double loads for bear?

[paulvallandigham]

As you have figured out, shoot a DOUBLE BALL- rather than two bullets is not going to cause problems in a well made gun. I know you are shooting Lyman rifles, and you should have no problems with that gun.


You do want a new nipple on any caplock, so that the hammer doesn't blow back on your sending shards of spent cap into your face.

And, the warning about the problem of dieseling when you load the second PRB will become immediately apparent when you try loading a second PRB! :grin: :bow: But, once you seat the second Ball on the top, it should be no problem. The recoil will increase, but against a Grizzly at social distances, I don't think you will notice! :shocked2: :haha:

BTW, from the old biographies I have read of Mountain Men, the situation you describe- finding fresh sign of a Bear and immediately putting a second Ball down your barrel is EXACTLY how it was done in the early 19th century, and obviously for the same reason.

There is no question that a double ball load, at close range will put a lot of Whomp on any bear. There may be a slight reduction in velocity from pushing the two balls, but at short ranges, the Bear won't feel the difference. Its the mass of the balls that drives them deep.

I know that you are shooting primarily .54, and .58 caliber guns, and you should, considering where you live and hunt.

Down here on the flats, I can't think of any game that would require a double ball load, save perhaps wild boar that go over 500 lbs. Most of the black bear taken are under 300 lbs, and are shot from elevated stands over bait, where hunter survival is usually not a problem. If I were going to hunt either large bears, or wild boar, I would recommend using conicals, in .45 or .50 caliber guns. Even in a .54, a RB might not be enough to drop them. That is where using Double Balls makes sense.

A friend shot a wild boar in the chest with his .62 caliber rifle using a PRB( 325 grains plus/minus) and the boar did not drop. He had reloaded his gun, and mounted it to his shoulder just as the boar finally dropped and died. It had not moved an inch since he shot it. It went over 300 lbs. The ball went all the way through the boar, cutting through the Ham, and was found under the skin at the rear of the back leg muscle(Ham).

I have used that weight of ball( 325 grs.) as my benchmark, personally, when deciding if a double Ball is needed. Two .45 cal. balls weighing 125 grains each barely equals ONE round ball in .54 caliber at 230 grains. I know Dan'l shot a lot of bear with a .45, according to legend, but I would be more comfortable with a .54 that I can double ball, thank you, as a minimum caliber to take bear hunting. :hmm: :surrender: :hatsoff:

 

[Mad Professor]

Hornaday conicals, 525 gr, work very nice with 90 gr FFg out of a 1-48 58.

I've seen one go through a deer, then through a 5 " maple tree: Both fell over.

Beware, the kick is killer.

 

[1eyemountainmen]

I am having a rifle built for me by John Bergmann. He built my first custom Hawken and I think the world of it. It is in a .58 cal and it looks like the new one will be also. I am trying to keep all the calibers the same. I have hinted to my wife that I would like a Howdah pistol from Cabela's - in .58 cal., now do you think that a Howdah pistol like that could take a double ball loading?

 

[Herb]

I have shot enough double-ball loads in .40 caliber rifles over a chronograph at 50 yard targets to know how they behave. My first advice to anyone is, don't do it without a really good reason, and then really pay attention to what you are doing. My reason was to develop a ball-weight load legal for deer in Utah, which is 170 grains. A .40 ball weighs about 90 grains and a game warden friend suggested a double ball load, because there are no .40 conicals available. I had built a .40 flintlock for my friend Carole and she wanted to hunt deer with it. Using my .40 Jacob Wigle (Westmoreland Co., PA) flintlock, with .390 balls and 40 grains of Goex 3F it gave 1751 fps. With the same load but a second patched ball seated on top of the first, it gave 1341 fps, 410 slower. Next I shot with .380 balls, because I had a lot of them, with 70 grains of Goex 3F at 2201 fps with a single ball (top target on left). Adding the second ball, velocity dropped 436 fps, group size cut in half. Three balls cut the same hole (bottom target on the left).

With 70 grains of Swiss 3F, one ball loads gave 2361 fps, double ball loads gave 1863 fps, 498 fps slower. The first two balls struck in the same hole at 50 yards, the next pair pitched about 9" apart, the only time I ever had that happen. I don't know why. The third pair were on point of aim, middle targets.

Next, 70 grains of Swiss 2F, one ball loads gave 2271 fps, a 2.2" group of six, and double ball loads gave 1784 fps, 487 fps slower (right targets). Shot #3 had both balls in the same hole, the group was 1.5".

In summary, double ball loads lose a lot of velocity. One ball with 40 grains of Goex 3F gave 1751 fps, but it took 70 grains of Goex 3F with double balls to get the same velocity, 1765 fps. These double ball loads had only one-fourth to one half the extreme velocity spread (standard deviation) and were about twice as accurate, except for one unexplained pair. The caution is that the second patched ball must be seated firmly on the first patched ball AND STAY THERE. I never felt any air compression and did not have any balls separate in the barrel, but I shot from the bench as soon as I loaded. If one loaded and hunted for some time, that ball might move. I don't know. But if it did, it would be a barrel obstruction and firing would damage or ruin your barrel. An acquaintance of mine ruined a barrel with a double ball load, probably a .50 caliber, but he is hard to talk to, so I don't know what he did.

I had no reason to try double balls in .45, .50, .54 and .58. Reading Lyman's Black Powder Handbook and Loading Manual, 2nd edition, (no .40 caliber loads) .45 caliber 128 grain roundballs with 120 grains of Pyrodex RS (Goex 2F equivalent) gave 2247 fps. Same powder charge with 245 grain Lyman conicals gave 1917 fps, or 330 fps less. They kept the 120 grain charge of Goex 2F with 325 grain Buffalo bullets at 1597 fps.

.50 caliber 177 grain RBs with 120 gr Goex 2F went 1806 fps. They used the same charge up to 490 grain Buffalos at 1597 fps. .54 caliber 230 gr RBs with 120 gr Goex 2F went 1674 fps, and they used the same charge up to 530 grain TC Maxis at 1349 fps. .58 caliber 276 gr RBs with 140 gr Goex 2F went 1773 fps. They used the same charge with 566 gr Lyman conicals at 1396 fps.

Back to Carole. She did kill a mule deer buck with her double-balled .40, but I think she used only 40 grains of Goex 3F. She saw the buck walking at about 80 yards and had to take a raking shot. The buck laid down, and I think she walked up and shot it again. The first double-balled load, one ball hit the hip bone and stayed there, but the second went a little to the side and penetrated the body cavity to put the buck down.

I had experimented with 10 mm conical pistol bullets, and should develop a conical load for her for the next hunt. She and her husband know the hazards of double-ball loads and would rather have a conical load. There is good information on .40 conical experiments on this forum, use the search feature, and good luck on that!

 

[larry wv]

Good post Herb. Thanks :thumbsup: Larry

 

[roundball]

I hope to chronograph my .45cal Dickert this summer...I'll try to remember to run a couple double ball loads through it to see what the velocity changes are out of that 42" barrel

 

[Stumpkiller]

Note that in NY (and possibly other states) a double-ball load would be in violation of the muzzleloading season requirements.

You're moving twice the mass with the same powder energy so something has to give. That something will be velocity. I figure one good shot at full-power is better than two at half-power. ;-)

 

[Blizzard of '93]

I've been invited to go on bear hunts that dogs were used to trail the bear twice - we didn't get a bear or even a shot at one or even the dogs tree or corner one. the bears (smart - they get chased a lot around here and if the dogs don't corner or tree it soon they hi-tail it for the 'bear sanctuary' across the river a few miles away as the crow flies) around here are blacks sometimes good sized ones.
I carried my ROA as it's the largest handgun I own and members of the party had about every type of rifle/handgun you could think would be used for hunting from .22 Mag rifles, 30-30 levers, .357 revolvers and such. a couple of ol' timers actually had bp rifles, cappers both .45's loaded with double balls loads another toted a smoothbore .62 double balled.
the dogs are highly thought of by the owners and the idea is to quickly put the bear down if one is cornered to prevent it tearing up a valuable dog. news was that they managed to tree a good sized one this past January and bagged it - wish I had made the hunt. this was in the Pilot mtn area of the Pisgah NF underneath the Blue Ridge Pkway.

 

[poordevil]

I have the Springfield 1842 musket, Rifled .69 cal. .....Oh Yes...Don't try this at home......Well one day I put 100gr of FFFg and 2 nacked, unpatched .690 balls Tapped the first snug then the other.....only powder and 2 balls.

I shot at an old water heater found in the desert and let me tell you :shocked2: holy smokes! :youcrazy:

The shot lifted my left foot off the ground and I took a step or 2 back, The water heater was about 25 yrs away. The shot went clean through and I founf the Balls in the dirt on the other side. They had fused together and made one solid smeer of lead about half the size of my hand.

The balls must have fused in the barrel and left as one. Other 2 ball loads I have done in smaller cal's did not do that. So if I wanted to illuse myself and shoot a big bear up close , I would use that load and hope I was still consus to see how the bear liked it! :hatsoff:

 

[Herb]

I talked with Carole and Carl today, and she did use 70 grains of Goex 3F with that double ball load and she did practice with it before hunting. That one ball penetrated the entire body cavity, through the liver and was stopped by the hide. They are looking at .50 flintlocks I am building now and would rather hunt deer with larger caliber rifles that fit them.

 

[Bill Hall]

I hear ya on the fused balls. When I was a teenager and attended rondezvous and reenactments regularly, a couple of us would go dig through the dirt backstops to scrounge the lead at the end of the day. Well, appearantly quite a few of those mountain men thought that their chances of hitting a target (clay pigeons, gongs, siluettes, lolypops, etc) would be enhanced if they loaded two balls. We knew this because we would find many double balls smashed together in the dirt. We called it "finding a pair of cojones". Point being, not all double balls separate before hitting the target. Would still pack a whollop though. Bill

 

[BrownBear]

I'm guessing that those loads were a double ball in a single patch?

It would be interesting to compare that with patching each ball. My guess is that with the single patch and fused ball, what you've created is a long conical, with all the stability problems of a conical if your barrel had a slow twist. Potentially patching them separately would retain more accuracy.

Just noodling, and the only way to answer the question involves lots of smoke. Okay with me!!!

 

[roundball]

I hear ya on the fused balls. When I was a teenager and attended rondezvous and reenactments regularly, a couple of us would go dig through the dirt backstops to scrounge the lead at the end of the day. Well, appearantly quite a few of those mountain men thought that their chances of hitting a target (clay pigeons, gongs, siluettes, lolypops, etc) would be enhanced if they loaded two balls. We knew this because we would find many double balls smashed together in the dirt. We called it "finding a pair of cojones". Point being, not all double balls separate before hitting the target. Would still pack a whollop though. Bill

I suspect the difference would be if each was individually patched they'd stay separated...but if they were doing it on the sly, they probably wouldn't risk anyone seeing 2 patches fluttering down

 

[paulvallandigham]

WADR, I don't think you can draw that conclusion from finding balls stacked into one another in a range backstop. Its common for earthen backstops to receive lots of shots at the same places- depending on the kind of target holders used-- year in and year out. As a kid I scrounged lead from the earth backstop at a modern range- both at 50 yds, and 100 yds. We often found bullets stuck together, including military "Hardball" bullets where the point of one bullet would be in the lead core at the rear of a bullet in front of it. I doubt the shooter was using two bullets in that gun, nor was he "Robin Hood".

Since the bullets were covered with dirt and sand and debris, it was impossible to tell the age of one bullet over another, unless one had only recently been fired, and did not have time to oxidize. We recovered several of Dad's 45-70 bullets by looking for the "shiney" bullets in the dirt.

He was using Hard Lead alloys for the bullets, not knowing that this was the worse choice for his well over bore diameter rifle barrel. It was not unusual for us to find one of his bullets with the grease grooves still showing, along with the driving band. Only the round nose might be deformed from the impact, particularly when he hit another lead or copper jacketed bullet in the dirt.

 

[arctichomesteader]

This is an interesting topic. I've never tried it though I have done buck and ball loads before.

I wonder what would happen if you put a patched ball over a conical?

 

[BrownBear]

I wonder what would happen if you put a patched ball over a conical?

I haven't tried it, but I'd guess you'd want the conical over the ball. I have shot some really heavy conicals, and I can certify what would happen on the back end of the gun, though. You will surely know when you light it off! :shocked2:

 

[longcruise]

How about two or three conicals on top of each other? :shocked2: The ways to generate punishing recoil are endless. :haha:

 

[rabjr]

I think if I was to try something like this, it would be a lighter, hardened WFN pistol bullet in a sabot on top of a roundball. The weight wouldn't be as massive as a big conical on top of a ball.

But out here I know what one .58 cal ball will do to a black bear. I'll never see the big bears you mess around with out there.

 

[BrownBear]

No kidding.......

Among the guns I currently own, the light 50-140 with 650 grain paperpatch and 130 grains of 2f just about takes the cake. :surrender: I launched one of those from a 50 cal TC Hawken over 90 grains of 2f. Pussy cat in comparison, even with its hooked butt.

I just might get around to trying a conical on top of a patched RB from one of my 58 cals, though. It could be a dandy thing to do when I get into "warmish" bear terrain. Just shove a conical down on top of the RB. It would be a small matter to pull it once I moved into terrain that was a little cooler. The more I think about it, the more interesting that sounds, compared to two patched balls.

When bears are pushing 1,000 pounds, I'm not ashamed of loading a conical. Kinda makes your hackles stand up when you can put both your feet inside a bear's hind foot track. Front paws on a big bear can be 8" wide. Pull out a ruler and measure 8", and see if your own hackles don't tingle a bit.

 

[Joel/Calgary]

You're moving twice the mass with the same powder energy so something has to give. That something will be velocity. I figure one good shot at full-power is better than two at half-power. ;-)

It's actually a little better than that, as powder-use efficiency seems to improve with projectile load. When I read Herb's figures, I calculated the change in muzzle energy for each example (easier to calculate than actual energy 'cause it only involves the velocities and I didn't have to look up ball weights and the various constants involved). For the four sets of single-ball vs. double-ball velocities, the individual double-ball energies were 58%, 64%, 62%, and 62% of the single ball. The total energy of the pair of balls compared to the single was 17%, 29%, 25% and 23% greater, respectively. Given that the higher the velocity, the faster the rate of slowing, I'd expect that the percentage of difference in energy would be increasing somewhat downrange compared to at the muzzle. Ain't a lot, but it is something to consider.

Regards,
Joel