Would You Consider Hornady Great Plains Bullets Traditional?

[luieb45]

My dad wants to use those bullets because he doesn't believe roundballs can consistently kill game :youcrazy: even though I dropped a doe right in her tracks with a .50 cal prb this year. He says that they are historically correct to hunters in the 1850s because he said they look like minie balls which were used in the civil war. What is your guys's take on this?

 

[David W.]

Yes, the conical is HC. And yes, round balls are totally capible of taking North American thin skinned game.

The questions are, what is it being shot out of? What rate of twist? How deep is the rifling? Several factors determine how accurate a conical will be.

 

[luieb45]

The gun is a t/c renegade with a 1:48 twist. I don't know the depth of the rifling though.

 

[David W.]

The gun is a t/c renegade with a 1:48 twist. I don't know the depth of the rifling though.

The T/C will shoot T/C Maxi balls fine. I would suggest a hollow base Minie ball as a good alternative, although a near maximum powder charge is needed to expand the hollow base effectivey. With conicals, the shallower the groove the better so blow-by does not occur. This is especially true with solid base conicals. The Maxie ball is designed for T/C rifles. A lot of thought was put into its design. It has minimal barrel to projetile contact in proportion to its sectional density.

However, that rifle is also great with round balls. I have never had a problem with deer and a round ball. Can you tell I like round balls?

 

[Trench]

Heck, if it gets him started don't worry about it. The important thing now is that he's front-stuffing. :grin: You keep knocking those deer down with your PRB's and he'll eventually be interested in trying. He'll notice recoil and cost are less and might switch over. All we're really talking about is the shape of the projectile. Elongated bullets were created to maximize killing power, but to make it a more efficient projectile between the rifle and the target.

 

[larry wv]

Well spoken trench. :thumbsup: Larry

 

[ohio ramrod]

I made a mold for hollow based mini's to "up" the energy of my 45's and prefer them for longer ranges ( 75 to 150 yrds. ) . But since the eyes aren't what they used to be I went back to shooting prb in the deer rifle since I only take shorter shots ( 50 yrds or less ) now. The prb is just fine on deer at reasonable ranges.

 

[PreglerD]

Here over the pond we use PRB from .45 to .54 for all kind of deersized game, esp. roedeer. but for bigger or heavier game like boars we use the killing power of a Hornady Great Plains bullet.

Regards

Kirrmeister

 

[tv_racin_fan]

You may want to try a wad under the projectile. I don't have any experience with em but some guys swear that a wad makes em more accurate. Some guys use a wad under a patched ball...

 

[PreglerD]

You may want to try a wad under the projectile. I don't have any experience with em but some guys swear that a wad makes em more accurate. Some guys use a wad under a patched ball...

I'm using wads regulary with any bullet, either PRB or conical. And I have to say that it works real good and accurate.

Regards

Kirrmeister

 

[Little Wattsy]

Well spoken trench. :thumbsup: Larry

Ditto!! :hatsoff:

 

[roundball]

My dad wants to use those bullets because he doesn't believe roundballs can consistently kill game :youcrazy: even though I dropped a doe right in her tracks with a .50 cal prb this year. He says that they are historically correct to hunters in the 1850s because he said they look like minie balls which were used in the civil war. What is your guys's take on this?

My take is similiar to trench's reply in this regard...imaginging the whole situation with it being your Dad, and him at least being willing to use a sidelock, don't bother giving him any grief for hunting with the big conical...if he comes around to a PRB fine, if he doesn't that's fine too...just do your thing.

However, just as an aside, I do have a slightly different view about the "difference only being the shape of the projectile"...when I hear reference to the word "traditional" I think about what was "traditionally used" or is "representative of" a whole era like, in this case the whole traditional muzzleloading era...and that would be the patched round ball.

By contrast when I hear reference to the word "HC", I think that's usually referring to a more specific time and place/region..."historically correct" for something more specific...ie: the minnie ball (conical) was basically the Civil War projectile of choice...a very narrow slice of time...therefore IMO they are not the "traditional projectile" representing the whole of the muzzleloading era since they surfaced at the tail end of that era...BUT...conicals used with the theme of the mid 1800s and Civil War time slice would be "HC".

But to your dad...don't fight it, let him use the conicals and enjoy the hunts with him while you can...you don't suddenly want to be in a position where the last issue of any consequence between you was a head to head about a concial :wink:

 

[Dave Rosenthal]

Couldn't have said it better, especially the Dad part :thumbsup:

Dave

 

[tg]

These as well as many others may resemble period bullets but were deigned using modern methods and means with not historic research or intent to follow a period pattern so they are not traditional projectiles, if in doubt ask the manufactures, I did several years ago and out of many I asked none would claim any connection to bullets of the past excedpt for replica Minnies and whitworth and a one or two others that are rarely used by hunters today.They do not have to be traditional to use and enjoy the sport but the distinction should be mantanied for the sake of reallity and respect for the true traditional gear,there is certainly nothing wrong with using them if leagal in your state,but they should be accepted for what they are.

 

[Dphar]

My dad wants to use those bullets because he doesn't believe roundballs can consistently kill game :youcrazy: even though I dropped a doe right in her tracks with a .50 cal prb this year. He says that they are historically correct to hunters in the 1850s because he said they look like minie balls which were used in the civil war. What is your guys's take on this?

No they are not traditional. So far as the Minie goes he would be hard pressed to find significant use by civilians. Very low velocity and/or relatively poor accuracy and the fact they tend to move off the powder are major drawbacks for the hunter.
The "conical" that saw the most use was the cloth patched picket. But this bullet is such a PITA to load that it was largely confined to the target ranges. In my experience and that of others its simply impossible to get good accuracy from the picket

without a starter.

This is not only heavy it has to be very carefully made and fit to the muzzle. The other traditional option was the false muzzle which was originally invented for the picket bullet. Even tougher to make right.
Also the picket often requires a LOT of powder. The RB load for a rifle may only be 3/5ths the picket load. I have gotten to 80 grains in the 40 caliber rifle that uses the flatpoint bullet above (the pointed round based one did not shoot well). This means lots of pressure and will require a platinum lined nipple to control the erosion when I start experimenting again.

The modern bullets will to some extent overcome the velocity problem of the minie but only at the expense of higher recoil and higher breech pressures. They still are not fool proof as far as staying on the powder.
Basically if you can't kill a deer with a 50-54 caliber round ball the bullet is not going to help any. The extra energy is simply expended on the dirt beyond. The roundball generally passes through as well.

However, modern hunters are often convinced that the RB is useless because they try to compare them with modern CF bullets with high sectional densities and high energy levels because of the high velocities obtained (the energy theory of stopping power relies on high velocity bullets).

Energy levels mean little when the velocity falls below 1600 fps or so. Its the hole size then. Don't really matter what makes it. In fact some folks I know in Canada quickly gave up on the Maxi-Ball (the only modern conical at the time) for moose found it no better at best than the 54 RB and far inferior to 62-75 caliber RBs (.662 RB equals the weight of a 54 Maxi.) But recoil can be high with even a 62 in a traditional American style rifle.

But gun writers in the pay of the makers of modern MLs and the various bullets they shoot (or writing for magazines that get advertising from these makers) constantly malign the RB. The magazines that get advertising from them don't care what is written so long as its complementary to the advertiser and the ads continue to be bought. After all if the RB works OK people don't need "new and improved" so the RB has to be bad. ANYTHING you read needs to be taken with a grain of salt as a result of the information in this paragraph. Trust me this I how it works, too few ads and the magazine is dead. Subscriptions won't cover the postage in most cases.

If your father is really convinced the bullet is better he needs to read "The Sporting Rifle and Its Projectiles" By Forsythe. I *think* it can be down loaded off Google books. While it deals with larger calibers, Forsythe hunted in India and used a 69 caliber, the information is valid.
If the ball is of equal weight to the conical at BP velocities the ball will invariably kill better. WITHIN ITS RANGE. For most shooters this is about 100-130 yards. The 50 caliber round ball will kill deer reliably to 140-150 yards IF the shooter can place the shot properly. I have a reliable account of a Northern BC Canada Moose killed with one shot with a 54 RB at 175 yards. Moose folded in a few feet, ball penetrated to the far side hide. Not recommended but it did work in this case.
The larger bores will kill at longer range than the 50-54 will but sights and range estimation are the limiting factors. Shooting a conical does not change this unless "hot" modern propellants are used and relatively light bullets then 50-75 yards can be added. If the sights are good enough.
I have worked as a big game guide and have shot numerous deer, elk etc and a bear or two. Using a wide variety of calibers modern and otherwise. Plus the stuff I have seen used by clients and friends. The RB works about are well as anything. But it cannot overcome poor shot placement.
Like I previously stated. If the round ball won't kill it the conical will do no better because the placement was wrong OR the critter just don't know its dead and covers far more country than anyone would think possible. I have run into this several times with everything from a 50 caliber RB to modern HV centerfires. I have had them pile up in few yards shot with a popgun like the 38-40 BP then have one take a HEAVY near perfect hit from a 54 round ball with pass through (or a 400 gr pure lead FP from a 44-90 pushed by 92 grains of FFG) at 30-50 yards and run 200 yards.
The only cure for any of this is experience. A person might shoot 2-3 deer with almost any rifle and have problems. Swear its a POS deer gun and go to something that is reality is no better and have deer drop dead on cue every shot.

Dan

 

[tg]

"What is your guys's take on this?"

The more I think about it, a polite taste of the truth couldn't hurt anyone or anythng and a good hunt could still be had by all.I don't think one has to be buried in false notions to enjoy the sport even if using some modern gear.

 

[Rat Trapper]

I've got to side with Roundball again.

 

[tv_racin_fan]

The way I see it there are good valid reasons to use a conical if you want. While PRB is no doubt plenty good enough at reasonable range a conical can stretch that a bit and if you want to use em do so. I dunno about the typical hunter but the military used em. I believe I read where many builders supplied a mold with two cavities with the rifles they built, one round ball and one conical matched to the rifle...

 

[tg]

"The way I see it there are good valid reasons to use a conical if you want.?"

that was not what the question was about, it was whether the specific type was a traditional comical and they are not, and this should be something that could be discussed with no ill will it is just a simple fact and has nothing to do with whether they should or should not be used,just how they fit into the traditional aspect of things and they do not even if from a distance they resemble a minnie ball they are a product of modern design and engenering as their manufactures will explain if asked,no one said they should not be used that I could see.

". I believe I read where many builders supplied a mold with two cavities with the rifles they built, one round ball and one conical matched to the rifle...'

That was likely very late in the game as far as ML's were concerned, quite often folks try to use the exception to justify something,before the cartridge became the dominant the round ball was the "normal"/"traditional" projectile, having said that if one were to find a pattern and recreate the one of the originals it would be considerd a traditional bullet.Things get fuzzy when folks try and hang the traditional tag on modern bullet designs.

 

[paulvallandigham]

I agree with Tg. The Hornady bullet is NOT a traditional design, made before 1865. Period. That is the answer to Louie's question. No one has to get angry about that FACT. It is the truth.

Now, if he wants to use it anyway, that is his choice. No one is saying he can't use the bullet when hunting deer during Ill.'s MLing season, or during its normal Firearms Deer Season.

As to molds that have two cavities, one RB, and the other a conical, This kind of thing began showing up with PB revolvers during and after the civil war. You might find examples in the 1850s, but conicals where only in the early design and testing stage much before then. This kind of mold was made in large quantities by the Italian Reproduction gun makers, and brass copies were sold widely through Navy Arms, and Dixie back in the 1950s, when the craze over reproductions had begun. I had one for the .36 cal. Colt Model 1851 replica revolver I once owned. I never did try to cast any balls from it, or bullets. The handles were very shot, and brass, and I was not going to risk burning my hands-even wearing gloves- trying to mold with that small mold. :rotf: :surrender: :hatsoff: