• Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

why are muzzleloaders consitered short range guns ?

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

silent sniper

40 Cal.
Joined
Jul 29, 2008
Messages
251
Reaction score
3
i was wondering why very few people do long range shooting and hunting with traditional muzzleloaders. Are the guns incapable of doing it ? today i was shooting 2 inch clay discs at 130 yards with my kimber model 82 22 LR target rifle. the clay discs at 130 were no problem for the kimber and i could easily hit a pop can at 150 with it. but my question is...can traditional muzzleloaders do the same ? the kimber with 40 grain solid point federal premium bullets goes about 1050 FPS and gets around 150 FPE. it only dropped about 5 inches at 130 yards from the 17 yard zeroed range. that about 1/2 of power of a 32 cal with 30 grains FFF and a PRB. So....could a 32 hit clay pidgens at 130 ? i was reading in a muzzleblast about hunting with 32s and it said that with a 50 yard zero,the 32 will drop 2 inchs at 75 yards. why would it do that,when the 22 shoots much flatter with half the power. is it because of the round ball compared to the 22s conical bullet? if i got these bullets
http://www.buffaloarms.com/browse.cfm/4,6935.html
and paper patched them...would they work for long range in my cva 32 cal squirrel rifle better then with round balls ?

i have read accounts of buffalo hunters and other mountain men shooting animal at unbeliveable distances with BP guns. but today I scarely hear of someone shooting something over 100 yards. why is that ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
my last elk was at 140 yards, open sight .54cal and patched round ball.

I mainly stick to 100 yard shooting range but am not affraid to shoot at 150-200 yards.
 
Most of the buffalo that was taken at extreme distances in this country were taken with black powder cartridge guns using heavy conical bullets. Theres a big difference between them and shooting patched round balls.
 
You are mixing readings of Black Powder Cartridge rifles, used in the last half of the 19th century, with the capabilities of a traditional rifle, shooting patched round balls, or later, conicals. It wasn't until the 1840s, that serious work on long range shooting using flat based, round nose, and pointed bullets were being tested, and rifle barrels cut with the shallow grooves, and faster rates of twist for the grooves to stabilize the longer bullets needed for long range accuracy.

The reason Traditional rifles and smoothbores are thought to be short range firearms is BECAUSE we shoot a Patched Round Ball(PRB) out of them. The Rate of Twist of the rifling is slower- ie. 1:48-1:70, with much deeper grooves in order to allow the cloth Patch we wrap around the lead ball someplace to go. When the Minie ball, a hollow based, semi-pointed bullet came into fashion in the early 19th century, the rifling was cut much shallower, and with a faster Rate of Twist( ROT) Because of the thin skirt thought to be needed to expand the base of the bullet on fireing to fill the grooves of the rifling to impart spin, the powder charges on those early guns was low, by today's standards. 60 grains of powder was the common battlefield load, in a .58- .69 caliber rifle shooting a minie ball. Today, you can buy replica rifles with shallow grooves, and fast ROT to handle the Minie balls, but today, you can buy molds that cast a much thicker skirt, and require a heavier powder charge. That allows for a flatter trajectory, and capabilities of long range accuracy. These guns can be, and are shot at ranges out to 600-800 yards. They far exceed the performance of the original guns.

Underhammers, and slug guns came into fashion in the 1840s, and by the 1860s, they were being replaced by breechloading rifles, but using much the same technology. Until about 1890, for instance, it was thought that target rifles were the most accurate, even when they were breech loading, if the bullet was seated using a false muzzle and run down the muzzle of the barrel to the throat of the barrel, just ahead of the cartridge casing. Harry Pope made target barrels of this type for the breechloaders, and made all kinds of tools for loading the bullets down the muzzle and later through the breech.

The Ballistics Coefficient for any round ball is next to TERRIBLE! That means that it shed velocity very fast, so that it is not very effective , due to a looping trajectory, beyond 100-125 yards. That does not mean you can't shoot and kill human targets a twice that range, however. In the larger calibers( above .50) a round ball weigh so much that even when its moving at a velocity under 1,000 fps., it can completely penetrate a human being.

Because most traditional rifles are made to shoot PRB, with a slow rate of twist, and deeper grooves, they are NOT suitable to use, with those barrels, to shoot bullets. Your .22 is a cartridge bullet gun. The bullet was designed way back in the 1860s, and 1870s, as the best shape for accurate placement at 100 yds. That is why target ammo today in .22 rimfire still use the Round nose lead bullets. For that caliber and weight, its a very accurate lead bullet when fired at the low velocities characteristic of the cartridge.

Centerfire bullets of .22 caliber are another matter. They are traveling at speeds that will be 2 or even 3 times the velocity of a .22 rimfire round, and they use the pointed, or " spitzer" shaped bullets for that reason. The pointed bullets, with the boat tails, exhibit LESS DRAG, and cut through the air better at those velocities.

THAT is the reason why we don't try to hit long range targets with PRB. Even a 10 mile per hour crosswind can move a .50 caliber RB about 8 inches at 100 yds. And, data shows that a round ball will have lost more than 40 % of its Muzzle Velocity at 100 yds. NO bullet performs that badly over that short distance, save wadcutters. Now, handicap the shooter with open, iron sights, and you have a real problem hitting targets even when you can see them at those distances.The rifles( and smoothbores) were not designed nor intended to be used as long range weapons.

I hope this helps answer your question. Paul
 
Traditional muzzleloaders are short range due to the limitations of the round ball's ballistics and the difficulty in using open iron sights. 120 yards on a deer with a .50 or .54 round ball is long range. ;-) I used to hunt woodchucks with a .36 muzzleloader (percussion w/set triggers) and occasionally found a very unlucky chuck out to 200 yards. Most were misses at that range. It took a lot of wind doping and very careful aim with the iron sights. This was after the .22-250 and 10X scope lost their charm.

Peep sights and conicals (even 140 year old designs) will get you to 800 or 900 yards with a Sharps or Rigby muzzleloader.

Lots of us chose the round ball and open fixed sights just because they are more of a challenge. Makes any deer a trophy.
 
ok thanks for the responses. my only question now is about the 32 bullet. if paper patched,would it work in the squirrel rifle for 100+ yard target shooting ? i love long range shooting and would like to incorperate my muzzleloaders into my addiction. thanks SS
 
I had a .32 cal flintlock and the rifling was for a round ball (1:48", but that's slow for a .32). Hitting a squirrel at 50 yards was good shooting. By 100 yards the round ball had forgotten what it's mission was and was wandering considerably.

You'd need very fast rifling for a .32 patched conical. You'd also need to first find a mold to throw a smooth sided conical for paper patching. That might be tough. It's not a bullet you can buy off the shelf.
 
By 100 yards the round ball had forgotten what it's mission was and was
:rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf:
 
Read up on some of the accounts of shots being made during the American Revolution...The account of General Hanger and how one of Morgan's men took out Fraiser comes to mind (this one has been accounted to Timothy Murphy)...

You will find that there were shots made out past 200 yards...But...These were not hunting situations...These men were there to kill or wound...Today in hunting situations we prefer to shoot and recover...

I can hit a man sized target in the torso consistantly to 150 yards...Once you get to 200 the open sights and my eyes limit my results...
 
the PRB loses velocity fast and wind can affect it.
I limit shots to max 75 yards and even then if past 50 yards has to be a profile still or moveing slowly.
this is my .50's.
 
All the above is true. That being said, according to Richard B LaCrosse, Jr in his book'The Frontier Rifleman' 200 yard shots on British soldiers have been documented, and these were head shots proving fatal to the officers. I have been experimenting to see if I could duplicate. Having no 18'th century British invaders for target practice, I have been shooting gongs at 200 yards. My gongs are 24 inches in diameter. With a lot more practice, I may be able to hit a 5 incher at that range. Terminal ballistics being what they are-unpredictable-I can see where a round ball in the head is a killing shot. According to this book, many of the men's heads were blown in half. Even at 200 yards, the roundballs will crater the steel gongs.

I wouldn't (?) try this on game as they are moving targets, even if they appear to be standing still, and will certainly move when the report reaches them. In any case, I haven't needed to take a shot yet on an elk past 70 yards where I hunt because of the terrain and the thickness of the woods.

Load: 70 to 100 grains of GOEX FFF, prb, 40 inch fintlock, 50 caliber.

As to conicals, Haven't tried them, just trying to duplicate what my ancestors did.

Next, I'll try the 36 caliber percussion at the same range.

For target work, just try long range. The only difference you will see from your 22 is holdover, and it isn't as much as you would expect. Have fun with it.
 
i was reading in a muzzleblast about hunting with 32s and it said that with a 50 yard zero,the 32 will drop 2 inchs at 75 yards. why would it do that,when the 22 shoots much flatter with half the power.

The Federal .22 bullet has a much better BC and will hold a flatter trajectory at longer ranges. Also, there is the question of the height of the sights on the guns. The higher the front sight from centerline of bore, the higher the trajectory will rise at midpoint on it's way to 130 yards. Even comparing identical rifles and ammo, if one has a front sight height 1 inch taller than the other the trajectory will differ a lot.

if i got these bullets http://www.buffaloarms.com/browse.cfm/4,6935.html
and paper patched them...would they work for long range in my cva 32 cal squirrel rifle better then with round balls ?

That particular bullet is gas checked and hard cast. Paper patched ml bullets need to be soft to expand into the grooves upon firing. Pushing a grooves size pp bullet down the bore will probably damage the patch. It's probably too long to retain stability as well. Soft cast bullets not much longer than bore size would probably work. But, that puts you right back in round ball ballistics territory.

i have read accounts of buffalo hunters and other mountain men shooting animal at unbeliveable distances with BP guns. but today I scarely hear of someone shooting something over 100 yards. why is that ?

Well, there are stories told second hand by modern day writers who might make those long shots seem commonplace. If you read enough of the actual journals and diaries of the trappers in the Rocky Mountain fur trade era, you will find many accounts of these long hail mary shots that were of no effect. The reason it's not done much today is because the modern hunter in general acts within a set of ethical guidelines that prohibits that type of shooting. The men of the Rocky Mountains were shooting at food. What they percieved to be an endless supply of food. When traveling, they often shot more buff than they could possibly eat and took only the prime cuts. If they had time they might jerk the remainder, but would not stop their journey to do so unless they thought they would not encounter more meat in the near future.

Same goes for the rev war shots, IMO. If a rev soldier saw a chance to shoot at the enemy even at very long range, why not? The vast majority of those hail mary shots probably missed. Those don't get talked about or written about, but the occasional near accidental successful shot would have been bantered about up and down the line.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"Same goes for the rev war shots, IMO. If a rev soldier saw a chance to shoot at the enemy even at very long range, why not? The vast majority of those hail mary shots probably missed. Those don't get talked about or written about, but the occasional near accidental successful shot would have been bantered about up and down the line.'

I think you have the definitive answer there, I also believe the same thing happens with todays ML hunters, if one hits and finds the deer where the shot was taken a 150 yds the whole world will know about it, but what about the miss or the slight blood trail that vanishes with no deer found,that story does not likely make it to the campfire. not likely a large number of such ML hunters I would like to think but I have seen a few while watching from a distance.
 
Back
Top