selecting a caliber for hunting? small game vs big game

[waksupi]

I would like to hear more of your thoughts on the .62 calibre & the .58 calibre. I may not always agree with your opinions, but I solidly respect your opinions and your depth of knowledge.

My .62 is my go-to for elk or bear.

 

[brazosland]

I would like to hear more of your thoughts on the .62 calibre & the .58 calibre. I may not always agree with your opinions, but I solidly respect your opinions and your depth of knowledge.

I’m not recoil sensitive, so that gives me an advantage in some respects. I’ve got a lot of time shooting and instructing on heavy recoiling modern rifles, but at the end of the day felt recoil is very subjective.

Free Recoil is what it is, but your perception of it is a product of your experience, the fit of the gun to your body and your body type. But, I have seen very diminutive shooters handle lots of recoil and barn door size guys that could not deal with it effectively.

The big bores are lighter for their size, I’m not a small guy but I am 55 so weight does wear on you a bit.

Historically I think the larger rifles bores tended to be an experts weapon. Obviously smooth .62’s were very common thru all periods, but rifled round ball guns of .58 and .62 were not nearly as common and spoke to a focused use on big and dangerous critters.

From a hunting perspective a .40 works and a .45 is a fine deer round ball. A .50 is as well. All three should be very effective at anti-personnel work also. The soft lead of those balls expands and they do their job.

The larger balls are sort of what they used to say about the .45 in modern guns…it arrived “pre-expanded.” The .62’s don’t need to expand to do their job, and when they do they perform even better.

I like exit wounds, and lots of blood. I also know that I am not a perfect shot with any weapon, primitive or modern, so I like the insurance the large bores bring in terms of effectiveness.

The last thing I would say is that I don’t stoke my big bores up with 90 grains of powder, so they are not “inefficient” or “uneconomical” to shoot. More lead? Yep. But 60 grains of 3F drives a .62 ball right thru every living thing I’ve ever hit. I use 95 grains of 3F in my 26” Wilson’s Chief smooth .62 since that’s what it likes accuracy wise, but otherwise 60 grain is plenty and at 100 I just hold a bit higher.

The mass of the ball does the work.

 

[Rock Home Isle]

I’m not recoil sensitive, so that gives me an advantage in some respects. I’ve got a lot of time shooting and instructing on heavy recoiling modern rifles, but at the end of the day felt recoil is very subjective.

Free Recoil is what it is, but your perception of it is a product of your experience, the fit of the gun to your body and your body type. But, I have seen very diminutive shooters handle lots of recoil and barn door size guys that could not deal with it effectively.

The big bores are lighter for their size, I’m not a small guy but I am 55 so weight does wear on you a bit.

Historically I think the larger rifles bores tended to be an experts weapon. Obviously smooth .62’s were very common thru all periods, but rifled round ball guns of .58 and .62 were not nearly as common and spoke to a focused use on big and dangerous critters.

From a hunting perspective a .40 works and a .45 is a fine deer round ball. A .50 is as well. All three should be very effective at anti-personnel work also. The soft lead of those balls expands and they do their job.

The larger balls are sort of what they used to say about the .45 in modern guns…it arrived “pre-expanded.” The .62’s don’t need to expand to do their job, and when they do they perform even better.

I like exit wounds, and lots of blood. I also know that I am not a perfect shot with any weapon, primitive or modern, so I like the insurance the large bores bring in terms of effectiveness.

The last thing I would say is that I don’t stoke my big bores up with 90 grains of powder, so they are not “inefficient” or “uneconomical” to shoot. More lead? Yep. But 60 grains of 3F drives a .62 ball right thru every living thing I’ve ever hit. I use 95 grains of 3F in my 26” Wilson’s Chief smooth .62 since that’s what it likes accuracy wise, but otherwise 60 grain is plenty and at 100 I just hold a bit higher.

The mass of the ball does the work.

I follow your posts and I love your direct, no nonsense logic.

I agree completely with your reasoning. Smaller projectiles require more precise shot location, the larger projectiles use the shear physics of their mass to transfer energy into the target and bring it down.

Makes complete sense.

I’m pretty recoil sensitive…there’s only so many shots I can take at the bench; from my .54 with hunting loads; before I need to take a break. If I don’t, I’ll develop a flinch. Funny thing is, in the field, hunting, I never feel recoil.

The biggest I’ve ever used in the field, with regularity, has been a .54 calibre. I’ve hunted with the .58 on only a handful of occasions, but not enough to have developed a definitive opinion. I’m much more opinionated on the.45 calibre, .50 calibre & .54 calibre.

You’re the type of person I would enjoy a coffee with, or a meal around a campfire.

 

[brazosland]

I follow your posts and I love your direct, no nonsense logic.

I agree completely with your reasoning. Smaller projectiles require more precise shot location, the larger projectiles use the shear physics of their mass to transfer energy into the target and bring it down.

Makes complete sense.

I’m pretty recoil sensitive…there’s only so many shots I can take at the bench; from my .54 with hunting loads; before I need to take a break. If I don’t, I’ll develop a flinch. Funny thing is, in the field, hunting, I never feel recoil.

The biggest I’ve ever used in the field, with regularity, has been a .54 calibre. I’ve hunted with the .58 on only a handful of occasions, but not enough to have developed a definitive opinion. I’m much more opinionated on the.45 calibre, .50 calibre & .54 calibre.

You’re the type of person I would enjoy a coffee with, or a meal around a campfire.

Same here. I’m looking forward to attending more events and meeting more people in this sport. Taking my 14 year old son to the Rocky Mountain Rondy next month. Can’t wait.

The bench maximizes felt recoil from any weapon type, modern or PC. The architecture of the rifle can make that even worse. Plus there are no benches in the fields we hunt.

There are trees, posts, kneeling and shooting sticks to use as stability rests…all are practice for hunting shots and all make felt recoil much more tolerable.

Get away from the bench if you can.

 

[Rock Home Isle]

Same here. I’m looking forward to attending more events and meeting more people in this sport. Taking my 14 year old son to the Rocky Mountain Rondy next month. Can’t wait.

The bench maximizes felt recoil from any weapon type, modern or PC. The architecture of the rifle can make that even worse. Plus there are no benches in the fields we hunt.

There are trees, posts, kneeling and shooting sticks to use as stability rests…all are practice for hunting shots and all make felt recoil much more tolerable.

Get away from the bench if you can.

I’m at Denver Museum with the grandkids right now.

I miss the days of wandering the fields and pastures, behind the house, hunting every day. Mostly Prairie Dogs. I was such a better shot back then…

 

[glidingdoc]

Why did the British army use the 0.75 calibre Brown Bess? Was this "overkkill" or were they shooting at much greater range than one would when hunting?

 

[Rock Home Isle]

Why did the British army use the 0.75 calibre Brown Bess? Was this "overkkill" or were they shooting at much greater range than one would when hunting?

I think it has to do with what @brazosland has just posted as content. The larger calibres are more effective at damaging a target.

 

[smoothshooter]

If I had to choose 2 and I wasn’t going to hunt anything bigger than deer, I’d have a .32 and a .45. .32’s are just plain fun and super cheap to shoot and I’ve killed enough deer with a .45 that I know it’s enough for me.

Do you find the skinny ramrods in .32 to be a problem?
I have a .45 already. Thinking about getting a .36 or a .40.
With a .40 I can use a 3/8” ramrod. But on the other hand, since I shoot a .433” ball in my .45, there is not that much difference between the two.

 

[Rock Home Isle]

Do you find the skinny ramrods in .32 to be a problem?
I have a .45 already. Thinking about getting a .36 or a .40.
With a .40 I can use a 3/8” ramrod. But on the other hand, since I shoot a .433” ball in my .45, there is not that much difference between the two.

You’ll want to get as strait a grain as possible when selecting a .32 calibre ramrod.

 

[smoothshooter]

You’ll want to get as strait a grain as possible when selecting a .32 calibre ramrod.

Am leaning more toward a .36.
Had one 30 years ago. Liked it quite a bit.
Never had a .40, though. Would kinda’ like to try one before
I die or get too old to see.
I used to hunt some with a family heirloom when I was a younger teenager that was a .31 caliber. Was a very early southern mountain or Tennessee rifle that had a barrel shortened to somewhere around 34 to 36 inches or so.
Even had the original bullet mould. It worked well on everything from starlings to groundhogs.

 

[Mike in FL]

I simply reduce the load of my 50 way down and find a load that shoots same point of impact at 25 yards. In the woods I carry 2 antler powder measures. One for deer and one for squirrels. I once shot a turkey with my deer load. Edible because I aimed behind the breast.

 

[Mike in FL]

Am leaning more toward a .36.
Had one 30 years ago. Liked it quite a bit.
Never had a .40, though. Would kinda’ like to try one before
I die or get too old to see.
I used to hunt some with a family heirloom when I was a younger teenager that was a .31 caliber. Was a very early southern mountain or Tennessee rifle that had a barrel shortened to somewhere around 34 to 36 inches or so.
Even had the original bullet mould. It worked well on everything from starlings to groundhogs.

I love a 36. Gotta get one to replace the one I stupidly sold.

 

[KIt]

Thanks for all of the good suggestions!

 

[Mike in FL]

If someone wants to emulate the bygone era of flintlock rifle hunters, he will go with ONE weapon. There are those who would argue that, unless they know I refer to the lone hunter who had no home to keep and store several guns. A smooth bore might serve you well if that is the kind of long gun you prefer. Me, I am 75 and recently back in to black powder after a long illness. In my early years I had 36, 45, 50, and 54s. I settled on a .50. With a 50 and very much range time, I developed a load for botW large and small game. At 20 yards there was no difference in POI. Where i might kill a deer at 60, seldom would I shoot a squirrel that far. We can say 50 is too much for rabbits and squirrels, but 'tis not so. Simply shoot the front end or head. Such a rifle and a full knowledge of it will keep you fed. I am afraid that today's muzzleloading outdoorsman has become one of specifics rather than historic realism.

 

[dkasprzak]

Thanks for all of the good suggestions!

@KIt Take a close look at the Pedersoli Side by Side Slug gun. It is a smooth bore 12 ga that is capable of taking any large game in North America. It can also be loaded down with shot to take birds and small game. I’m saving to purchase this gun myself so yes, I am biased, but I believe it can be the “one” gun that can do “most” of everything you want. Good Luck in your decision.

 

[bud in pa]

Started out with a 50 cal TC. loaded it down for squirrels. Next was a 50 cal. Pedersoli Kentucky. Then PA Game Commission made the decision for the next one for me. Maximum caliber for small game is 40 cal. minimum for deer is 44 cal. The woods that I hunt limit my range to about 50 yds. so I went with a 20 gauge smoothie. It handles everything I may encounter in my woods. Even the 600 llb. bears, but only in self defence.

 

[smoothshooter]

If someone wants to emulate the bygone era of flintlock rifle hunters, he will go with ONE weapon. There are those who would argue that, unless they know I refer to the lone hunter who had no home to keep and store several guns. A smooth bore might serve you well if that is the kind of long gun you prefer. Me, I am 75 and recently back in to black powder after a long illness. In my early years I had 36, 45, 50, and 54s. I settled on a .50. With a 50 and very much range time, I developed a load for botW large and small game. At 20 yards there was no difference in POI. Where i might kill a deer at 60, seldom would I shoot a squirrel that far. We can say 50 is too much for rabbits and squirrels, but 'tis not so. Simply shoot the front end or head. Such a rifle and a full knowledge of it will keep you fed. I am afraid that today's muzzleloading outdoorsman has become one of specifics rather than historic realism.

I suspect a .50 or .54 smoothbore is a prime candidate for The All Around Gun.
Have had had a smoothbore .54 for 22 years myself.
But a .40 or .45 rifle is pretty handy too. With a rifle one does not have to deal with all the accuracy idiosyncrasies smoothbores usually have.

 

[smoothshooter]

Why did the British army use the 0.75 calibre Brown Bess? Was this "overkkill" or were they shooting at much greater range than one would when hunting?

I think they liked the larger calibers for three main reasons:

(A) Less fumbling the cartridge during the loading process with shaky hands
(B) Larger caliber more effective against cavalry and artillery horses.
(C) Larger caliber is more likely to pass through more than one enemy soldier.

 

[Mike in FL]

I've never owned or fired a military musket. Never cared for their looks or uses as they do not fit my fantasies of a "long hunter" nor my notion of a "1740- 1760s persona. Ain't that weird for an old man? Still playing in the woods and pretending I lived in another time.
Maybe I'm not alone. Maybe that's why a PA or VA or KY replica have so much allure to the modern BP enthusiast.

 

[pab1]

Hi, I am new to the MlF. I am looking to purchase my first flint lock rifle. I am thinking of a 36 or 40 caliber to be used for plinking and small game like rabbits or perhaps coyote. 45 , 50 or 54 for deer or possibly Elk. What do you recommend? What are the advantages and disadvantages of the various calibers?

Late reply but if there are no caliber restrictions where you live I would recommend just buying a .54 caliber for both big game and small game. Take the money you were going to spend on a second gun and buy powder, lead and flints. Then practice.

Years ago I shared some small game hunts here using .54 and .58 caliber guns with reduced loads. I always go for head shots on small game. I've found with reduced loads in big bore guns there is less bloodshot/meat damage when your shots off a little than with a .32 caliber gun.

One benefit of this is that you will become very familiar with your gun. You'll get in a lot of practice loading out of your shooting bag in hunting conditions. This will build your confidence when you hunt big game.