What projectile should I use?

[laufer]

Muzzleloader season has been a draw sence before I moved here in 1988 but if all you want is meat you can get a cow tag every year, I have been putting in for bull preference points for a few years now and just get a cow tag... yumm.

:hatsoff:

same here. good luck.

 

[laufer]

The thing is there are many things to look at. When it is windy and you might be taking longer shots, fact is the conical is better. If it is calm and your shots wont be real far then the roundball will be just fine.

Every hunter has different needs for what he is hunting and where he is hunting.

correctomundo, prb is more than enouogh for ml hutning, long distance bp shooting is something else. :wink:

 

[Idaho Ron]

tg,
I am starting to sense some hostility in your posts. I should stop here, but I have as much or more ACTUAL knowledge of killing big game as any one here. I feel my success is just as relevant, as anyone else's.
OK I agree at 50 yards a ball through the lungs will work. At 100 yards maybe if you use BIG PRB's. My ethics won't allow me to do that. Sorry, they are my ethics you won't change my mind.
I don't need to put any conicals into the traditional category. And I don't need to spin or wriggle them into a traditional hunt. State regulations do that. All I have to do is comply with state regulations.
In fact our state used to be PRB only for traditional hunts. The F&G changed that rule because of the number of wounded deer they found after the PRB hunt. I have never claimed to be a traditional hunter, or reenactor. I am a hunter that uses gear that is allowed on traditional hunts. I am not the only one that does this, many do.
You need to remember, conicals have been used with great luck for the last 200 years as well. Why did we have the evolution of guns and bullets we have today if the conical was not an improvement over the PRB? Why didn't we just stop right there with the PRB?
Why was the whitworth ever invented if the PRB was more than good enough?
Another question. Why does the state of CO, limit the bullet length to twice the bore dia? Why don't they just use the PRB if it is better?
I know you believe that the conical is no better than a wadded up feather. One heck of a lot of deer and elk are killed with them every year.
I CAN tell you I NEED them like a junky needs a fix. They are what I DO have confidence in. If a man has no confidence in his gear he should not be hunting. I have NO confidence in a PRB so I DON'T use them for big game.
tg, What ever is good for you is fine by me. I don't have to live with your decisions, and you don't have to live with mine. Like I said I am starting to sense you are shaking a finger at me, and the guys that shoot conicals. Remember right or wrong everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Ron

 

[Sharp Shooter]

Good Point. I agree

If think a conical works better when you get out toward 100yds and when the wind kicks up so why not if it works better for that? Now at closer ranges the roundball is just fine. I just want my game to drop as soon as possible. I have to problem using a roundball at longer distances but since a conical works better that is what I like.

You guys all have excellent points and views though.

 

[tg]

"You need to remember, conicals have been used with great luck for the last 200 years as well."

I have no issues at all with conicals from the ML period, the modern ones are what should not be allowed in ML seasons, they are the foundation that the Modern ML was built on,and I would not suggest that someone who has no faith in the PRB should use one, just that his faith is missdirected.I have no imtention of trying to convince those who are stuck on modern conicals to change, just want to give those in the wings the facts about what is NEEDED to take an animal with a ML so they can make an educated choice.

 

[gmww]

Hey tg, I'm asking because I'd like to know what were the traditional conicals. I'm using a minie. What else is out there and who makes moulds for it?

 

[Dphar]

See? My bullet fits the time period we are allowed.

The patent picture is of a CANNON projectile. Not small arms ammunition. Sorry..
They used a lot of these and similar during the American Civil War and other conflicts using rifled muzzle loading CANNON. I think Joseph Manton patented the wooden (IIRC) sabot for rifled field pieces about 1810-20.
This does not mean it was used in small arms. It was not. IT WAS NOT NEEDED. Rifles shooting long heavy lead bullets need not sabot to fill the bore.
Very few ML used for hunting in the 19th century used conical projectiles. In fact the round ball was used almost exclusively for large game (i.e. African Elephant) until the advent of Smokeless powder. The large bore BL guns 8 and 4 bore used RBs or very short conicals only slightly heavier than the RB since it was not possible to get usable velocity from heavy bullets.
In fact Samuel Baker found that fired from the same rifle the RB had greater reliability and stopping power. I believe this rifle used a 3 ounce belted ball and Baker called it his "Devil Stopper" since it would never fail to "floor" a charging elephant. He had a conical mould made for it and it made the rifle useless and got him into several "scrapes".
Most of the modern make believe concerning conicals in ML hunting arms ignores history. But facts never stops advertisers who need to sell something.

Dan

 

[Dphar]

Hey tg, I'm asking because I'd like to know what were the traditional conicals. I'm using a minie. What else is out there and who makes moulds for it?

Aside from the Minie and the short, cloth patched "picket" there are none that were used for hunting to any extent.
The ML rifles that used paper patched used long heavy bullets loaded with false muzzles. Not practical for hunting. Most of these rifles weighed 15 to 50 pounds. They did not even have ramrod pipes.
The Minie ball has an abysmal record for failing to track straight after striking flesh when used in rifled muskets or rifles with similar twists. Many "modern" ML bullets fail in the same manner. If used in short barreled rifles with charges of powder required to produce a trajectory useful for hunting all the traditional Minie designs will suffer damage to the skirt of the bullet and accuracy disappears.
The picket bullet was usually used with a "guide starter" that fit over the muzzle and is harder to load for accuracy than the round ball.

Dan

 

[nealglen37]

I have no dog in this fight........however if conicals were not better the army would not have switched to them.............and the civil war would have been fought with roundballs.

 

[Dphar]

tg,
I am starting to sense some hostility in your posts. I should stop here, but I have as much or more ACTUAL knowledge of killing big game as any one here. I feel my success is just as relevant, as anyone else's.
OK I agree at 50 yards a ball through the lungs will work. At 100 yards maybe if you use BIG PRB's. My ethics won't allow me to do that. Sorry, they are my ethics you won't change my mind.
I don't need to put any conicals into the traditional category. And I don't need to spin or wriggle them into a traditional hunt. State regulations do that. All I have to do is comply with state regulations.
In fact our state used to be PRB only for traditional hunts. The F&G changed that rule because of the number of wounded deer they found after the PRB hunt. I have never claimed to be a traditional hunter, or reenactor. I am a hunter that uses gear that is allowed on traditional hunts. I am not the only one that does this, many do.
You need to remember, conicals have been used with great luck for the last 200 years as well. Why did we have the evolution of guns and bullets we have today if the conical was not an improvement over the PRB? Why didn't we just stop right there with the PRB?
Why was the whitworth ever invented if the PRB was more than good enough?
Another question. Why does the state of CO, limit the bullet length to twice the bore dia? Why don't they just use the PRB if it is better?
I know you believe that the conical is no better than a wadded up feather. One heck of a lot of deer and elk are killed with them every year.
I CAN tell you I NEED them like a junky needs a fix. They are what I DO have confidence in. If a man has no confidence in his gear he should not be hunting. I have NO confidence in a PRB so I DON'T use them for big game.
tg, What ever is good for you is fine by me. I don't have to live with your decisions, and you don't have to live with mine. Like I said I am starting to sense you are shaking a finger at me, and the guys that shoot conicals. Remember right or wrong everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Ron

I think that telling us about going to MT and needing conicals the kill the bigger animals here might irritate some who live here all the time. Also people often are misunderstood in the printed word and sometimes seem hostile when simply putting across a point.
I do get tired of people playing the "ethics" card. A poor shot with a scope sighted 7mm mag is far less ethical hunting elk than a good shot with a 54 RB. Apparently by mentioning your "ethics" you are telling people who hunt with the PRB that they are "unethical". This is insulting. I have no problem with anyones ethics so long as they don't try to use them as a weapon. If you need to use this argument to justify the projectiles you use or to attempt to weaken someone else's statements you are not dealing in facts but emotion.
The State of Colorado's F&G rulings are not relevant. You cannot blame poor shooting on the projectile. Are we to believe that the wounded game "problem" suddenly evaporated with the use of the conical? This is laughable. The hunters using conicals were suddenly endowed with better shooting skills and the ability and determination to track wounded game?? You gotta be kidding.

It is more likely that they just stopped looking having "fixed" the problem. They should have instituted a shooting skills test. Allowing primitive weapons hunts always brings out people with no skills with ML arms. They have no idea what they are doing, they buy a cheap ML they don't know how to use and go hunting. Then the state finds they have a "problem". Its a self inflicted wound. Montana is not afflicted with this silliness (special ML season) and I would certainly oppose it if they tried to set up such a thing. Its primary purpose is to sell rifles for ML rifle makers, at least thats how it works out in the end. The shills for the makers of inlines and such spend a lot of time defaming the traditional ML to state F&Gs so the people who pay their bills can sell more stuff. They actively lobby against the PRB as a hunting projectile. Much of what you relate sounds lot like their dogma concerning hunting with traditional MLs and the PRB.

I consider the 54 RB to be marginal, though NOT inadequate, for large game though others would tell me I am full of "it" but thats how I see it. Elk, buffalo and moose being "large" in this context. LOTS of people kill these critters with 54 RBs just fine. Clean one shot kills. Some at fairly extended ranges (moose at 175 lasered yards is the longest I have heard of in modern times, reliable 3rd party witness).
Balls of this size have been killing large American game for CENTURIES. Read Parkman's "The Oregon Trail". 2 shots, 2 buffalo at 175 yards. Parkman killed an Antelope at over 200 paces. Caliber is not mentioned but they were "American" rifles (Parkman described his as a "St. Louis rifle")and 54 was by far the most common for the time and location could have been 50 cals just as easily. The 54 is probably perfect for the smaller deer species. Light recoil, shoots flat and kills as good as anything.

Those who believe the RB is ineffective simply lack experience or have had a bad experience (this can happen with any hunting rifle) or they try to stretch the range past the point blank range.
If the animal is so far that you need to hold over DON'T SHOOT with any BP rifle. I have done this and succeeded when my eyes were better and my judgement worse, its not advisable. OR they believe that muzzle energy is important when discussing low velocity lead bullets (likely Colorado's justification). In this case its irrelevant. Its just a number. Inevitably a failure to kill with a low velocity lead bullet (an most others as well) is related to POOR SHOT PLACEMENT.
Weight for weight. 400 gr RB vs a 400 gr conical for example, the RB will kill better within its range. Bigger hole. This has been proven repeatedly and written about, since the 1850s or so. James Forsythe in "The Sporting Rifle and Its Projectiles" reported shooting through both shoulders of a Sambar (think elk) in India with a .675" (15 ga) ball at 250 yards. His heavy load was a 137 gr of powder giving about 1600 fps if his trajectories were correct. He was probably using hardened lead since he shot Elephant with the *same rifle*.
When the Maxi-Ball came out I did penetration testing with baffle boards. The 54 maxi out penetrated the RBs (50 and 54) as was expected. However, from actual experience in shooting game I determined that a 50 or 54 RB would penetrate adequately (to the far side hide) on broadside chest shots to kill Mule Deer at 200 yards. The rifles were accurate enough too. BUT there is that hold over thing...
The problem most people have is not sizing the ball to the animal, assuming they can shoot accurately that is. While a 50 RB will kill elk and is perfectly adequate for any Mule deer, its light for the job when Elk is the target. The 54 is better, even bigger balls are better still. The 62 or 66 is likely the "perfect" RB for elk. But the 66, and maybe even the 62, will not work well in a "Hawken" or other deep crescent but rifle. One of the reasons most American rifles were 54 and below. Recoil characteristics of the stock design.
At the ranges most people can hit a big game animal with a traditional ML a suitably sized RB will kill any animal the conical will and will usually shoot flatter to 120-140 yards. The conical requires much higher chamber pressure to make useable velocity than the RB of the same weight. The round ball will provide *adequate* penetration so I see no point in shooting conicals.

I have shot a considerable number of Mule Deer and a few whitetails and antelope with RBs in 50-54-58 and 1 MD with a 66. I have also shot them with modern high powers, a number of different BP cartridge guns with black and smokeless. 40, 44, 45 and 50 with various bullet weights and powder charges (think ML conical). I have shot elk with 54 rb, 30-40 Krag, 30-06 and 40-90 BP Sharps.

You know what? Its all shot placement. Most deer run 40 yards or so no matter what they are hit with. Elk about the same. The only 2 elk I remember knocking down were with a 30-06 and a 54 rb. The RB broke a front leg and got her heart at about 80 yards and I think the 06 shot was close to the spine at 150 or so.
Now when you hunt with a round ball or ANY projectile using BP as a propellant you are range limited. Sure it is *possible* to kill large animals over long KNOWN ranges with a 45-100 Sharps. But unless you carry a book with sight settings and a laser range finder you are kidding yourself even then. Past 300 its very risky. At 400-500 yards the 45-100 with a 500 gr bullet is dropping so fast that a 10-15 yard error in ranging or sight setting will likely cause a miss or a cripple on deer. Never mind that many people cannot load ammo or shoot aperture sights well enough to shoot under 12" at this range. Add this to a small range estimation error and there will be "problems".
Conicals in MLs are even worse. But most people do not want to be bothered with a range limit and they think an elongated projectile is the "fix". Its not.
So if you have open sights on a traditional rifle shots past 120-150 yards are very chancy WITH ANY BULLET.
I have shot completely through deer at 140-150 yards with a 50 & 54 RB. I have shot them end on at 25-60 yards and saw 30"+- penetration. None of these animals were lost.
If you choose to shoot conicals that is fine. So long as you know they have problems as well. Just do not try to tell me they are a panacea for shooting game with a ML. They are not. See my post in this thread concerning Samuel Baker. They do not significantly increase the range for the average hunter. Since a PRB will kill game to 120-140 yards the "increased range" argument is not valid. The conical will buck wind better. But when its windy here I find it easier to get close.
Shooting in high wind conditions is generally a poor idea even if shooting prone since its difficult to hold on the animal. So "wind bucking" is not terribly relevant either. My 6.5x55 (brass suppository) really bucks the wind with 140 gr bullets. But this does not matter if buffeting prevents making the shot.
This is an argument that will never die. It did not really exist until TC "invented" the Maxi-Ball. Since they had a conical for sale it had to be better than the RB. Otherwise there was no reason to buy it. Right?
Gunwriters working for mags that TC advertised in certainly were not going to tell folks it moved off the powder and failed to expand. Might hurt advertising income. They seem to miss Pyrodex's short comings too. Same reason. Then the plastic stocked, scoped "modern" ML came out and things really went downhill for the RBs effectiveness. Had to bad, they had "modern" stuff they needed to sell.
A well placed shot with a 54 Rb will kill elk better than a bullet thats just a little off with a 45-70 or a .338 Improved. Trust me... Didn't happen to me but a friend blew a chunk of lung out of a cow with a 45-70 and followed it a mile. Another friend lost one he shot with a 338 but only got one lung he figured, looked for more than a day. Both well experienced hunters. They would have likely had the same problem with similarly placed shots with any firearm they might have used.
To summarize;
The RB has adequate penetration so long as the ball size is reasonable for the game hunted. A 40 caliber is not going to kill buffalo, Meriwether Lewis tried this. But the 54s worked well though they did have some trouble with G-bears.

The RB shoots flat enough to any distance a hunter should shoot at game with typical traditional ML sights.
The RB has a large blunt striking surface, largest for its weight.
It will not move off the powder to form a bore obstruction as some "conicals" can. (Yes, I tested this too.)

Dan

 

[paulvallandigham]

YOu need to remember the battlefield tactics of the times when the Military adopted conicals to understand why they were adopted. It had nothing to do with accuracy, for sure. It had very little to do with killing power.

These were first used in muskets, without rifling, using European battle tactics of standing rows of men, shoulder to shoulder, to fire volleys of rounds at each other at 50 yards or so. Being killed or maimed was an almost certain outcome for the average soldier in the line. They didn't have any greater wish to die or be maimed as you and I do, but they were fighting there because units were typically created from men who were related or who grew up in the same town or county. As in all wars, they didn't fight for a Country, or " Flag", but for each other. That is what soldiers do. What their commanders do is something else.

Dan is correct. Minie balls, and picket balls were not popular for hunting. Until cartridge rifles came out and ammunition was plentiful, and cheap, people hunted with MLers, and used PRBs. They were cheap, accurate, and the hunters knew the value of getting close enough to place that ball where it would count. They would shame themselves if they didn't recover their game by tracking it from the POI to where the animal dies, not just in the eyes of their hungry families, but in the eyes of their neighbors, too. No one could afford to waste meat.

I know a couple of outstanding shooters who have killed deer with shots out to 140 yards with their rifles. I know other men who have killed deer at well past that using foster style slugs in smoothbore shotguns. All have spent years practicing shooting their guns at various distances and sizes of targets, are great marksmen, and have their own ranges out their back doors so they can shoot daily!

If you don't fit those descriptions, then you are only kidding yourself about being able to kill game out at 200 yards or beyond with any kind of MLer, using conicals, or PRBs. I met a hunter who killed a deer the year before using a shotgun, with NO rear sight, shooting from one ridge to another, during the failing light on the last day of the deer season. He pointed out where the deer was stading when he shot, and from the place where he was standing. The distance was no less than 200 yds. There is no way a shotgun slug should be expected to be that accurate out of a shotgun at that range, much drop a deer dead on the spot. It was pure luck. But the guy was very proud of himself.

I was horrified that he would even attempt that shot. :hmm:

 

[doulos]

Dan, I agree with much of what you say. Ive killed alot of whitetails over the years(probably not as many as some but not just a few). Ive use many different kinds of weapons to do it. Ive allways favored heavy projectiles over light fast ones. I dont believe in knockdown. The deer I have shot have only went straight doen when a component of the nervous system was struck or the projectile came close to a component. Even when shot through a shoulder sthey have tried to run. Granted many only made 10-30 yards.

My use of heavy projectiles was allways to guarantee peneration and a pass through. I want a good blood trail because I allways expect them to run after the shot and me to have to track.

Last year I decide to use round ball exclusively for my hunting. I had a .54 allready but I chose a .58. The reasoning being that it might afford better penetration at the outside spectrum of my shooting range of about 100 yards.
Im happy with it so far and am probably going to put together another rifle in that caliber.

What is your opinion on the penetration of roundballs at that distance?

 

[nealglen37]

This is good guys..............I like arguments on the merits of different ideas........and you all make sense........just remember we are all the same muzzleloading boat...........so play nice guys.......I don't want anu of you to take his marbles and go home.

 

[Idaho Ron]

I think that telling us about going to MT and needing conicals the kill the bigger animals here might irritate some who live here all the time.
Dan

__________________________________________________

Dan Look at the time of year I went to Montana. It was February!!! I never said I went to Montana and went hunting. I never said I went to montana and needed a conical. Re read the post. To be honest, I was there in February for a business/ vacation trip.
Here in southern Idaho we don't have those little white tails. I won't argue that a PRB will work on them. I have no doubt in my mind that a 50 cal or a 54 cal is WAY more than enough.
Those white tails I saw were tiny. Most won't weigh more than a big dog.
The elk was in the picture for size difference it was killed in Idaho.
Again my ethics are mine alone. You don't have to live with them and I don't have to live by yours. If that is playing the Ethics card, so be it. I am confident in what I use, and conicals made of pure lead are legal by the regulations of the state of Idaho. Ron

 

[gmww]

To know one in particular. The thread has been interesting to read. My personal preference is for a good pass through or very deep penetration shot. Needless to say I'm a conical user for the added weight of it.

I'm interested in traditional conicals that may still be out there to use in my ML. Interesting stuff.

 

[wirehairman]

Those white tails I saw were tiny. Most won't weigh more than a big dog.

As a point of clarification, the pictures you posted are of a group of fawns (not quite yearlings) in someone's yard. I am not arguing that elk are much larger than a whitetail, but adult whitetail in MT do "weigh more than a big dog".

 

[tg]

"and the civil war would have been fought with roundballs."

The reason for the switch to the minnie was for speed of loading not for ballitic advantage.

I think there are some original molds for the Whitworth and Parker hale but other than the original minnie which were in.58 I don't know of any period types, this may speak of their performance, if they were so good why don't the makers use the same deigns? these came at at time of transition when the hollow base was not needed as the cartridge bullet was born, T&C tried scores of old molds and finaly designed the Maxi on artillary projectiles, they could not find an original that worked well most were likely in need of a paper patch or worked only in the larger bores with a specific twist or grove setup
i just wish people would stop trying tomake like all the modern bullets used in ML's today are traditional just because it makes them feel good, if they are traditional then so is Mr. Knights bolt action watchamacallits same standards, same rules,not really hard to digest.

 

[Sharp Shooter]

So we all know that no matter what you shoot you need good shot placement. We get that.

I think roundballs are very effective on all types of game. Conicals are just better. You have more knock down power. Nothing wrong with roundballs at all. I love to shoot them but for elk this year I figure I will try conicals so I know they will go down very quickly. Roundballs will drop them too but a hollow point conical will do I better.

And this is not a high tech bullet. It is a lead slug with a hollow point. It is not no jacked bullet or trophy bonded, or a partition or any of those advanced bullets.

 

[tg]

"And this is not a high tech bullet. It is a lead slug with a hollow point. It is not no jacked bullet or trophy bonded, or a partition or any of those advanced bullets."

The term is modern design conical, unless it was cast from an original 19th century ,mould or replica of such, a lot of high tech goes into the R&D of todays lead conicals they are no was comparable to the originals, ask the makersthay will tell you the same thing I asked several of thewm a few years ago and none make any claims to making anything based on early conical bullets thye started from scratch with modern ballistic science and made a bullet for a ML, enjoy uding them just be aware of their historic provence.

 

[Kentuckywindage]

I mold all my .54cal round balls out of lead ive recovered from Powerbelts. I like how they actually mushroom and not just have a little smudge on one side when they hit a piece of wood or in my sandbox. The more it expands the better blood trail im going to have due to the size of the hole.