Round vs Conical

[RetPara]

On another shooting forum (not primarily black powder) the theory that a conical bullet was more accurate than a round ball was round was widely disabused.

What do y'all think of ball vs conical say.... in my .50 cal Pedersoli Pennsylvania Rifle or my Ruger Old Army?

I've always shot round ball, but wonder if switching is even worth the price of a couple of boxes.....

 

[cynthialee]

I can hit my targets with roundballs consistently. With a conical I have to do things just right every time, hold the gun just so and squint just so and I will probably hit somewhere near what I was aiming at.
With a patched ball I get about 90% satisfactory hits, with a conical I get maybe 75%.
Now then there is the issue of getting smacked hard from the conicals...
I'll just stick with my roundballs.

 

[stuartg]

I'm with my CynthiaLee...My caliber and projectile of choice is a .54 roundball. It's around 225 grains of lethal lead and will take down most anything North America can throw at it.

 

[coloradoclyde]

It has a lot to do with the individual gun.
I have tack drivers that shoot conicals and tack drivers that shoot round balls. but I do not have any guns that drive tacks shooting both.
Roundballs are my preference, hands down.

 

[stuartg]

I'm sure someone will chime in at some point with some formulas of rifling vs. length of projectile, but in general the twist of the rifling will kind of determine what will shoot best. Typically, faster the twist the better a conical will shoot. On the other side, the slower the twist the better a round ball will shoot.

 

[Spikebuck]

I have two guns that shoot both conical and roundball very well...and at 1-65 twist! Even at 100 yards the conical holes are crisp indicating no porposing or end over end. Both of these guns have shallow square grooves. I would not even attempt a conical in my deep round grooved barrels.

Net, I've shot both a lot and both will group very, very well, but perhaps not from the same gun, or perhaps they will.

I will say this...I've also used both extensively over 15 years of hunting northern whitetails and I see zero difference in ability to kill. Those I have shot with a .54 to .62 cal roundball (most with a .54) died every bit as quickly and left as good a blood trail as those shot with big Hornady Great Plains conicals.

So net, if you're happy with patched roundballs, you have no need to change, IMO.

 

[wattlebuster]

If it aint broke dont fix it :idunno:

 

[dcriner]

I have an original M1863 .58-cal Springfield, civil war era rifled musket. Minie balls (conicals) were standard issue, but I've fired both Minie and round balls. Both are fun to shoot, but I tend to go with Minies. I haven't carefully compared their accuracy and I don't use the musket for hunting.

Conicals were standard because they are quicker to load, don't require patches, barely require ramming, and are heavier. I have a book that contains the detailed accuracy tests run the Army, including copies of the actual targets. Here is a summary of the results, using deliberate aim (off-hand, but not timed):

100 yds, 10 shots, all struck within 8x12"
300 yds, all 10 struck within 2.5'
500 yds, 1 shot struck within 4'

All the other tests were timed. It seems that rapidity of fire was considered equally important as accuracy.

Penetration was 11 1" pine boards at 100 yds.

The tests didn't include round balls.

 

[Stumpkiller]

No question the conicals are more accurate at ranges over 80 or 90 yards.

A modern centerfire conical bullets are accurate MUCH further out. So if you're not in this for the historical challenge you might better forgo the muzzle loading aspect entirely. ;-)

 

[coloradoclyde]

Somehow I think we are comparing apples to oranges?
Technological advancement creates the illusion of proficiency.

 

[Stumpkiller]

Yep.

It boils down to are you using whatever it took to feed the family vs. using whatever it takes to feed the family.

 

[Rat Trapper]

It depends on the rifle. I have some TC Hawken rifles that really shine with Hornady great plains bullets. They shoot best with a ox yoke wad under the bullet and a heavy charge. If it loads easy they don't shoot well.

 

[nkbj]

Conical bullets typically won't group worth a hoot because they are conical in shape and do not have sufficient barrel alignment to have the center of mass concentric to the bore after the powder charge expands the lead to fit the rifling unless special means are employed to make that alignment happen. That is why in the mid 1800's people developed muzzleloaded bullet designs for accurate long range shooting that were essentially cylindrical with a somewhat rounded front end, some with a large or small cup in the base and some flat based. Later on the same basic bullet designs were used in cartridges with the same results... and in general conical bullets were the least accurate while elongated cylindrical bullets were the most accurate. Rifles is rifles and the same principles apply whether the lead goes in the front or the back.

 

[swathdiver]

Your Ruger Old Army will shoot Kaido conicals quite well. In fact it will penetrate twice the water jugs of a .30-06 and keep going.

That being said, the only real point in using them is for hunting in thick cover or to reach out beyond 50 yards for deer and hogs for example. Closer in and for general plinking, the venerable round ball still holds its own!