Why don

[Boer]

I am new to this forum , but here is my first question. I look forward to any advice.
I want to build a rifle suitable for hunting springbuck and also kudu and Wildebeest. (The Wildebeest are very hardy and notorious for taking a well placed heavy 30-06 class bullet and not going down. Many hunters prefer hunting them with a 9,3mm or even a 375H&H). The Springbuck are small but range will normally be a problem as they are hunted in open terrain.
I am only interested in traditional rifles. The rifle needed must be a traditional rifle for legal reasons anyway. I am new to muzzle loading rifles and am now in the reading phase.

My natural inclination is towards an English sporting rifle shooting heavy conicals of at least 500gr. from a .45 or .50 rifle. Using a rifling twist of about 1 in 20. This stems perhaps from a familiarity with the ability of the Martini-Henry rifle. It has a load of about 80gr black behind a 480gr bullet. Ballistically it would be adequate at short range. I have spend some time reading about the Gibbs, Henry, Rigby and the so called Volunteer rifles used by the guys who shoot the 1000 yards competitions. Beautiful sporting rifles were also built on this

 

Boer,

Our American long rifles and their projectiles developed based on the conditions of our frontier and the game we were shooting. While your ancestors were moving south to north, ours were moving east to west.

Our buffalo were slightly larger than your kudu, our elk about the size of your eland and our deer somewhat larger than your springbock. Our grizzly have teeth and claws and weigh in about the same as a lion.

Our buffalo and elk are considered hardy animals that need a good deal of killing. .54 patched round ball is considered marginal here also. This is espically true in this day, when one shot kills are the expectation. In the old days hunter ethics were not a factor in firearms choice.

Fast twist barrels and heavy conicals are not my area of expertise. I leave those projectiles to the in-line shooters, although many sidelock shooters in our country do use the more modern projectiles.

The Lyman Trade Rifle is designed with a fast twist and the various Thompson Center rifles are normally set up to shoot both PRB and conicals. Both are favorites of numerous forum members.

If you drop down to the modern muzzleloader forum and to the modern hunting forum you will find an abundance of information on the use of these projectiles. The information is just as valid for a fast twist sidelock as it is for a fast twist in-line.

Good luck

:front:

 

[crockett]

I think you are mixing muzzle loading rifles with black powder rifles that loaded from the breech. So.... Let's clear our minds and talk logic.
Like you, I long ago couldn't figure out why no one built a muzzleloader using the same projectile and powder charge as one of the Sharps; after all,same powder charge, same projectile, you ought to get equal ballistics. The problem comes in trying to load that long bullet down a muzzle loading rifle. The conicals used in muzzle loaders are rather short and even then you must use a short starter and often a mallet to pound down the bullet. About ten years ago Dixie Gun Works, in their Black Powder Annual ran an article about traditional muzzle loaders that had fast twists and used conical bullets, so these aren't really new developments. As a general rule, the longer the bullet, the faster rate of twist required to stabilize that bullet in flight.
It is my recollection that the old White Hunters of yesteryear used massive bores, like fours and sixes, smoothbore, double guns, and got close to the game.
Ballistics? Oh yeah baby, that IS rocket science.

 

[BrownBear]

I suspect that most of what you see here in the RB versus conical "discussions," but also in rifle styles, is driven by considerations of American tradition. Without reading your post a second time, I believe you are weighing the question of penetration versus bore diamter without regard for American aesthetics.

In my reading over the last 50 years of African accounts, there have been similar "discussions" about rifle and bullet performance, and in fact some countries have legislated minimum calibers in light of performance records.

In the days of African round ball yore it is my impression that large dangerous game pretty much mandated very large bore diameters for killing power along the lines of various 4- and 8-bores. But with the advent of longer "conical" bullets and better penetration, bore diameters began quickly to diminish. Just where the line between enough and too much fell depended in large measure upon adequate sectional density and velocity.

Before this gets too long, I would lean in the direction you seem to be headed- a long bullet with ample sectional density. Among the currently-available models, it does seem that 45 caliber is the beginning, middle and end, and that "English" style target guns prevail in this regard. You may hear from advocates of 69 caliber minnies and similar projectiles, but I tend to think that a long 45 caliber bullet will penetrate better due to its higher SD.

If you're looking for African tradition, I'm not well-enough acquainted with the English and perhaps German rifles at the close of the muzzleloading era and before cartridge guns really caught on (and probably in response to the success of cartridge guns), but I suspect that there were additional rifles/calibers put into use larger than 45 caliber. Your best answers may come from researching that era and looking at the "discussions" of that period between large and small caliber advocates. I'm sure that some regarded the 45 as a small caliber and spoke voluminously about the superior performance of larger bores. Lots to weigh, but probably more information there than in American tradition.

As far as pure black powder ballistics go, i.e., a lead projectile moving through the air and striking a target, you might look into the popular cartridge performance during the American buffalo hunting era. The various black powder cartridges were often offered with shorter (Express, along the lines of English terminology) and longer bullets. For that matter a comparison of express and heavy bullets in English BP cartridges in Africa might yield even more useful info for comparison.

Interesting question, and food for great speculation.

Thanks!

 

[jdixon]

Boer:
Don't know if you found this old post or not but, check out the thread titled "loooooooooong range gun" on the p-cap forum originally posted March 31. It has a lot of responses, discussion about the old Whitworths, and a lot of general information with several links. You may find some answers there. ...Wildebeest huntin' - now that would be a rush w/ a sidelock - we want pictures when you get one!

 

[Boer]

JR I will go and read that post right now. My concern with the heavy long conicals still is if it would be a whole lot more trouble to load and get that long bullets in the muzzle than perhaps say a compromise with .58 minies or whatever. I wish I had a suitable rifle already as I am going to hunt in about a month's time and would really have liked to shoot with a muzzle loader.
This is going to be an interesting season for the game. What's all that smoke? Since our firearm laws have been changed since last hunting season a great many hunters has now bought muzzle loaders. There are however few experienced users amongst them. Some of my friends have rushed off and bought all kinds of muzzle loaders (the cheapest models are sold for a lot of money here due to the current demand) and everybody is on a steep learning curve. Some are having trouble getting accuracy.
I want to build myself a rifle I really like, but I do not want to be sorry later about the twist or caliber. It would be interesting to here from a long range shooter how satisfactory this type of rifle would be as hunting rifle from a practical point of view. Thank you for the responses.

 

[jdixon]

Boer:
Interesting the change in the law. :hmm: What can you use now? Are the in-line designs legal, i.e. Thompson Omega? What about the BP cartridge weapons like a Sharps replica? Can you still use scopes? Knowing your restrictions in weaponery would give us a better idea on suggestions. I can say this much, you have stumpled onto the right place for information on this subject!

 

Hey Boer...

I believe you're on the right track with 45 cal. and a 1-20 twist. I also believe you would do well to build your rifle in the pattern of a Rigby, Gibbs or Henry. There is also the Forsyth but I don't know if he ever built rifles with faster twist for use with conical bullets. From my limited knowledge of him his rifles were for huge doses of black powder, an extremely slow twist and large caliber, 14, 12 and 10 bore.

The pros and cons of each should be obvious. The lighter round ball starts off with a considerably higher velocity than a conical, however, it sheds velocity very fast. It's great for the first 50 yards but after that falls of considerably. The conical starts at a more modest velocity but retains it's velocity and energy farther down range. Also, as you alluded to, it makes hitting at greater distances easier, IF you know your trajectory and the distances. Even tho I don't use it in my muzzleloaders I believe the conical to be a superior hunting bullet. It has more mass and more mass equals more retained energy.


If you can find one I would definitely go with the 1-20 twist and dismiss the 1-48. I don't believe it will stabilize bullets much above 400 grs., if that. There is provenance for the 1-20 twist.

I can't believe the 1-20 twist would be any more trouble to use in a muzzleloader than any other twist. During the match between the US and Ireland in 1874 John Bodine of the US team loaded his Remington Rolling Block as a muzzleloader as did some other team members. The cartridge was 44-77 and the bullet weighed around 500 grs. He didn't seem to have any problems loading and I can't believe it would be any slower than a patched round ball.

We use the round ball and slower twists in our muzzleloaders because "that's how it was done in the old days". We do it to emulate our forebears. As you said, your traditions are not ours.

I also shoot Sharps rifles and in them I do use the heaviest for caliber bullet that the rifling will stabilize. That too is our tradition, as you alluded to. At that time the British were using light for caliber bullets and driving them as fast as black powder would allow. The Express cartridges come to mind.

I worked with a frinds Martini-Henry until I got a load for it. Tis a beast. I'm surprised it carried on as long as it did in the British military. Not that it wasn't a good and effective weapon, but that so much better ones were around. Of ocurse, that was a time of transition for armament in general. As much as I like them I can't say a whole lot for our Trapdoor of the same era.

I think, from what you said, you would be best served with a 45 cal. with a 1-20 twist. The 50's are great rifles but to get the same ballistics with a 50 cal that you will with a 45 using a 500 grain bullet you're going to be pushing 700 grs. bullet weight. By the time you get 100-150 grs., or more, of powder under the bullet, recoil is going to be considerable. You don't have to shoot that much powder but if you don't then you may as well shoot the old 577 Snyder.

Of course, there is much to be said for Forsyths 14 and 12 bore rifles utilizing the round ball. Ross Seyfired has written some interesting articles on them.

Sounds as if you have some fun and interesting research ahead of you.....good luck.

Vic

 

[jim gray]

You may want to look into the Lyman Great Plains Hunter, as a traditional styled rifle with a fast twist barrel. Note that it is traditionally styled and if an exact copy of a traditional gun is required this is not it. You can also get replacemant fast twist barrels from Green Mountain. These are primarily for T/C guns but could probably be readily adapted for other models.

Additionally Val Forgett used some very heavy conicals (610 grains) in a .58 caliber ML for African hunting.

 

[Rat]

I think you would be well served with a .58 calibre minnie rifle. They have been taken to Africa where they were used on all types of game, with great success.

I prefer the 1861 Springfield, but perhaps a .577 Enfield would fit better into your traditions/heritage. Although not especially long for caliber, a 580 grain minnie would be plenty of lead for whatever you wanted to shoot at. By the way you can get much more than 80 grains under a 580 grain minnie...more like 110 if you can handle the recoil. I have a minnie rifle that at one time I used to fire 120 grain loads under a 600+ grain minnie.

With the Enfield's graduated sights you could get out to 150 yards easy, although shooting animals with muzzle loaders is usually a 100 yard game. But 150 is doable with a minnie rifle, if you become a serious shooter and practice a lot.

Getting a minnie rifle to shoot accurately can be a "learning curve", especially for a novice. But they will shoot, and a Parker-Hale with progressive rifling should not be too hard to learn on, or get to shoot well.

Well I realize that type of rifle is not your natural inclination, or anything you mention really, but give it some thought, study the .58 calibre minnie rifles such as the Springfied, Enfield, and Remingtons, and perhaps you may incline that way. ?? Seems to me the perfect type rifle for the hunting you describe. And...a minnie rifle is FAST to load...if that means anything when making the first shot count is the most important thing!!

If I was going over to hunt in your neighborhood, from the conditions and game you describe, I would not hesitate a second to grab my 1861 Springfield.

A round ball rifle, for your purposes would probably need be .62 calibre or larger, and somewhere closer to .69 calibre as you surmise, and would be limited to 100 yards regardless of calibre. A slug will indeed carry it's energy out further.

Good luck.

Rat

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

The minie rifles actually load easily. That was a factor in their design. A Whitworth would make a fine stalking rifle and has proven its capability on African game. It is a little harder to load than a rifle-musket and standard minie ball, but the extra precision is worth it in my experience.

 

[Smokin6Gun]

I can verify that a Tennessee Mountain Rifle 33 3/4" bbl., 1-56 twist, will drop a Wild Bore at 70 yds. with a .50 Maxi Ball. If you are gonna buy a .58 Mini Ball shooter for hunting get an 1863 Remington Zouave.58 N/SSA approved(.575 mini or.575 patched ball), 44"overall length, 33" barrel 1-66 twist, priced $475-$595 at Dixie Gun Works. Very accurate, mines proven to 200 yds. I've been at this over 20 yrs. and these rifles serve me well. What you need to ask yourself is what do i want my rifle to be to me, then spend the money you need to in order to get what you really want. A T/C Hawken or the Lyman Great Plains Rifles are excellant choices for what you described. A Hawken T/C 1-48 twist was my first... loved it. I shoot Silouette competition and prefer round ball more accurate with my .50. And when using the Zouave I use the skirted mini.

Hope this helps... :thumbsup:

 

[F.G. Ford]

Hello Boer,
I have shot and owned a Parker Hale Whitworth .45 for several years.
It's quality and ability to shoot well is outstanding, especially at longer ranges, with accuracy and substantial energy to penetrate.
I deplore the idea of trying to make a " Magnum " out of any of these fine old rifles.
But if you are looking for a very powerful muzzle loader, the Parker Hale Whitworth is the way to go.
A good load for this rifle is 500 gr. lead 100grs. FF, card over powder, and lubed felt wad over powder. This will give about 1550 ft/sec.
It has taken moose for me on several occasions with ease.
Best shot was 220 yds. clean kill.
The down side it is slow to load, it must be swabbed between shots to get maximum accuracy.
I hope this helps Fred Ford

 

[BillinOregon]

Boer: What an enviable position you are in! For an African plains game muzzleloader, I don't think you can go wrong with a fast-twist Whitworth or Volunteer that takes a 475-550 grain .45 bullet and a stiff dose of powder. Once the bullet is out of the barrel, you essentially are shooting a .45-90 or .45-110 and the accuracy and penetration potentials are awesome. I have shot both, and find them faster to load than a patched round ball gun. You'llwant to invest in a platinum-lined nipple to deal with the higher pressures, though, as the 1,000-yard shooters quickly learned.
It is only when the distance gets short and the game gets nastier that pure power becomes more important than penetration alone. That's when we start talking about something like the Pedersoli Kodiak .72 double rifle and 9 drams behind a conical, or an 8-bore English sporting rifle with hardened ball and 10 or 12 drams, a la Samuel Baker. These need to be able to stop, rather than merely drop, and so we go to slower twists and round balls.
A compromise would indeed be a minie rifle, and some of the very best were the Enfields with 1:48 twist barrels firing a 500-600 grain conical. These gave power, accuracy and ease of loading, and a fair number of the fellows shoot these to 600 yards at the target butts. See Bill Curtis' article on Managing the Enfield Rifle at David Minshall's Web site.
Please keep us informed.

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

When you think about it, recently Cape buffalo have been taken with the .45-70 and the cartridge was more than ample. If memory serves, the load was a 400 grain slug at around 1800 f.p.s. So a Whitworth with a 550 grain bullet at close to 1500+ f.p.s. is a very potent load. I seem to recall that on one occasion the .45-70 shot through one buff. And the Whitworth's fine accuracy and long range capabilities are a bonus. I think the Whitworth would be my choice, despite its higher cost.

I have a three band Enfield and it has a 1 in 76" twist. It is very accurate with both minies and ball loads, but it only produces about 1000 f.p.s. with the 563 grain minie. I could stoke it up a bit and maybe get 1150-1200 f.p.s., but it still wouldn't equal a Whitworth' punch.

 

[Rat]

Now that would be an interesting contest, .45 Whitworth vs. 1861 Springfield, '53 Enfield or '63 Remington!

They could both be scored in different categories, such as range, trajectory, sectional density, frontal area, penetration, FPE, Taylor KO, accuracy, whompability, recoil, maximum loads, etc., and then add all the scores for one total.

Oooops sorry...my imagination getting away from me again.

ff: :sorry: :what: :yakyak:

At any rate Russ, I'm not convinced at the moment that a .45 slug gun would out-punch a .58 minnie rifle, loaded to equal pressures...?? Possibly the FPE foumula would say so, which is not real convincing.

Rat

 

[unspellable]

My inclination would be to go with the Pedersoli Kodiak. The 72 is rifled for the round ball. The 58 is rifled for a conical. The 54 had compromise rifling. (I've heard rumors that the latter versions have faster rifling.) the 50 was rifled for a conical, but I'd go with 54 or larger.

Being a double, you do have the quick second shot.

All this is outside the provenance of the kentucky or Pennsylvania rifle. They were originally designed as small caliber small game rifles and as such are graceful rifles. Scaling one up to these calibers and power levels would result in a clumsy beast. Even 50 caliber is big for a kentucky.

 

[Tahquamenon]

For Big or Dangerous US or African Game I would invest in a Kodiak Double rifle.

http://www.davide-pedersoli.com/ArmiCategoria.aspx?CategoriaId=247&lang=en

 

[Boer]

I do not know how you do this quote thing but JR asked about he legal situation.


All firearms had to be licensed before. Need for every firearm had to be shown. Black powder guns were treated just like other licences. Now possession of cartridge arms has been severely (and Draconically) tightened. I do not want to go into details regarding this but at the moment a lot of irreplaceable and historically significant firearms are being handed in by their legal owners to be melted down by the police. This is seen as a mayor triumph in gun control. Handguns have almost no market value at the moment. A dealer will not take a 38 revolver for free if you were to offer it to him. It is to cry of when you see the guns that are being destroyed. Many people believe the goal is to disarm.

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

Rat-with the projectile weight being so close, I think velocity is the major factor in the equation. And I don't think you could use enough powder with the Minie without blowing out the skirt. I suppose you could turn down the base pin for the mold and produce a thicker skirt. Then you could load a heavy charge and see what happens. I use a 70 grain charge in mine, and have been told that this charge produces 1000+ f.p.s. It would make an interesting project to see what performance level could be reached with this setup. Maybe the oldtimers had it wrong in using the small charge--they could have flattened the trajectory significantly and increased range for relatively small cost.