I received this email from Toby by mistake, it was actually a reply to a friend who emailed Toby from my computer but he does site some interesting stats. He repeatedly states he is not opposed to hunting with patched ball but it still comes across that he is.
"Joe;
I have no problem with anyone hunting with a round ball. What I have a problem with is someone feeling that EVERYONE who hunts with a muzzleloader MUST
hunt with a patched round ball.
Argue all you want my friend about the effectiveness of a round ball... but the physics of ballistics are against you.
I actually once participated in a study by one game department...on a very controlled hunt to take down the deer population on a large privately owned eastern plantation. In four days, 24 shooters took 102 deer. Each day, 8 went out with modern rifles and sabots...8 went out with bullet rifles and maxi-style bullets...and 8 went out with patched
round ball loads. All things were recorded...including the loads, distance of the shots, where the deer were hit, the angle of the shot, whether the projectile exited, how far the deer went after being hit, and the extent of damage to internal organs.
All rifles were 50 caliber, shooting 100 grains of the appropriate powder - Pyrodex in the modern guns, black powder in the traditional guns.
Guess which projectile came in dead last in the efficiency department? Yep, the round ball.
None of the deer shot were more than 100 yards away. The average shot with all three different rifles and loads was about 55 yards. In all, 41 deer were taken with
sabot loads...29 with maxi-bullets...and 32 with the patched round ball.
31 of the deer hit with a sabot went less than 20 yards after being hit...only 2 went more than 40 yards...none went 50 yards.
16 of the deer hit with a maxi went less than 20 yards after being hit...6 went more than 40 yards...and 6 went past 50 yards...and 1 made it to nearly 100 yards.
13 of the deer hit with a patched round ball went less than 20 yards after being hit...9 went past 50 yards...6 made it to 100 yards...and 3 made it to between 125 and 150 yards, and 1 traveled close to 200 yards before going down (with a double lung hit).
Only 1 deer was lost during the entire hunt...and it was shot with a patched round ball.
This hunt was conducted by one of the eastern state game departments. I was one of two muzzleloading industry people asked to participate, all others were state wildlife agency officials - who were asked to reduce an over population of deer on a large private farm. And it was this hunt that got modern in-line rifle loads legalized in this
state. Those rifles and loads proved to be the most efficient...traditional round ball rifles and loads proved to be the most inefficient.
Again, I am not against anyone having the right to hunt with a patched round ball rifle and load. I am against regulations that say those who choose to hunt with a more efficient modern muzzleloader and load do not have the right to do so. And I will fight those game departments and individuals who hang on to such non-serving muzzleloader hunting regulations. (There's a reason why fewer than 5% of all muzzleloading rifles sold in this country today are of traditional design.)
And in 2011, I fully intend to bring all of this back to a hard boil.
Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH" end quote
I wonder what he means by intending to bring all of this back to a hard boil?
My reply to him was, in short, that no one questions that inlines and sabots are more efficient and that is exactly why they don't belong in the muzzleloading season. A scope sighted 30/06 semi-auto is more efficient still but they aren't allowed in the muzzleloading season either, so is that unfair to owners of those rifles? If a person doesn't want to hunt with a real muzzleloader, accepting its' drawbacks, limitations and challenges then there are other seasons for modern firearms and that is where the inlines belong.
"Joe;
I have no problem with anyone hunting with a round ball. What I have a problem with is someone feeling that EVERYONE who hunts with a muzzleloader MUST
hunt with a patched round ball.
Argue all you want my friend about the effectiveness of a round ball... but the physics of ballistics are against you.
I actually once participated in a study by one game department...on a very controlled hunt to take down the deer population on a large privately owned eastern plantation. In four days, 24 shooters took 102 deer. Each day, 8 went out with modern rifles and sabots...8 went out with bullet rifles and maxi-style bullets...and 8 went out with patched
round ball loads. All things were recorded...including the loads, distance of the shots, where the deer were hit, the angle of the shot, whether the projectile exited, how far the deer went after being hit, and the extent of damage to internal organs.
All rifles were 50 caliber, shooting 100 grains of the appropriate powder - Pyrodex in the modern guns, black powder in the traditional guns.
Guess which projectile came in dead last in the efficiency department? Yep, the round ball.
None of the deer shot were more than 100 yards away. The average shot with all three different rifles and loads was about 55 yards. In all, 41 deer were taken with
sabot loads...29 with maxi-bullets...and 32 with the patched round ball.
31 of the deer hit with a sabot went less than 20 yards after being hit...only 2 went more than 40 yards...none went 50 yards.
16 of the deer hit with a maxi went less than 20 yards after being hit...6 went more than 40 yards...and 6 went past 50 yards...and 1 made it to nearly 100 yards.
13 of the deer hit with a patched round ball went less than 20 yards after being hit...9 went past 50 yards...6 made it to 100 yards...and 3 made it to between 125 and 150 yards, and 1 traveled close to 200 yards before going down (with a double lung hit).
Only 1 deer was lost during the entire hunt...and it was shot with a patched round ball.
This hunt was conducted by one of the eastern state game departments. I was one of two muzzleloading industry people asked to participate, all others were state wildlife agency officials - who were asked to reduce an over population of deer on a large private farm. And it was this hunt that got modern in-line rifle loads legalized in this
state. Those rifles and loads proved to be the most efficient...traditional round ball rifles and loads proved to be the most inefficient.
Again, I am not against anyone having the right to hunt with a patched round ball rifle and load. I am against regulations that say those who choose to hunt with a more efficient modern muzzleloader and load do not have the right to do so. And I will fight those game departments and individuals who hang on to such non-serving muzzleloader hunting regulations. (There's a reason why fewer than 5% of all muzzleloading rifles sold in this country today are of traditional design.)
And in 2011, I fully intend to bring all of this back to a hard boil.
Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH" end quote
I wonder what he means by intending to bring all of this back to a hard boil?
My reply to him was, in short, that no one questions that inlines and sabots are more efficient and that is exactly why they don't belong in the muzzleloading season. A scope sighted 30/06 semi-auto is more efficient still but they aren't allowed in the muzzleloading season either, so is that unfair to owners of those rifles? If a person doesn't want to hunt with a real muzzleloader, accepting its' drawbacks, limitations and challenges then there are other seasons for modern firearms and that is where the inlines belong.