Round Ball effective range?

I agree with ridgeroader,.... if you can consistantly hit a 2x4 block at 180 yards with complete penetration, any deer within thet range is in serious truble!! :haha: :thumbsup:

YMHS
rollingb

P.S.,.... and don't worry 'bout "tg", I'm sure he'll be tha first to admit thet true "traditional" doesn't happen over night!! eace:

 

[roundball]

I'm finding myself wanting to get into some fresh new interesting areas of muzzleloading and want to really focus on two areas this coming spring & summer:

Learning to shoot more accurately standing / offhand;
Learning what my rifles will do at long range distances;

I had started out 2004 planning to do that but got sidetracked getting up to speed with the .58cal flintlock I got in the spring, getting it ready for hunting, etc.

A 2x4" target at 180yds?? Now there's a challenge...might hold that one off until the following year :: and just see if I could learn to hit a paper plate more than once !!

::

 

A 2x4" target at 180yds?? Now there's a challenge...might hold that one off until the following year :: and just see if I could learn to hit a paper plate more than once !!

::

Heck!!.. I cain't hit no "2x4" at 180 yards (even if it's turned "flat-wise"), 'course I'm blind so I got an "excuse"!! :crackup: :crackup: :crackup: :crackup: ::

YMHS
rollingb

 

[RussB]

TG,
I apologize if I have offended you. The gun/ sight combo that I use is legal in a "Traditional Muzzleloader Only " hunt, here in Idaho. I actually went with the peep sights to have the best chance to test the accuracy of the different loads and patch combonations I was experimenting with in the beginning. Im sure that as I develop my skills I may add some more challenges for myself and may lean toward a more " Traditional " style. A Flintlock is a VERY intriguing idea to me now and up until several years ago I would have sworn that would never be the case. I really am just trying to learn more than I know now and not trying to change any definitions .
Idaho PRB

Idaho PRB...It is myself who owes the apologies if one is forthcoming. When we talk about "effective range" it is my understanding that you must "hit" the target to be effective, and that was my only reason for dwelling on the vernier sight....that sight, in combination with your regular iron sights, do extend your effective range, plain and simple. Nothing else was said, nothing else was intended.
There was no mention of Modern vs Traditional, Flint vs Cap, or my gun is bigger than your gun....it had to do with effective range.

So, tg, if it's an apology you are looking for, I will apologize if my post was offensive to you, and is not in the "traditional hunting" scheme of things. However, I will not apologize for what I said about the vernier extending ones range.
In view of what I just said, it is me who should be "out of here". Apparently I was not aware of the sensitivity of the subject. :m2c:

Respectfully, Russ

 

[Stumpkiller]

We used to lop scrap 2" x 4" sections into foot long pieces and use them as "poor man's pins" for pistol shooting and woodchuck practice with rifles. Best 15 yard target in the world for a Colt percussion revolver. They hop nice. :thumbsup:

180 yards with a M/L. That's an awful long walk to reset the plank.

Think on this: In Medieval England they would "Shoot the Wand" at a 6' tall, thumb diameter willow sapling stripped of bark at 100 yards WITH LONGBOWS! If your opponent hit it (any touch) but you missed your opponent got to clout you upside the head with his fist.

No wonder the French hated the English archers.

 

RussB,.... Once agin I must mention my blindness, and my failure to "see" what sights have to do with the original question,.... thet be'n,.. does the roundball retain enuff power to cleanly kill a mule deer at 180 yards??

I'd mention some of my "past experiences" of shoot'n critters at long range with roundballs, but I don't wish to encourage such practices.

YMHS
rollingb

 

[Rat]

Hey good thinking dude.....

I've been having the same idea Roundball, do more off hand shooting. I usually shoot off the bench, or from a sitting position with my back rested against a tree, or from prone, being concerned with sighting in and group size, and thinking in terms that those are the postitions I'd LIKE to take when shooting at big game...but sometimes the game don't cooperate.

However, I'm starting to think more and more that group size is not that important to a ML hunting rifle. Yes it's nice to shoot small groups. Yes it's nice to know the rifle is as accurate as you can get it.

But really, at whatever range you can hit a paper plate, (because, IMHO, a paper plate represents the kill zone of a deer, elk or bear...and they are CHEAP!) EVERY time, really tells you what range you are good for on game. Alot of people would say that a rifle that groups 6" or 7", or even 8" at 100 would be "too" inaccurate, but if that rifle puts it's shot on the plate, everytime...???

Shooting offhand more at the plates will tell me at what range I can confidently take a offhand shot at big game, and of course the practice should extend that[url] range...win-win[/url] situation!!

My new Jaeger is good to go, (.62") and I'm looking forward to shooting it a lot offhand this winter, spring and summer. Will do the same with Bess and the '61.

Just got off a 24 hour work shift...I think I'm kind of rambling here....good nite.

:youcrazy:

Rat <---needs sleep.

 

[Stumpkiller]

There has long been a debate about the "hunter who is poor at targets but is a good shot at game." I believe it is true because I know of such people. When hunting, only the first shot (should) count, and that has to be on target at unknown ranges.

So lets say we have two shooters: Elmer and Vern. Elmer can shoot 8" groups at 100 yards but is a cautious hunter, spends a lot of time in the woods hunting small game up close and out to 50 yards, and is a good judge of range. Vern can shoot 2" groups from a rest, shoots #1 in a target league, but is somewhat antsy in the field and a poor judge of range . . . we'll even give him a scope on his M/L. Both are shooting .50 cal rifles with 90 grains of FFg and PRB.

The largest twin bucks in the state, coincidentally traveling together, suddenly appear on the edge of a field; standing tail-to-tail they begin feeding. Both men fortunately were already sitting down on their foam pad seats, eating their lunch sandwiches. They now each take a shooting position, resting their elbows on their knees. Elmer does this all the time, Vern seldom shoots without a bench. "You take the one on the right" says Elmer.

Elmer breaks the terrain down into 10 yards "legs" and estimates the buck to be 12 of them, or 120 yards away. He is sighted 2" high at 50 yards, so he holds for an imaginary spot a hand's width over the deer's back.

Vern is pumped, heart racing and adrenals spewing, and guesses the deer to be 90 yards away (that BIG rack looks Sooo close). His scope is dead on at 100 yards, so he places the cross-hairs on the center of the deer's heart - 3" up from the bottom of the brisket. The x-hairs are bouncing a bit but he begins to creep the trigger back.

The deer are 126 yards away from the muzzles. Who kills a deer?

 

[Java Man]

Vern misses, Elmer either kills or or wounds it.

Shoot a gun that will group 2" at 100yds, and practice varied shooting positions.

 

[Stumpkiller]

1.) Actually, both misfired because Elmer dumped his prime and Vern pulled off his cap before crossing the barbed wire fence to sit down for lunch and neither had remembered to re-prime.

B.) Both lowered their rifles and agreed "that looks like an awful long shot for me today" and let the deer go unmolested.

iii.) Just before the pulled the triggers there were two "Blams!" from 400 yards to their right and two in-line shooters with Mega-Death-Badder long range conicals had taken the 250 yard shots to collect the deer. Neither Vern nor Elmer had noticed the ATV's parked under the treestand camo cabin where the other two "hunters" had been watching the game and cooking burgers prior to the motion detector going off on the game feeder disguised as a treestump and the red "Deer Active" light had gone off in the cabin, automatically lowering the shooting port covers for them.

Did you see Cabela's actually has an automtic deer feeder disguised as a tree-stump in their catalog? Is that to fool the deer or the wardens?

 

[roundball]

1)
B)
iii)


I love it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I remember seeing that skit done by a comedian years and years ago by one of the old original type standup comedians...can't remember who

 

[Huntinfool]

I'm finding myself wanting to get into some fresh new interesting areas of muzzleloading and want to really focus on two areas this coming spring & summer:

Learning to shoot more accurately standing / offhand;
Learning what my rifles will do at long range distances;

Hey Roundball all of our primitive club gong shoots are offhand plus we regularly shoot out to 100 yards. But I still take a rest every time if I can when an animals life and limb are at stake.

I believe my mentor is startin' to see that it pays off. I've taken 7 deer with flintlocks in the last 3 years and he's taken 2. He's missed 8 or 10 shots due to limbs or moving targets. Nothing replaces time spent in the field and the number of moments of truths you've experienced.

This is a man who has the reputation of winning more target shoots than anyone else in our whole ML club. But not the primitive gong shoots where they are setup like archery 3d courses the brush has a way of fowling his shots.

YMH&OS,
eace:Chuck

 

[tg]

No apologied are required or expected...as usuall I was expressing my opinuion at how ridiculus it is to even have the word "traditional" incorporated into a forum, group, hunting season or whatever as it has become a meaningless term from a historical point.

 

[WSmitty01]

I'm still trying to figure out if camo hunting stays in the traditional line. I shoot an EXACT Hawkens reproduction with spit patch pillow ticking usually cut at the muzzle with a patch knife, powder poured out of a horn into a measure, short starter made out of a old deer antler, hickory ramrod, all kept in a leather possibles bag. I love hunting this way, it makes me appreciate the old ways of doing things, but just can't seem to get into those leather outfits!!! It's too warm here in Florida!! So how about the camo, breaking out of tradition,,yes or no!!!!

 

Stump,

I always heard that Elmer could hit a deer at 600 yds with a 44 Mag pistol - what happened? :crackup:

 

[musketman]

Stump,

I always heard that Elmer could hit a deer at 600 yds with a 44 Mag pistol - what happened? :crackup:

Elmer Keith or Elmer Fudd???

 

[Huntinfool]

Elmer Keith or Elmer Fudd???

HAY Be BERY, BERY Careful There I bea Wabbit Huntin'

Chuck :crackup: :redthumb:

 

[tg]

I would think that hunting in modern camo clothes is not hunting in a traditional outfit, though you would be useing a traditional gun, a PC outfit of linen or cotton would suffice in a warmer climate if you wanted to go the whole nine yards. The main issue is the gun and gun related gear... this is where the definition of the word takes a real beating.

 

[Java Man]

Smitty,

Many say that large checked flannel shirts are very good camo. Not quite buckskins, but way better than modern camo.

Gregg

 

[Stumpkiller]

A friend and I did some black & white photos of different kinds of camo and hunting gear. Most modern camo looks like dark blobs from 50 yards. Red buffalo plaid actually blends into trees and brush mighty well. Green plaid got to be too dark, again. Plain Blaze Orange was harder to pick out than Tree-bark or Mossy-Oak in a lot of cases! In snow cover, blaze orange was again hamds down best for color-blind prey.

Though, I am told deer see colors in the blue spectra.

A red capote ought to be a good compromise to keep from being made by deer or shot by man.

Woolrich has been around since 1830 and Filson since 1897. Can't say when plaid jackets and shirts appeared. Tartan kilts been around since God knows when. 1400's maybe?