Does it make a difference?

[Mike Vach]

I'm looking for another flinter and here's my question: Given the choice, would you opt for a .50 cal or a .45 cal flinter, to be used at the range and for hunting deer?

I have to make a choice and I'm torn. I'd really like to hear some thoughts from the hivernants on this board. Thanks.

 

[RC]

50.. great for target shootin, great fer huntin, many accessories(lots of stuffs!) available.. :thumbsup: (it's 50..or... 62! :haha: ) good luck! when ya decide,,pics! :thumbsup:

 

[ord sgt]

.50 calibre is good for eastern whitetail deer. Plenty of power for a clean kill. Also good for target shooting. IMHO, it makes bigger holes in the target, easier to see from the firing line!

 

[Trench]

Oh man, caliber selection is always a nail biter with a new rifle. Well, the .45 should be cheaper to shoot if you are actually going to be to be doing a lot of target shooting. But then, you want to take deer too. Bigger is always better with deer. I hear .45 can do it just fine, but within a range on the conservative end of 50-60 yds due to the mass of the ball. Crack shots do shoot farther and take deer with it though. Oh heck, go with the .50...and then later get a .45 too!

 

[boar]

I have .32 to .54. I beleive I would go for the .50. The .45 is good but a 50 will be better for the deer. I have only killed one deer with the 45,the rest with 50&54. 54 the better one . I shot a 50 in match and use the 45 for groundhogs,32&36 for squirrels. The 50 will cost a little more to shoot, but you won't feel underguned when the big one walks up. Shot the last two deer with a 50,RB 80grs 2ff. Dilly

 

[Osprey]

I use a .45 here in MD for deer, killed three with it last season with no problem, so it certainly works well. Even with a 50 or anything bigger still have to hit 'em in the right spot. Liked it so much I'm building another .45. For me total weight and handling of the gun are more important than caliber.

 

[Mike Brooks]

.54 for me.

 

[RC]

I use a .45 here in MD for deer, killed three with it last season with no problem, so it certainly works well. Even with a 50 or anything bigger still have to hit 'em in the right spot. Liked it so much I'm building another .45. For me total weight and handling of the gun are more important than caliber.

:hmm: wouldn't a 50 weigh less than a 45? :hmm: :wink:

 

[MSW]

well, i'd go with a .54, unless i couldn't get one for some reason, and then i'd opt for the .50. as far as shooting for target, don't forget that you'll be using a reduced load anyway, so i don't think there'll be very much cost difference between .45 and .50 or. 54.

just one guy's opinion...

 

[Roy]

I use a .45 here in MD for deer, killed three with it last season with no problem, so it certainly works well. Even with a 50 or anything bigger still have to hit 'em in the right spot. Liked it so much I'm building another .45. For me total weight and handling of the gun are more important than caliber.

:hmm: wouldn't a 50 weigh less than a 45? :hmm: :wink:

In standard barrel sizes yes.

 

[Snakebite]

I personnally am a .54 fan. You said in your post that you were going to get another flinter. What caliber is the one you have? If is a smaller caliber (.36/.32), I'd go with the .50, if larger, I'd go with a .45. I have a .40 which I love, it's the first flinter I've owned, my .54 is a custom Hawken percussion which I've used for deer hunting, I'm contemplating the .40 though for next year. Of course range is more of a consideration with the smaller caliber. I feel shot placement is the most important regardless of caliber.

Chris

 

[Dphar]

I'm looking for another flinter and here's my question: Given the choice, would you opt for a .50 cal or a .45 cal flinter, to be used at the range and for hunting deer?

I have to make a choice and I'm torn. I'd really like to hear some thoughts from the hivernants on this board. Thanks.

50 is better hunting rifle though the 45 is adequate. The 50 is better on the range if shooting to 100.

Dan

 

[smokehouseman]

I'm also behind all those who recommended .54; there's nothing wrong with .50 but then you won't have that lingering question later on about getting that .54. :thumbsup:

 

[renovato]

I'm one of those "bigger is better" folks. I prefer a .54. The .45 will be a little cheaper to shoot, but if you intend to cast your own balls someday, the costs will be too close to worry about. The .50 would probably be a better choice for hunting.

 

[jbwilliams3]

I love my .45. It shoots a deadly load. Please inform: I am told that the .45 has a greater velocity than the .50- because of smaller ball size, perhaps? Doesn't matter too much for me, however, as my targets in the VA woods are usually no more than fifty, seventy-five yards at most. Just wondering

 

[paulvallandigham]

YOu can produce the same velocity, assuming your barrels are long enough, with both a .45 and a .50 caliber MLer. However, the recoil with the heavier ball begins to affect the shooter sooner as the velocity goes up.

Remember that the ballistic's coefficient for any round ball is -- well----terrible! :shocked2: Any high velocity at the Muzzle is quickly being lost as the ball travels down range. If your deer is within 70 yards, a .45 cal. PRB will do just fine and there is no reason to try to push it over 2000 fps. for such a shot.

In fact, when a deer is shot with a high speed PRB at close range, the ball actually will tend to penetrate less, and may even veer off to one side or another, rather than travel in a straight line, simply because the ball is spinning too fast at impact, and, being made of soft lead, mushrooms quickly at those high velocities. You have to learn an entirely different way of thinking about how a ball or bullet delivers a killing blow to game when you shoot traditional MLers with PRBs, when your prior experience, training, and education has been using modern smokeless powder cartridges shooting copper jacketed, expanding bullets.

 

[Gemoke]

I was a big fan of the 50s till I got my first 54cal. now it it`s only 54s and 62s for me

 

[TxGR]

What do you have now?

What factors narrowed your selection down to .45 vs .50?

I prefer .54 for hunting.

 

[bart_anastasi]

My first gun was a 54 cal TC renagade.

Still got it and have never and I do mean never felt under gunned.

I can load it with reduced loads to produce velocities and killing power and recoile similar to a 45 or 50.

The but here of course is that you can only do so much to make a smaller caliber hit like a large one. with a prb

Also if you are buying a 1 inch barrel across the flats gun a 54 will be lighter than a 50 or a 45.

 

[Mike Vach]

Thanks for all the replies. I currently have, and use regularly, a .60/20gauge flintlock smoothbore and a .50 cal transitional rifle in flint and a Brown Bess "carbine.", which mikes out to be an 11 gauge but which shoots well a .730 patched RB. The rifle is 10 pounds, with it's wide butt stock and 47" swamped Getz barrel. It's heavy to drag through the woods and very long, too. The Bess and the fowler are pretty light. I also run my own RBs using Lyman molds. I hunt in western Maryland and shots are always under 75 yards, being wooded and brushy and "mountainous."

I've taken deer cleanly with all three pieces. I've saved up some money and want a new rifle, which is why I was thinking .45. But I always outthink myself and end up dazed and confused. That's why I asked for opinions. Funny, the responses seem to indicate a .54 cal, followed by the .50, followed by the .45. Guess it really makes no real difference; all a matter of personal preference.