PRB...Not for me

This thread appears to have gotten completly off the topic, and out of hand. All I tried to do was to thank you all for the advice I was given, and to let you know how things worked out at the range. This appears to have started a tempest in a teapot. So, let me make myself clear.
Over the last 10 years or so, I have been happy to spend a great deal of time and money to hunt, and have taken numerous big game animals all over North America. (Florida to Yukon) This, with with a gun that loads from the front end. (I guess I am not permitted to use the word "inline").
In doing this, I have expended a great deal of effort to learn what works for me. At no time did I attempt to inflict my ideas on anyone. I simply told you what I had found out at the range.
As I see it, it appears that "Tradition", as you see it, impairs my ability to take game in a safe and humane manner.
Now, this is just my opinion, and I don't intend for you to accept my way of doing things. I place real world practicality ahead of tradition. However, I would appreciate it if the needless, and stupid sarcasm was cut to a minimum. If I wanted to hunt with a 30-30, I have one, and have done so. If I want to use a semi-auto, I have a couple of those as well. What I want to use, simply for the challenge, is a .50 cal., traditional style side hammer, with iron sights. I don't think that this makes me one of hunting's elite, it's just a tool. If I want or need a .54 or .58, it's simple, I'll buy one.
So, as long as I am devoting my time, spending my money, and at times risking my life doing what I love to do, I and I alone will decide what I use as a hunting tool.
If I have offended anyone, it was not intentional. However, you have not changed my opinion in the least. Form follows function.
Thank you, and good hunting

 

[Runner]

Then perhaps you can discuss it on YOUR OWN SITE!

 

[bwhoffman]

sites and forums are typicly built around a common theme. this thread does not fit that mold.

 

[Runner]

AMEN!

 

[Dave Rosenthal]

I've been shooting the 370 grain Maxi's since I first bought my trade rifle. The 70 grain charge of 3F seems to be the most accurate out to 100 yards. I've "stoked-it-up" to 100 grains of 3Fg Goex on occaison...it really lets ya know it's there! The hammer pretty much stays on the spent cap. Switching-over to the no-longer-made 470 grain .50 cal Maxi's does drive the hammer back to half cock while using 100 grains of 3Fg! This load is NOT what I would consider safe, but it still might be? It does a great job on watermelons, and puts R. Lee Ermey's .30 BAR to shame! I haven't had any problems with nipple "burn-out"!

To all my friends on this Forum, please take note:

That all being said, I use and will continue to use PRB's at the matches at the Traditional BP club that both I and my son travel more than 1.5 hours (one way) to get to. I enjoy the sport, the friendships and all of the good times that belonging to a traditional club brings to our lives. And we respect this club's rules and still enjoy being there! I'm starting to think that maybe it's time for us to buy some 18th century clothes too. My son and I will always use PRB's for all of the Boy Scout Demos as I feel that this is what's right and it gives the Scouts a chance to realize what our forefathers went through as they use the rangerod themselves!

I think that it's time to put the FIRE OUT, and everybody take a deep breath. And I'll still be here, enjoying your company, when the dust settles. I consider you folks friends that I haven't had the pleasure of meeting in person. To all of my friends, have a pleasant weekend and may all of your shots hit the X!

Dave

 

[Mike Brooks]

sites and forums are typicly built around a common theme. this thread does not fit that mold.

That's odd, I found it interesting an informative, :hmm: and you guys know what a PC Nazi I am. :haha:

 

[Zonie]

Some of the comments which have been made in this post can be considered to be more than rude.

The last time I looked, Claude had not prohibited a discussion of elongated projectiles so currently, in my opinion, if someone chooses to discuss the merits or demerits of these projectiles the post in and of itself and the poster should not be verbally attacked.

 

[Claude Mathis]

Some of the comments which have been made in this post can be considered to be more than rude.

The last time I looked, Claude had not prohibited a discussion of elongated projectiles so currently, in my opinion, if someone chooses to discuss the merits or demerits of these projectiles the post in and of itself and the poster should not be verbally attacked.

I agree. This is not the "Round Ball Only" Forum. :wink:

We did draw the line at the end of the Civil War, so I think conicals are acceptable here.

I don't say this in reference to Tweesdad, but all of us need to remember that some folks are not the least bit interested in the historical aspects of any firearms. They are "shooters", not reenactors nor are they interested in being one. I have no problem with that, as we still may have a lot in common. I would choose to share what we have in common and disregard the rest. I have to do this with some of my more "liberal" friends. :grin: I don't let the small stuff ruin a good frindship.

 

[tg]

"We did draw the line at the end of the Civil War, so I think conicals are acceptable here."

that would be civil war period Buffaloe bullets, Maxis and all the others that will not be developed for over a hundred years? if conicals are so great why not use the conicals of the period, instead of modern ones? could it be that the old ones lack the advantage of a hundred years of technology? seems like this line of thought could be used on ignition terminology as well...interesting how we can accept one yet shun the other when in principal and fact they are the same issue.Ahhh yes we are " keeping tradition alive" or are we?

 

[Kentuckywindage]

Maxi's dont shoot worth a hoot out of my .45 Great plains do good but drop badly @ 100 yards, Powerbelts i can choose from 195-225,275,300 grain and use whichever one shoots best for me. The last time i used a minnie i had to use a board and my plastic ramrod to smack it down the bore.

 

Yer the Booshway. Yer right, maybe we have been a wee bit rude. Maybe if these guys hang out long enuff around here we can cure 'em of there ills. :grin:

 

[tg]

"we can cure 'em of there ills."

I am convinced my condition is terminal...

 

[Claude Mathis]

"We did draw the line at the end of the Civil War, so I think conicals are acceptable here."

that would be civil war period Buffaloe bullets, Maxis and all the others that will not be developed for over a hundred years?

Frankly, I know nothing about conicals. I used the term generously, to mean the elongated "slugs" used in the Civil War. (Remember, I'm not the expert here, just the guy behind the curtain) :grin:

Could someone educate me and post some photos of the differences?

 

[Kentuckywindage]

Would this help calm those who dislike the plastic modern powerbelts?
These were recovered 348 and 225 grain powerbelts that i melted down and molded into .490 for my kentucky. Very soft lead and they mushroom nicely.

 

:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :rotf:

 

[Pork Chop]

Tweesdad,

If you are more comfortable with and accustomed to shooting projectiles that are not roundballs, by all means do it. It is your rifle, your hunt and potentially your life on the line. If I did not have confidence in a projectile, I surely would not be firing it at a bear to find out if he is in the mood to chew on an overweight, foul tasting greenhorn like myself... I have not shot much in the way of conicals, but that will change a bit - I picked up several boxes from Wallyworld when they were clearancing them a while back.

 

[tg]

The famed minnie ball of the civil war was a simple round/slight point top Hollow based slug there were others that had soild bases earlier like the sugar loaf and lozenge, picket ball,I think the whitworth rifle had its own type also, given that these were around does not give merit to hanging the term traditional on the modern versions of elognated bullets that are offered today, which not only look different but are technological ahead of the origianls, apples and oranges, all were quite simple ballistical speaking, the shapes were often evolved into the cartridge gun bullets only solid, I will try to find the pics I had of the drawings of some of the early conicals they may be on my old 'puter, the new stuff is not based on the old type but more on military artilary rounds with driving bands and other resulting changes obtained thru 20th century R&D technology which was unavailable in the past. it is much like laying an original NW trade gun beside a Mdl 70 re-designed to load from the front and calling them equal or the same.. by name only and not taking into account performance and design, the new bulets are being designed for longer range, better accuracy and to deliver more energy to the target than anything from the past that was used in a ML, much like someone quite a few years back found the need to improve on the ML itself in regards to changing the profile to something more familiar to the modern hunter and making it easier to use and more efficient than a type from the past, and designed specificaly to use the new highly modernized elongnated bullets. I won't drop any names as to what this type of gun is generaly called, neither the bullets nor the gun type are traditional, not bad just not traditional.

And that is all I have to say about that... life is like a box of.....

 

I think you are making a good point tg. It's a bit like saying a center fire rifle is a percussion cap rifle because both have to use a cap to ignite the propellant.
If it didn't exist in the time period then it is not truly traditional. It is then a modern substitute.
Shoot what you may but don't fool yourself into thinking it is traditional or historically correct.

 

[gmww]

1823 Norton's bullet

1836 Greener's bullet

1836 Minie's bullet

From this Link.



Edit:

Also stumbled on this while Googling. Is there such a word as Googling?

Of interest to me is the bottom right conical with the narrow base. Make it narrower and add a plastic wad and...? :hmm: I'd like to know how that one was set up.

 

Lewis Gerrard tells of an old mountain man by the name of Drinker that shot a inch long bullet in his Hawken rifle in the 1840's. I have always wondered what exactly that bullet looked like.