Velocities & ballistics calculator for PRB

https://www.ctmuzzleloaders.com/ctml_experiments/rbballistics/web_apps/rb_ballistics.html
The above may help some in their calculations.

Various velocities with various powder loads and guns for PBR

http://www.namlhunt.com/traditionalmldata1.html

Thank you! Valuable info.

Updated to reflect some calculations published for various 50 cal loads

Word of caution. No one would take archery equipment and apply modern ballistics. Quite maybe a poor example the fact remains that modern ballistic, such as mushrooming bullets, etc. doesn't apply that well to muzzle loading. I think the best bet is asking for field experience from others.

Red Owl said:

Word of caution. No one would take archery equipment and apply modern ballistics. Quite maybe a poor example the fact remains that modern ballistic, such as mushrooming bullets, etc. doesn't apply that well to muzzle loading. I think the best bet is asking for field experience from others.

Click to expand...

And what in the hell do the two links above provide? It is for a PRB. Read the links before you comment helps quite a bit. What was provided is external ballistics, you are talking terminal ballistics.

Yep, anecdotal evidence, one person's unscientific, not repeatable and therefor an one-off at best. That's the ticket.

What's all the flaming about? I READ THE LINKS. I guess I should have been more definite. I was just calmly and politely pointing out that on the info provide- say the FFg 100 gr load at 100 yards yielding 457 f.p.e. and a lot of newbies might look at that and figure it was too low to kill anything. I didn't see anything in the original post about only external ballistics. SORRY

The information in the link is flawed and useless when the truthful data is mixed with speculation and conjecture about so-called minimum 800ft lbs.. It is an outright lie!
Whoever conjured that notion is just wrong! And folks that repeatedly parrot the information must never go to the field. Foot pounds energy has zero application in the field.
In the field you'll see truth.
Shot a 22lr pistol bullet into the rib cage of a cow elk, she trotted 30 yards and fell dead. Sent a 50Browning through the rib cage of a deer...she looked around, took a few calm steps, laid down...and died.
100 fpe vs.12,000fpe... and the results were exactly the same.
Bullet placement puts meat in the freezer! Numbers and nonsense give politicians and gun writers things to write about, and internet reader something to parrot.

You should go to jail for shooting a cow elk with a 22lr (if true) and I have a hard time believing your 50 BMG story. Your credibility sucks, big time. And if both true, then your ethics suck even more.

Isn't that oft-touted minimum energy of 800 ft-lbs credited to Jim Shockey, who has a reknown HUGE distain/dislike for traditional muzzleloaders shooting lead roundballs? Be aware he sells 'modern smokeless' or synthetic powdah inlines, and puts his name on anything for $$ endorsements, so of course he is going to discredit anything that interferes with his business.

chorizo said:

Your credibility sucks, big time... your ethics suck even more.

Click to expand...

You know sir, for weeks, you've been personally attacking anyone who doesn't share your opinion. I sure hope you have a chance to go burn some powder and gather yourself.
Maybe when you come back from the field, you'll have something interesting to share.

freedom475 said:

The information in the link is flawed and useless when the truthful data is mixed with speculation and conjecture about so-called minimum 800ft lbs.. It is an outright lie!
Whoever conjured that notion is just wrong! And folks that repeatedly parrot the information must never go to the field. Foot pounds energy has zero application in the field.
In the field you'll see truth.
Shot a 22lr pistol bullet into the rib cage of a cow elk, she trotted 30 yards and fell dead. Sent a 50Browning through the rib cage of a deer...she looked around, took a few calm steps, laid down...and died.
100 fpe vs.12,000fpe... and the results were exactly the same.
Bullet placement puts meat in the freezer! Numbers and nonsense give politicians and gun writers things to write about, and internet reader something to parrot.

Click to expand...

I smell a load of BS, and I don't mean breezy speculation.

I've choreographed the chronographing (sorry, but it was an opportunity to poke fun BACK at auto correct ) and the info in the original link tracks very closely with my own results. If you want exact info you need to check your own equipment in the chrono.

Some observations during much testing.

1. The fit of the load can make a significant difference in muzzle velocity. Tighter is faster.

2. The slickness of the lube can make a lot of difference. Slicker is slower. A fast lube in comparisons is the Dutch schoultz method. His system also results in low SD.

3. Consistency in the method and amount of lube applied improves SD. Wiping between shots improves SD over wiping every couple of shots. Using a wet lube that eliminates the need/effect of wiping settles into equally low SD after a few shots.

4. Powder granulation makes some difference in velocity but it's not huge.

5. Powder manufacturer is a significant factor and proves Swiss to be the most energetic. Whether it's worth the price is an individual pocketbook decision. Pyrodex RS is nearly identical to goex 2f when compared on a volumetric basis.