100 Yards and counting

[Dragoon]

I attended the Sequim rondy this weekend and had a great time! I thought I would share and experience in dialing in my .50 Cal Lyman Plains Rifle.

We had a 100 yard paper target of a bear. I had shot my gun in that morning at 25 yards about as well as I have ever had it dialed in. So, I loaded up and fired my 5 rounds. they hit the bear's feet, about a foot or more below the center of mass. My aiming point was his back.

So, when an opportunity came to help a friend who is not very ambulatory take his gun and stuff to the range I helped and took mine too. After setting him up I loaded up with 100 grains, vs. my usual 65 grains, and shot 5 rounds at a spare target, firing with the top of the front post at the top of his back.

When I went up to get his target all five of my rounds had missed. OK, I knew they had not gone below the target, right? So, I loaded up with 100 grains again and fired at his feet. I have never seen such a perfect hole in a piece of paper, and it was exactly in the center of the bear's body, a kill shot, about 12 inches above the point of aim (I have a picture of the hole in the target and my friend as a witness!). At least now I know where the gun shoots at at 100 yards.

My thought is that with 100 grains at 100 yards it is still climbing? Any thought? It was an interesting experiment in shooting.

[Lady of the Woods]

One question that pops into my mind is: what was the landscape?hilly? flat?

I have a TERRIBLE time remembering if I'm supposed to adjust up or down when shooting up hill or down hill and at which range, that's why I ask...

[Dragoon]

Just talked with Beaverman... should have adjusted my sight to put round on target at 100... was not dialed in enough at 25... well, live and learn.

[FG1]

Z , whether shooting up hill or down hill its the same . You will impact high if you dont hold lower.
I know it dont sound right but it is  

[mike rumping]

M'Lady, you're thinking shooting a bow there,
a rifle gun won't make any difference.
Mike

[Stryker]

M'Lady, you're thinking shooting a bow there,
a rifle gun won't make any difference.
Mike

Mike
I was taught, growing up, there was a difference. My PMI in the Marines reinforced it. But there are a number of variable involved. I really doesn't come into play until your are shooting up/down at angle more the 30-40 degrees. But past that, you want to aim low regardless if it's up or down.

To give you a modern example, if you are shooting, up or down, at a 40 degree angle and the line of sight range is 400 yards to the target, the horizontal range is only 335 yards. 335 yards is what you want to aim at.

I'venever reall messed around with the angles with my flinter. I may have to try sometime. I would suspect that under 100 yards, there's probably not a lot of compensating unless the angle was greater than 40 degrees.

[sse]

I love these external ballistics concepts, especially regarding shooting a roundball, where I think the controversy fades a little closer to art than science.

There is an overriding principle, mentioned by Jeff Cooper, in his book The Art of the Rifle, which he calls the morning glory effect.  Basically, this is the is the idea that past certain threshholds, for instance extreme distance where centerfire is concerned, other factors trump the good ballistics and shooting form we generally strive for in placing a good shot.  I think the factors are enlarged by comparison when shooting a black powder rifle.  So, the bottom line for me is that in our B/P shooting efforts, shooting at different angles on a grade probably doesn't call for much of and adjustment, if any...

[Captchee]

well i have found through the years it  does apply .
 when im shooting i use the very same princaples  that i  use with my bow , jut to a lesser amount .

as to sighting in . I sight in at 100 yards . then i make my adjustments for closer ranges .
 100 yards with a roundball im dead on . off cross sticks she holds a good 3 inch or less group .
at 25 yards  im 5 inches high .
 i also often shoot long Gong targets  and have taken  those events at over 300 Yards . longest one was 345 lazered .
 the target is a 36x36 steel target . my point of aim is  high but the ball still falls  on target

OHHH my powder charge is 80 grains of 3F in a 54 cal .

 now thats not to say you shoud hunt at that distance but  that you can hit at that distance  once you learn your rifle .

[sse]

I think conceiving of gravity in terms of wind, when attempting to make a shot with a firearm with an effective range of 100 yards or less, with a projectile with a low ballistic coefficient and low velocity, though roughly analogous, is dangerous.  The effects of a crosswind on a rb are so dramatic, any similarity is remote.
 

Anyway... if you are shooting down at 25-30 degrees you are going to get about 1/3 less drop then you would on your rifle range back home.

This would be an extreme angle, plus, just like any other shot, the distance to the target is a  much greater factor.

Even with a rb low velocity, since the muzzle to target distance is so short the effect of gravity on the rb...?  I'm not from Missouri, but...to bad I'm a flatlander or I could run my own tests fo the fun of it.  Failing that, i gotta defer to you mountain men and sit here in disbelief... :|    

[Captchee]

i would disagree SSE .
 thats one of the things i find wrong with ballistic computers concerning the RB . I simply do not get the drop they suggest
 A cross wind also only plays a part at greater distance   ie 75  yards or so  . But that also depends on your original charge thus the velocity  that the ball leaves the muzzle . The faster the velocities the lest wind initially plays a great part .

As to effective range . That range is based on the intended target . On big game  we consider that effective range to generally be below 100 yards . But that same  load combination on a human target would still be effective well past 300 yards

[Wyoming Mike]

I do a little different than some do.  I find the best load at 50 yards then sight the rifle in.  I then up the load until I'm shooting dead on at 100 yards.  I may need to adjust the 100 yard load to tighten it up a little.  It may come out to an inch or two high or low but it is still in the money at that range.  I use that load for competition and hunting.

For my .50s the short range load runs from 40 to 50 grains depending on the rifle.  The 100 yard load will run between 65 to 75 grains depending.  A 75 grain load with a soft lead ball will go all the way though the chest of a deer or antelope at 75 yards.

[tg]

It is a fact that when you use the right angle triangle the hypotenuse is the line of sight and shot to the target from bottom to top at tha angle, the horzontal line (bottom)is tha actuall distance gravity has to work on rhe ball and is always less distance than the hyoptenuse, draw it out it will become evident if you draw the Deer at the top and the shooter on the bottom.

[Captchee]

mathematically a bumble bee cannot fly .
Mathematically if two rifles, one shooting 3500fps  and another at 2300 fps  , both fired horizontally 12 ft off  the ground at the very same time , while at the same time dropping an object  from that height , all three would reach the ground at the same time and neither of those bullets would reach  a distance = to its velocity .

 Personally , I prefer experience of practical application . To often the mathematics of an equation doesn’t match the application  ,when it comes to muzzleloading ballistics.
.
 So if you just fired a PRB and got an effect that is different them the math whats wrong ? Cant be the  PRB because it just did what the math said it couldn’t .There for the only thing left  , no mater how unlikely it seems , is the most likely culprit of the error  IE the math   .
 The thing about math is its only as good as the person working on it , if ALL the proper variables are not included , if just one is  left out , the  resulting sum can not be comparable .

[oomcurt]

I gotta say this...I just gotta.....

All this kind of makes me wonder....chronographs, computers, charts, weighing balls to get them all the same or as close to it as possible.... It seems to me, all those people back in the 18th, 19th, and early 20th century must have either starved or been awfully lucky hitting anything. I wonder just why it is that back then folks did what they did with what they had and got along just fine. Today....with some people....unless it is backed up with all kinds of scientific proof...it just ain't so. Baloney! Seems to me life in general would be a whole lot simple and more enjoyable without all the modern hoopla.

Just my two cents...
Curt

[Spotted Bull]

I gotta say this...I just gotta.....

All this kind of makes me wonder....chronographs, computers, charts, weighing balls to get them all the same or as close to it as possible.... It seems to me, all those people back in the 18th, 19th, and early 20th century must have either starved or been awfully lucky hitting anything. I wonder just why it is that back then folks did what they did with what they had and got along just fine. Today....with some people....unless it is backed up with all kinds of scientific proof...it just ain't so. Baloney! Seems to me life in general would be a whole lot simple and more enjoyable without all the modern hoopla.

Just my two cents...
Curt

Very well said, sir!