Terminal Effect of Roundball?

[Bigslug]

Part professional interest (firearm instructor), part recreational (hunter), and part historical, I'm hoping I can get some firsthand observations on how these nearly pure lead marbles behave on impact. Due to CA's impending lead hunting ban and the sheer difficulty of hunting in my zone, I'm unlikely to learn in the one season I'd have available to try, even if I did have the gear.

On the negative hand, you have almost the worst possible aerodynamic shape, and the worst possible sectional density numbers.

On the positive hand, people did successfully fight wars and feed themselves with them, and even in fairly primitive smoothbore form, the arms were viewed as sufficiently superior to the improved versions of the sharp stick that they were willing to accept the technical and logistical penalties of chemistry (gunpowder), and metallurgy - both gun making and bullet casting - to possess them. No less an authority than Elmer Keith observed the roundball in the .36 Navy Colt to be a superior manstopper to the conical options that were often found in the accompanying molds.

Unfortunately, we don't have Marshall and Sanow doing studies of bank robbers being felled by round balls, nor do we have Federal, Remington, and Winchester shooting gelatin blocks with them and publishing the results. If the surgeons at Waterloo had anything to say about it, I'm not really sure where to look.

So if any of you charcoal burners have smacked rows of milk jugs or done autopsies on your deer, elk, and pig in the name of science, I'd love to hear the details of caliber, velocity, penetration (recovered or not), expansion, and damage caused.

:drinks:

[UKShootist]

Not much help, but I was reading some time ago about the .577 Artillery Carbine muzzle loader which uses a Minie round. The article discussed terminal effects and stated that round balls tended to move to follow the softest tissue if it could. With the introduction of the bullet shaped Minie it was noticed (especially by anyone hit with one) that this bullet appeared not to mind in the least the presence of bone etc. in it's way. Exit wounds apparently became much more common.

Ball rounds seemed quite effective in this case though.

214555

[FrontierMuzzleloading]

IMO, paper #'s don't mean jack squat when it comes to round balls.

.490" round ball, 70gr 3fg goex.
https://s5.postimg.org/emzjkto07/P1040930.jpg (https://postimages.org/)
https://s5.postimg.org/z0qog7umf/P1040944.jpg (https://postimages.org/)
https://s5.postimg.org/c9hltt9l3/P1040945.jpg (https://postimages.org/)
https://s5.postimg.org/8gy3e2u2v/P1040946.jpg (https://postimages.org/)
https://s5.postimg.org/vsm7368cn/P1040948.jpg (https://postimages.org/)

[FrontierMuzzleloading]

https://s5.postimg.org/ekdotvn47/IMG_8572.jpg (https://postimages.org/)
https://s5.postimg.org/8pp3m5k93/IMG_8584.jpg (https://postimages.org/)
https://s5.postimg.org/63e6iyifb/IMG_8590.jpg (https://postimages.org/)
https://s5.postimg.org/b4lkkbpvr/IMG_8591.jpg (https://postimages.org/)

[Bigslug]

FrontierMuzzleloading,

Good stuff there! I can't be 100% sure from the photos - was the shot on your elk a complete pass-through? The rib cage pics show the obvious hole (exit?) and a splotch on the opposing side that might be either the entry or just a blood puddle.

No such questions on Porky! Not only merely dead, but really most sincerely dead.:bigsmyl2:

[rodwha]

This may be of interest to you:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hQnVfyhVJ-Y

Also search YouTube for black powder ballistics gel test and it will bring up a couple handgun results.

When I first became interested in muzzleloading arms I looked at the numbers such as what you did and wondered how on earth a ball could be very effective past about 50 yds with such low sectional density and energy numbers compared to what I “knew” about modern stuff and what was effective. According to modern gun forums most people held the same view and stated I shouldn’t even consider such and just move on to sabots with modern bullets.

However I also signed up on traditional forums and asked lots of questions. And far too many answers of a ball being effective to 125 yds or even more were prevalent. Pics were shown and were no different than the ones posted here. I was schooled that the numbers don’t mean squat.

One thing that was fairly common was that a soft lead ball generally mushroomed within 75 yds and was often found on the off side under the hide whereas beyond that it tended to give full penetration without much sign of expanding unless it hit bone.

I don’t recall who’s commercial site stated that pure lead expands at 1200 fps and above. Below that it will tend to behave more like a solid.

What I notice from ballistics gel and revolvers is that the ball tends to produce a little bit of an over caliber permanent cavity but after several inches it becomes a bit more like a FMJ. And this is why, for my revolvers, I created custom WFN bullet designs.

As to the Civil War pistol conicals not being as effective as a ball I attribute this to the pointy design and low velocity of the paper cartridges used. A pointy bullet allows the flesh to stretch thereby creating a very small need caliber permanent cavity. Precisely why I believe Elmer Keith’s testing is weighty.

[triggerhappy243]

First thing i would do is to get written clarification if lead ball is going to be banned in commifornia. If it is, I would suggest leaving Ca. without delay.

[triggerhappy243]

As frontier has pictured, a roundball can surely kill an elk with no trouble at 30 yards. I have a friend who hunted with a 50 cal. Hawken for over 40 years. He was a survivalist freak. He hunted elk Like a true mountain man. Hiked miles into his hunting grounds where there are no roads. Not 1 single shot went past 50 yards.

[sharps4590]

Probably the best description I ever heard or read about the lethality of the round ball was coined by Sam Fadala, I believe. "A patched round ball kills all out of proportion to its paper ballistics". That would echo my experience as does Frontier's pictures and experience. No sir, the paper ballistics do not indicate a very effective projectile. Flesh and bone tell another story.

[northmn]

Killed a couple of critters with a roundball. One was a deer at very close range with a 36 C&B revolver straight into the chest. Whiel it did not run that far trailing was a problem. Another was a doe hit in the neck with a 3-50 cal round ball. Broke the neck, but I think the charge was a bit high as it did not exit. Totally destroyed the spine. Had a friend that shot 26 deer with a 50 cal round ball and 70 grains of powder. He felt it was superior to the Maxi's at closer range as it seemed to do more damage. He also claimed a kill at over 200 yards on a bedded deer.
Another BP shooter from Canada mentioned seeing a bull moose shot at 175 yards with a 54 round ball. The terminal ballistics would have been similar to a 45 Colt. Ball was recovered and looked almost like it could be reloaded.
We have grown up and been exposed to energy charts and other bullistic nonsense making think it takes 1000 foot pounds of energy to kill a deer and so forth. Never really been any backup to those theories other than some comparison to a caliber that is thought to be effective. How many deer were killed with a 44-40? One thing was that back in the BP days they often took shoulder shots to put game down.

DP

[Soundguy]

I agree with the others posted here. I have shot my 50 cal rifle out to 100 yards on targets from a standing off hand shot with no problems hitting my target. My 69 caliber smoothbore at 50 yards and less is no problem for hog sized or larger game. ( Target shooting I can do 70 yards ... but I just wouldn't take that shot on an animal at that range with a PRB out of a pipe. ).

[725]

RB's work. They work very well. I generally prefer them in my ML's, although I do use conicals from time to time. As a matter of fact, I developed a cast round ball load for my rifled 12 ga. shotgun that is truly exceptional, both in term of accuracy and lethality. I also like a round ball load in my .45-70 which allows me to shoot quietly and is just fine for small game. I punch paper most of the time but that is only "Prep" for hunting. I'm sorry California is so whacky about all things guns & ammo. I understand why those who can move away from the place. Good luck with the prevailing anti-everything in Cali.

[FrontierMuzzleloading]

FrontierMuzzleloading,

Good stuff there! I can't be 100% sure from the photos - was the shot on your elk a complete pass-through? The rib cage pics show the obvious hole (exit?) and a splotch on the opposing side that might be either the entry or just a blood puddle.

No such questions on Porky! Not only merely dead, but really most sincerely dead.:bigsmyl2:

On the elk and hog, the Huge holes are the ENTRANCE holes, the smaller holes are the exit. Both balls exited these animals. I for sure was thinking I could recover the ball on the elk after I shot it!

[ofitg]

.

Unfortunately, we don't have Marshall and Sanow doing studies of bank robbers being felled by round balls, nor do we have Federal, Remington, and Winchester shooting gelatin blocks with them and publishing the results. If the surgeons at Waterloo had anything to say about it, I'm not really sure where to look.



Since you mentioned Ed Sanow - he published this gelatin test data in the Feb'98 issue of HANDGUNS magazine (the one-shot stop values were estimated) -

https://i.imgur.com/rwukmui.gif

https://i.imgur.com/rwukmui.gif

[rodwha]

Since you mentioned Ed Sanow - he published this gelatin test data in the Feb'98 issue of HANDGUNS magazine (the one-shot stop values were estimated) -

https://i.imgur.com/rwukmui.gif

https://i.imgur.com/rwukmui.gif

Did the article happen to mention the powder used for these figures?

I noticed an incorrect listing. There was no 1861 New Army. There was an 1861 Navy in .36 cal and the 1860 Army in .44 cal. Unless it was some fantasy gun...

[Bigslug]

On the elk and hog, the Huge holes are the ENTRANCE holes, the smaller holes are the exit. Both balls exited these animals. I for sure was thinking I could recover the ball on the elk after I shot it!

Now THAT is some fascinating data that at least touches on the old "bullets that exit waste energy" argument. Veral Smiths response is that a bullet that exits at high speed is still crushing and tearing, while one that grinds to a halt in the chest cavity at some point is merely pushing tissue gently out of its way. While you obviously had plenty of steam to make an exit wound, I think we're seeing clear evidence of velocity loss as the wound progresses. But the fact that an entire bull elk torso is not an obstacle to a .50" PRB is certainly an eye-opener.

And yeah guys, California is a horrid place to be a firearms professional, but whatyagonnado until one gets his retirement? The good news is that Barnes TTSX's work entirely to my satisfaction. The bad news is that I'll have to do my deer killin' with the more meat and potatoes diameters. This hasn't been the barrier that one might think. Being a glutton for punishment, the zone I hunt in has roughly a 3% success rate. Given the difficulty, I tend to automatically reach for the tools with sharp optics and flat trajectories rather than make the attempt with the older, emotional favorites. Might take a stab with cast in a P17 Enfield sporter this year - won't be able to in 2019.

[Soundguy]

Did the article happen to mention the powder used for these figures?

I noticed an incorrect listing. There was no 1861 New Army. There was an 1861 Navy in .36 cal and the 1860 Army in .44 cal. Unless it was some fantasy gun...

There certainly have been some fantasy 44's from pietta.

[ofitg]

Rodwha, I managed to find that 20-year-old magazine; Sanow's complete article is spread out across 10 pages, but he didn't specify what brand of powder he used for the tests.
He did express thanks to Dixie Gun Works, Uberti USA and Navy Arms for furnishing the revolvers he used - chances are, he was not an longtime blackpowder enthusiast.

[Texas by God]

I have a high regard for round balls. The ball pictured took the buck on the wall with a head on neck shot. After breaking the spine, I found it in the chest- missing one gr of its original 225 gs. (.54)
The javelina fell to a .50 rb- on the same hunt I got a WT doe and a gobbler - all one shot DRT.https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180220/8bfffad30b37c7ac6acae112994f5ffb.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180220/b08c0c965c42c7fc739fc2d54c409cd5.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180220/b49d033ad60bd8bf61320f0bf716bec5.jpg

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[rodwha]

Now THAT is some fascinating data that at least touches on the old "bullets that exit waste energy" argument. Veral Smiths response is that a bullet that exits at high speed is still crushing and tearing, while one that grinds to a halt in the chest cavity at some point is merely pushing tissue gently out of its way. While you obviously had plenty of steam to make an exit wound, I think we're seeing clear evidence of velocity loss as the wound progresses. But the fact that an entire bull elk torso is not an obstacle to a .50" PRB is certainly an eye-opener.

And yeah guys, California is a horrid place to be a firearms professional, but whatyagonnado until one gets his retirement? The good news is that Barnes TTSX's work entirely to my satisfaction. The bad news is that I'll have to do my deer killin' with the more meat and potatoes diameters. This hasn't been the barrier that one might think. Being a glutton for punishment, the zone I hunt in has roughly a 3% success rate. Given the difficulty, I tend to automatically reach for the tools with sharp optics and flat trajectories rather than make the attempt with the older, emotional favorites. Might take a stab with cast in a P17 Enfield sporter this year - won't be able to in 2019.

Another option is non lead round balls:

http://www.ballisticproducts.com/mobile/Roundballs/products/365/

[FrontierMuzzleloading]

Loading those non toxic balls was terrible even with a .015 patch. Reloading was even worse! Plus the cost. A buck a ball! One idea, if you can recover them, they dont expand so you most likely could reuse them again.

[reivertom]

The effect of roundballs on game defies all the ballistic charts and speculation by modern "experts". When I've shot deer with my .54 Lancaster longrifle, it has been from 50 to 80 yards, but that is the usual shot where I hunt. RBs lose speed fast compared to conicals, but at moderate ranges, I will say they probably kill better. The first thing is the balls most shoot are dead soft pure lead. When this type projectile hits game, it transfers nearly all of its energy to the game, and flattens out to nearly double the original diameter. The deer I've shot have a .54 entrance hole and a golfball sized exit. They don't go far. The thing to remember pick shots within 100 yards and go for the "boiler room" to maximize effect.

[scattershot]

I noticed an incorrect listing. There was no 1861 New Army. There was an 1861 Navy in .36 cal and the 1860 Army in .44 cal. Unless it was some fantasy gun...

The 1861New Army was a Remington.

[rodwha]

Loading those non toxic balls was terrible even with a .015 patch. Reloading was even worse! Plus the cost. A buck a ball! One idea, if you can recover them, they dont expand so you most likely could reuse them again.

I don’t know anything about them myself but have read of a couple of people who have used them and claim they are the next best thing.

As an aside there is a fellow on a traditional forum who experimented with a patched brass ball and found it worked quite well. Even found it once and reused it to see what that was like.

[rodwha]

The 1861New Army was a Remington.

Hmmm. Well that would be incorrect as well since the New Model didn’t come into production until 1863. The Remington-Beals Model was introduced in 1861 but the Army wanted it revised which later became the New Model.

[scattershot]

Just quoting from New West Magazine, don’t know for sure.

“Original 1861 New Model Army revolvers had an estimated production run of 122,000 from 1863-75. The ’61 revolvers with an original percussion system and those altered to take metallic cartridges remained popular for some time after the Great Rebellion. Remington’s top strap design added strength to the revolver. The Remington also eliminated a frequent problem found in open-topped revolvers—exploded percussion caps falling rearward into the revolver’s internal workings—because its hammer struck the cap through an opening in the frame. And its rear sight groove along the top strap provided better sighting than that of the simple notched hammer found on other handguns.”

[justashooter]

a .440 round ball from a 45 caliber pennsylvania type rifle waxed everything from groundhogs to small deer when i was 16. for them, it was always terminal.

[Traffer]

Great thread. I learned a lot here. Wow that Walker 44 behind 60 grains of black packs a wallop! Never knew.

[Soundguy]

Great thread. I learned a lot here. Wow that Walker 44 behind 60 grains of black packs a wallop! Never knew.

I had never seen the numbers, but had always heard that till the 357mag came out, that the walker stood tall among handguns.

[kens]

Inside of 100yds, blackpowder and roundballs are about as good as anything.
Yes, roundball slows down fast, but, the key is to stay inside 100yds.
They shoot flat (relatively speaking of deer boiler room) out to 100yds.
As long as you stay within their performance distance, there is no such thing as 'rainbow' trajectory either.
The lead projectile so-called 'rainbow' trajectory doesn't come into effect unless you are sighting in the FAR side of 100yds.
If you consider the deer boiler room being the size of a pie plate, then yes muzzleloaders shoot flat out to 100yds,

[OverMax]

I started my shooting days looking for a conical bullet to work in my T/C 54 Hawken. Although I had the rifle sighted in quickly so to shoot P/RB accurately to 100 yards just after its purchase. Easy peasy to do not having different Ball weight's to deal with. And that's a major problem of looking for that accurate conical by a caster. So many weights_ profiles_ and brands needing to experiment with along with those charge tweaking's surely can put the hurt on someone's wallet buying molds and pure lead.

Once I was told my rifles-twist rate wasn't friendly to> conical use. That ended my ambition to find a accurate conical I thought I needed to drop those super heavy weight deer occasionally passing in front of my deer stand years ago. (Keep in mind all my rifles were custom ordered from Fox Ridge Outfitters} two were ordered having factory Round Ball Only barrels.

The very first time I shot one of those big fellows back a-ways in the woods I own thru its ribs with a 54 cal patched Ball I caught standing in a derelict hay field gawking at two doe not 50 yards away. I was truly impressed how little distance he ran after my shot. Maybe 25 yards? his tail hung {low between his legs} before falling dead. Another surprise came in the same animals cape'ing? My Ball passed completely thru the animal side to side just nipping the shoulder bone a bit ~~~never found that Ball as I spent some time purposely looking for. Ball pass thru's? Turned out to be a typical observance time after time with the 54's use.

I figured if a deer any size deer can be harvested so easily with a 54. Why not my deer hunting be done with a 45 cal. Much easier on this old bushwhackers shoulder and not so much blood shot meat needing soaking in kosher salt water before its cutting and wrapping convince me into trying.
Already having a 45 Hawken new in the box ordered at the same time my 54 was (but never fired.) I was really pleased with my 45s ball targeting. 45 cal in its current configuration is a bit more accurate than either a 50 or 54 cal with P/Ball use. As my 45 cal also has a Rd Ball Only Barrel factory switched too.

I so seldom need to shoot deer in the ribs with it. Neck {white patch} and spine shots POA {above} the animals front shoulders gave me cause to retire my 54 cal. to the safe. "Tiny 126 gr. ball has toppled quite a few nice size deer shot at different ranges."

45 Hawken has been my " Lets go hunt'in Mary K " gun for more years than any other B/P I own.

[Drm50]

I am far from a BP enthusiast. As far as hunting I have only used T/C Hawkin 50 to deer hunt. The
only reason I own ML is for ML deer season. I have had this rifle since they first came out. Round
balls were standard then, before maxi ball. I did try maxi when they came out but gun shot balls
much better, especially at longer ranges. I have shot several deer with it and never had to shot
one twice. My furthest kill was about 150yds and I hunched, shooting through a fork of a tree. I
think my count is 7 with that rifle. They were all through & throughs, never had recovered a ball.
Mine cast from pure lead with just a small amount of tin. A Hawkin 50 on deer is overkill but I
didn't know that when Ibought gun in late 60s. I should have bought the 45 cal. When maxi came
out the Renegade was on the market and I sold a lot of them in the 70s & 80s. They were cheaper
and most guys were using maxi balls. 50 & 54 cal guns where deer are shot average 40 yds equals
dead deer, herd no complaints on killing power of ball or maxi. I think it would take a heavier game for any bullet to make a difference.

[rodwha]

Just quoting from New West Magazine, don’t know for sure.

“Original 1861 New Model Army revolvers had an estimated production run of 122,000 from 1863-75. The ’61 revolvers with an original percussion system and those altered to take metallic cartridges remained popular for some time after the Great Rebellion. Remington’s top strap design added strength to the revolver. The Remington also eliminated a frequent problem found in open-topped revolvers—exploded percussion caps falling rearward into the revolver’s internal workings—because its hammer struck the cap through an opening in the frame. And its rear sight groove along the top strap provided better sighting than that of the simple notched hammer found on other handguns.”

Can’t say what the disconnect is as they even state that it was first introduced in 1863.

[Geezer in NH]

My .54 flintlock has killed 2 moose, many deer and 1 bear. Lots of small game also and I have never recovered 1 ball all exited. All PRB.

What more can 1 ask.

[scattershot]

“Can’t say what the disconnect is as they even state that it was first introduced in 1863.”



Confusing, isn’t it?

[rodwha]

“Can’t say what the disconnect is as they even state that it was first introduced in 1863.”



Confusing, isn’t it?


Up until it was mentioned that it was the common “1858 Remington” ;)

[triggerhappy243]

My .54 flintlock has killed 2 moose, many deer and 1 bear. Lots of small game also and I have never recovered 1 ball all exited. All PRB.

What more can 1 ask.

ask the critters to stand in front of a big fat pine tree. LOL

[rickw55]

I recovered some of the lead round balls I used the first time I fired my .54 caliber underhammer rifle. The backstop behind the target was a sandbank, and it made recovering the balls easy.I was surprised to find that the balls had expanded to nearly twice their original diameter! I don't have any measurements, but they certainly did expand, and by quite a bit.
I don't remember the exact load, but it was around 50-60 grains of FFG.
Hope this helps.
Rick

[Texas by God]

The way I explain BP/prb terminal effect to my non charcoal buddies is "shove a 1/2" pipe through a deer and see what happens"

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[Rick Hodges]

A 54 cal. patched RB entered through near shoulder quartering on and found in front of the off side ham looking like a little flying saucer for the 1950's movies. It was about the diameter of a quarter with about half the ball looking untouched.
The deer never moved a step.

[1Hawkeye]

I know a lot if ground hogs I hit with a .36 or .40 cal round ball from 20 to 80 plus yards just kinda shuddered and fell over dead. Lots of the time there was no exit wound. At over 100 yards the round ball does run out of steam fast but on the other hand its small sectional area means that the crosswinds don't have as much effect on its path. When NASA does impact studies in a vacuum environment they use small steel round balls because of something to do with physics and impact force. I wrecked a friends steel target one time because he insisted I shoot at it with a .45 caliber flintlock. "It won't hurt it its an inch thick and rated for.44 mags" At 25 yards that .440" dia round ball with 60 grs of 3fg put a better than 1/2" deep 1/2"diameter crater in it. When he saw the crater I said "I told you so, round balls and steel don't play well together" Then I explained about the NASA thing he's got an engineering degree so it made sense to him I guess.

[rodwha]

I know a lot if ground hogs I hit with a .36 or .40 cal round ball from 20 to 80 plus yards just kinda shuddered and fell over dead. Lots of the time there was no exit wound. At over 100 yards the round ball does run out of steam fast but on the other hand its small sectional area means that the crosswinds don't have as much effect on its path. When NASA does impact studies in a vacuum environment they use small steel round balls because of something to do with physics and impact force. I wrecked a friends steel target one time because he insisted I shoot at it with a .45 caliber flintlock. "It won't hurt it its an inch thick and rated for.44 mags" At 25 yards that .440" dia round ball with 60 grs of 3fg put a better than 1/2" deep 1/2"diameter crater in it. When he saw the crater I said "I told you so, round balls and steel don't play well together" Then I explained about the NASA thing he's got an engineering degree so it made sense to him I guess.

Actually the ball has the worst BC because of its poor sectional density. It’s more effected by a crosswind than a bullet. Look up similar caliber bullets and compare that to the round ball.

A .451” ball has a BC of .064. A 185 grn XTP has a BC of .139 and a 230 grn XTP has a BC of .188. The higher the BC the better it defies the wind.

[FrontierMuzzleloading]

BC is modern day **** for pointy bullets and LONG range shooting.

Our state allows a 85gr .243 for elk and moose. Shows how much sense they have. Then again, if treated in a responsible manner, like most traditional hunters out there, a .243 will kill elk and moose, just not wise at long range.

[rodwha]

BC is modern day **** for pointy bullets and LONG range shooting.

What??? BC just is and it certainly means something to a RB even to 50 yds all depending.

My ballistics calculator is set for 900’ elevation for where I am. This is roughly what I estimate 70 grns of 3F T7 to do for a 177 grn .490” patched ball with a zero set at 100 yds with figures for every 25 yds. This gives me an 1830 fps velocity. Granted the low BC value doesn’t negatively effect the drop too much to be concerned about out to 125 yds but it certainly effects the wind drift, which is what was mentioned, even with a light 10 mph 90* crosswind.

With a very light 5 mph crosswind it drifts 0.3”, 1.2”, 2.8”, 5.1”, and 7.9”.
At 10 mph it drifts 0.6”, 2.4”, 5.6”, 10.2”, and 15.9”.
At 15 mph it drifts 0.9”, 3.6”, 8.4”, 15.3”, and 23.8”.
And at 20 mph it drifts 1.2”, 4.8”, 11.2”, 20.3”, and 31.8”.

Pretty drastic when it gets a bit breezy actually. But even at 10 mph, which isn’t real that bad it makes a 100 yd shot a bit questionable. Even a 75 yd shot is a bit much. I can estimate distance we’ll enough but judging wind speed and direction not so well.

[triggerhappy243]

BC is modern day **** for pointy bullets and LONG range shooting.

Our state allows a 85gr .243 for elk and moose. Shows how much sense they have. Then again, if treated in a responsible manner, like most traditional hunters out there, a .243 will kill elk and moose, just not wise at long range.

Jon, Use a more polite word in place of**** so I can understand what you are trying to say.

[FrontierMuzzleloading]

Starts with a c and ends with a p.

[triggerhappy243]

Starts with a c and ends with a p.

B.C. is modern day excrement?

B.C. stands for ballistic coefficient. Do you Not understand where B.C. comes into play?

[Good Cheer]

Short boolits (round ball) accelerate quickly which generally makes them a good choice for muzzleloaders at open sight distances because it ups their rate of displacement on game. That's cubic inches per second not foot-pounds.

[Bigslug]

A 54 cal. patched RB entered through near shoulder quartering on and found in front of the off side ham looking like a little flying saucer for the 1950's movies. It was about the diameter of a quarter with about half the ball looking untouched.
The deer never moved a step.

Sounds like a soft tissue broadside on a moose won't stop one, but an initial bone hit and a long pass through most of a deer will. . .and that weight retention is not a concern.

Good intel guys! Keep 'em comin'!

[KCSO]

I have saved recovered round balls for years and have a small drawer full. Depending on what they hit they may or may not expand but over 50% show full penetration side to side on game as large as Buffalo. They will break into the brain cavity of a buffalo with a 490 ball and 90 grains of FFG. With 75 grains of FFG the same gun will shoot through a buff side to side and leave a 2" hole on the off side. If you PM me I will send you some pictures but I lost my photo program and can't shrink to fit here any more.

[Soundguy]

Nice ballistics software. Would you mind running a number for my 69 cal PRB? It shoots about a 461 grain ball over about 70 grains pyrodex RS. My max range is 70 yards. Thus I'm shooting at 25, 50, and 70. In florida if you need that for sea level calcs or anything.


What??? BC just is and it certainly means something to a RB even to 50 yds all depending.

My ballistics calculator is set for 900’ elevation for where I am. This is roughly what I estimate 70 grns of 3F T7 to do for a 177 grn .490” patched ball with a zero set at 100 yds with figures for every 25 yds. This gives me an 1830 fps velocity. Granted the low BC value doesn’t negatively effect the drop too much to be concerned about out to 125 yds but it certainly effects the wind drift, which is what was mentioned, even with a light 10 mph 90* crosswind.

With a very light 5 mph crosswind it drifts 0.3”, 1.2”, 2.8”, 5.1”, and 7.9”.
At 10 mph it drifts 0.6”, 2.4”, 5.6”, 10.2”, and 15.9”.
At 15 mph it drifts 0.9”, 3.6”, 8.4”, 15.3”, and 23.8”.
And at 20 mph it drifts 1.2”, 4.8”, 11.2”, 20.3”, and 31.8”.

Pretty drastic when it gets a bit breezy actually. But even at 10 mph, which isn’t real that bad it makes a 100 yd shot a bit questionable. Even a 75 yd shot is a bit much. I can estimate distance we’ll enough but judging wind speed and direction not so well.

[rodwha]

Nice ballistics software. Would you mind running a number for my 69 cal PRB? It shoots about a 461 grain ball over about 70 grains pyrodex RS. My max range is 70 yards. Thus I'm shooting at 25, 50, and 70. In florida if you need that for sea level calcs or anything.

So Lyman’s Blacklowder Handbook only goes up to .58 cal and the site I find the BC values just goes up to a .570” lead ball. However I found a formula for figuring the BC of a lead ball which is:

Weight /(10640*diameter in inches*diameter in inches) = BC

You mentioned a weight of 461 grns which I figure to be a .675” ball as a .678” ball weighs 493 grns. Using the formula it has a BC of about .0951. However Hodgdon’s site doesn’t give velocities for their powders above .54 cal. You’d need to use a chronograph to figure that out.

The ballistics calculator I use is a phone app called Bullet Drop. It’s free.

[Soundguy]

Thanks, and yes you were correct. I use a .675 ball and ticking. Makes a great fit.

Thanks for the info!