58cal Round Ball

I hear alot of good things about the 58cal round ball. What is so good about it?

Well it's a small big bore, and a big small bore! :rotf:

With roundball, when you are concerned with downrange energy for taking big game, the bigger the ball, the better.
IMO, the .54 is plenty big enough to take anything in North America with roundball as long as you pay attention to shot placement and keep within your rifles effective range.
Roundballs shed velocity and energy quickly, so the bigger it is, the more energy it will have at a given distance.

Huntin Dawg

IMHO the .58 is inferior to the .54.The .54 outperforms it.Up to 120 grains of powder the .54 has more f.p.s more foot pounds of energy and a flatter tragectory,the only thing the .54 gives up is a slightly smaller frontal area and a small amount of weight.

It's considerably heavier than a .54. It's considerably larger than a .54. On paper the .58 compares favorably to a .44 Magnum rifle. The .50 compares favorably with a .30 carbine.

This doesn't seem posible, but look at the projectile weight and velocity.

Sharp Shooter said:

I hear alot of good things about the 58cal round ball. What is so good about it?

Click to expand...

IMO, a .58cal .570/279grn ball is an absolute powerhouse...I've killed deer with .45/.50/.54/.58cal round balls and while all of them kill cleanly within various considerations, none of the smaller ones are on equal footing with the .58's power and the reaction of deer to it in the field...it has a "whompability factor" that is beyond tables & graphs in ballistics charts.

The larger/heavier .570/279grn ball holds/carries higher levels of energy into the target at longer distances than the smaller calibers...but IMO, the .58 isn't really needed for typical Eastern woods whitetail hunting with the average shot at deer being 40-60yds...however, if I was going after bigger game and/or would have average shots at 100+ yards distances, my personal choice would be to grab the .58cal when I left the house.

.58cal Hornady/Speer balls are half again more costly than the smaller calibers, so it's not as economical a caliber to shoot year round as the smaller ones are...but it seems to be an intrinsically accurate caliber and I love shooting/hunting mine.

Sharp Shooter said:

I hear alot of good things about the 58cal round ball. What is so good about it?

Click to expand...

Sharp Shooter, I'm sure you're familiar with the term Balistic Coefficient."

The greater the ballistic coefficient, the less "drag" there will be on a given projectle. The greater the ballistic coefficient, the greater efficiency that projectile will have in retaining energy and also in "bucking wind."

Here's a link that goes into more detail on the subject:[url] http://www.exteriorballistics.com/ebexplained/5th/221.cfm[/url]

You might think initially that all round lead balls would have the same BC. Here's a look at the BC's of several round balls being used today.

Size.... BC....Weight
.395 = .055.. 93gr
.40 = .055.. 96gr
.445 = .062.. 133gr
.495 = .068.. 182gr
.535 = .074 .. 230gr
.575 = .08 .. 286gr
.615 = .085 .. 350gr
.715 = .099 .. 550gr

I shoot both a .40 caliber and a .72 caliber. You can see from this chart that the .72 caliber ball has nearly twice the balistic coefficient of the .40.

You may have heard of cannon balls traveling for several miles. That's because of having a much greater BC.

So, I hope this answers your question. The .58 ball, given equal muzzle velocity, will retain a greater percentage of it's energy over useful range than will a smaller ball. And, if it starts out at the same muzzle velocity as say a .50 or .54 caliber the .58 not only has more ft. lbs. energy at the muzzle, it retains a greater percentage at all distances down range.

So, I hope this answers your question. The .58 ball, given equal muzzle velocity, will retain a greater percentage of it's energy over useful range than will a smaller ball. And, if it starts out at the same muzzle velocity as say a .50 or .54 caliber the .58 not only has more ft. lbs. energy at the muzzle, it retains a greater percentage at all distances down range.

I will agree that at the same f.p.s the .58 is better,but with 120 grs of powder for each the .58 is going 388 fps slower.

Weight trumps velocity.

Think about the 10 year boy or girl struggling to barely get a heavy bowling ball started down the lane.

The ball is rolling so slowly you can see the finger holes as they come up and appear, disappear, reappear, etc...agonizingly slow.

But as long as the ball stays in the lane, it gets to the pins and slow as it is, never-the-less just bores in and plows right on through the pins, knocking many of them down.

Weight and momentum...velocity was so practically non-existent as to be insignificant.

Think of a Ferrari, and an M-1A tank with a one mile straight track. They both go as fast as they can towards a concrete wall. Who will crash through the wall, andcreate the most damage, and who might bounce off. The M-1A is that .58 cal. round ball.

I agree with the last two posts. All that extra velocity gets you in a heavy ball is trajectory. A relatively insignificant factor at normal hunting ranges of under 100yds.

I have taken quite a few deer with a .58. Kind of overkill for deer. Was fun though! It smacks em pretty hard with 120gr FFg.

Hopefully my next ML deer will be with a 20ga smoothie, with probably less than 70gr FFFg.

Gregg

Jess said:

So, I hope this answers your question. The .58 ball, given equal muzzle velocity, will retain a greater percentage of it's energy over useful range than will a smaller ball. And, if it starts out at the same muzzle velocity as say a .50 or .54 caliber the .58 not only has more ft. lbs. energy at the muzzle, it retains a greater percentage at all distances down range.

I will agree that at the same f.p.s the .58 is better,but with 120 grs of powder for each the .58 is going 388 fps slower.

Click to expand...

Yep, that makes sense. A heavier ball takes more energy to get it going. And once you have it going, it jes keeps going. My .40 only takes 35 grs of 3F Swiss to achieve 1850 FPS out of a 32" barrel. Yet, I'm not going to use my .40 for large game, especially something that bites.

You can, however start the heavier ball out a little bit slower and because of a better balistic coefficient, the larger ball will shed it's velocity at a slower rate than will the smaller ball.

This isn't really a subject regarding accuracy, but understanding the implications of larger size balls having a better balistic coefficient make this relevent to the category. Especially when shooting at longer ranges and in wind.

Here's something that will capture your imagination. My friend Jim Gefroh shoots an 8 bore with 250 grains of 2F Swiss as his hunting load. The .835 Round ball has a balistic coeficient of .116. Sighted in for 100 yards, the ball only rises about 1.5 inches at 50 yards. Energy at muzzle is over 6,000 ft lbs and still over 3,000 ft lbs at 100 yards.

Size does count.

Roundball, great analogy, I found myself getting a bit dizzy reading how you described those finger holes.

RiverRat said:

Roundball, great analogy, I found myself getting a bit dizzy reading how you described those finger holes.

Click to expand...

:grin:
But it's true, eh...I suspect most of us have seen that in our lives...you think the ball won't even get there and then the pins just start going down...for me, it's one of the best, simple explanations of the weight/momentum/penetration aspect of projectiles...

"whompability factor"
Hey, Roundball I like that. I've been calling it the bulldozer theory of ballistics, big, heavy, ugly, and slow, but sure gets the job done. :haha: Bill

Bill of the 45th Parallel said:

"whompability factor"
Hey, Roundball I like that. I've been calling it the bulldozer theory of ballistics, big, heavy, ugly, and slow, but sure gets the job done. :haha: Bill

Click to expand...

"Bulldozer Factor" makes it pretty clear too!
:grin:

roundball said:

Bill of the 45th Parallel said:

"whompability factor"
Hey, Roundball I like that. I've been calling it the bulldozer theory of ballistics, big, heavy, ugly, and slow, but sure gets the job done. :haha: Bill

Click to expand...

"Bulldozer Factor" makes it pretty clear too!
:grin:

Click to expand...

There are many different size BULLDOZER'S
My 7ga ball only traves at the speed of a 22 Long Rifle. but weighs 1000 grains. Must be about a D9

Good Lord...what kind of powder charge is used with that big boy?

And is that a rifle that has to be supported on top of a post or monopod, or can it be managed at the shoulder?

BS, you made a mistake and left a cannonball on the table! :shocked2:

My smooth bore 7ga. with a 170FF it moves at 1100fps.

If you go back and read my first post, maybe you will understand why I call a 58 a small Big Bore!

Pictures add to my site on the 7ga.
Link to BS's Site