round ball in brush

[mothernatureson]

Hi all, I have been muzzleloading a long time, and certainly always something to learn. A few weeks ago, in the Iowa late ml season a had a very close(under 15 yds) at a yearling. I was in a hedgerow with light branches etc., and picked a hole through which to shoot. I put my sights right behind the front shoulder, the usual "boiler room" shot. I fired and the deer did not fall or appear hit. I tracked in the snow for over 150 yds and found only very light traces of blood. Obviously a deflected high or low shot. My question, will a roundball deflect even on the smallest of vegetation. I was using a stout load of 90 gr 2f over a .490 rb. I appreciate all comments. thanks mothernatureson

 

[rabjr]

Unless your shooting a 105 Howitzer, there is no such thing as a "brush gun". Balls, bullets with deflect some more than others.

 

Sometimes those hidden twigs will get ya. Good reason to cut a few shooting lanes or holes if ya can. I use a big ball with a heavy charge and haven't had any problems but I always try to take a clear shot. If there are branches in the way I will pick a hole like you did and wait for them to walk into it. Sorry you didn't recover your deer. Great hunting out there in Iowa, hows it been this MZ season? What are the odds of a non resident getting a muzzleloader buck tag next year, any ideas?

Thanks,

Billy

 

[mothernatureson]

Thanks for the replies. Yea, I thought I had a good shooting lane. I did get a button buck a week later in the same location. I was able to make a down wind stalk and put him in the bag at about the same distance (15 yds). Billy , Im not sure of the regs for nonresident, but I believe there are a few tags for late ml season for non residents. I know this year that many of the bucks had shed their headgear by the early weeks of december.

 

[dgold]

Unless your shooting a 105 Howitzer

Wow, speaking of in-lines---but are they legal in California?
:grin:

 

[BrownBear]

Yup, no such thing as a brush bucking bullet, but there is a useful rule of thumb. Basically the closer the obstruction to the target, the less the bullet deflection before impact. And of course, conversely, the further the obstruction from the target the greater the deflection. On deer sized game I wouldn't have confidence hitting the deer right if the obstruction was more than a couple of feet from it, and then it would depend on the size and nature of the obstruction. Caliber and bullet weight just don't seem to make much of a difference, and I've seriously tested both.

Just this week I thought I could skim a bullet just over a low alder limb and land right at the neck/head joint of a snowshoe hare. I was off by less than 1/4 the ball diameter judging by the groove it cut, and the alder was only about a foot from the hare. Ball skipped right over his head. It deflected at least three inches in a foot after glancing off the alder. And nope, I wasn't shooting my 32 cuzz I've got it in pieces. I was using my 54.

That's right. A 54 cal ball deflected around three inches in a foot of travel after glancing off an alder. Would have been less deflection from something less solid for sure, but that's getting pretty far down the judgement scale for game shooting.

 

[Stumpkiller]

That's the tough part about having just one shot. You have to be careful with it. I set up "klangers" in the woods and shoot at them from different angles and through uncleared lanes, just as in hunting situations. It doesn't take much near the muzzle to deflect a ball (or bullet) off course. As noted, there are no guaranteed brush busters, but some do better than others. Heavier is better, so a lot of the big 'ol lead bulleted blackpowder cartridges had a good reputation, while the modern lightly jacketed (and fast) high velocity bullets do not.

Pop a .715" round ball at 'em and you may blow through, but never depend on it. Trying to find that window is a despirate task sometimes. And sometimes there just is none suitable and it's a pass. That's the hardest shot in hunting - the one you decide against taking.

 

[BrownBear]

"That's the hardest shot in hunting - the one you decide against taking."

And it may be the best one too, when you're being a responsible hunter.

:hatsoff:

 

[doulos]

I passed 3 shots this year because of brush . One was very close at a bedded deer, about 12 -15 yards. Its not worth the risk of not recovering an animal to me.
Almost anyone who has hunted for a more than a few years has lost an animal they hit. Remember how that felt before taking a shot you're not 100 percent sure of.

 

[Britsmoothy]

I,ve noticed how a pattern of shot can be ruined too by a little brush, same thing really. I,ve seen bullets land just in front of crows and you would swear it'll bounce into them but no it very rearly does.

 

[dgold]

Will the size of the roundball have an effect on the deflection? Like will a .69 deflect more or less than say a .45 if the same stick is hit?

 

[Mountainman56]

What Swamp Rat and Brownbear said.

 

[Stumpkiller]

Will the size of the roundball have an effect on the deflection? Like will a .69 deflect more or less than say a .45 if the same stick is hit?

Well here's where we all pull our armchairs up and pontificate.

A .62 should deflect less than a .45 BUT a .45 might be of enough smaller diameter that the branch would have been missed that the .62 clipped. Don't try and shoot an obstructed target. Period. When all else fails mass and velocity are all you have; and since velocity is relatively similar among blackpowder balls go with mass. Just don't count on it to punch through cover when a living, breathing animal is on the other side and is deserving of the least suffering you can inflict.

Here's a picture of Carp in a red great-coat on my neighbors's land. Cover is something I work around every hunting season.

I pass on a LOT of shots. And if you think round balls are tough try snaking a relatively slow wood arrow on a rainbow trajectory through that stuff! :wink:

 

[BrownBear]

From what I've seen experimentally firing an assortment of calibers (conventional arms) and RBs though brush intentionally, there may well be a relationship between ball size and penetration. I only know for sure that the smaller the obstruction relative to the size of the projectile, the less it will be deflected, and of course, the larger the obstruction relative to ball (or bullet) size, the more it will be deflected. If that holds true, then the bigger the ball or bullet, the bigger the obstruction would have to be to deflect it.

But then again, if you could see an obstruction well enough to judge how much it would deflect any particular projectile, you can also see it well enough to avoid it. It's the ones you don't see that bite you. And if a really big ball gives you more confidence that you could get through something you didn't see, then by all means go big. Judging by the trend in my eyesight over the years, maybe I oughta plan on shooting 8-bores pretty soon. That'll fix em till my eyes say it's time for a 4-bore!

 

[paulvallandigham]

Will the size of the roundball have an effect on the deflection? Like will a .69 deflect more or less than say a .45 if the same stick is hit?

Well here's where we all pull our armchairs up and pontificate.

A .62 should deflect less than a .45 BUT a .45 might be of enough smaller diameter that the branch would have been missed that the .62 clipped. Don't try and shoot an obstructed target. Period. When all else fails mass and velocity are all you have; and since velocity is relatively similar among blackpowder balls go with mass. Just don't count on it to punch through cover when a living, breathing animal is on the other side and is deserving of the least suffering you can inflict.

Here's a picture of Carp in a red great-coat on my neighbors's land. Cover is something I work around every hunting season.

I pass on a LOT of shots. And if you think round balls are tough try snaking a relatively slow wood arrow on a rainbow trajectory through that stuff! :wink:

I agree. Every time I read about a " Brushbucking " caliber, modern, or MLer, I immediately stop having any respect for the author, or the magazine for printing such nonsense. There are NO brushbuckers, that will do it reliably 100 % of the time. I simply pass on the shots, as you suggest we do.

My thoughts run this way: If you never pass up a shot because its not a good shot, you will never be able to join in on those B.S. sessions about the " One that got away!"

Much of the fun of hunting is being able to talk about what you saw, but didn't shoot. The folks sitting home watching TV have no idea what they are missing. Some of the funniest times I have had is sharing my fascination with birds that have landed on a branch inches from my face, as I sit in some treestand. Or the time a squirrel walked over my boot because it was in his path as he walked up the tree I was stretched out on, as he went on up the side of the ravine we were in.

Other hunters know what I am talking about, and understand why it was a special moment. Its about " BEING THERE!" The folks in their warm beds haven't a clue, and you quickly learn not to try to talk to them about these things.

 

[Pork Chop]

I have to agree with that. I was astonished that David Petzal suggested shooting deer through brush, then had the huevos to get offended when called on it...

 

[johnnyroundball]

My 54 roundball deflects just fine off of trees.