• This community needs YOUR help today. We rely 100% on Supporting Memberships to fund our efforts. With the ever increasing fees of everything, we need help. We need more Supporting Members, today. Please invest back into this community. I will ship a few decals too in addition to all the account perks you get.



    Sign up here: https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/account/upgrades

Conical Bullet Pro's and Con's

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

JimmyC

32 Cal.
Joined
May 10, 2005
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
I have always shot conicals in my 50cal side lock (a cheapy I admit)and am extremely pleased with their performance.

But I am wondering if there is any valid concern as to worry about "leading" in my barrel? Am I affecting the longevity of my barrel and or accuracy by shooting these chunks of lead?

I plan on buying a new rifle and before I start putting my trusty CVA Buck Slayers through her, I thought I would get any insight.

Thanks,

Jim
 
JimmyC said:
I have always shot conicals in my 50cal side lock (a cheapy I admit)and am extremely pleased with their performance.

But I am wondering if there is any valid concern as to worry about "leading" in my barrel? Am I affecting the longevity of my barrel and or accuracy by shooting these chunks of lead?

I plan on buying a new rifle and before I start putting my trusty CVA Buck Slayers through her, I thought I would get any insight.

Thanks,
Jim

You might get some leading which you can remove of course.

But as far as wearing out a barrel, we know that the cloth of a patched ball will wear/polish a bore and I suspect at a much faster rate than soft lead...yet competition shooters claim to shoot 10's of thousands of PRBs through a barrel without wearing it out.

We know that 'Action Pistol' competitors shoot 10's if not 100's of thousands of hard cast lead bullets through their .357's and .45's...and suffer no barrel problems.

Personally, I wish I could live long enough to shoot enough soft lead conicals through a modern steel barrel to wear it out.
 
The only practical tradeoff I can see comes into play if you don't cast your own. Conicals are a whole bunch more expensive than RBs from most sources, so you're going to run up the meter pretty quickly if you shoot lots.

I cast both, and even there, I simply have a whole lot more fun shooting the RBs. They're a lot more versatile, and I use the same gun for small game, target and big game. In my guns anyway, the conicals don't do well at low velocities like I use for small game and recoil from full power loads can take the fun out of a long day, whether whapping snowshoe hares or paper.

I do use the conicals a lot for play, shooting at long range just because. I never shoot large game beyond 100 yards, and 75 yards is a more realistic limit. At those kinds of ranges, conicals simply don't offer any advantages on broadside shots. I don't shoot up the poop chute, so any advantages in penetration are purely theoretical, too.
 
Is that a solid base (flat base) or hollow like a minie? have read that leading has happened with minie-style slugs.
 
Lead fouling can be removed and over 85,000 rounds through my competition 45 with hard lead bullets have not worn it out so I doubt that you need to worry about it.
 
Thanks for your thoughts guys. Some of the negative stuff I have read comes from the modern crowd, likely perpetuated by makers of sabots.

I will certainly stop losing sleep over the idea now.

My style of hunting is to get within 75 yards (usually much less), put the sights on a broadside shoulder and let 'em have it. So, I really like the idea of being able to shoot those bad boys a lot for practice, plinking and small game.

Thanks again for all the input.

Jim
 
You wanna have some fun and sell a few primitive muzzleloaders in the process, get some of your centerfire friends out shooting with you, but take their benchrest away from them. All shooting offhand at small targets. Clay pigeons or balloons the same size hanging on strings are great out to about 75 yards.

With the steadier handling of your rifle offhand and a little practice beforehand, you'll really smoke most of them. They'll want to shoot yours right away and quickly discover how easy and how much fun it is.

Use all your strategies to avoid hangfires and bring lots of powder and balls, cuzz you're going to need em!
 
roundball said:
But as far as wearing out a barrel, we know that the cloth of a patched ball will wear/polish a bore and I suspect at a much faster rate than soft lead...

Sorry, but I just can't believe or agree that a lubricated cotton patch will wear out steel rifling faster than soft lead can.
Lead has a much higher density than cotton and is much more abrasive too. Is there some logic or science behind the claim?
Especially considering the fact that in most cases, the diameter of the round ball that the patch is covering is smaller in diameter than the bore diameter, thus even less friction is created compared to an over bore size lead conical bullet.
And the denser lead bullet is usually making at least some direct friction causing contact with the barrel steel, even if it is lubricated.
I would tend to think that if 10,000 PRB's were loaded and fired out of one new ML'er bore, and 10,000 conicals were loaded and fired out of another new ML'er bore and the loads were of equal diameters, then the bore of the gun firing the conicals would show more measurable wear, especially at the crown.
Also, I don't consider "polish" to be an interchangable concept with actual "wear" as stated in the context of the original statement above. Just because something is being polished doesn't necessarily mean that there's also going to be wear, i.e. - polishing a diamond with a cloth. :hmm:
 
arcticap said:
Sorry, but I just can't believe or agree that a lubricated cotton patch will wear out steel rifling faster than soft lead can.
Lead has a much higher density than cotton and is much more abrasive too. Is there some logic or science behind the claim?
No more science than you have in this statement of yours:

"...I would tend to think that if 10,000 PRB's were loaded and fired out of one new ML'er bore, and 10,000 conicals were loaded and fired out of another new ML'er bore and the loads were of equal diameters, then the bore of the gun firing the conicals would show more measurable wear..."
[/quote]

:grin:
 
roundball said:
arcticap said:
Sorry, but I just can't believe or agree that a lubricated cotton patch will wear out steel rifling faster than soft lead can.
Lead has a much higher density than cotton and is much more abrasive too. Is there some logic or science behind the claim?
No more science than you have in this statement of yours:

"...I would tend to think that if 10,000 PRB's were loaded and fired out of one new ML'er bore, and 10,000 conicals were loaded and fired out of another new ML'er bore and the loads were of equal diameters, then the bore of the gun firing the conicals would show more measurable wear..."

:grin: [/quote]

I think other variables would come into play here, projectile hardness, courseness of patch material, (thinking in terms a courser weave is more abrasive than a finer weave) barrel erosion from heavy vs moderate or light loads, (as evidenced by hot loads in centerfire rifles) as well as the quality of the steel in the barrel as well.
Speaking for myself, i'd be more concerned about wear at the muzzle, from loading and cleaning rods, from a comparable number of loadings without the use of a bore guide.
i think with reasonable care a barrel will shoot accurately longer than most of us will be shooting it. :surrender:
 
roundball said:
No more science than you have in this statement of yours:

With all due respect, someone missed the science part I guess. Lead has a higher density which would cause more friction upon loading and firing, and the concial is making some direct contact with the metal.
Does gravity not exist and cause friction?

It sounds absurd to me to think that cotton would produce the same amount of wear as lead. Isn't that the reason why most people wear cotton underwear and not garments made of lead? :haha:

But as far as wearing out a barrel, we know that the cloth of a patched ball will wear/polish a bore and I suspect at a much faster rate than soft lead...yet competition shooters claim to shoot 10's of thousands of PRBs through a barrel without wearing it out.

We know that 'Action Pistol' competitors shoot 10's if not 100's of thousands of hard cast lead bullets through their .357's and .45's...and suffer no barrel problems.


Roundball, you said "we know", but who is we? It's certainly not me.
As far as pistol action shooters, they don't load through the muzzle, and many barrels do wear out, especially where the bullet leaves the chamber and first contacts the lands. Most people have observed this or at least, the worn rifling of an older gun, even if it's just a .22 LR or a gunshow beater...it happens! :winking:
 
spottedpony said:
i think with reasonable care a barrel will shoot accurately longer than most of us will be shooting it.
I[url] agree...in[/url] fact, so far I've never heard of or seen a post about anyone who has EVER worn out a barrel.

There are some folks who THINK they've worn out a barrel...I've bought two used/like new TC barrels at a bargain price, whose owners declared were "shot out"...(only 3-4yrs old)...and after I used Shooter's Choice Blackpowder Cleaning Gel to remove all the build up they had let accumulate in the bores, they shot perfectly...:grin:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
roundball said:
I[url] agree...in[/url] fact, so far I've never heard of or seen a post about anyone who has EVER worn out a barrel.

Maybe that's because they are using patches which produce less wear than lead conicals! :haha:

If you have never seen a worn barrel, you should see one of my old Remington Model 12 .22 pumps made in the 1920's. :grin:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
arcticap said:
roundball said:
I[url] agree...in[/url] fact, so far I've never heard of or seen a post about anyone who has EVER worn out a barrel.

Maybe that's because they are using patches which produce less wear than lead conicals! :haha:

If you have never seen a worn barrel, you should see one of my old Remington Model 12 .22 pumps made in the 1920's. :grin:


But does it still shoot? :hmm:

Ive got an ancient mod. 62 winchester (grandad bought it well used) thats had a kazillion rounds through it, & its still accurate. one of my favorite 22's to shoot.
Along the same lines one of my varmint rifles in 22/250 has around 50K rounds through it & the bore is as good as the day it was new. still shoots sub 1/2 moa if i do my part, (and it has better accuracy potential than i do.) i attribute much of that to very few hot loads, mainly loaded to middle spectrum velocity, as well as proper care.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
arcticap said:
roundball said:
I[url] agree...in[/url] fact, so far I've never heard of or seen a post about anyone who has EVER worn out a barrel.

Maybe that's because they are using patches which produce less wear than lead conicals! :haha:

If you have never seen a worn barrel, you should see one of my old Remington Model 12 .22 pumps made in the 1920's. :grin:
I had one of those, only mine was a .32-20. I think the "wear" in the barrel was from the old corrosive priming mixtures.
:(
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top