AmericanLongRifles Forums
General discussion => Black Powder Shooting => Topic started by: TommyG on October 30, 2017, 03:26:18 AM
-
Over the years I have heard this mentioned about black powder guns and never really gave it much thought as I usually spend time on the bench until I find what works to my satisfaction in the gun. But I heard this again recently and thought I would run this by you guys for your more experienced opinions. The claim is that beyond ??? grains of powder you are simply wasting powder and shooting unburned powder from your rifle. I am inclined to believe that this is true as only so much can burn until the projectile leaves the barrel, but are there other factors that come into play here? Does a certain gun work better in some cases when the ball is sitting at a certain distance from ignition? Like I mentioned, I will work my loads from lower charges upward in 5 gr. increments until I find what groups best, but on some of my guns the best grouping charge will definitely fall into too much and unburned powder category according to some.
-
Stop overthinking - shoot the gun where you get optimum accuracy & precision...
-
I agree. Work up to the most accurate load. I doubt it will be an overload.
-
What you first run up against is the law of diminishing returns. The extra powder does not increase velocity to a meaningful degree and may diminish accuracy as well. That said, there is a point where you will just be blowing unburned powder out the muzzle.
Not sure what you mean by "sitting a certain distance from ignition". I expect that you know to seat the ball firmly on the powder charge, so could you explain the phrase?
Thanks, Dan
-
Every rifle/gun will develop a maximum velocity with some charge of powder. More powder will diminish the velocity, as the burning gases are pushing powder that does not get consumed in the bore. But your accuracy load will be reached long before that happens. As much as all that is interesting, absolutely maximum velocity has no use in target or hunting.
-
Crazy me but I was always told that black powder burns in a flash manner and unless you have an extra short barrel all the powder will flash/burn in the first half or before of the length of the barrel. This sounds like a good question for the Mad Monk.
-
Dan, yes I do seat the ball firmly on the charge, mark my ramrods, etc.. I guess what I mean by "distance from ignition" is simply does where the ball sits in the barrel(when firmly seated on the charge) have anything to do with downrange accuracy? I am thinking not, but like I said originally, you guys have decades of experience and I am curious about the notion of too much powder. What prompted me to post this thread was I have heard that anything over 70gr. in a .50 is too much, I recently heard a fella saying that anything over 60gr in a .54 - is too much. I just cannot agree with those statements, even though they are experienced guys making them. My .54 groups best with 95gr. of 2F, which from what I have read in this forum is not too much powder, but yet according to some, I am simply blowing unburned powder out the muzzle.
-
not saying this has merit, but I used to know someone who used to shoot increasing loads over snow till he saw unburnt powder. never tried it.
-
I think it was Norman Brockway from Vermont back in the 18&whenevers that shot over snow
to determine when to stop loading too much powder. Now that real black powder is around $30
or more a pound it pays to take a close look.The Medina Hawken has a flask with it the throws a
maximum of 85 grains for a 58 caliber gun. The flask has an adjustable spout.The old measure was
to lay a ball in the palm of your hand and pour powder over it until it was JUST covered.That works fine
and my own grandfather 1873-1972 used it and told me about it..
Bob Roller
-
I've heard for so many years about covering the ball in your hand with powder. Has anybody tried this and checked to see how much powder that is by volume?
-
To get an idea of the amount of ejecta, lay an old bed sheet or two in front of your bench and see how much powder collects after a few shots. A local thrift shop might have some used bedsheets.
-
You can go back on this forum and view Denny D. video's of the Flathead boys shooting and see quite a bit of ejecta coming out of the muzzles. I'm assuming that is fouling that is being forced out and not unburned powder granuals.
-
At a candle shoot years ago, a competitor decided that by supercharging his rifle he could shoot high, and the cone of hot gas would blows the candle out. It would have worked except that the unturned powder that contacted the flame created a little extra fireworks, and the unburned powder that went low imbedded itself in the candle.
Hungry Horse
-
Black powder isn't very efficient. I think you'll find when you've worked up the most accurate load that it still blows out unburned powder.
-
Black powder is very "flashy" stuff and makes fireworks if it gets too near a flame. Barring a ridiculous load of powder, it's unlikely any BP exits the bore unburned. Even with normal loads a huge, billowing ball of flame can be seen when shooting in the dark. Anything near this flame is burned. No proof, but....
-
I think there is some amount of un-burned powder that exits all barrels. Some of the powder is ignited and exits as sparkling particles or un-burned particles. You see this in modern (mostly pistols) as well as muzzle loaders (rifle, shotgun, & pistols). Here is a 45 cal rifle barrel of 32-1/2" shooting 50 gr of Goex 3F under a .440 ball and a .015 lubed patch. Look close about 2 to 3 feet in front of the muzzle and you can see "sparkling particles" and probably some un-burned particles we don't see.
(https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpreview.ibb.co%2Fcj4z2b%2FIMG_1608.jpg&hash=ea01ea834e3a5b1ebbcf25b05f0c6ff6c171d9d9) (http://ibb.co/kakiTG)
-
It has long been established that the powder burns out in the first few inches of the barrel. The hot gas continues to expand and add to the acceleration of the bullet thereafter. What you see coming out of the barrel are the hot products of combustion condensing into glowing particles. It is these cooled that form the particles left on the ground after firing as well as the fouling when they condense upon the inside of the barrel. The true sporting powders like Swiss have slightly more saltpetre than the theoretical ideal to promote more heat and thus more pressure even with less gas production. In considering internal ballistics it is common to focus upon the chemistry of the conversion of the powder to gas but the effects of the heat of combustion greatly raises the pressure of the gas when released. Consider the internal combustion engine. The fuel/air burns and produces gas but it is the heat from the burning expanding the fuel/air combustion produced gas that does the work. In the case of the black powder gun the charcoal is the fuel and the saltpetre makes the oxygen. Then the heat of the process expands the produced gas. Thus the description of a gun as a 'single stroke free piston internal combustion engine'.
-
It has long been established that the powder burns out in the first few inches of the barrel. The hot gas continues to expand and add to the acceleration of the bullet thereafter. What you see coming out of the barrel are the hot products of combustion condensing into glowing particles. It is these cooled that form the particles left on the ground after firing as well as the fouling when they condense upon the inside of the barrel. The true sporting powders like Swiss have slightly more saltpetre than the theoretical ideal to promote more heat and thus more pressure even with less gas production. In considering internal ballistics it is common to focus upon the chemistry of the conversion of the powder to gas but the effects of the heat of combustion greatly raises the pressure of the gas when released. Consider the internal combustion engine. The fuel/air burns and produces gas but it is the heat from the burning expanding the fuel/air combustion produced gas that does the work. In the case of the black powder gun the charcoal is the fuel and the saltpetre makes the oxygen. Then the heat of the process expands the produced gas. Thus the description of a gun as a 'single stroke free piston internal combustion engine'.
Exactly! No matter the load, there are always sparks as shown in that photo.
As Taylor noted, you will reach a point of diminishing returns when increasing the powder charge. My 14 bore is case in point. 82gr. 2F produces 1,220fps. 110gr. 2F produces 1,300fps. 165gr. 2F produces 1,500fps. 200gr. 2f produces 1,700fps, 330gr. 2f produces 1,770fps.
The 165gr. load, the most accurate load in this rifle, is about the most that is reasonably comfortable offhand, it is max. as far as I am concerned. Too - it simply staggers moose, out to 100yards, my furthest moose kill with it.
-
It has long been established that the powder burns out in the first few inches of the barrel. The hot gas continues to expand and add to the acceleration of the bullet thereafter. What you see coming out of the barrel are the hot products of combustion condensing into glowing particles. It is these cooled that form the particles left on the ground after firing as well as the fouling when they condense upon the inside of the barrel. The true sporting powders like Swiss have slightly more saltpetre than the theoretical ideal to promote more heat and thus more pressure even with less gas production. In considering internal ballistics it is common to focus upon the chemistry of the conversion of the powder to gas but the effects of the heat of combustion greatly raises the pressure of the gas when released. Consider the internal combustion engine. The fuel/air burns and produces gas but it is the heat from the burning expanding the fuel/air combustion produced gas that does the work. In the case of the black powder gun the charcoal is the fuel and the saltpetre makes the oxygen. Then the heat of the process expands the produced gas. Thus the description of a gun as a 'single stroke free piston internal combustion engine'.
Excellent post.
-
So as an example, if you shot 100 gr. of 2f out of a 32" long 32 cal gun, say 25 times, and had a sheet of poly out there collecting the ejecta, you could fold the poly,drain it into a pile and try to burn it to see if there was any unburned powder in the pile. Would that be some thing doable to prove one way or another about the unburned powder question? Also, would a tightly patched round ball load burn the powder more effectivley than a less tighter load?
-
I agree with yulzari. Plenty of sparkley things to pick up off a white sheet from a Walker firing 60 grains.
(https://preview.ibb.co/nNdCNb/1382215_656450791056437_2139563712_n.jpg) (https://ibb.co/kRumhb)
-
I've heard for so many years about covering the ball in your hand with powder. Has anybody tried this and checked to see how much powder that is by volume?
I tried it with a .50 cal in an actual shooting situation. It seemed somewhat anemic compared to my standard 70 grain hunting load. A bench top experiment would determine what actual loads would be produced by the method and how consistent they are.
It may seem to be a way of keeping things simple, but when you actually do it under field conditions it's clearly not so simple. The use of a well organized powder measure and horn is easier and faster.
-
A few years ago I was frustrated by sparks ruining a photo project. Bill Knight (Mad Monk) taught me something that is showing up in this discussion.
We can be mislead at times by the amount of sparks leaving the muzzle upon firing. I was using Goex in my photography, and Bill suggested changing to Swiss. He explanation was that the sparks were pieces of burning charcoal because Goex was not grinding the charcoal as finely as Swiss. Switching to Swiss allowed me to complete the photo.
You can demonstrate this for yourself using the test that Bill gave me. He suggested placing a measured amount of Goex on a saucer, adding water and stirring until no more will dissolve. When rubbing a spoon around in the mix. You can feel the undissolved charcoal as grit. When I repeated this test with Swiss, I could not feel any undissolved charcoal. Bill mentioned that Swiss grind their charcoal almost to dust.
I suggest this only to point out the powder differences, and that sparks from the muzzle can be misleading unless the brand of powder is known.
Regards,
Pletch
-
The next time I take a muzzle loader out to shoot I am going to see if 49 year old
GOEX sparks more that Swiss. What is the current price gouge now for Swiss??
Bob Roller
-
About $24 lb for Swiss depending on where you buy it.
I gave up paying the money for Swiss. I kind of like Graf's/Schuetzen now. It's even cheaper than Goex and it's cleaner burning and some say a hair more power too.
-
The next time I take a muzzle loader out to shoot I am going to see if 49 year old
GOEX sparks more that Swiss. What is the current price gouge now for Swiss??
Bob Roller
Hi Bob,
I can't speak for Goex that old. The experiment was done in 2005 I think. I'd have to look back to see. I do have some Goex bought in '89, but I don't think that was what I was using. AT one of the woods walks I attended, I could see by the sparks which shooters were using Goex.
Regards,
Pletch
-
Same here, Pletch - it did not seem to matter if the person was using 60gr. of 2F in a .62 smoothbore, or 50gr. 3F in a .58. 85gr. of 2f in my .50 48" bl. - all showed a flury of sparks dropping out of the smoke.
Shooting at night, is an especially good show, as noted by the Walker Colt picture. It is an even better show if shooting 165gr. 2F from my .69, or 82gr. for that matter.
It seems that tighter loads burn the powder more efficiently, maybe much more depending on how loose the loads were to start with in the comparrison.
Another trick is seating pressure. This also makes a difference & is why black powder ctg. shooters compress the powder slightly. When playing with my .40, 42" Goodioen barrel, hitting the
starter knob, with the end of the rod inside a hole in the knob, averaged almost 100fps higher average speed with much less shot to shot velocity variation. That translates into improved
accuracy- never visible at 25 yards but definitely so at 50yards.
The military practice of throwing the rod onto the seated ball 3 times to ensure it is seated on the powder, usually hurts accuracy as it "meals" the powder on top (turning it to dust). Too, this
could and possibly has caused a discharge due to hydraulic excessive compression of the powder and air in the breech area in a VERY hot barrel. Whether this actually happened or not, I do not
know, but it was reported here or elsewhere to having happened. Some have said it cannot happen if there is a vent or nipple. I see the vent as being a pressure relief for compressed air, but
with the hammer on a spend cap under the nipple, THAT situation creates a seal. It does this in my .69 and will push the rod on the seated patched ball back up the bore a good 6 to 8". That my
friends is with a pure lead ball loaded with a .035" patch. THAT much compression may be enough to cause compressed powder to ignite if the rod is thrown onto the powder.
-
We need to keep in mind that anything seen as sparks, flames etc is not what we're talking about. Unburned granules won't be seen until on the ground. It seems unlikely any could survive ahead of the ball of fire, but might survive behind it.
-
One mystery for me is that some guns of identical bore size, load, and barrel length make none or lots of sparks out the muzzle when fired. Any ideas?
-
the only way to really know whats going on is a chronograph and range work. since only 60% or so of black powder turns to gas, you'll have all sorts of black stuff on the snow, sheet etc. and yes the point of diminishing returns will show up at some point. Without a chronograph your just guessing.
-
From a slightly different angle, How much powder do we need to get the job done?
When I got my Mark Silver kit from Jim decades ago, I asked Jim about loads. (It's a .58, 42" long Getz)
Jim said 70 grs as a decent load.
I Had been using 60gr Go 2F in a .54 Hawken type, and 120 2F for hunting.
The 70 grs worked and would shoot through mule deer and w-tails most every time. Collected very few balls from them.
Used that rifle 9 years straight for all my hunting just to get a feel of "how it was".
worked and didn't let me down, and I never did bother increasing the powder charge. Shots from maybe 30 yards to about 125 -30 yards at most. One was a bit more.
Different slant on this interesting subject!
Richard.
-
I agree. It takes less powder than some realize. I've used 80gr 3F for elk for years. Most of the time it shoots right through them. I think using more powder just makes the ball expand faster and I got less penetration.
Why beat yourself up with more recoil, more fouling, more expense, and get less penetration?
I'm thinking 75gr might be enough and i'm thinking of trying it next year. Could 70gr be enough? How low can I go and still get a humane kill? I think i'll stop at 75gr. I don't have a long barrel like some of you guys use.
-
Pete,
If I was going looking for an elk I might push my charge up a bit.
Mind, I have sat in the bush here ion the farm with a bull elk within 25 yards of me...couldn't see a thing of his head to know if legal. Had a short Jaeger in .58 with same old load, but couldn't risk a shot. I think if I'd Known he Was legal I wouldn't have hesitated to pop him in the ribs with it!
-
I've hunted them since the 50's. A couple of holes in their lungs and it's meat in the freezer. Most guys think they need way too much gun.
Before getting into muzzleloaders in 1980 I hunted elk with a Win 94 in 30-30. The magnum boys laughed at me saying my gun was barely adequate for deer. I never lost an elk and they did from taking long risky shots. I'm a still hunter and all my shots are up close. I love that style of hunting and have done it all my life ever since dad taught it to me when I was a youngster. Be sneaky, get close, hunt like a cat. Dad told me that over and over.
So, with that in mind. My muzzleloader load doesn't need to be as strong as someone who takes long shots. Another advantage is at almost 75 I can still use open sights. :)
-
After using pretty heavy loads in my flintlocks for a few years, I finally settled on 60 grains of 3F in the .45 and 70 in the .50. My .54 also is very accurate with 60grns.
-
Really loose range shooting large game with huge X rings does not need much powder for accuracy.
It's when you hunt and shoot in the plains or areas with bush with large open spaces, that more powder is needed for flatness of trajectory and improved accuracy.
-
Yup! I only hunt the dark timber in the mountains. Muley's, elk, and bear. Up close and personal.
If I have an itch for long shots I hunt for coyote.
-
Pete,
You have it pretty well figured the same as me.
I've been that close to deer I could hear them breathing, when my hearing was working right that is.
Up close and make it count.
The old English soft game guns were usually 16 bore for deer, but you only used 2 or 3 drams of powder. Range was close and it was the weight of the ball that did the trick. I think with a small bore of .44 or so, we need more powder to scale, but with heavy lead, not so much.
We have a Victorian shoot once a year up here on the farm, and shoot 100, 150 & 200 yards, but also shoot an old baler at 700 yards.
That does me for the longer range itch. (And coyotes)
Richard.
-
Forsyth spoke of the fast twist large bore deer and stag guns of the Northern UK.
He was not very complimentary of them - talking about the light charges they used.
He stating that to wound was therefore as much the intent as to kill outright, as all
deer hit were brought to bag with the use of dogs, and that these fast twist
bore rifles that needed small powder charges did THAT (wounded) better than anything.
Just to state, the wounding was not due to not having enough POWER - but the problem
is that with such low velocities from light charges, the trajectory is horrific & actually hitting
the vitals very difficult. My own bore rifle is case in point.
Last time out, Taylor and I were checking sights and using Neetsfoot oil for lube. I decided
to use a mere 4 1/2 dram charge (smaller than my normal hunting charge of 6 drams.
The 4 1/2 dram charge struck a wee bit higher than normal at 50yards. I thought
COOL! It should be on at 109yards(100meters), however we found it to strike 8" to 10" low. Now
that was with 4 1/2 drams. 2 or 3 drams has about 14 to 16" of drop at 109yards from a 50yard zero,
which, when shooting in the wide open heather, makes for very difficult accurate hitting over unknown,
guess-at ranges.
-
Daryl: Is it possible that the lighter charge striking a bit high was from a longer time in the barrel and recoil affecting a higher strike at 50 yds. much like a modern hand gun with slower or heavier bullets?
-
Daryl: Is it possible that the lighter charge striking a bit high was from a longer time in the barrel and recoil affecting a higher strike at 50 yds. much like a modern hand gun with slower or heavier bullets?
Not in my rifle - more powder, strikes higher. For example, 3 drams (82gr. 2f ) strikes on the bead at 50 meters. 4 1/2 drams (125gr.) strikes 1 1/2" higher, but is still really low at 100 - thus the point blank range is not very good. If I use it's normal moose hunting charge of 165gr. (6 drams) I then generate 1,550fps fps and have a 3" point blank range of 120yards ie:with the ball no more than 3" above nor below the line of sight. That load poleaxes moose - just staggers them.
Most all handguns and BP ctg. guns strike higher with lower velocity loads - my .69, for some reason, does not follow that 'rule' - perhaps stock design has a part in that.
-
Daryl,
That is why the English term for these 16 -bore rifles is usually a "Park rifle", for where deer are confined to a park, and must be culled and such to keep the herd healthy.
Such shots are often close, so no great power is needed, and the fast twist will give needed accuracy. Totally different to out on the moor for wild beats.
Dogs weren't usually used in a park setting.
All the best,
Richard.
-
Daryl, I notice the same thing; heavier loads hit higher, sometimes much higher. Back when I was first getting into muzzleloaders - 1960s - I read that way back then riflemen increased the powder charge for more distant shots because it elevated the poi.
-
I can use 120gr in a 1-48 twist and it works fine. I just don't find a need to use anywhere near that much of a load. I can't see good enough anymore to use open sights that far, so why use a load for that distance. Not that I took long shots when my vision was above average, so not seeing is a moot point.
I'm more impressed by the hunter who can sneak in to take a close shot than the hunter who takes long shots. One is hunting and the other is shooting.
-
Daryl,
That is why the English term for these 16 -bore rifles is usually a "Park rifle", for where deer are confined to a park, and must be culled and such to keep the herd healthy.
Such shots are often close, so no great power is needed, and the fast twist will give needed accuracy. Totally different to out on the moor for wild beats.
Dogs weren't usually used in a park setting.
All the best,
Richard.
Richard - I had never heard of 'Park rifles' before. Thanks for that tidbit of information. I was referring to Forsyth's book where he talked about the fast twist bore guns used in the Highlands for shooting deer and what poor killers they were with their tiny charges. Forsyth specifically spoke of the use of dogs to run down and catch wounded game.
Where does this Park Shooting happen?
-
From a slightly different angle, How much powder do we need to get the job done?
When I got my Mark Silver kit from Jim decades ago, I asked Jim about loads. (It's a .58, 42" long Getz)
Jim said 70 grs as a decent load.
I Had been using 60gr Go 2F in a .54 Hawken type, and 120 2F for hunting.
The 70 grs worked and would shoot through mule deer and w-tails most every time. Collected very few balls from them.
Used that rifle 9 years straight for all my hunting just to get a feel of "how it was".
worked and didn't let me down, and I never did bother increasing the powder charge. Shots from maybe 30 yards to about 125 -30 yards at most. One was a bit more.
Different slant on this interesting subject!
Richard.
An old friend,Bob Watts once said that "If the last two inches of the barrel doesn't
turn red then the load ain't right."
Turning from levity and farce,the late Tom Dawson had a 16 bore Manton rifle that
was marked "1 and 1/2 Drams".I would assume that it was a "Deer Park"rifle and
remember that the lock was so fast that the ignition was as good as a cap lock.
I don't know if any of his family/descendants still have it or not.
I had a cased 16 bore Greener double rifle that used 90 grains of DuPont 3fg
with patched round balls to make "snake eyes"at 50 yards.9 groove barrels with
an unknown twist.
Bob Roller
-
Bob,
I like the bit about last2" turning red!
Daryl,
Where does this Park Shooting happen?
In England and Scotland, there were many large country houses, Country seats really , maybe also known as Manor houses. These had extensive park-like grounds, of varying acreages, but could be 1,000 acres or more. some a lot less. It was fashionable to keep within these grounds herds of deer, quite often fallow deer. These with no natural preditors so had to be kept at a healthy limit. This meant that so many bucks and does had to be removed each year.
Sometimes the gamekeeper was roped in for this, and at other times the landowner had his sport .
As these parks had woods/shelters and single trees scattered about, stalking fairly close to the herd and picking out the required animal was not too difficult. Difficult enough to be called sport, but not impossible anyway!
In W Keith -Neal's book, GBG 1740n-1790, he has a charming chapter on the guns of Packington Hall, near Birmingham;
This was the seat of the Earls of Aylesford, and their herd of black fallow deer had been kept there for hundreds of years.
The lands of this estate were a part of the ancient forest of Arden, and had been a deer chase since the times of William the Conqueror.
In this book, he shows photos of the rifles used for this purpose and kept at one time at Packington, in the old Hall.
Richard.
-
Thanks for the explanation Richard. The only thing I had to go on, was Forsyth's little book & his disdain for fast twist rifles, common in the mid 1800's.
In particular he spoke of a 13 bore he once had, with a 36" twist that 'stripped'(was inaccurate) if he shot over 40gr. of powder in it. His main trouble was
the 13" trajectory over 100yards, IIRC.
I am sure I could get it to shoot with more powder than that, but then, I use tighter loads than he did, I am sure.
-
Daryl,
Some of the blokes back then had an agenda as well. :-)
(Like Greener bashing all the other makers.)
I'm quite sure that a 1~36" could be got to shoot more than 40 grs accurately, tight ball/patch and all.
I have an old Germanic barrel at present, still a bit rumbly to load in the rough old bore.
It is 1~33".
Seems to want to shoot with 70 grs, (20 bore it is) Still cutting patches yet though, so throws some wild ones. When we get it smoothed up more, I'll try more powder and let you know.
-
Back then, as today, sportsmen are/were resistant to using tight combinations. Thus, it took a slow twist (or very low powder charges) to get accuracy, I assume, as I have not tested this out.
For dangerous & very large game, heavy charges were needed and could not be used in the fast twists without very poor accuracy, which makes sense.
Scotch-Brite is really good at smoothing rough bores. As it follows the rifling, it will not hurt accuracy - at least from our experiments - all good results on smoothing up bores, even bores with rough spots.
-
I think it was Norman Brockway from Vermont back in the 18&whenevers that shot over snow
to determine when to stop loading too much powder. Now that real black powder is around $30
or more a pound it pays to take a close look.The Medina Hawken has a flask with it the throws a
maximum of 85 grains for a 58 caliber gun. The flask has an adjustable spout.The old measure was
to lay a ball in the palm of your hand and pour powder over it until it was JUST covered.That works fine
and my own grandfather 1873-1972 used it and told me about it..
Bob Roller
My pap told me for target shooting use 1 grain per caliber + 5 , add about 10-15 grains for deer . I have tried the cover the ball method and best I remember it works out about the same .
Eddie
-
I use what the gun tells me to use. That means I use what the gun shoots best with. If you use really thin patches that burn or blow out with anything but light charges, it will shoot best with 1gr.
to bore size, or a tiny bit more. If you use a combination that actually seal the powder gases behind the patched ball with heavy loads, you will find your gun is a LOT more accurate than ever
before and you need more powder than what some of the old tales tell you to use.
If you never shoot past 50yards, fine - use whatever you want. We have targets at rendezvous, out to 200yards and beyond. Locally, much closer, only out to 109yards. Shooting accurately at
those ranges (especially 200+), requires more than the 78gr. .58 deer load mentioned above. That can actually depend on the rate of twist in the rifling. 75gr. 2F with a decent ball and patch load (.575" ball &
.022" patch, in my Enfield) produced 1,308fps. That load actually shot well in the 48" twist Enfield Musketoon and made a 3", 5 shot group at 100 meters for me and would do just fine for deer,
likely to that 100 meter range.
-
Who in their right mind would shoot a deer at 200yds with open sights? The front bead/blade would be bigger than the whole deer. How do you aim for the kill zone?
Let's not mix up target shooting with hunting.
I've shot coyote at 500yds with a .243, but will still try and get as close as possible for big game with a ML. It's way more fun and challenging. Lot's of guys can shoot. Not everybody can get close. You can even get close on open ground if you try hard enough.
-
"If you never shoot past 50yards, fine - use whatever you want. We have targets at rendezvous, out to 200yards and beyond. Locally, much closer, only out to 109yards. Shooting accurately at
those ranges (especially 200+), requires more than the 78gr. .58 deer load mentioned above. "
Did you not read the text - or did you just see 200yards and fly off your handle? No one has said anything about shooting deer at 200yards with open sights.
You are the only one who said anything about shooting animals at 200yards. BTW - the front sight is not larger than a deer at 200yards - well, mine aren't, just saying.
-
Yes, I read it and it could be taken as if you want your deer load to shoot past 50yds you need to use more than 78gr. You even give 200yds as an example of one of the longer yardages.
It's never good to mix up target loads with deer loads. I can always be taken the wrong way.
Not sure what you have for sights, but the average hunting rifle front sight will cover a deer at 200yds. A Hawken for sure. If you use some target sights it won't be what most hunters use. Hunting sights should be bigger to pick up fast in hunting situations.
-
The past weekend in WV there were huge pastures all around. A large buck with a doe was spotted in a field. I could only see them when they moved; like watching a period at the end of a sentence move. A range finder put them at 455 yards. I wouldn't attempt that with a powerful gun/scope combo. But it did provide an education as to critters at extreme range. I could only see them as "deer" when using the powerful binocular we had. I always thought of 100 yards a "long range" for deer and prb.
-
Me too.
-
What is "long range" to some might not be to others. I would think all the variables of making the shot would have a lot to do with the definition. Caliber, optimum load combo, shooter skill, local and it's current conditions (wind,light,etc.) and I'm sure others. I have several rifles that are capable of making 200 yd. shots if the shooter is up to the task. I'm not. But I would not pass on a 125+ yd. standing shot on a deer if I had a rest and the light was agreeable. 15 years ago it would have been 150 yd.
-
You wouldn't even consider it with my vision.
-
I've made a couple of deer kills at around 100 yards (+ or -). I know many of you are quite capable of making kills quite a bit farther; not so sure I can. I'll take a 100 yd shot - maybe a tad farther - under excellent conditions with a rested rifle. I much prefer them under 50.
-
I've heard for so many years about covering the ball in your hand with powder. Has anybody tried this and checked to see how much powder that is by volume?
Now that is where I went wrong, I thought they said cover your hand with the powder.
Now I know that I might be over loadin' a bit. :o
Fred
-
;D
-
This one is 'in range'.(quite literally)
(https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpreview.ibb.co%2FbP5ucm%2FMuleydoe_6_May09001.jpg&hash=1c72a140817cad267c9a17b74f8a80bf4f6df69e) (http://ibb.co/cYWZcm)
-
[/quote]
Now that is where I went wrong, I thought they said cover your hand with the powder.
Now I know that I might be over loadin' a bit. :o
Fred
[/quote]
:o HUH?? ;)
-
I like shooting over fresh snow at spruce trees- alot of data.
-
I watched a shot taken (I was about 300yards from them at that time, gutting another moose) of a client and his guide shooting at a moose, 170 yard shot by laser range finder.
The rifle was a .54 TC - had a cut rifled barrel seems to me, & was loaded with a .018" pre-lubed Oxyoke patch + a swaged Speer or Hornady .535" ball. The powder was a phony one, RS Pyro--x of 100gr. stricken measure.
Had I been his guide, I would not have let him shoot as I witnessed his shooting in camp, wherein he barely kept 3 shots on an 10" x 14" target at 100yards from a bench.
If starting at 1,800fps (wild guess)I figured the ball's vel. at 170yards at about 850fps with an energy of approximately 360 foot pounds. The moose took off like a horse out of a starting gate and dropped dead after covering 40 yards- mere seconds after receiving the hit.
The ball went through a rib on the impact side, through the left lung, centered the heart, holed the right lung and stopped against the hide on the far side.
There was a 1/2"hole through those vitals. I was as surprised as anyone else.
Forsyth noted he'd penned both shoulders of a Sambar Sag at 250yards, with his 14 bore sxs rifle, a single shot. He was prone to using hardened lead, usually with tin or mercury & 4 to 4 1/2 drams of #6 powder.
I will also note here, that his .54 barrel died before a year was up - totally rotted out by the pyro powder's acidic fouling. He then had Taylor build him a .54, .40 interchangeable barrel rifle, then a .32, also in English design. He destroyed all 3 of those barrels with that powder, as he insisted upon using it.
He did not believe Taylor nor I about it being harmful, until he later contacted Mike Nesbit, I think it was, who also told him it was death to his barrels to use it & it would indeed, eat a hole right out the side of the barrel, once it started the cancer.
-
That’s pretty funny that he trusted Mike Besbitt over Taylor. Expensive lesson learned!
-
There was an article in this week's hometown paper where an 18 year old girl went out hunting late in the day. It was still ML only season, she was in a tree stand and saw a large black bear by a tree. She took the shot and knew she hit it but the bear ran. She was afraid to look for it and went home for help. They found the dead bear about 40 yards from where he was when she shot it. The next day they took a range finder and measured the shot at 150 yards! They estimated the weight at excess of 350 lbs. No mention of what type of ML she was using.
Dennis
-
Dennis,
Wonder if it was that 12-bore from the other thread!?!