load limits

I am a newbie to this site and I have only shot my .50 cal flintlock on 3 occasions. I have discovered that my rifle seems to prefer 3f over 2f The last time I shot it I used 60 grains of 3f with a .490 ball and a pillow ticking patch lubed with Moose milk. Do you think that this load would be ok if I get a chance to shoot a deer with it this fall or should I continue upping the amount of powder until I start to loose accuracy?

Pguy

60 grains of 3f with a .490 ball. . .

Click to expand...

On the light side but certainly effective with a well placed shot.

It will be good for deer but what is most important is accuracy. You have plenty of leeway before nearing the maximum powder charge so increase by 5 grains and take 3-5 shots and see how tight your groups are, then increase by 5 grains again, repeat until you get nice, tight groups. Then you've found the optimum powder charge for your rifle and can then change other variables to see if accuracy can be improved. Patch thickness, powder granulation, etc., can all affect accuracy but only change those after you've found the best amount of powder for your rifle. My 50 does better with 3f while my .54 does it's best using 2f. I had a slow twist 50 caliber that did best with 65 grains of 3f.

Pguy said:

I am a newbie to this site and I have only shot my .50 cal flintlock on 3 occasions. I have discovered that my rifle seems to prefer 3f over 2f The last time I shot it I used 60 grains of 3f with a .490 ball and a pillow ticking patch lubed with Moose milk. Do you think that this load would be ok if I get a chance to shoot a deer with it this fall or should I continue upping the amount of powder until I start to loose accuracy?

Pguy

Click to expand...

Personal experience and opinion:
Under ideal conditions, close range, and perfect shot placement it'll kill a deer.
But it's a light / target-plinking kind of a load, and not anything I'd consider as a general purpose big game deer hunting load for the various hunting conditions, distances, and angles that can be encountered.
Well established load data charts published for decades show a range of 50-110grns Goex, and 90-110grns is a more appropriate big game choice for trajectory / power at distance.

Keep stepping up your charge until your groups start to open up again.

That being said, I've never killed a deer using more than 60gr of 2F in either my .50 or .58. The .50 was at 40yds and the .58 was at 20yds. All were complete pass-thrus.

I had just bought the .50 and didn't have time to play with anything more than 60gr of 2F. I've since found the most accurate load is 70gr.

With my .58, I totally lost confidence in the hunting load I was using and dropped down to what I knew worked. I'm starting all over with it again to see if I can find a load in the 70-80gr range for deer.

So, looks like you probably want to keep working on your load-up.

I don't think I have ever used more than 60gr. for deer hunting. Always pass clear through. I always shoot my most accurate load. Now, if you hunt out west you might want to investigate a more stout charge for the longer distances you'll have to shoot. I have always found large "hunting" charges unnecessary in the midwest where shots over 75 yards are very rare.

These hunting charge threads are always interesting. Another similar is going on now too. An experienced hunter said considerably heavier charges are necessary even for whitetail. For the record, except for the first, all the deer I have killed with an ml have been 65 gr. charges of bp with a .45 pure lead round ball. They were just as ded as if shot with a .54 cal. and 200 gr. charges. Although, for the original poster, I would advise bumping up to the 80 gr. + range. Time spent on the bench testing will tell him more than we can about accuracy.

In our experience 60 grains is plenty for deer, in terms of killing power. If terrain dictates that your shots stretch past 50 yards or so, you might find the trajectory a little loopy. And that can affect your ability to drop a ball into just the right spot.

Our more or less "standard" 50 cal load for hunting is 80 grains of 3f, which results in a trajectory of about an inch high at 50 yards, dead on at 75 yards, and roughly three inches low at 100 yards.

Given my choice though, if the gun was more accurate with 60 grains, I'd stick with that and limit my shooting distance to 50 yards before I upped it and settle for larger groups along with a flatter trajectory, then tried longer shots.

To answer your inferred question, yeah, I'd try larger charges, but I'd wait till I picked a charge before sighting in and deciding on my range limits.

Thank all of you for the good advice. I will continue to develop a load for my Kentucky.

Harry

I will also say that this is enough IF you limit your range. I personally use 70grs FFFg in my .50, and it has worked well every single time, at least til I got my .54. I haven't gotten near as many deer as some of the members here though so they have very valid points too. I limit my shots to 100yds, but my longest to date has been closer to 75yds on a deer. Clean pass through just like many above have said. One thing many people dont consider though, and I am not trying to start a flame war, but sometimes you can INCREASE penetration by DECREASING the powder charge. I know this sounds counter-intuitive, but here is why. Since most of us tend to use PRBs which are fairly soft, the decreased velocity is responsible for decreased expansion, which in turn decreases resistance to penetration, resulting in increased penetration. This is why many have reported the same load stopping on the off-side of the animal at close range while the same load at longer ranges will provide a complete pass through. Please dont use this to excuse plinking-type loads, as that is NOT what I am advocating, just saying that you should get sufficient penetration, but like has been said, the trajectory will suffer limiting the practical range. In the end, shoot the most accurate load your rifle likes and limit yourself to your responsible range limits and go make meat.

I am not trying to start a flame war, but sometimes you can INCREASE penetration by DECREASING the powder charge.

Click to expand...

Glad you said that first!

I shoot 70 grs. in almost everything.for two reasons. It seems that is just about where accuracy is good in most rifles, give or take a grain or two.
And I get 100 shots from a pound can of powder and that is better for my simple brain to keep track of. :grin:
Remember, I do this because it is fun, nothing else!

"said. One thing many people dont consider though, and I am not trying to start a flame war, but sometimes you can INCREASE penetration by DECREASING the powder charge. I know this sounds counter-intuitive, but here is why. Since most of us tend to use PRBs which are fairly soft, the decreased velocity is responsible for decreased expansion, which in turn decreases resistance to penetration, resulting in increased penetration. This"

That is an intetresting theory but many report clear thru shots with stout loads at all ranges out to 100 yds. so how will it "penetrate " better than thru and thru a lighter load, not sure the physics are inline here the expansion of the PRB is just not that big of a difference between moderate and heavy loads unless maybe you shoot at a plate of steel, one will likely not see any variation to speak of, the expansion of a PRB is more effected by what it hits in the animal than powder charge I suspect. Just based on a load of various reports on performance and load variations reported over the years by many hunters, and nothing has suggested that say a 60 gr load will penetrate better than a 100 gr load on an animal, even if it did the more deformed ball would probably cause more tissue damgage and shock.

There are just too many variables to accept your theory as meaningful. Good campfire talk fodder though, with a jug going around to help.
I once read a long and extensive FBI report about tests done shooting sheep and pigs to determine projectile effectiveness. After a considerable amount of ammo was consumed and a lot of misfortune for the pigs and sheep, no real conclusions could be assertained regarding expansion, penetration, deadliness, etc. It still takes a good hit on vital organs or the brain to guarantee instant kills. As ML'ers, what we want is effective whompability and assurance the animal we shot will end up on the dinner plate and not try to eat us when we walk up to it. Ded is the only study that means anything.

Just a matter of increasing the cross section. A little bit of expansion means a lot more resistance. If the ball hits an area that gives enough resistance to create significant expansion then there is going to be a significant shedding of velocity. That same ball at the same velocity might pass through a short ways away, a little different angle, and run into very different resistance. Just luck of the draw.

On a (rare) 75 yard shot I easily killed a deer with a .45 using either 60 or 65 grains of 3F; can't remember which. The ball was a complete pass-through and the deer only ran about another 50yds.

And absolutely, reducing velocity can sometimes result in more penetration; simple physics. A ball, or bullet, hitting a game animal is always a balancing act of expansion vs penetration. This is the same reason a modern bullet can be driven too fast and not even penetrate to the vitals. Slowing the velocity then results in much better penetration.

With a soft, lead ball all this happens at a much lower velocity level. If the ball expands (flattens out) inside the animal it is less likely to exit. All this depends on size of the animal, range and initial velocity. With game the size of most deer an expanded ball often exits unless it's a heavy, mature animal. Up really close that ball will flatten out like a quarter and penetrate about like a quarter. At farther distances or lower velocities the ball will not flatten so dramatically resulting in more chance for penetration.

As an example I shot a buck at about 20 yards with a .45 prb over 80grns of 3F. The ball was recovered flattened out under the off side skin. Contrast that with the 75 yard shot, same caliber but only 60-65 grains of 3F. That ball went through and through; lower velocity and longer range. With that said, I like 70grns of 3F in my .45.

As an example I shot a buck at about 20 yards with a .45 prb over 80grns of 3F. The ball was recovered flattened out under the off side skin. Contrast that with the 75 yard shot, same caliber but only 60-65 grains of 3F. That ball went through and through; lower velocity and longer range. ...

Click to expand...

And what about the other 100, give or take, variables involved here? Do you really think velocity was the only concern? :hmm:

I personally dont believe it is the ONLY concern, but as we build more experience we learn that there are MANY variables and each can make a difference. At the same time, what drives me nuts is that the same one that makes a difference one time, is totally insignificant next time. Everyone is right in saying that velocity is needed, but so is ball size and weight, but the most important thing is accuracy. In the end, put the biggest most accurate ball you can in the proper spot and it will do the job every single timeregardless of if it was launched by 60grs of powder or 100+.

I belive that one would find that the difference in velocity possible in MLs that there would be little difference in the distortion of the ball that could be soley linked to the velocity, particularly in the highly variable resistance involved in the angles and variations in the bio-mass we shoot at when hunting, a well done test with ballistic jell and another one with solid plate steel as targets would show what difference there is though it is probably not a factor in "kill power" with the slower and supposedly less distorted ball as some would argue that a ball that flattens out more and leaves all the energy in the target is more efficient and more leathal more quickly. Without any controlled test it is all speculation no matter what the physics tell us should happen due to the variables, it smacks a bit of an "old wives tailish" way of thinking as often that which is solid on paper and theory does not hold true in real life practice and is all to often accepted when the desired results happen to show themselves occasionaly which will happen in a situation with so wide a degree of variables such as bone, muscle mass deviation and angle of approach, and distance.IMHO.....strike the "Humble". Basicaly if one is usiong 100 gr in a .50 it is probably not advisable to drop to 60 gr. in hopes of having consistant better penetration and a faster kill.

TG,
I hope no one is misunderstanding me as trying to promote plinking loads instead of hunting loads, as that is NOT what I am trying to do. I was just trying to throw in a variable that I have seen personally to say that, in this case, I believe we can all agree that a .50 is enough for deer, that the absolute maximum loads are not the bare minimum needed and to use the accurate load as opposed to the highest velocity load, and that sometimes, the lower velocity has certain advantages. Having said that, we also need to be honest with ourselves and remember that the RB slows down very quickly as compared to a conical or modern bullet, so the light loads lose enough velocity quickly enough to make them a questionable choice unless limited to close range use. This makes the high velocity loads extend the effective range but they do eventually turn into low velocity loads if we were to measure them far enough down range. What I am saying is that, just to pick on a few people here, Roundball being the first one to come to mind after having just read one of his posts a few minutes ago, prefers fairly heavy powder charges for the flatter trajectory, and I don't disagree one bit. BUT, his 90 gr load will work the same as my 70gr charge, but his will do it a little further out than mine will, and mine will do it a little further out than the OPs 60gr charge. In the end, we all accomplish the same thing, but Roundball can reach out further than the OP and I. I would bet that RBs load does at 125yds, what mine does at 100yds, and the OPs does at approximately 85-90yds. Personally, most of my shots are close enough that the OPs load would work well enough for me, but that may not be the case for many others here. Also, I would bet that many people here were surprized to learn how slow their ball actually is at, say for example, 100 yds vs. what it was travelling at at the muzzle. This is one of several reasons we limit our hunting ranges when using PRBs. Personally, I like the range limitation as it forces me to hunt, where I used to just have to be able to shoot when I was using CFs before I started MLing. I think we are looking at the same issue and for the most part agree, but with just a slight disagreement--and one that I dont think makes enough true difference to matter in hunting considering our chosen weapons and calibers.