Traditional Muzzleloading Association

Shooting Traditional Firearms and Weapons => General Interest => Topic started by: jtwodogs on March 14, 2009, 01:56:11 PM

Title: What would be the most efficient cal.?
Post by: jtwodogs on March 14, 2009, 01:56:11 PM: I really am trying to sort this out in my head. Those with experience with a .58 cal. 1:48 twist,

From a good barrel would a .58 cal. with a 1:48 twist shoot a conical and a RB with accuracy, or should you just go one way or the other and not try to split the diff?

Thanks ahead of time for all the accumulated wisdom
Title:
Post by: tg on March 14, 2009, 02:05:57 PM: I would think that with a .58 you have plenty of lead, and a bullet would not be needed I would go for a good ball load and get to know it well.
Title:
Post by: Bigsmoke on March 14, 2009, 02:06:47 PM: Frankly, I have always viewed 1:48 as a compromise rate of twist. It will shoot either style projectile pretty good, but the slower twist is better for round ball, the faster is better for conical.
With that all said, I did used to do pretty good with my old Renegade shooting with a round ball. Won quite a few matches back in the day. Now if I can keep up with Two Steps I am doing pretty good.
Title:
Post by: jtwodogs on March 14, 2009, 02:22:41 PM: I had thought about a .62 RB, but when I look for molds the .58 is ubiquitous, there is everything from a rb, to a minni ball, and everything in-between.

I know a 1:48 is kinda middle of the road but I do here that some get pretty good accuracy for both bullet and rb, I would like the efficacy of a rifle that could do both with aplomb.
Title:
Post by: tg on March 15, 2009, 04:54:17 PM: If you are talking about buying a new gun/barrel and using it for hunting I would go with a .54/.58 and the slow twist to match. I would not build a new gun with a compromise barrel.
Title:
Post by: Kermit on March 15, 2009, 05:54:51 PM: When I saw "most efficient cal" in the topic line, I was preparred for a donnybrook!
Title:
Post by: Two Steps on March 15, 2009, 08:07:54 PM: Kermit Said:
Quote
When I saw "most efficient cal" in the topic line, I was preparred for a donnybrook!

Hmm...donnybrook...Seems like I've heard of them, but don't have one...how do ya like it? :|
AL
Title:
Post by: jtwodogs on March 15, 2009, 10:49:21 PM: ok, let us in on the joke. or rather me. whats a donnybrook?
Title:
Post by: pathfinder on March 16, 2009, 09:20:46 AM: I've got two .58's, both with 1-72 twist. 1 is a Hawken, 37" Getz barrel, hit all 4 bears at a silhouette match[200yds] in the same spot on the shoulder[a feat NEVER to be repeated by me....EVER!!!!! ] and a "Marshall" style with a 38" barrel. It holds a 1" group off the bench at 75yds[best these old eye's can do any more]. I guess for my money I'd stick with the slow twist and round ball. As far as moulds go,Dixie,Jeff Tanner and Rapine can make what ya need. I don't think conicals and breech loaders will ever catch on, IMHO!
Title: caliber
Post by: jtwodogs on March 16, 2009, 09:22:30 AM: Well good question, Wyo.
I live in E. KY., so most of my hunting are in the hills of App..
Mostly Whitetail, I like to target shoot but only as a second to hunting and getting ready to hunt. One of these days would like to go west,(My sister lives in Colorado), and hunt Elk, I have read some of the regs out there and they are pretty specific and restrictive as to projectiles used for black powder.
I would also like to hunt bear and hog with it eventually. I fear I suffer from the same thing that Mark Davidson suffers from Magnumitis. I like big guns and big projectiles. But I also suffer from an acute efficiency syndrome, I guess do to my sparse upbringing, and the fact that sometimes one gun had to wear many hats. In this changing socioeconomic society were somethings may be taken away from us sorry to say. I would like to have a rifle that I could use a ball or a slug in with equality.

I know, this animal may no exist, but you asked. So I am just letting you know what I was thinking. I know with my eye sights and iron sights, my shots would be limited to <or equal to 100 yds.
On a side note I would eventually like to match my rifle with a good pistol, most I have seen on the Internet do not exceed .54 cal., I would want to match it with the cal. of my rifle for obvious reasons.
Thanks guys for your responses.
jack
Title:
Post by: jtwodogs on March 16, 2009, 09:27:05 AM: Quote from: "pathfinder"
I've got two .58's, both with 1-72 twist. 1 is a Hawken, 37" Getz barrel, hit all 4 bears at a silhouette match[200yds] in the same spot on the shoulder[a feat NEVER to be repeated by me....EVER!!!!! ] and a "Marshall" style with a 38" barrel. It holds a 1" group off the bench at 75yds[best these old eye's can do any more]. I guess for my money I'd stick with the slow twist and round ball. As far as moulds go,Dixie,Jeff Tanner and Rapine can make what ya need. I don't think conicals and breech loaders will ever catch on, IMHO!
Thanks Pathfinder. I was leaning pretty hard toward a .62 with a slow twist, I think the major consensus is a RB with slot twist.
I am thinking that .62 would be sufficient for elk in the 100 yd range?
Title: cal.
Post by: jtwodogs on March 16, 2009, 01:58:56 PM: Thanks Wyo.
I consider your opinions as definitive. I think you have convinced me to go with a .62 with either Forsyth or round bottom rifling, I may even go with a butt pad that accommodates heavy loads wether it be historically correct or not, or maybe there is a butt pad out there that is between the crescent so oft seen and a flat one.
Thanks to all for your thoughts on the matter.
Jack
Title:
Post by: Bigsmoke on March 16, 2009, 02:39:19 PM: Jack,
Just to add in on this, I agree with the .62 caliber concept. Up until 10 - 12 years ago, I was a pretty staunch .54 cal guy. Then the big bore bug bit. (say that 10 times fast).
My "shooter" is a .62 cal Sporting Rifle style gun, with a 32" tapered octagonal barrel, rifled 1:104, .006" deep. It has a steel flat buttplate (available from TOW).
A similar rifle I chronographed with 200 grains GOEX Cartridge powder at 1,994 fps. Normally for target work, I shoot 135 grains Ffg. That gives me minimal recoil.
I will take a photo of it and post later.
Title:
Post by: Mitch on March 16, 2009, 02:49:39 PM: to answer someone-a "donnybrook" is a brawl/fight
Title:
Post by: tg on March 16, 2009, 07:53:02 PM: You will have plenty of gun with a .58 PRB for Elk at 100 yds, I don't know what all you have around to hunt but a .62 smoothbore is a good gun for Deer and big game out to 50=60 yds and as a scatter gun will take Turkey, Tree rats and such
Title:
Post by: Kermit on March 16, 2009, 08:45:29 PM: Donnybrook: it's an Irish thing. An uproar; a free-for-all, after Donnybrook Fair, held annually in Donnybrook, a suburb of Dublin, Ireland, and noted for its brawls.
Title:
Post by: swampman on March 16, 2009, 08:46:56 PM: The most efficent caliber is the .54.
Title: cal.
Post by: jtwodogs on March 17, 2009, 07:37:56 AM: By efficiency, I think I was trying to justify, the ability to use rb, and a conical, not so much powder, to ball, to cal. So I guess I phrased my question wrong. Sorry
Jack
Title:
Post by: Kermit on March 17, 2009, 05:04:25 PM: Yessss... but "efficient" is a LOT more fun around the campfire!
Title:
Post by: jerry on March 18, 2009, 10:56:13 PM: Quote from: "Kermit"
Yessss... but "efficient" is a LOT more fun around the campfire! :P
Title:
Post by: Three Hawks on March 18, 2009, 11:35:10 PM: I'm gonna toss my hat in the ring here, too.

Unless you really enjoy getting the sh*t kicked out of you, why not .50 cal.? With 1:48 twist as in T-C and many others, most rifles will give sufficient accuracy for informal competition and plinking without breaking the bank what with the current price of BP. For instance at rondy I shoot 50 gr. 3F under a .490" Patched round ball, the same load I've killed deer with.

For heavy game such as Elk, Moose, Griz, and Hogs, a Maxi or a Lee minie ball in it's several variations and weights or Lee's R.E.A.L.'s would do the job quite nicely.

We're not shooting Cape Buffalo or Elephant here.

Three Hawks
Title:
Post by: jtwodogs on March 19, 2009, 06:41:44 AM: Quote from: "jerry"
Quote from: "Kermit"
Yessss... but "efficient" is a LOT more fun around the campfire! :P ;)
Title:
Post by: Gordon H.Kemp on March 19, 2009, 10:01:32 AM: I'll pass on my turn! Thats a lot more punishment then I'd enjoy , even 50 years ago.
Title:
Post by: jtwodogs on March 19, 2009, 03:36:39 PM: When I refer getting the pooo kicked out of me, it was on the lines of my heavy loaded .450, dislocated shoulders are not my idea of fun I guess I would try it once, but I do believe thats all I would want of that beast.
Title:
Post by: mark davidson on March 23, 2009, 10:17:24 AM: Jack, Sounds like you and I may well have the same "sickness." I settled on the .62 as the best (for me) efficient caliber. Above .62, the ball weight gets so heavy that I suspect trajectory will be a very limiting factor if you want to shoot much at 100 yards or beyond. Below .62 cal. the ball weight gets too light to suit my tastes. In my early testing in the last few weeks, I find the .62 with "enough" powder to shoot for all practical purposes identically to my .54. Recoil is a bit heavier but manageable around 140 gr. of 2F. At 180 grains it gets pretty stiff. At 200 grains it plain slaps that shoulder pretty good. At 100 grains the .62 is a powder puff. For versatility, I suggest you go with a slow round ball twist in a big enough caliber that you are not tempted to feel the need for a conical. I find the patched round ball to fulfill my need for the old world or sense of traditionalism quite well. I am new into all this but the big .62 cal. hole in the end inspires confidence especially if I want to pour in hefty charges or I can load it down and plink with it just like I could with smaller calibers. I do not think you will be disappointed with the .62 with a twist made to shoot one projectile really well.
Title:
Post by: Bigsmoke on March 23, 2009, 11:41:20 AM: Steve,
Thank you.
Once again, another common mis-conception laid to rest.
I recall our common friend Jim C. mentioning to me more than once that he kept shooting over the backs of critters on his first black powder hunt in Africa with the .69 caliber rifle. He just "knew" that big ol' .678 RB had to drop two feet at over 100 yards, so he aimed right over the back. Strangely enough, that was exactly where it went, right over the back. He sent me some video footage of the hunt, and probably the most impressive scene was where he lets the PH take a shot with the rifle at a duck on a small lake. They lazered the range at 240 yards. Bang, good bye duck. Not a bad shot.
Title:
Post by: mark davidson on March 23, 2009, 12:25:08 PM: Wyo, Great point and lesson in ballistics. As with all things there is a point of diminishing returns or better yet a point at which all things being equal is offset by the recoil factor being so unequal. In terms of the original question about "efficiency" it seems that .62 is about a perfect happy medium in terms of attainable velocity to retain equal or similar trajectory while remaining at a "reasonable" recoil level.
Title:
Post by: mark davidson on March 23, 2009, 01:39:50 PM: Wyo, Wow, what a great analogy. The 12guage shotgun thing really hit home with me. I have come to realize what a credible contributor you are here. The fact that you are a builder and can have anything you want and chose the .62 gives me a lot of confidence that I have migrated in the right direction for a hunting gun. Thanks again for your spot-on insight! :-)
Title:
Post by: Riley/MN on March 23, 2009, 02:48:23 PM: Quote from: "Wyosmith"
... It's more then you need for deer, but so what. LOTS of hunters go to the field every years with smooth and rifled 72s. They are called 12 gage shotguns. Many places require a shotgun for deer hunting, and no one seems to think a 12 is too big for deer in modern gun season.

I went on a "party hunt" here once (which is enough). We live in a shotgun only zone, but muzzleloaders are allowed. One of the guys looked at the bore of my .50 and said "Man, that is a huge hole." I told him to look at his 12 ga.
Title:
Post by: Kermit on March 24, 2009, 08:16:22 PM: All this discussion has me wondering if the Wash St F&G folks have it all upside down. On the island in Puget Sound where I live, deer hunting is "shotgun only." The conventional wisdom is that hunting with a shotgun limits range and therefore the potential for damage to residences/livestock. So now I'm wondering if a 10 ga mag firing slugs is REALLY "safer" in our rural environment.

One feller built himself a .40 flint smoothie years ago to hunt deer here. For his purposes he called it a "shotgun."
Title:
Post by: Three Hawks on March 24, 2009, 09:24:25 PM: Quote from: "Wyosmith"
Funny thing....they probably require a smoothbore in a flintlock, but it's also probably legal to shoot sabot slugs in 50 cal and maybe even a rifled shotgun
Having lost sight of the objective, governments often redouble their efforts.

In WA. west of SR9 to Puget Sound on the mainland and in the islands the only legal arm is a shotgun with slugs or buckshot. Same for black powder, smoothbore only, single round ball or slug or buckshot. Choice of ignition system is determined by whether or not you're in a primitive game mangagement unit. The reasoning is that because it is a heavily populated area the slug or buckshot rule limits range. A 10 gage roundball, being round, has no more range than a 20 ga roundball.

Three Hawks
Title:
Post by: medbill on March 24, 2009, 10:55:49 PM: Here in NY there is some state land near by that is shotgun only but rifled muzzleloaders are fine. Got myself a nice buck out of there this year, was like cheating, walked in late and was out in 2 hours with a deer. Just meat, hardly hunting but had fun and my .62 Sharon didn't let that deer run far. As long as it keeps making run in the direction of my truck I'm a happy man.

This year I'll be bragging about my .62 Zihn's flint and caplock.
Title:
Post by: Three Hawks on March 25, 2009, 02:33:37 AM: Quote from: "Wyosmith"
Yes, and a round ball from a rifled barrel has no more range of travel then one from a smooth bore.
Again, I fail to see their point.

Maybe it is simplification of regulations. I don't know. Have you ever dealt with the public? I have, and some people are so skullcrushinly stupid that I have no idea how they manage to breathe on their own.

Three Hawks
Title:
Post by: mark davidson on March 25, 2009, 11:41:56 AM: Not only do they breed and vote but many of them become game wardens here in the South! :-)
Title:
Post by: James Kelly on March 27, 2009, 06:38:07 PM: Old Stuff:

The US Army, known for being pretty good at the job, chose .54 cal for round ball rifles from about 1803 through 1855. Standard charge for the 1841 percussion rifle was 75 grains of rifle powder, for a velocity of 1850 fps (Springfield Shoulder Arms, Claud E. Fuller).

A lot of the rifles in Flintlock Jaeger Rifles, by Erhard Wolf, are in the range .54--.58 caliber (14--15mm)

Personal Unsubstantiated O-pinions:

Me, I only kill hanging steel targets these days. .40 would be nice, as I am one of those guys thinking "smaller balls shoot flatter" yes I know the math but I don't like pain. 45 better in some wind, decent velocity w minimal pain.
I happen to have a Zihn pistol & a Pedersoli Jaeger in .54, and have acquired considerable predjudice in favor of that caliber. Along with early influences--the H. Aston pistol Dad bought me when I was 12 is .54 cal. Shot it some as a teenager. Nice size ball.

Once y'all figure out the ideal caliber, we could discuss the best brand of whiskey, car, ideal woman & breed of dog? I'm sure we can come to agreement about these subjects as well.
Title:
Post by: Kermit on March 27, 2009, 08:10:46 PM: "Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened." Winston Churchill

I think of this whenever my hubris begins to show. I expect I fit into the category of "most of them." Experience gives me little reason to think otherwise.
Title:
Post by: mark davidson on March 30, 2009, 10:19:45 AM: "ideal" and "efficient" are not always the same thing. We will NEVER all agree on what is ideal because it can mean so many different things to so many of us for so many different wants and needs. Efficient on the other hand, at least in theory, can possibly be more defined, proved and possibly even agreed upon. Not likely, but possibly. For shooting game, any caliber will work under perfect circumstances with perfect shot placement. However, there is likely some caliber that is a really good compromise between too little and too big with recoil that is manageable but not severe and trajectory that is acceptable with energy that is plenty adequate even under less than perfect conditions. I'm not sure we will ever all agree on just what that caliber is but if the criteria is "efficiency" then the subject becomes more objective and less subjective.
Title:
Post by: Kermit on March 30, 2009, 11:28:43 AM: Ah, compromise. The bugaboo of all things human--politics, religion, ethics, economics...and now ballistic efficiency. Ain't life grand? So many questions, so few absolutes.
Title:
Post by: James Kelly on March 30, 2009, 12:12:38 PM: In modern guns two of the most popular/ideal/efficient calibers are .22rf and .30-'06. The one only kills little things & paper, but is widely available, economical, accurate and pleasant to shoot.
For those who like to kill Big Things .30-'06 does right well. Amazing variety of bullets & developed loads, accurate.
If you are looking at muzzle loaders in similar fashion, might be good to look at what mix of paper & flesh you wish to pierce, are economics and shoulder damage a factor? Round ball or minie?
If I wanted to kill a large animal that could do me harm, if it so chose, I sure would like that .62 caliber. And Round Ball rather than minie for more effect on the beast. That last was British big game hunting experience, I believe.
For paper or steel depends on range, how serious one is, and shoulder condition. No doubt a big ball at highest tolerable velocity can make excellent groups with good retention of velocity.
Is not .50 caliber popular for chunk gun shooting these days?
In a lighter offhand rifle, some of us more fragile types prefer a rifle in the .36--.54 caliber range, for a More Pleasant Shooting Experience. My Grandfather told me he could shoot the head off a pheasant with his ~.36 halfstock percussion. He did some other things that made me inclined to believe him. Won a lot of turkeys at turn-of-the-last-century matches. Didn't use it on black bear, though, & I suspect he got pretty close to that pheasant/groundhog/whatever.

I like Jameson Irish whiskey . . .
Title:
Post by: Kermit on March 30, 2009, 08:24:28 PM: This one would be my preference if I was contemplating truly dangerous game! Eight-bore and TWO musket caps.

http://underhammers.blogspot.com/ (http://underhammers.blogspot.com/)

The first part relates to the African Zephyr; the rest is underhammer stuff.
Title:
Post by: Kermit on March 30, 2009, 08:25:11 PM: Oops, sorry--this is "flintlock territory."