• This community needs YOUR help today. We rely 100% on Supporting Memberships to fund our efforts. With the ever increasing fees of everything, we need help. We need more Supporting Members, today. Please invest back into this community. I will ship a few decals too in addition to all the account perks you get.



    Sign up here: https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/account/upgrades

longer range hunting

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Right on. That's the way it used to be. Anything else is just a single shot, modern, as far as I can see.
 
Personally, I wish the various states having a ML season would specify that the MLs used had to be traditional side lock rifles only. Actually, I wouldn't mind if they specified flintlocks only. Then muzzleloading season would be what it was originally intended to be.

I'm with you on that. But, unfortunately, it is unlikely any of us will see a reversion to such a concept.
The game commission people look at things differently than we do. Originally, the ml season in Arkansas was created to offer a quiet, low pressure hunt for traditional ml enthusiasts. I loved the quiet woods and opportunity to wear clothes of my choosing (no blaze orange) and carry my flint longrifle.
But, with the introduction of those horrid non-traditional rifles, the number of people in the woods has skyrocketed. Businesses that depend on hunters for income are happy with this change. It really brings a lot more money into local economies. And, in Arkansas, despite the greater harvests of deer their numbers are increasing. They are increasing so much, in fact, that special hunts are being encouraged to thin the numbers. Laws to take hunters out of the woods??? :shocked2: Not gonna happen. :(
 
I agree,I use a trad sidelock,and a trad bow longbow sometimes a recurve,and I am a odd ball around here,I can count on one hand the peolple that I know personnally that use either of. Here in Tn it seems like it is opened up to anything goes in Archery Season,both I guess.But what I do see is that the number of young hunters are down,My kids were brought up hunting but none do now.Sorry for getting of topic& no offense to anyone,I think it depends on where you hunt as to what you want out of you ML.
 
I agree that the special seasons ought to be traditional, but I am also glad that muzzleloading in itself is increasing the availability of our supplies. Were it merely traditional there would be so much less and our prices for supplies would be higher with less choice.

I figure the inlines may be a gateway to eventually getting into a traditional gun. I wasn't so much interested in the inlines, but my initial direction was much more modern until I listened to those who spoke so highly of the traditional ways and how effective it actually is (on paper it looks like a big BB gun).

I can certainly understand the feelings by those who want this to stay traditional, and this is a traditional styled forum, but to completely dismiss with a high level of voiced disgust those who venture into nontraditional avenues further separates us, and helps to kill the very thing you'd like to see passed on IMO.

In parting I must say THANK YOU to all of you who have been patient and understanding, and that have helped those like me to see the light!

:hatsoff:
 
rodwha said:
I figure the inlines may be a gateway to eventually getting into a traditional gun.
No more than a Vespa is the gateway to a chopper. :wink:

Different motivation, different attitude, different lifestyle. IMO (I'm generalizing of course)
 
I was lured away from the modern...I had no interest in this old outdated worthless technology, especially once I entered some info into a ballistics calculator. But I was shown the errors of my ways, and that the physics don't work the way I've been told. Had I have been assaulted and scorned I likely would have went the other direction.

Maybe it wouldn't bring interest in a chopper, but it might get you onto a real bike.
 
I was too. I had a CVA Hawken when I was about 10 or 12 years old. The Hawken was so unreliable that I gave up on it and eventually got an inline. Idaho made a law that you had to use a side hammer (aka traditional) gun in the ML hunts. They also said that the only projectile that was legal was a PRB. Wounding rates soared and in 1990 or 1991 the Idaho Fish and Game came out with a booklet that had many tests in it. At that time the testers recommended using conicals and Sabots.
So Idaho opened up to allow bullets again. But a state ML group helped toss the sabots and to this date sabots are not allowed in a ML hunt.
I built my Hot Rod Hawken and Renegades when they allowed conicals. After studying about paper patched bullets I decided to step back into the mid 1880's for the answer to the problem of accuracy and consistency. The Hod Rods and the loads were developed to be used in traditional seasons anywhere that allowed conicals.
The technology that I use is all mid 1800's. The hardware might be different but it is the same technology and general look.
Most guys look at me in the field as Daniel Boon. Most of the guys with their underwear tied in a knot on this forum think of my rifles as Something right out of star trek.
I think of my self as a traditional hunter. I am not HC/PC and I don't claim to be or want to be. I am one of the guys that uses the best equipment I can for the type of hunting I do. ML hunts here are draw only. A tag for anything is literally once maybe twice in a life time in some areas. The guys that put in for these hunts are not doing it to recreate a by gone time. They are after a trophy animal, and the hunt happens to be ML.
Most of my hunting revolves around my Hawkens and Renegades. I don't care for hunting with a centerfire. But I do want the best equipment I can get and I believe I do have it, and I am traditional. Ron
 
Well said Ron, I have been close to some of the areas you hunt and I don't think I could get shots in the range that I do here in our type of cover.And as you know I am working on a longer range ml myself.Do you ever Bear hunt?We were prowling around between Erwin and Dreggs a few yr ago and found some bear tracks with awfully long claw marks,do you think it may have been a Grizzly.I really like what I have seen of Idaho.
 
Yes that area on up to Henry's lake all has Grizz. Every year one is killed somewhere over there getting into trouble.
I would trust my Paper Patched loads completely if I had to protect my self from a grizz. But I would sure wish for a faster reload just in case :thumbsup:
Ron
 
I can certainly understand those sentiments.
I'd be happy if centerfire deer season was one week and the rest was sidelocks but the state agencies wouldn't be getting their funding that the hunting rules are structured to promote.

Billnpatti said:
AMEN!!! Personally, I wish the various states having a ML season would specify that the MLs used had to be traditional side lock rifles only. Actually, I wouldn't mind if they specified flintlocks only. Then muzzleloading season would be what it was originally intended to be.

That's my opinion. Put it in the FWIW column.
 
While the longer range hunting topic is being bandied about, what caliber offers the best characteristics / attributes for the use of paper patched bullets with black powder in muzzleloaders? I've worked with .40 and .458 bores. Played around some with a 22" GM .50 fast twist. A .46 bore or a .52 bore would be my guesses with strong leanings towards the lesser.
 
Claude said:
rodwha said:
I figure the inlines may be a gateway to eventually getting into a traditional gun.
No more than a Vespa is the gateway to a chopper. :wink:

Different motivation, different attitude, different lifestyle. IMO (I'm generalizing of course)

I was one that started with an unmentionable and after a couple years moved to a Pedersoli Frontier, then other caplocks, and now moving into flintlocks.

Now, I have been a traditional and modern bowhunter for four decades and love traditional tackle, so I was destined to move into traditional muzzleloading. But with no one I knew in my area shooting traditional ML's, the modern alternative was a good way to break the ice, learn some things, and progress to traditional.

That's not the overall, general case, I know, but it can and does happen. :v
 
GoodCheer said:
While the longer range hunting topic is being bandied about, what caliber offers the best characteristics / attributes for the use of paper patched bullets with black powder in muzzleloaders? I've worked with .40 and .458 bores. Played around some with a 22" GM .50 fast twist. A .46 bore or a .52 bore would be my guesses with strong leanings towards the lesser.

I have for quite some time thought that if a guy used the .52 in a fast twist he could paper patch the .515 bullets for sharps rifles. Those with a 9# onion skin would be about right, maybe a bit snug. Ron
 
"That's not the overall, general case, I know, but it can and does happen."

Exactly.

My point is that the severely negative attitude doesn't help promote the traditional ways, which I, too, would like to see continue on. It's kinda like the old saying that you catch more flies with sugar than vinegar...

And I'm certainly not suggesting we allow the conversations/forum to get into the speaking or promoting of such, just not the flames.
 
rodwha said:
My point is that the severely negative attitude doesn't help promote the traditional ways, which I, too, would like to see continue on. It's kinda like the old saying that you catch more flies with sugar than vinegar...

That's sure been my experience. We're restricted from using scopes during AK's muzzleloader hunts, which really levels the playing field. Almost all the guys who got into moderns did so because they were reading all the press push for easy cleaning and super long range. Once they learn than neither is true, they're suckers for a friendly guy who is having fun and performing well with a traditional. Just smile and shoot with them, but don't criticize their gear. Pretty quick they're full of questions and standing in line to shoot your traditional. Straight downhill from there.
 
Idaho Ron said:
Wow it must sting pretty bad that guys like me get to use the same forum as you do.
In my opinion every guy that left for the west would have taken their Original hawkens and burned them after shooting mine. I wouldn't trade 50 of the originals for one of mine. I have no use for one. Ron

Ahh. Ron.
They knew about elongated projectiles from before the 1830s. The most popular early bullet in America, the picket bullet, was being used in long range matches out to 440 yards or more, before the Mexican War. The false muzzle, according to Chapman, was invented for the Picket bullet. By the 1850s the PP bullet was in use as was the Minie and other experimental military bullets. But not for the typical "sporting rifle". They simply were not seen as necessary, obviously. The PP bullet as used here was even more complex to use than the Picket. The best shooting ones used 2 piece bullets with the different parts cast from different alloys then swaged to lock them together, 2 and 3 strip patches etc. These last requires even more pieces to keep the paper strips in place
As I have stated the Picket (and the somewhat later PP bullet) added too much complexity, weight and easily damaged or lost equipment to be viable in the field. AND the bores were often (dare I say invariably) choked so that once through the false muzzle and the choke the weight of the loading rod would cause the PP bullet to seat on the powder and tipping it down after it was loaded could cause it to slide away from the powder.

The "naked" bullet was dangerous to use (see following comments) since anything not cloth patched to a tight fit can move off the powder and does in both historical context and modern. Its a problem for LR ML match shooters I have been told. Many rifles have had their barrels ringed by a bullet moving away from the powder/wads as the rife is carried to the firing line.

Here is another question. What about horses? Have you ever rode for a day or 3 on a horsewith one of your bullet guns then checked to see where the bullet is?
You DO understand why there was never a Minie Ball Cavalry carbine adopted for general issue right?
You see modern usage is not 19th c usage. The early percussion breech loaders and the Spencer and Henry were better horseback guns than any of the MLs. You see the SB carbines would unload themselves in a few miles of horse travel (documented from writings of the time) as would the Minie ball rifle muskets for the same reason, too little friction in the bore for the weight of the projectile.
While civilians did not generally carry them on a sling as the Cavalry did they were still generally muzzle down across the pommel, this carry continued with all guns that were very heavy and/or long since if the rifle were long (by modern standards) it just does not work well. So if we put the bulleted ML on a horse with the muzzle down, since its easier/safer, the bullet may well move unless its tight in the bore to the point that it cannot move. Of course if we don't ride a horse its meaningless or have a short barreled ML we can carry them in a saddle scabbard (so long as they have never been capped) but they are still carried somewhat muzzle down and not with the buttstock back behind the rider since they tend to SLIDE out and are then lost on steep trails. So they are generally carried muzzle down butt to the front or if they are long across the pommel and these end up muzzle down. If they are carried at too flat an angle muzzle to the rear they may interfere with the horses leg. We can see the pommel carry wear pattern (if one knows what it is) on original rifles like the fairly pristine Bridger Hawken in Helena, an 1850s rifle made for the PRB and obviously for use in the west. Colt revolvers and revolving rifles were using pointed bullets much like a picket before Jake Hawken died of disease.
So when people start talking about people not knowing about elongated projectiles and how they would have preferred them they show very limited understanding of how the firearms were used at the time. The cloth patched RB was very difficult to beat in a ML. It seals the bore better, it can be used successfully on heavy game like Elephant where the ML conical was found to be far less effective. It does not slide away from the powder charge and can be used without fear or it moving under recoil in double rifles.
Garrard in "Yah-To-Yah and the Taos Trail" describes a man with a Hawken rifle that shoots a bullet an inch long. So apparently the Hawken shop knew of them too, but this is the only known description of one using anything but a RB. Whisker in "Gunsmiths of Lancaster County PA" shows a bullet mould by A Gumpf (there were two one living until 1851 the other until 1907) it has a RB cavity, a pointed "Picket" cavity and another cavity that casts a "slug" about 2 calibers long with rounded ends. Have no idea how this could be used. Its not usable with a cloth patch at any rate.

Wounded game? Wounded game is the result of poor shot placement. It is impossible to cure this with a projectile change. In fact people thinking they can shoot at greater range than they or the firearm are practically capable of can be a major cause of this.
The "wounded game" argument is the classic "modern ML website" drivel aimed at the RB which "won't kill anything because it has poor sectional density".
Reliability?
I can't help if you had some cheap ML when you were a kid and it didn't work. Its very common with poorly designed and assembled firearms no matter if its a ML or brass suppository type. This is beyond my control. Buy cheap stuff sometimes it don't work right. Just a fact. Confusing this with ALL traditional MLs being unreliable is a sign of lack of experience. Or people simply wanting to do what they want to do and trying to justify this by what ever means they can think up. Lots of hunters also wound game with modern scope sighted rifles usually from lack of practical marksmanship skills or from SHOOTING FARTHER THAN THEY SHOULD since they read of or watched someone on TV shooting an antelope or what ever at 750 yards etc.
Penetration testing from over 30 years ago has shown me that a 490 RB will penetrate adequately to kill deer to 200 yards. Reports from a friend to witnessed the shot from a hillside and later checked the distance prove that a 54 RB will kill a Moose (in Northern BC Canada) at 175. No effectiveness issues at all, moose went about 30 yards IIRC before piling up. Now had he KNOWN it was only a RB he might have lived for years (according to the "modern ML" folks) but he must have thought it was a 338 of something :rotf: Either a complete pass through or to the far side hide. Would have to have my memory refreshed.
I have shot a number of deer and a couple of elk with bullets similar to what you shoot in your ML. I just use them in BPCRs. As a result I am not ignorant of the abilities of the projectile either on game or at targets. I know what works and what does not work so good. So far as killing power a LOT of deer and elk and some Gbears have fallen to the 44-40 in the west. I can assure you that a 50 caliber ML shooting a RB of identical weight is far superior of the 38-40/44-40 BP load for deer or elk. In fact a 45 caliber rb is more effective on deer and makes larger wound channels within its range.
Conicals are not magic. You still have to place the shot. I have a 45-100 Sharps that is accurate enough to kill Bison or an Elk to probably 1000 yards with reasonable reliability. But I would not shoot at one at 300 unless I REALLY knew the range. I have in the past (40-90-380 actually). Poor success for TWO experienced hunters, range was ACTUALLY 425 long steps (flat ground probably off by 5% at the most). It is very possible, even likely that the lighting and the size of a given animal can make them look a lot closer. You see this was before lasers. Bull would probably have gone Boone and Crockett too :shake:, we both still laugh about it. Today one of us would have killed him with the same rifle/load with my Leica 1200 laser. So I know about shooting at elk at extended ranges both with and without a sight setting for the range.
I don't shoot at critters with a ML at extended ranges, over 150 and don't shoot that far anymore due to eye problems. If I think longer range will be the norm I use something capable of the range I will likely encounter. But then where I live we have not been saddled with a ML season, we hunt the general season like everyone else. Thanks I believe to efforts by the bow hunters in the state who oppose, rightly, another season. So there is no reason for all the nimrods to take to the woods with a ML they barely understand for the "ML Season".

I like hunting with a Flintlock. I have never seen a reason to shoot an elongated bullet from one though I have a percussion I shoot pickets from every year or 3 or 4. But its not a hunting rifle.

Dan
 
Wow I expected a whole lot more flack then you got on this one. Looks like most are arguing instead of answering your question though, as is predictable. Remember this is the forum where not to long ago they were telling a new fellow that 4-5" groups at 100 were excellent with conicals. Also every time a fellow has a conical question 3 or 4 folks have to provide their worthless unrelated info that a prb is all that is needed when that question was never asked.

As for platform the ones I like are;
A tc renegade with gm long range hunter barrel in 54 and a tang sight.
A lyman great plains hunter in 54 and tang sight.
An austin halleck mountain rifle with 54 fast twist barrel and a tang sight.
A 3 band enfield in 58 and the factory leaf sights.

I depend more on a heavy bullet for down range energy and a little better trajectory.
I shoot lee real bullets in all of them in pure lead. No scopes, laser range finders, shooting sticks or any other gadgets. Just a lot of practice and a tree to lean on when the shot presents itself. Nothing magical or mystical about shooting something at long range with a traditional. Just a whole lot of trigger time preparing for it.
Some folks tend to handicap themselves with narrow mindedness and declare what is and is not traditional and try to convince everyone else the same. If they were practicing what they preached they'd have no internet, tv, vehicle, or anything else of that nature but let them preach it if it makes them feel important. :stir:
Have a good Christmas guys.
 
Ya Dan I don't have a clue what I am talking about. But I will continue to hunt and kill trophy animals with my Conicals and basterdized traditional rifles. I love being a modern hunter with traditional gear.
Ron
 
I agree and I'm grateful for the info.
What is the twist on the 3 band enfield? I thought the pedersoli I had seen had a slow twist, and I can't imagine that being good for conicals.
I've also heard great things about the Great Plains hunter and tang sight combo. Plus, that might be easier on the budget
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top