Lighter hunting charges?

Okay I admit to hunting for a while with muzzle loaders. When I started hunting years ago with them I was told with a 50cal the lightest charge I should use was 80gr with a round ball any lighter I wouldn't have enough energy to kill a deer, and I took that as gospel. Reading different threads and what another friend of mine has told me, he uses 60gr with round ball for his 50cal to hunt with and has had no problem, has got me wondering. What is the lightest powder charge for a 50 and a 54 (since they seem the more popular calibers) would you use to hunt deer with and what would your max yardage be with that load? Seems what I was told may not be the whole truth and there is a WHOLE lot more experiance here to learn from. Yes I know one should shoot the heaviest powder charge they can and still maintain good accuracy, what if your best accuracy is with lighter loads. DANNY

I always use the charge that my rifle "likes". Helps put it in the "boiler room". Accuracy and placing the shot means more than how much powder is used!

80 grains of powder for deer (50 cal. PRB)? I shot a 500 lb. black bear with this charge. He didn't argue with it. :haha:

Max range? Depends more on the shooter and accuracy. Gives you a chance to get out and play some...

I use 70 3f in my 54 and 60 3f in my 50, in 2 f I increase by 10 grains and shoot through and through deer.

I have been using 60gr in my 50 for several years now and have had no trouble getting complete pass throughs out to 70yds. Only ball i have recovered went through both shoulder blades and the spine before stopping under the hide on the off side. My son got a pass through on a 180# buck using only 50gr this year. I dont like the kick in the face i get from my rifle when i use a heavier load.

My wife uses 60 grains of 3f in her 54. Never shot past 50 yards, but it slaps the snot out of deer, and we've never recovered a ball. Only reason to use more would be for a flatter trajectory at longer ranges, I think.

BrownBear said:

a flatter trajectory at longer ranges

Click to expand...

That's one for sure...and at least in my opinion the subject of powder charges for big game hunting is loaded with too many variables to come up with a one-size-fits-all-answer.

A relaxed, standing still, close range, perfect broadside lung shot in a fairly clean area for tracking is one things...an alert deer at long range standing next to a thick wet swampy area, that could also start turning just as the sear breaks bringing more and larger bones in to play might be a lost deer.
Personal experience and opinion from it is I use stout powder charges to increase the advantage to me as much as possible considering the many variables under hunting conditions.

I like the peace of mind knowing if a B&C buck stepped in to view at 125yds I wouldn't have to pass on the shot because I was using basically light target level loads...rather have more and not need it than need it and not have it...recoil doesn't even enter into the discussion, but that's just me.

:thumbsup: I'm with Roundball on this one, no wimp loads for me when hunting!

Me too, actually. But don't stand close when you say that to my wife! She's really careful with her shots and passes up any but the right ones, but I doubt just anyone has her restraint. And restraint is required with light loads in my book.

Nearly all the hunting my wife and i do for deer is with 40 & 45cal rifles. I shoot 50gr-3f in the 40 and we both use 60gr-3f in the 45's. All PRB! After counting, now, 21 whitetail and mulies, we've only ever had 1 ball stop in the animal. Her first mulie doe offered a 57yd front on shot. Impact point was above the brisket in the soft spot and the ball was found under the skin, in front of the right hip joint. I've killed 3 whitetails with the 40cal, from 37 to 71yds. All full broadside, and all pass throughs. I use a 54cal for elk and my charge is 90gr-3fg w/PRB. I've killed 1 bull and 3 cows with that rifle. Ranges from 18-55yds. All broadside. All 4 balls were found under the skin on the off side. Recovery distance ranged from 5yds.(bull), a 35yd shot, to 160 yds, downhill from impact. I'd recommend between 60-80gr 3fg w/prb for any deer, anywhere, 54cal. Reduce by 10gr for a 50cal. As already mentioned, distance is dependent on YOUR SKILL level, "in the field". NOT on the target range. Good Luck and keep us posted

Accuracy and placing the shot means more than how much powder is used!

Click to expand...

Would never argue against the importance of shot placement, but there has to be a bottom limit for any caliber or situation. Would not want to take that advice literally and head out loaded with 10 or 15 grains of powder! :shocked2:

I don't personally think ft/lbs of energy has a lot to do with muzzle loading but it does give you a point to compare.

From the Lyman manual -

50/54 cal, 32" 1:60 barrel - retained energy at 100 yards with various charges of Goex 2F

50 cal/ 54 cal

40 gr = 321 ft lbs / 377 ft lbs
50 gr = 347 ft lbs / 413 ft lbs
60 gr = 375 ft lbs / 446 ft lbs
70 gr = 390 ft lbs / 461 ft lbs
80 gr = 407 ft lbs / 477 ft lbs
90 gr = 427 ft lbs / 488 ft lbs
100gr = 449 ft lbs / 500 ft lbs
110gr = 474 ft lbs / 550 ft lbs
120gr = 502 ft lbs / 610 ft lbs

Now you can draw your own conclusions, but if you are used to shooting 90 grains, dropping to 60 grains would shed less than 50 foot pounds of energy from either caliber at 100 yards - and to get the same "thump" from a 50 cal/90 grains you would only need about 55 grains in your 54.

Yes, energy numbers in the ML world can be interesting...and if ML effectiveness is being measured with foot pounds of energy, an additional viewpoint to consider is that retained energy from a round lead ball at distance is already so pitifully low that any further reduction at all is undesirable.
To try and illustrate the point, it seems if that wasn't the case / wasn't important, instead of .5x calibers being well suited for most big game, all we'd need would be the little .3x calibers. :hmm:

Yes I know one should shoot the heaviest powder charge they can and still maintain good accuracy

Click to expand...

I'm not sure that is a viable rule-of-thumb. I think that's a modernism brought about when cartridge shooters began to return to using the patched round ball and muzzleloaders.

I know from direct observation that 70 grains of 3Fg will send my .530 ball through a deer standing broadside, out to 110 yards. I get acceptable groups when going as "hot" as 90 grains, which gives me merely 27 ft lbs more energy on the chart provided by galamb, and according to Goex gives me 270 fps higher velocity... but the 70 grains is the best accuracy, and I don't percieve the recoil nearly as much. The amount of force needed for my patched round ball to transit a broadside deer is the same for both loads..., the energy and velocity retained upon exit is a moot point once the work is completed.

The problem with the discussion is that we need an updated serious study of the patched round ball, as the study of the PRB stopped because the conical and the cartridge were invented.

Some of the most respected hunters of the time period of the end of the round ball and the introduction of the conical bullet report that the round ball, though lighter was superior. Some combat veterans reported the same thing. This was based on their observations.

Now on paper the energy from a conical is much higher than a round ball, so the question would be why does the patched round ball, when fired at the same distance at the same velocity, seem to take better effect on a game animal or a human?

This question seems to be answered in The Sporting Rifle and Its Projectiles by Lt. James Forsyth, 1867. Forsyth had the option of patched round ball or conical, and from years of experience on big game, and dangerous game, would only use the patched round ball.

Forsyth was part of the "whompability" club, probably due to his experience coming almost exclusively from India. His parameters for his rifles, however, were to be able to shoot out to 200 yards, with as flat a trajectory as he could achieve so he went for very large powder loads. This eliminated his having to learn how to adjust his sight hold for longer range shots (beyond 100 yards) or for the use of adjustable sights. YET..., he admitted in his book that while he wanted a rifle that he could depend upon out to 200 yards, in his personal experience he had not had to fire beyond 100 yards, and the vast majority of his shots were well under 100 yards. He surmised that would be the experience of big game hunters in other parts of the world as well. Sounds like the same distances at which most of us harvest our game, does it not... 100 yards or less?


LD

I've used 60 grains in my 50cal for years,prints about one high a fifty yards.And i use 30 grains as a squirrel load out to 25 yards works great!

Loyalist Dave said:

Yes I know one should shoot the heaviest powder charge they can and still maintain good accuracy

Click to expand...

I'm not sure that is a viable rule-of-thumb. I think that's a modernism brought about when cartridge shooters began to return to using the patched round ball and muzzleloaders.

I know from direct observation that 70 grains of 3Fg will send my .530 ball through a deer standing broadside, out to 110 yards. I get acceptable groups when going as "hot" as 90 grains, which gives me merely 27 ft lbs more energy on the chart provided by galamb, and according to Goex gives me 270 fps higher velocity... but the 70 grains is the best accuracy, and I don't percieve the recoil nearly as much. The amount of force needed for my patched round ball to transit a broadside deer is the same for both loads..., the energy and velocity retained upon exit is a moot point once the work is completed.

The problem with the discussion is that we need an updated serious study of the patched round ball, as the study of the PRB stopped because the conical and the cartridge were invented.

Some of the most respected hunters of the time period of the end of the round ball and the introduction of the conical bullet report that the round ball, though lighter was superior. Some combat veterans reported the same thing. This was based on their observations.

Now on paper the energy from a conical is much higher than a round ball, so the question would be why does the patched round ball, when fired at the same distance at the same velocity, seem to take better effect on a game animal or a human?

This question seems to be answered in The Sporting Rifle and Its Projectiles by Lt. James Forsyth, 1867. Forsyth had the option of patched round ball or conical, and from years of experience on big game, and dangerous game, would only use the patched round ball.

Forsyth was part of the "whompability" club, probably due to his experience coming almost exclusively from India. His parameters for his rifles, however, were to be able to shoot out to 200 yards, with as flat a trajectory as he could achieve so he went for very large powder loads. This eliminated his having to learn how to adjust his sight hold for longer range shots (beyond 100 yards) or for the use of adjustable sights. YET..., he admitted in his book that while he wanted a rifle that he could depend upon out to 200 yards, in his personal experience he had not had to fire beyond 100 yards, and the vast majority of his shots were well under 100 yards. He surmised that would be the experience of big game hunters in other parts of the world as well. Sounds like the same distances at which most of us harvest our game, does it not... 100 yards or less?
LD

Click to expand...

Just to be clear to other readers:

The way loyalist dave cut and pasted his post above makes it looks like he was quoting me (roundball)...but I did not make the statement he quoted / posted right under my name.

One thing to consider is that 90 grains will flatten a ball more than 70 grains at equal ranges. And a flatter ball makes a bigger hole. Also more blood and more shock. Larry

larry wv said:

One thing to consider is that 90 grains will flatten a ball more than 70 grains at equal ranges. And a flatter ball makes a bigger hole. Also more blood and more shock. Larry

Click to expand...

Agree...and while 'shock effect' isn't often thought of / discussed in the world of ML hunting, I've seen the effects of increased shock on deer from really pushing a PRB fast with stout powder charges...ie: a higher rate of DRT and/or down in sight a few body lengths away...vs. a 40-50yd tracking job through thick brush.
Personal choice, 90grns Goex 3F is my lightest powder charge for deer using the medium calibers like .50/.54, and 110grns Goex 2F in the larger .58/.62cals.

I think my eye sight and ability to shoot at longer range, would change how I thought about it. I can only accurately shoot a deer at max. distance of about 60 yards, so 60 to 70 grains, would do fine. If I could see to hit a deer at 90 to 100 yards, I'd choose a heavier load, and give up a little accuracy.

roundball said:

larry wv said:

One thing to consider is that 90 grains will flatten a ball more than 70 grains at equal ranges. And a flatter ball makes a bigger hole. Also more blood and more shock. Larry

Click to expand...

Agree...and while 'shock effect' isn't often thought of / discussed in the world of ML hunting, I've seen the effects of increased shock on deer from really pushing a PRB fast with stout powder charges...ie: a higher rate of DRT and/or down in sight a few body lengths away...vs. a 40-50yd tracking job through thick brush.
Personal choice, 90grns Goex 3F is my lightest powder charge for deer using the medium calibers like .50/.54, and 110grns Goex 2F in the larger .58/.62cals.

Click to expand...

:thumbsup:

Something I didn't see mentioned is that in some states, Va and Ga, for example, one must use a charge of at least 50 grains of black powder. In my .50 a charge of 70 grains gives 1700 fps. I would do fine with a charge of 60 grains but 70grns gives me the accuracy and poi I want at 100 yards. In my .45s 60grns is excellent although I have the option of going up to 70grns if I expect a long shot.