How big a bore is too big?

[Bigsmoke]

Mark,
Read my original post about the bison I shot.  100 yards distance as verified with a range finder, shot in the neck, went in, clipped the spine, kept going to the other side of the neck, and stopped just under the skin.  Knocked the critter all the way over onto his back.
I agree with Steve that the story of the .72 bouncing off the hide is the stuff that urban legends are made of.  The BS flag is blowing wildly.
The club I used to shoot with actually banned guns like that from competition as they caused way too much wear and tear on their silhouettes.  I think they put a .54 or .58 limit on bore size a while back.
They are plenty gun for anything on this continent, and almost enough for anything anywhere else.
And with the right rate of twist and the right powder charge, they have an amazing flat trajectory as well.

[mark davidson]

Thanks for the input. There has to be more to the story than meets the ear. Are components like balls and patches just as readily available for the .62 as the .72. How does the trajectory of the two compare?  Is there some caliber in between that I should consider?

[Kermit]

So if my combined grade-school arithmetic and geezer memory work together right, a 2-bore ball would mean that there are TWO balls to the POUND. Hence, a ball weighs half a pound, or 8 ounces. That should be in the neighborhood of 3700 grains of lead. Right?

Crosschecking with the formula of bore diameter cubed times 1502.6, I get a similar number.

I'm trying to imagine enough powder to accelerate one of those pumpkins to murderous velocities in a barrel of, say, 36 inches. And when I try to imagine the recoil produced, I wonder which end of the gun I'd want to be on when one of these things lights off...

This ball needs to be launched from a swivel gun!

[Bigsmoke]

Kermit,
If you were to go check out the thread that Steve originally started a while ago about the 2 bore gun, I checked out the ballistics of the thing on the Beartooth Bullets calculator.  Frankly, I don't recall all the numbers, but the felt recoil was somewhere north of 200 pounds.  That's a real thump.  A swivel would be a good ideal.  Someone else's shoulder would be even better.

[tg]

I would not think that anything bigger than a .62 rifle gun with the heaviest swamped barrel profile offered would be needed on this continent, built with a wide heavy buttplate and in a 38" or so barrel it would have a good sight plain and not knock you down when you shoot it. You have a .54 which has enough umph to take Elk or Hogs you may consider a .69 or larger smoothbore and doing some up close and personal hunting and have the option for shot as well

[Gordon H.Kemp]

My shoulder hurts , just thinking about shooting any of the monster bores mentioned. If for no other reason than the cost of powder I'll stay with .72 and under.

[mark davidson]

TG, or someone, Tell me about caliber and the "shot option."  Can I shoot shot a lot from a rifled barrel or do I really need a fowler?  .72 is the equivalent of 12 guage.....is that correct. Then what is .69 the equivilent of?  Will shooting lots of shot ruin the rifling of a rifle or diminish its accuracy with patch and ball. Be patient, I am obviously fairly new to this. Finally, is there a huge trajectory difference between .62 and .72. I do not mind getting close to critters cause I am mostly a bowhunter but I do not want to spend the money to get a rifle and end up with a 50 yard gun. I need it to perform within reason at 100 yards at least. Thanks in advance for all opinions and advice.

[Bigsmoke]

.62= 20 bore, 66=15 bore, .69=14 bore, .72=12 bore, .75=10 bore, .84 =8 bore, 1.05=4 bore, 1.325=2 bore.  Bore = Gauge.
The .72 that Mike and I have shared seems to shoot about point of aim at 100 yards.  So does my .69 and my .62.
Roger Renner at pacific Arms at one time advocated the use of shot in his Zephyr Rifles as an option.  I think the use of some sort of shot cup was advised.  However, even with his slow rifling 1:144, the powder charge really had to be backed off, as the spin of the rifling tended to obliterate the pattern if a very hot load was used.  Without the shot cup, they will tend to lead up.

[mark davidson]

Thanks for the info. Sounds like if I want to shoot shot, I better round up a real smoothbore fowler of some kind. I will want to possibly squirrel hunt and for sure shoot ducks with the shot-firing gun so I need to be able to shoot a hot charge and lots of them in practice and hopefully in the field. It does not sound like a rifled barrel is what I need for hot loads and lots of shooting.

[rollingb]

TG, or someone, Tell me about caliber and the "shot option."  Can I shoot shot a lot from a rifled barrel or do I really need a fowler?  .72 is the equivalent of 12 guage.....is that correct. Then what is .69 the equivilent of?  Will shooting lots of shot ruin the rifling of a rifle or diminish its accuracy with patch and ball. Be patient, I am obviously fairly new to this. Finally, is there a huge trajectory difference between .62 and .72. I do not mind getting close to critters cause I am mostly a bowhunter but I do not want to spend the money to get a rifle and end up with a 50 yard gun. I need it to perform within reason at 100 yards at least. Thanks in advance for all opinions and advice.

"Trajectory" (of ANY calibur) is directly related to the powder-charge used until you reach the cailbur's "PODR" (Point Of Diminishing Returns) when using blackpowder.

The bigger the bore,... the bigger the powder-charge needed to retain the "same" trajectory when being compared to smaller caliburs.

Or,.... (maybe) more simply put,... "velocity" is directly related to "trajectory".

[mark davidson]

Rollingb, Good point and the basis of may question exactly.  How does the PDR compare between .62 and .72?  Does the .72 use such a heavy ball that you run out of velocity and acceptable trajectory sooner than the .62 assuming both remain within safe powder charge limits? Compare say 45-70 to 30-06... there is nothing you can do to the 45-70 to make it approach the acceptable range and trajectory of the 30-06. On the other hand, there are some other calibers that are very similar and not so far apart. The 45-70 because of trajectory limitations is simply a much shorter range gun for the average guy. If the .72 can be heated up on the back side to shoot about as flat as the .62 at PDR then the .72 will be my choice. On the other hand if the .72 is for all practical purposes a 75 yard and under rifle because of trajectory at PDR then I will need to go a little smaller to get the best of both worlds.  Hope this makes sense. :-)  Remember I  am new at this.

[rollingb]

The 45-70 can't be compared to the 30-06 simply because of cartridge "shape/design" and the increase in velocity that "design" lends itself to when using smokeless powder.
On the other hand, "barrel length" is also a very big factor when we start discussing PDR/blackpowder ,... as an example, consider the navel guns on a battleship (they also use blackpowder charges, and would definitely be fun to play with, but would be a "real pain" to carry in the field
I prefer a muzzleloader that's light and easy to carry, it just makes my experience in the "field" that much more enjoyable.

[mark davidson]

Thanks again for your kind and polite responses. My mission centers around the word "want." I have a custom .54 and it kills bambi with much authority. I just for whatever reason "want" something with a "big" ole hole in the end but I still want to be able to shoot on out to 100 yards without excessive holdover. Trajectory can be so bad in some cases that you have to completely cover the target with sight, muzzle and everything to have any hope of the projectile falling into the target. I do not want that! I have always liked big bores in handguns as well. There is just something appealing about a big hole in the end. None of us "need" such things. It is all part of our version of FUN! ;-)

[Spotted Bull]

Is is just me or could someone write a book on the info in just this post?

[rollingb]

Thanks again for your kind and polite responses. My mission centers around the word "want." I have a custom .54 and it kills bambi with much authority. I just for whatever reason "want" something with a "big" ole hole in the end but I still want to be able to shoot on out to 100 yards without excessive holdover. Trajectory can be so bad in some cases that you have to completely cover the target with sight, muzzle and everything to have any hope of the projectile falling into the target. I do not want that! I have always liked big bores in handguns as well. There is just something appealing about a big hole in the end. None of us "need" such things. It is all part of our version of FUN! ;-)

2 things here,.... if the trajectory is "that bad", then (either) increase the powder charge to flatten the trajectory by increasing the velocity,... and/or, take a few "swipes" off the front sight with a file (if) you don't have an adjustable rear-sight.

I "can" adjust my loads, and my sights, to shoot poorly,... or, I can work up a load that's every effective, and tune my sights to be accurate out to 100+ yards. (I chose the latter options)

"ANYTHING" your .54 can do,... a bigger bore can "ALSO" do.

...., please tell us what "calibur", what "rifle", and what "load", is being used to give such a horrible trajectory, as mentioned in your post?