PRB...Not for me

[Dphar]

Believe me, I am not worried in the least. I do believe that there is a place for PRB loads. At the range. However, that place is not in MY rifle when hunting. I will use the thing to hunt game that can hunt back. I have taken Moose, Brown Bear, Black Bear, and Boar with my scoped Encore, and now want to try something a bit more challenging. The Hawken, with iron sights seems to be more of a challenge to me.
For whatever it's worth, I think that if you are hunting Bear or Boar, the ability to reload rapidly is a safety requirement. I have no need to impress anyone at the range, as most the people who shoot at my club think as I do. There is an awfully big difference between a shot that kills, and a shot that stops. Nothing survives a bullet through both lungs or a heart shot, but they can keep on coming till they drop. A "rapid" reload with a muzzleloader is still really slow, but I try to get it done as fast as I can.
So, it appears that we have agreed to disagree. I have no problem with that. I respect your opinions, and I hope you will extend me the same courtesy.
Good Shooting to all.

If you have the slightest idea that you can load a ML in time to keep a brown bear from getting to you it is obvious you are delusional.
So far as stopping one. I would take a 16 to 10 bore hardened round ball over one of your small diameter conicals any day.
Before getting into discussions of this sort you should do some reading. A hardened 15 gauge ball fired with a 137 grains of powder would penetrate an Indian Elephants head from side to side according to James Forsythe who lived and hunted in Africa.
16 bore rifles, using a one ounce ball .662 in diameter. Were considered minimum for dangerous game by Forsythe.
If you read John Taylor's "Pondoro" you will find an account of his using a 10 bore smooth to kill a number of African Elephant and Rhino when his shipment of ammo became lost. All one shot kills with a hardened ball and 6 drams of powder (167 gr).
The problem with modern MLs is that people are trying to do things with bore sizes that are too small, at least by British standards. I have hunted elk in areas populated with G. Bears with a 50 cal ML with a RB. Would I intentionally hunt a G.Bear with this, no.
I just built a 16 bore flintlock using Manton hardware. I have wanted one for a long time and I will in all likelyhood kill a Grizzly or brown Bear with it in AK since both my son and Father are residents there. I will use a hardened ball, probably wheel weights and 140 gr of FFG Swiss.
So far as "stopping" an animal. This takes interruption of the nervous system. Nothing else is reliable.

The bottom line is this. People with a financial stake in promoting "high performance MLs" have been maligning the patched rb for quite some time 25-30 years. Idiots like Toby Bridges leading the way. Thus we have a rather considerable body of "knowledge" out there that tells people the the RB is no good. Its BS. Primarily put out to sell people rifles that are "new and improved".
The same type drivel will tell shooters that the 30-06 (for example) is inferior to this or that new cartridge that when carefully checked may prove to be at best its equal. But that does not sell advertising for Guns and Ammo or any of the other slick paper magazines so they print drivel so people will buy a new Remington or Ruger etc that does nothing different than there old rifle.
It does keep the Robertson-Pitman funds rolling in and keeps the manufacturers in the black. But the actual BS designed to sell the product is, well BS.

Dan

 

[Dphar]

"far into the realm of that of which we do not speak so I will sign off".
At this point, I also will sign out of this thread.
However,I leave you with one question.
Had the technology been far enough advanced, what would Boone, Johnson, Lewis, Clark et al have used? I think they would have carried the most effective weapon they could lay their hands on. Do you think "Tradition", or practicality would have influenced their decision?
Thank you to all

Boone is said to have once owned a 66 caliber rifle so in this case he needed nothing better.
Elongated projectiles were in widespread use by the 1830s. These were cloth patched "picket" bullets and eventually evolved into a paper patched bullets used in highly accurate slug guns by the 1860s. The primary reason for the elongated projectile was increased range. Rifle matches at extended ranges became popular. 220-440 yards.
The flat base, flat point picket was used for hunting in the east at least but in the west it did not seem to catch on as fast. The only report I can recall is in "Yah-To-Yah and the Taos Trail" can't recall the author. The pointed picket was much harder to load and usually needed a guide starter.

However, if you do some historical research you will find that a round ball of EQUAL WEIGHT was found to be a better killer for GAME. It makes larger wound channels and will give better velocity when used with BP. This discussion has been going on since sometime in the early 19th century.
For shooting men at extended ranges the Minie ball found favor. It, and many other comical ML bullets do not work well on game unless the rifle has a fast twist. The 72 and 48" twist used by the Minie ball and the 20th century Maxi-ball respectively both allow the bullet to veer wildly after striking flesh. Surgeons during the Crimean War found this in treating wounded men.
People shooting game like moose have found the same problem with the maxi-ball. This is a serious problem (not limited to MLs BTW) since the bullet may not strike the internal organs it is aimed at.
Anyone intending to shoot conicals at game should shoot a flat point bullet about 2-2.5 calibers long from a twist fast enough to keep it stable after striking the animal. I should be no harder than 40:1 lead:tin. Though if expansion is secondary to penetration then 16 or 20:1 is OK. Probably 22-30" twist in a 45 caliber barrel. For conicals nothing bigger is needed. Assuming they will stay on the powder.

Anyone wanting to read about shooting heavy game with round and belted balls should find some of Sir Samuel Bakers writings. "With Rifle & Hound in Ceylon" etc.
For information on early elongated projectiles find "The Improved American Rifle" By Chapman. For recommendations of ML rifles for large game Forsythe's "The Sporting Rifle and its Projectiles" is a good read. All predate the American Civil war. Chapman was first printed in 1840+-. Its been reprinted and used volumes are available. Forsythe's is likely the hard one to find. John Baird reprinted it in the 1970s.

 

[Blizzard of '93]

the 'Ferguson' rifle was also a breechloader.

 

[shmrck1]

Tweesdad,
Well after reading this entire thread,and it has
taken a bit of time, nothing has changed my mind one bit. I have never used anything but PRB's,in
any of the traditional rifles I have.I am a hunter
not a paper shooter,and 99% of my deer harvest have been inside of 50yds and the PRB has served
me very well. Maybe you look for a clover target at 100yds+.I,myself am happy with a 3" group at
50yds.Works for me :hmm: I will have to say
conicals maybe in the past,but I seriously doubt
power-belts were in anyones arsenal prior to
I/L.
snake-eyes :hmm:

 

Lewis Gerard, "Wah-To-Yah and the Taos Trail". Mountain man by the name of Drinker shot a 1" slug out of his Hawken in the 1840's. That is the only mention of it in all of my reads of that period. I would not consider this an example of wide spread use of conicals in the 1830's.

Real black powder and a linen or cotton patch with a round lead ball of appropriate size for the killing of whatever you are hunting. Plenty good enough for the killing. The average size bore on the american frontier was around .54. Most mountain men didn't go looking for Ol' Ephraim, they tried to avoid him. Buffalo, antelope, deer, etc. was easier shopping for grub.

 

Well, yours is one of the few replys that actually attempts to answer my questions. For this, I thank you. I would also like to express my gratitude to those who PM'd me with further information I can use.
Now that I can actually load PRBs, I was astonished to find out how accurate and easy to load they are. Amazing. (Thanks Rosey)
Now for "the rest of the story". I am still not comfortable with the idea of using a .50 PRB on any game larger than deer. So. I have to decide whether to use a non-traditional bullet in the .50, or go to a larger caliber. Yesterday, I started to put out feelers for a .58. Whereas I would normally just buy a .58 barrel for the Hawken, the different barrel widths make that a non-starter. As we are planning another trip to Kodiak in Fall of '08, time is running a bit short, and decisions have to be made.
To those who actually tried to help, please accept my thanks.

 

[Blizzard of '93]

I have used PRB in my .50 for deer many a time with only one run-off/trackdown (took a shot on a running deer and hit too far back that got the tip of the lungs) but lately have been working up a load with Lee REAL slugs for a possible feral/wild hog hunt in S.C. there are some BIG boys in there and they are MEAN. IMO more 'whack' is likely called for. nearly twice the weight of RB and truncated cone shape will do some major damage

 

[Stumpkiller]

I would take a 16 to 10 bore hardened round ball over one of your small diameter conicals any day.

That's a good point, too. I have a heavy barrelled 12 bore (a T/C New Englander) that I played around with using .715" patched round balls and 85 to 95 gr FFg. I decided it was overkill for the whitetails I hunt at the range I was comfortable shooting (I was hitting 10" paper targets to 60 yards just sighting down the barrel - at the time I was mostly using a Bess and was practiced at that). Putting a 1 oz ball that size into an animal may or may not drop it immediately, but it sure would punish it.

As far as the earlier comment about what Lewis and Clark would have used if it was available? They'd have surveyed by satellite and stayed home. That is a cop-out response to picking and choosing what you want for an extra chance to hunt. Why bother with muzzleloaders at all if you're going to stuff a 21st century projectile in it? If conicals are better killers, and they are, then they belong in the regular season and not the speciality seasons (IMHO). Take closer shots and try hunting instead of shooting.

 

[Blizzard of '93]

I right much agree with your thoughts, if I had a .58 I would use it instead of my .50 but I don't so I'm settling on a hand-cast REAL.

 

[Stumpkiller]

Go get 'em, tiger.

 

[Mulebrain]

I find it astonishing that this thread continues. It is like the energizer bunny - it just keeps going and going and going...

LMAO :rotf:

I guess one could locate a lead mold other than round ball, that was used to cast different projectiles prior to 1865. Of course the lead used to make the projectile would surely be of modern manufacture :grin:

 

[Stumpkiller]

Of course the lead used to make the projectile would surely be of modern manufacture

Lead is an element. Like gold. It is, it's not made. Just found, refined or re-used. Made in the solar furnace of a sun that died billions of years ago. ;-)

 

[Rainman]

I've found this thread rather amusing myself. Just as an intro, I've never claimed to be a "traditionalist" myself, as I also shoot a 1970s-designed T/C .50 Hawken (outfitted with a tang-mounted peep, no less). I also use those new-fangled plastic quick loaders for "quick" reloads in the hunting woods and I don't dress in period clothing. But I do find it disheartening that our "primitive" season in Georgia has turned into inlines with scopes shooting saboted slugs. This being a quota hunt, I'll bet our camp of 9 guys was one of only a few shooting sidelocks out of the 400-500 that were in that campground. Just another way to extend the season & sell more gear to hunters, I guess.

Up until this year, I've always hunted deer with a 370 gr T/C MaxiBall and have been very successful. After spending hours on the range, though, I've never been completely satisfied with the accuracy out of my 1-48" twist factory bbl. My last trip to the range, I finally got my Hawken dialed in with 85 gr of Goex FFg and a .490 Hornady ball patched with .015 prelubed patches. Finally found a load I can live with! My last 3 shots went into 2" at 85 yds...not the best, but a lot better than any conicals have ever shot out of this particular bbl.

Last weekend, all my buddies were hunting with conicals out of those newfangled huntin' perches (climbing treestands). Myself, I went a-sneakin' into the woods right after daylight and followed a fresh deer trail through the dew down into a creek bottom. Found a good tree to sit up against and about 30 minutes later a nice 5-point come a-runnin', trailin' after a couple of does. Kilt him at 20 yards with that PRB. He never knew what hit him. I'm sold on them for deer (and turkey) huntin', although I personally think I'd go up in caliber for larger game if using a PRB.

Just waiting to get my .45 flinter finished over the winter months. I'll be using PRB in it for deer as well....

Rainman/GA

 

Of course the lead used to make the projectile would surely be of modern manufacture

Lead is an element. Like gold. It is, it's not made. Just found, refined or re-used. Made in the solar furnace of a sun that died billions of years ago. ;-)

Once upon a time in a galaxy far far way........ :rotf: :rotf:

 

[roundball]

"far into the realm of that of which we do not speak so I will sign off".
At this point, I also will sign out of this thread.
However,I leave you with one question.
Had the technology been far enough advanced, what would Boone, Johnson, Lewis, Clark et al have used? I think they would have carried the most effective weapon they could lay their hands on. Do you think "Tradition", or practicality would have influenced their decision?
Thank you to all

The problem with the above statement is that it totally, and completely, 100% entirely misses the whole point...shows a total lack of understanding about what traditional muzzleloading is all about.
More reading and learning than pontificating is in order.

I'm also sure it they'd have had Boeing 747's back then they would have used them to cross the Atlantic instead of using those tiny litle wooden boats, but they didn't have 747's either.

The entire, whole point is INDEED precisely that of using the technology and methods that were commonplace during the early american muzzleloading era...the whole point is to learn, master, and experience what our ancestors had to deal with every day to just to put food on the table and keep their scalps.

I go out of my way to do all my hunting with Flintlock rifles and smoothbores...deer, turkey, crows, squirrels, etc, etc...it's NOT because I don't have a houseful of modern shotguns in four gauges, and several calibers of modern rifles with big scopes...it's precisely because the settlers "DIDN'T HAVE THOSE THINGS"...is why I chose to learn how to do it like they did it...

 

[bucktales]

Of course the lead used to make the projectile would surely be of modern manufacture

Lead is an element. Like gold. It is, it's not made. Just found, refined or re-used. Made in the solar furnace of a sun that died billions of years ago. ;-)

I think I have a box of RBs that may have a pagan idol in ancient Egypt. :shocked2: :rotf:

 

[tg]

"I think I have a box of RBs that may have a pagan idol in ancient Egypt"

And the lord sayeth " show me just one who understands traditional gear on this forum and I will not will not strike it down with fire and brimstone"

 

[bucktales]

:bow: :bow: :rotf:

 

[Zonie]

"with fire and brimstone"
--------------------
Isn't it going to need some charcoal and salt-peter as well?

 

[Blizzard of '93]

and Paul V fell on his face saying "thy will be done only don't use Pyro or T7"