What is the cartridge gun equivelency of ML'ers

[Zonie]

What the heck. My 45 is the same as a trap door 45-70 with the original trap door load. :thumbsup:

Those of us who know you, know what your saying but IMO, that statement is exactly what galamb is referring to when he says the comment can be dangerous to a new ML shooter.

A newbie to muzzleloading and the forum may well come to the conclusion after reading that comment that his .45 caliber gun with a roundball is the equivalent of a .45-70.
After all, his gun is a .45 caliber gun and he can easily load 70 grains of black powder.

For those who don't know Ron, he lives out West and he shoots heavy bullets from his .45 muzzleloader, not roundballs.

While his bullets lose velocity and energy while they are going downrange the loss is no where near as much of a loss as a lead roundball while it is covering the same distance.

 

[Idaho Ron]

What the heck. My 45 is the same as a trap door 45-70 with the original trap door load. :thumbsup:

Those of us who know you, know what your saying but IMO, that statement is exactly what galamb is referring to when he says the comment can be dangerous to a new ML shooter.

A newbie to muzzleloading and the forum may well come to the conclusion after reading that comment that his .45 caliber gun with a roundball is the equivalent of a .45-70.
After all, his gun is a .45 caliber gun and he can easily load 70 grains of black powder.

For those who don't know Ron, he lives out West and he shoots heavy bullets from his .45 muzzleloader, not roundballs.

While his bullets lose velocity and energy while they are going downrange the loss is no where near as much of a loss as a lead roundball while it is covering the same distance.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

 

[TFoley]

No charts just 35 yrs or so of hunting.

Nailed it right there. :thumbsup:

Animals don't read charts. :idunno:

tac

 

[Loyalist Dave]

You can put it anyway you want, but you will get criticism for drawing comparisons.

I did, the very next comment.

Of course the ballistic data on the .44 mag shooting a lead free 225 grain XPB is 1500 fps, and my .530 round ball is 225 grains and is moving at 1500 fps... and as I explained, most of the guys where I am don't look at the bullet other than the weight, and velocity, and does it shoot straight (and in some cases it's more like does it sorta shoot straight.)

They have little concept that the .530 rb is a bit larger than a .429 bullet, or that soft lead does very different things than lead alloy, or a jacketed bullet. Most know a hollow-point acts different upon impact than other bullets.

As for the .45-70 comparison I point out that if the questioner thinks that the old 405 grain .454 bullet launched with 70 grains of BP would kill a deer out to 100 yards, then why wouldn't a .50 caliber 370 grain Maxi-hunter launched with 70 grains of BP do the same?

All of this is to try and get the person new to the discussion of black powder to maybe look into what they use for hunting, even if it only gets them to make a better choice with their modern ammmunition, some good has been accomplished.

LD

 

[ray j.]

When i first started muzzleloading was changing from prb to bullets...love me little cherokee with it's 103 grain maxi-ball, right amount of 3f gives it a dandy .32-20 equivalent for short range (100yd.) and the 200 grain r.e.a.l makes my .45 a much more capable deer gonne.. :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

 

[Preacher Jeremy]

I don't care if your using a 7 mil rem mag or a 45 cal prb, a shot in the hip is a poorly placed round, and if that is the only shot you have, IMHO you should pass, and wait for the next opportunity.

 

[hanshi]

Nothing "dangerous" about it at all. At 50 yards my .45 kills as well or better than my 30/30; read my post again.

As far as a hip shot is concerned, I seriously doubt that deer will drop but can attest that a long followup will be required. I've seen this happen with a 30/06 (I did this once)! Once more, I'm referring to prb ranges, not 30/30 or especially 30/06 ranges.

I'm a huge fan of the .45/70 and have killed a number of deer with it. I handload and like big, heavy bullets. It's a sure and reliable deer slayer but not a "quick" deer slayer; Too much bullet for a fragile target, especially with my whomping handloads. This load is more appropriate for elk than deer. A .250/3000, however drops 'em fast. So does a .45 prb.

Please take notice that my take on this subject is based entirely, purely and absolutely on first hand experience with shots up to 75 yards. With my 30/30 I fired one shot each kill same as with the .45. None of this is second hand or anecdotal or told to me; if I can do it anyone (who can shoot) can do it as well. those who can't hit a deer's vital zone at least at 50 to 75 yards should stick to the target range and not hunt. If it's dangerous for beginners to think the comparison is valid, then it is dangerous to have them believe the 30/30 is the ticket at 100 to 150 yards.

Those who don't agree with MHO are encouraged to use what they desire to fill their freezer and take this with a grain of salt; I'm merely relating what I've experienced over many decades.

 

[Col. Batguano]

Thanks Hanshi.

You understand the premise of the original post. A good hit with just about any caliber is a good hit. I've hit deer through the boiler room with a 300 Wby. Mag and had them run over 100 yards before they expired, but had a bad hit with the same caliber and had them go less distance than a good hit with this, or a lesser caliber. Each animal is an individual, and circumstances can and do vary. In my opinion, a bad hit is a bad hit, and a good hit is a good hit. What we're really talking about, is the marginal lethality of a bad hit. No matter how good of a shot you are, bad hits sometimes can and do happen. States often set minimum caliber restrictions (on both CF and ML'ers) for a reason, and I'm reasonably certain those got established for reasons of lethality. For instance, in most states, the 30 M1 Carbine is not legal for deer, and the 45 ML'er is a minimum.

In most people's opinions, (given proper bullet construction) a 30 Carbine is less effective than a 30-30, which is less effective than a 30-`06, which is less effective than a 30-378. Yet all are 30 caliber, and, in theory, can shoot the same bullet. The only difference is velocity. So the original purpose of the post was to take an informal poll of sorts that tries to equate the two.

 

[azmntman]

For instance, in most states, the 30 M1 Carbine is not legal for deer

AZhas very wierd law for BP hunting. NO REVOLVERS. BUT if ya got a .32 crockett our game wardens are happy to have ya hunt a big fat bull elk! AZ really needs to revamp the rules! And (I have already suggested) it would be nice to have a true traditional side/flint lock season for big game!

 

[Alden]

No charts just 35 yrs or so of hunting.

Would you take Hanshi out for his first?

 

[galamb]

I don't care if your using a 7 mil rem mag or a 45 cal prb, a shot in the hip is a poorly placed round, and if that is the only shot you have, IMHO you should pass, and wait for the next opportunity.

But that goes to the heart of my point about a new ML shooter.

"I" wouldn't shoot unless I had a "standing still broadside shot" or at "worst" a quartering away shot.

I would aim precisely for the heart lung region and will not (personally) shoot at a range greater than 70 yards.

BUT, I hunt with a 40 cal shooting PRB and have so for years now and KNOW the limitations.

If this is my first time out and I have guys telling me that my ML is EQUIVALENT to a CF rifle, that I am familiar with and many CF shooters will take that "iffy" shot.

AND NOW you are telling me that my front stuffer will work the same as that CF, I still say you are making a dangerous comparison.

It's one thing to have an academic discussion amongst a bunch of guys/gals who are familiar with "all the facts".

It is quite another to throw out comments/comparisons such as these on an open forum with no preamble or (warning notes) that some web surfer may trip over while looking for "the answer they want to find".

 

[nkbj]

Comparing round ball weight and diameter to 1800's cartridge rifles can kinda make your eye brows bounce up and down. In general the cartridges used bullets that could expand to equivalent weight round ball diameter if the range was kept within reason. With round ball it was already expanded when it got there. Just interesting comparisons of different ways of doing the same job.

 

[hanshi]

It truly escapes me that there are people who will read a sentence and see it as the OPPOSITE of what is written down. If anyone has a theory please post it. :2

 

[hanshi]

Out for what? :bull:

 

[Dphar]

You are only comparing velocity.

The ballistics of a conical round/bullet is better than a round ball and also it's "heavier" so you have more retained energy down range.

Yes, if I stuff about 75 grains of powder down the spout of my 45 I can get 1800 fps and about 300 foot pounds of retained energy at 100 yards out of a 128 grain round ball, but -

a 30-30, shooting the bottom end ammunition on the market retains over 1300 foot pounds of energy at 100 yards and well over 1600 with a premium round.

We are not even talking about apples and oranges here, more like apples and elephants.

There is no comparison.

On any caliber below 54 you are not going to kill with "shock" the way you do with a CF. You need shot placement on a vital area...

Shock does not work in animals much larger than a Prairie Dog. Been repeatedly proven. Bullets that may kill by shock in limited circumstances are deficient in penetration so trying this route on on large or dangerous game is a no-no. Look up 280 Ross which killed extremely well. But shooting a charging Lion with it was not a good idea producing a fatal result for the hunter in one case. The event basically killed a great hunting cartridge that was ahead of its time but used outside its ability.
The proper sized round ball is as effective as an elongated projectile within its range. The HV streamlined bullet extends the range. At the ranges Elephant were generally shot the 4 bore was very effective. Sir Samuel Bakers "devil stopper" was I think a 6 bore. He stated that with the RB (it was actually a belted ball I think) it never failed to "floor" a charging elephant. It was a "stopping" rifle. This is what a modern heavy game rifle is for. Stopping. Now will the 458 penetrate better. Sure. But penetration only has to be "adequate". A .662 ball at 1600 fps is probably about like a 375 for game like a large bear etc. But it will not penetrate as well I don't think even with hardened round balls, though at 1600 it would penetrate an Indian Elephants head from side to side (Forsythe). But its still a pretty powerful firearm. Being equal in velocity to most 12 ga slugs and will penetrate better with a hardened lead. The 12 gauge slug is pretty well respected. A 72 caliber ball will out perform the slug, within its range.
However, to "prove" any of this would require a lifetime of shooting game, some large and dangerous, with various firearms to get a true idea.

So we look at the past where we see Forsythe writing that the 16 bore is about as small as anyone would use on dangerous game in India. In Africa where the Elephant was larger and there were other large dangerous game the "minimum" caliber went up something like 12 or 10 ga. With "stoppers" being larger still 8 to 4 ga.
The great advantage of the breechloader is in faster followup shots without a second or third rifle at hand (elephant can be killed with an AK47 but its not something I would want the face a charge with even with a full magazine. The velocity associated with smokeless powder and streamlined bullets increase the range. But in some applications its not relevant.
BTW. Energy is not a relevant measure of killing power at BP velocities this has been repeated proven both in the past and by contemporary experience. For example; A Mule deer shot in the lungs with a 30-06 at 150 yards will typically run 40+- yards and fall dead. Shoot a similar deer through the lungs with a 50 caliber RB started with 90 gr of powder at a similar disance and it will run 40 +- yards and pile up. Shoot it at 40-50 yards with a REALLY anemic cartridge like a BP 38-40 or a pretty potent one like a 44-90 and it will run, you guessed it, about 40 yards and pile up. Yeah, I have done all these things more than once and witnessed others doing them in most cases. Used within its range and with a ball size suitable for the game the RB is, ballpark comparable to the modern cartridges typically used for the same game. The DIFFERENCE is the 30-06 will kill the deer about as well at 400 yards while the RB is about maxed out at 150.
The best explanation of this comes from John Taylor in "Pondoro" at the end of Chapter 5. People that have not read it probably should.
Read his "African Rifles and Cartridges" first.

Dan

 

[don hepler]

My view of your OP is that I agree with your idea. For example, if I was going small game hunting, a .36 BP, OR 25-20, either one would be just fine. And, if I was going after a little larger game, then a .40 or 30 carbine, either one would work, just fine. If I was hunting Virginia size deer at fairly close range, the .45 BP or a 30-30, either one would be a choice, that I might make. If I was hunting in an open woods, then the .50 or 30-40 Krag might be my choice. Knowing each limits, would be a factor, but I think I know kind of where you were going with your original post.

Isn't that what the OP, was all about? Let's say you're going Elk hunting, and you have all of the Black Powder rifles and CF rifles that he mentioned. You open the gun vault, you ain't thinking .36 BP and you ain't thinging 25-20, that's for sure. If we were undecided, if we were using BP or centerfire, we'd probably think along these same lines.