; was about the degree of elevation the gun was held. It said any hold above 35' and the projectile actually began falling shorter
.http://www.loadammo.com/Topics/May01.htm
Now I understand the differance between round and elongated projectiles, but I'm not going to stand at 6/8 of a mile and dare someone to take a shot at me :blah: .
Wasn't the shot at Adobe Wells(?), albeit an arguably lucky shot, something over a 3/4 mile? And that knocked a man off his horse.
Just found this; qoute
"The second day after the initial attack, fifteen warriors rode out on a bluff nearly a mile away to survey the situation. Some reports indicate they were taunting the Adobe Walls defenders but, at the distance involved, it seems unlikely. At the behest of one of the hunters, Billy Dixon, already renowned as a crack shot, took aim with a 'Big Fifty' Sharps {it was either a .50-70 or -90, probably the latter} he'd borrowed from Hanrahan, and cleanly dropped a warrior from atop his horse. This apparently so discouraged the Indians they decamped and gave up the fight.
Two weeks later a team of US Army surveyors, under the command of Nelson A. Miles, measured the distance of the shot: 1,538 yards, or nine-tenths of a mile."
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2004
- Messages
- 14,767
- Reaction score
- 319
I can believe those numbers. Living by the ocean, one of our favorite games is long range shooting with any gun at floating kelp balls (sea weed bulbs about the size of a 500 watt light bulb at the largest, more typically like a 150-200 watt bulb). With flat calm water you can see your rounds hit a loooooong ways out there, then start walking in your shots.
The few times I've done it with RB's are always startling how far they WON'T go. I haven't lasered any of the kelp balls, so I'm not going to guess and put numbers on the distances involved. But a 44 mag handgun with 300 grain bullets starting at only 1100fps shoots a whole lot further than a 54 cal RB at around 1600fps, due to the long slug I'm sure. It would be interesting to compare different calibers from 32 to 75, just to see what's what.
The few times I've done it with RB's are always startling how far they WON'T go. I haven't lasered any of the kelp balls, so I'm not going to guess and put numbers on the distances involved. But a 44 mag handgun with 300 grain bullets starting at only 1100fps shoots a whole lot further than a 54 cal RB at around 1600fps, due to the long slug I'm sure. It would be interesting to compare different calibers from 32 to 75, just to see what's what.
Joel/Calgary
50 Cal.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2004
- Messages
- 1,251
- Reaction score
- 6
necchi said:
Actually it came from investigations of the ballistics of iron cannon shot, shell, and spherical case (Shrapnel) and was used through the 19th century for artillery fire-control. It is a general formula that works fairly well because most of the trajectory is subsonic, regardless of MV, and has been adapted for other spherical projectiles. All one needs for the ballistic coefficient is diameter (squared) as the form factor stays the same, and the weight. Since the weight of a solid sphere is also related to the diameter (cubed) and the density, when you write out the equation then combine terms and simplify, you are left with the diameter and all the constants rolled together. The most common use now-a-days is for bird & buck shot.
necchi said:
Either you believe the math or you don't. As I said, it is an approximation, but it is a good one as born out by the fact that it is still used by military and civil authorities (safety distances for shotgun ranges, for example). As you pointed out, Billy Dixon's shot was with a 500gr+ bullet, not a 180gr round ball and the ballistic coefficient is MUCH better (see below).
45° only works in a vacuum, where the trajectory coming down is just like it was going up except in reverse. Air resistance is not your friend - the ball starts at 35°± but it's coming down close to vertical. IIRC, the angle for maximum range of a low-drag large-caliber pointed boat-tail bullet (or shell) may be closer to 38° or maybe 40° or 42°, but it's still not 45°.necchi said:A noted fact there; was about the degree of elevation the gun was held. It said any hold above 35' and the projectile actually began falling shorter
This has been investigated and duplicated - see: http://powderburns.tripod.com/sharps.html or on p.4 of http://www.ssbpcrc.co.uk/Resources/BlackThunderNo2.pdfnecchi said:
That big slug is very serious medicine, and this performance could be duplicated in an appropriate M/L, but not with a ball! There is an interesting side-light about the sound of this shot (on the receiving end!) at http://www.firearmsid.com/Feature Articles/soundofbullets/soundofbullets2.htm about a third of the way down, right after Photo 3B.
Regards,
Joel
Last edited by a moderator:
paulvallandigham
Passed On
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2006
- Messages
- 17,537
- Reaction score
- 89
You can find " A Trajectory Analysis of Billy Dixon's Long Shot", in Vol. 34, No.4, Journal of Forensic Science, July, 1989, pp. 1037-1041, authored by John I. Thornton, Professor of Forensic Science Group, Univ. of California,Berkeley, and Jill M. Shirakawa, Grad Student at the University. The Shot occurred in June, 1874, At Adobe Wells, in the Texas Panhandle, when a group of Camanche, Kiowa, and Arapahoe Indians attacked a trading post there. This battle is actually the Second Battle of Adobe Wells, the first occurring in the Fall of 1864, about a mile south of that location. The Famous Scout, Kit Carson was the leader of the First Battle of Adobe Wells, and survived.
Billy Dixon was an experienced Buffalo Hunter, whose own .50-90 Sharps rifle had been lost. He had replaced it with the only Sharps rifle for sale at the Trading post, a .44-90. He borrowed the .50=90 Sharps rifle from the Bartender who was working at the Trading Post, to make the shot, as he was not familiar with the trajectory of his new rifle. At 7/8 of a mile, the drop of the 465 grain bullet would have been tremendous, adding to it the elevation of the ridge above the post where the band of Indians were sitting on horseback. The wind was also blowing from the South at about 15 mph. Dixon's intend was to put the fear of God into the Indians, in hope that they would abandon the siege of the trading post that had been going on for 3 full days before he took the shot. Its doubtful that he could make out a single Brave on a single horse, but he would have been able to see a group of Indians on their horses at that distance. Striking a brave on horseback was a matter of pure Luck, combined with some application of experience by Dixon. However, the fatal wounding of the brave did unnerve Quannah Parker and the other leaders of the 3 tribes, and they ended the siege. To that extent, Billy Dixon's " lucky Shot" came at the right time and place, and saved the people holed up at the post. Some 4 people at the post were killed during the raid, most in the first rush by the Indians, before they were driven back by gunfire. How many Indians were killed or wounded in the raid has never been disclosed.
Billy Dixon was an experienced Buffalo Hunter, whose own .50-90 Sharps rifle had been lost. He had replaced it with the only Sharps rifle for sale at the Trading post, a .44-90. He borrowed the .50=90 Sharps rifle from the Bartender who was working at the Trading Post, to make the shot, as he was not familiar with the trajectory of his new rifle. At 7/8 of a mile, the drop of the 465 grain bullet would have been tremendous, adding to it the elevation of the ridge above the post where the band of Indians were sitting on horseback. The wind was also blowing from the South at about 15 mph. Dixon's intend was to put the fear of God into the Indians, in hope that they would abandon the siege of the trading post that had been going on for 3 full days before he took the shot. Its doubtful that he could make out a single Brave on a single horse, but he would have been able to see a group of Indians on their horses at that distance. Striking a brave on horseback was a matter of pure Luck, combined with some application of experience by Dixon. However, the fatal wounding of the brave did unnerve Quannah Parker and the other leaders of the 3 tribes, and they ended the siege. To that extent, Billy Dixon's " lucky Shot" came at the right time and place, and saved the people holed up at the post. Some 4 people at the post were killed during the raid, most in the first rush by the Indians, before they were driven back by gunfire. How many Indians were killed or wounded in the raid has never been disclosed.
Joel/Calgary said:
And mathmatical aerodynamics proves, Bumblebees can't fly.
OK, then you stand at just over 5/8 of a mile and let me shoot,, :wink:
Joel/Calgary
50 Cal.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2004
- Messages
- 1,251
- Reaction score
- 6
IIRC, the fallacy was that "they" tried to apply fixed-wing aerodynamics to an "aircraft" much more analogous to a rotary-wing. The misapplied theory obviously failed to correspond to Nature's evidence. Journee's formula has given adequate results for everything up to an 11" Rodman cannon.necchi said:
Give me 10% margin for experimental error and a day when you have no tail wind (RBs are gawdawfully sensitive to wind), and you're on.necchi said:
Regards,
Joel
Actual tests of a 54 caliber roundball by a VERY experienced ML shooter have proven that 900 yards is about maximum with that caliber and a roundball - wind and other factors can and will affect the yardage to some degree, but overall that's the maximum range. Actual testing always trumps theory.....
As for the Billy Dixon Sharps rifle shot - Mike Venturino and others actually tested this on the Army Long Distance Range at Ft. Huachuca, AZ some few years ago and found it was easily feasible with the conical bullet that would have been used by Mr Dixon and without a radical change in sighting at the stated distance - any conical has a better ballistic coefficient than a round ball and will easily out distance said roundball. The findings of the test by Mike V were published and IIRC are available via the Net.....
On the other hand Mr Dixon always stated that it was a one off "luck" shot....
As for the Billy Dixon Sharps rifle shot - Mike Venturino and others actually tested this on the Army Long Distance Range at Ft. Huachuca, AZ some few years ago and found it was easily feasible with the conical bullet that would have been used by Mr Dixon and without a radical change in sighting at the stated distance - any conical has a better ballistic coefficient than a round ball and will easily out distance said roundball. The findings of the test by Mike V were published and IIRC are available via the Net.....
On the other hand Mr Dixon always stated that it was a one off "luck" shot....
zimmerstutzen
70 Cal.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2009
- Messages
- 5,848
- Reaction score
- 1,215
There is a huge difference between how far a ball will carry and haw far it will carry an injurious amount of power.
According to Quannah Parker, who was with the group of indians that Dixon shot at, the bullet riccocheted off a rock and struck the brave in the leg. When they went over the bluff to huddle and discuss the white man's new medicine, they were out of the line of site of the white. A bullet struck a poney in the hed and killed it, at which the indiaans decided the white medicine and new guns were far too much for them.
If you check the Lyman Black powder Handbook, the larger the ball, the further it retains it's energy. To the point that a huge 75 cal ball retains approx 75% of it's energy at 100 yrds.
In addition, a ball fired at a speed higher than the speed of sound decelerates and loses energy at a proportionately faster rate than a slower ball.
Billy Dixin most likely fired a conical bullet o about 450 grains.
A better comparison shot, would have been Tim Murphy's shot at Saratoga. He climbed a pine tree and shot the Brit General off his horse at 400 yds. I don't know what caliber.
According to Quannah Parker, who was with the group of indians that Dixon shot at, the bullet riccocheted off a rock and struck the brave in the leg. When they went over the bluff to huddle and discuss the white man's new medicine, they were out of the line of site of the white. A bullet struck a poney in the hed and killed it, at which the indiaans decided the white medicine and new guns were far too much for them.
If you check the Lyman Black powder Handbook, the larger the ball, the further it retains it's energy. To the point that a huge 75 cal ball retains approx 75% of it's energy at 100 yrds.
In addition, a ball fired at a speed higher than the speed of sound decelerates and loses energy at a proportionately faster rate than a slower ball.
Billy Dixin most likely fired a conical bullet o about 450 grains.
A better comparison shot, would have been Tim Murphy's shot at Saratoga. He climbed a pine tree and shot the Brit General off his horse at 400 yds. I don't know what caliber.
Joel/Calgary
50 Cal.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2004
- Messages
- 1,251
- Reaction score
- 6
Cool - that guesstimated 10% margin-of-error is in my favor in this case.LaBonte said:
Yes - see the links I posted above.LaBonte said:
Regards,
Joel
Joel/Calgary said:
:rotf: OK, you win, I'll belive it. :surrender:
Seem's everyone coverd my advantages; tail wind, ricochet and "skip/bounce".
I can still learn. I'll keep my "old school" saftey frame of mind though, and be aware of what's behind my target out to a mile or more.
:v friend.
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2004
- Messages
- 14,767
- Reaction score
- 319
necchi said:
One thing about long distance shooting (or any shooting) over water. You get to see what happens after that ball first strikes. However far that ball will go in the first place, it seems to go about twice as much further skipping and bouncing across the water. :shocked2: Certainly I'm exaggerating on that, but it's still far enough to keep a guy thinking real hard about what's behind the target.
