The effect of barrel length

[Packrat]

Maybe Tim Murphey shot Simon Frasier at 300 yards, according to some, Murphey hit him on his second shot, Frasier was not to smart to sit on a horse and be shot at twice.

 

[chorizo]

Folks, he ain't asking about taking potshots at foes.

He is asking about carbines and hunting deer.

 

[tenngun]

He had his chrony right in front of the target. I'm not sure what range he was shooting, it looked like perhaps 50 yards. Round balls shed velocity rapidly, and more so as the velocity goes up. Muzzle velocity would have shown somewhat more spread. Of course, velocity at impact is what counts.

An important fact. At 2200 fps a ball will slow to about 1100 at a hundred yards. At 1100 fps at the muzzle a ball will slow to about 800. When you load a long gun for bear you can turn out some numbers. Velocity in breach loading range. Slow breech loaders but at least in their range. 30/30 types.
But ball just dumps that noticeably by twenty five yards
I took a deer with a CVA Mountian pistol at about twenty yards. Velocity was all ready subsonic. But she dropped real quick with holes in both sides.
Except for the historic correctness of the rife in particular types there is no advantage to long barrels. Ball remains a short rage projectile. All that is offset by a conical.
A .50 maxi runs about 300 fps slower then a ball at the muzzle, but will overhaul a ball by a hundred yards

 

[Grenadier1758]

There have been several studies showing the loss of velocity in round balls over distance. The graph in this example should have ranges marked on the axes but the measurements go from the muzzle to a little past 100 yards. the 100 yard distance is the second blip from the end.

For what it is worth, the advantage in muzzle velocity from a longer barreled rifle is not there as the distance increases to 100 yards. The answer to @PARidgeRunner is that accuracy is the significant driver for success in the hunting fields. The energy of the round ball in his 21" barreled rifle will be just about the same as the energy remaining in a 42" barreled rifle. It is the confidence in the accuracy of the rifle that will ensure success while hunting at reasonable ranges of less than 100 yards.

https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/threads/is-70-grains-3f-enough-umph.118699/#post-1624102

 

[longwalk]

The only way you well know how the gun shoots is to shoot it at the max range you would hunt at, and you have the accuracy you want. If you have the accuracy at a known distance, put a 2x4 or other wood be hind your target and see what kind of penitration you get in the wood. If it passes through it will surly kill a deer. Also shot placement is key.

 

[chorizo]

There have been several studies showing the loss of velocity in round balls over distance. The graph in this example should have ranges marked on the axes but the measurements go from the muzzle to a little past 100 yards. the 100 yard distance is the second blip from the end.

For what it is worth, the advantage in muzzle velocity from a longer barreled rifle is not there as the distance increases to 100 yards. The answer to @PARidgeRunner is that accuracy is the significant driver for success in the hunting fields. The energy of the round ball in his 21" barreled rifle will be just about the same as the energy remaining in a 42" barreled rifle. It is the confidence in the accuracy of the rifle that will ensure success while hunting at reasonable ranges of less than 100 yards.

https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/threads/is-70-grains-3f-enough-umph.118699/#post-1624102

Excellent! I was spitballing the velocity of the round ball. the link within the link is good!

http://www.namlhunt.com/traditionalmldata1.html

 

[chorizo]

The only way you well know how the gun shoots is to shoot it at the max range you would hunt at, and you have the accuracy you want. If you have the accuracy at a known distance, put a 2x4 or other wood be hind your target and see what kind of penitration you get in the wood. If it passes through it will surly kill a deer. Also shot placement is key.

Poor way of doing that. Shooting a 2x4 is in no way indicative of shooting a deer..

A ballistics calculator with a ftlbs of energy column is much more accurate noting that 800ftlbs of energy is the accepted minimum for shooting a deer with round ball.

http://www.namlhunt.com/traditionalmldata1.html
https://www.ctmuzzleloaders.com/ctml_experiments/rbballistics/web_apps/rb_ballistics.html

 

[longwalk]

The idea behind shooting at a 2x4 is to show penitration. If the roundball or whatever type projectile you shoot at a given distance can pass through a 2x4 it will penitrate a deer.

 

[chorizo]

The idea behind shooting at a 2x4 is to show penitration. If the roundball or whatever type projectile you shoot at a given distance can pass through a 2x4 it will penitrate a deer.

I doubt anybody can find any study of 2x4 penetration in relation to a PBR penetrating a deer. That is simply a wild a** guess.

Sounds more like someone weighing more than a duck to see if they are a witch.

 

[TNTraveler]

The idea behind shooting at a 2x4 is to show penitration. If the roundball or whatever type projectile you shoot at a given distance can pass through a 2x4 it will penitrate a deer.

Using a wet phone book that has sat in water for a couple of days, then shot at right after removing from the water has shown to closely match ballistic gel and would be a better option than a piece of wood, it takes way more energy to pass through a 2x4 than a lung shot on a deer,

 

[Grenadier1758]

Yes, @TNTraveler, but finding a phone book today is kind of like looking for percussion caps, except I think finding caps would be easier.

 

[TNTraveler]

Yes, @TNTraveler, but finding a phone book today is kind of like looking for percussion caps, except I think finding caps would be easier.

Im sure some of y'all have an old Dixie Gun Works catalog sitting around

 

[Pete G]

energy doesn’t kill game, tissue damage does

 

[chorizo]

energy doesn’t kill game, tissue damage does

Where do you think tissue damage comes from? Since you can't measure tissue damage with a chronometer, you got to use what CAUSES tissue damage to measure it.

Well documented studies of energy/tissue damage/bullet types abound.

Helps if you read the articles provided before commenting.

800 ftlbs for deer, 1000 ftlbs for elk

http://www.namlhunt.com/rbhunting1.html

 

[longcruise]

A ballistics calculator with a ftlbs of energy column is much more accurate noting that 800ftlbs of energy is the accepted minimum for shooting a deer with round ball.

The author of that statement (below)

Also, note that the "Minimum" 800 foot pounds of energy needed to cleanly take deer-sized game WAS NOT achieved by any of these loads at 100 yards. Even the hottest .50 caliber patched round ball load covered here has a maximum effective range of around 80 yards. Most of the 80 & 90 grain black powder loads shared here WILL NOT produce 800 foot-pounds at 50 yards.

Has an opinion that would not be shared by many many ml hunters who have hands on experience to the contrary. He has no first hand experience to the contrary I'm sure.

I've killed quite a few mule deer with 50 round balls and nearly every kill would defy the authors conclusion. Below is a table of the ballistics of my last kill with a 50. The muzzle velocity is the actual as measured over five shots and averaged. The range to the deer was 75 yards. Full penetration. The deer walked about 50 yards and was done.

 

[64Springer]

energy doesn’t kill game, tissue damage does

There are countless battlefield reports where people have died due to what's known as hydrostatic shock.

8mm Mauser, .30-06, etc. slam into the human body with such a transfer of force that this force alone kills.

No penetration of vital organs required. Just violent shaking. Then the organs stop working.

 

[SLOTHEAD]

As a carbine fanatic, I have been studying it. You will lose about 125 fps from 28" to 22" with FFg

If you use FFFg you will regain some of that so maybe 50 to 60 FPS will be loss.

Insignificant. As far as accuracy goes, the faster twist helps a carbine, but accuracy should not be an issue with the load that works for the gun,

Here are my carbines....three 21"..two in 50 cal, one in 54 cal, a 58 cal that is 24" and a 24" 54 calView attachment 195434

Hmmm.. I always thought a carbine by definition was a repeating arm.???

 

[chorizo]

Hmmm.. I always thought a carbine by definition was a repeating arm.???

Nope. Origins of the word go back to the 16th century. Carbine is used to described a shorter barreled, lighter version of a rifle. Modern secondary usage of the word has some relation to repeating firearm where the confusion comes from.

https://www.wordnik.com/words/carbine

 

[Packrat]

Guess this is why I like my 1803 Harpers Ferry, good enough for decent rnge shooting, easy to tote. Hard to improve on Perfection

 

[sbernhoney]

Interesting video on barrel length for muzzleloader

I thank you very much for your sharing the valuable information you obtained for your "experiment". Most interesting!!!