AmericanLongRifles Forums
General discussion => Black Powder Shooting => Topic started by: olgreenhead on December 14, 2009, 05:20:47 AM
-
Well probably been beat to death but whats your squirrel load?
-
In my 33" GM barrel, I have settled on 40grns Goex 3F, .018" pillow ticking, Hornady .390" ball...haven't dropped the hammer on a squirrel with it yet, but it'll pick off empty .12ga hulls at 25 yards consistently so that's good enough for me
-
I used to use 40 gr fffg and a .395 ball in my longrifle--very accurate and plenty stout for squirrels--unfortunately where I live now a .40 is illegal to hunt with so I gave it to my son who lives where it is legal...
-
Mike,
Does the law say "under .40" or how exactly does it read?
Mark
-
My .32 uses 35gr. 3F, and the .40 prefers 55gr. 3F with a spit or water based lube. With grease or an oil, the .32 stillshotos 35gr., however the .40 wants more- 65gr. for it's accuracy load. If I was shooting small animals at close range, it: out to 25 yards, almost any charge will cut a single hole for 5 with almost any load in either rifle. Accuracy at 50 yards and beyond requires more powder.
-
At close range I used a 45 ACP case in my 40 for squirrels and it worked ok. Actually did less damage than the 32's I used to use. Still best to head shoot them. I think it runs about 35 grains of 3f. Almost all muzzleloaders are best with head shots.
DP
-
I've killed red (Pine) squirrels with my .69, loaded with 165gr. of 2F - couldn't tell if it killed them or not, they just disappear- gone, but a bit of mung hanging in the branches and against the trunks showed hits. ;D
-
Mike,
Does the law say "under .40" or how exactly does it read?
Mark
The law says .36 or under for small game and .44 or over for big game--thus ruling out the .40 both ways. I was told this was so that 'they' could control poaching better by eliminating the .40 which some use for both big and small game. You are not allowed in the woods with a big game rifle in small game season--nor any buckshot loads on you when shotgunning for small game.
-
Mine likes 30 gr. 3F for squirrels. 40 gr. 3F for turkeys in the woods. If on a powerline or field I'll bump up the turkey load to 50 or 60 gr.
-
[/quote]
The law says .36 or under for small game and .44 or over for big game--thus ruling out the .40 both ways. I was told this was so that 'they' could control poaching better by eliminating the .40 which some use for both big and small game. You are not allowed in the woods with a big game rifle in small game season--nor any buckshot loads on you when shotgunning for small game.
[/quote]
I never cease to be amazed at the fool laws we are burdened with. Most poachers do not use BP rifles, and a 36 will do for poaching as well as anything. On that note the 40 is kind of a dual purpose rifle, but is likely loaded a little heavier for deer. Since a 40 is legal for deer in MN I did carry mine for that purpose with a 45 grain load of 3f which I felt was adequate for up close deer (especially smaller ones) and head shots on squirrels. Can't report success on either, but I suspect it would be a little dramatic for squirrel but still not really ruin anything with a head shot. Been wanting to try one on deer. In a worse case situation I do have a four legged tracker to help, but on a good shot reasonably close I suspect I would not need one. The concept of dual purpose is interesting but usually results in something too big for one use and too small for another, although I do consider a 40 a good small game getter if one also is including coyotes or similar varmints in the bag.
DP
-
I agree about the crazy laws that are passed.How can someone look at a hole and tell how big the projectile was that made it, especially when we are talking in thousants of an inch.I'll bet you could take a forty five and stamp it thirty six and the majority couldn't tell the difference.
-
Well, in my .40 both 30 and 40 grains of 3f make one hole at 25 yards which is a typical squirrel distance. This being the case I've settled on 30 grains (mostly) and use a .390 ball from a Lee mold and .018 patch lubed with Hoppes #9 Plus. For my .32 & .36 I like either 20 grains or 30 grains for both. The 25 yard & under load is 20 grains and the accuracy load for over 25 yards is 30 grains for both. These loads don't seem particularly destructive on tiny critters. To be fair, about any reasonable load is going to be accurate at 25 yards given a good gun. Sixty grains of 3f is my "everything else" load for my .40 and is what I use when anticipating a deer in my sights.
-
The maker of my old .40 here in Lousyanna fully intended to hunt deer with it--he is an old backwoodsman/gunsmith and takes little heed of laws. He has been known to kill deer on his property with .22s--even a doe with a .22CB. I am more cautious [and law abiding] so I bought his rifle and gave it to my son after deciding I had plenty others for hunting various game...P.S. he was a Marine sniper in his youth...
-
I am very well acquainted with an individual, who in his youth was less law abiding. 22's worked well for poaching, especially with head shots. But if one misses a crippled deer can result which will die a slow death as they cannot eat. To avoid this some took them looking away from them to get the back of the head That works for heavy birdshot as well, so I have heard.
I am in the process of getting the parts together for a future build. Was considering a 32 but am leaning to a 40. I can use a 5/16 ramrod (already have the thimbles from stuff I bought back when) and have molds and other stuff. When I looked at swag ed balls, which are very economical for small bores, TOW lists 395 Hornady at $9.15/100 and 315 at $8.15. Not a real major difference. Also a 40 shoots well with 35-45 grains of powder and a 32 with 25 to 35. Priming is the same. We are looking at slightly over a dollar difference for 100 shots, and less if you cast. 32's are fun and lots of folks like them for good reason, but after shooting my current 40 this fall, I am starting to appreciate the little caliber. 40 grains is not that hard to shoot, I can legally hunt deer with it and it really does not do any more damage to small game than an accurate load in a 32. About the only drawback is that a 40 will carry farther. There are better deer rifles, but one can if bored during deer season with about a 45-50 grain load in a 40 and hunt both small game and deer. For me if I do both then I can see neither as I went squirrel hunting yesterday and saw 2 deer and no squirrels. During deer season I saw lots of squirrels and no deer.
DP
-
It's rather amazing how one's perspective changes with the guns he shoots. Back when I did a lot of shooting with a .50, anything bigger seemed way to overpowered. Then I started shooting the .58's and everything smaller was a pipsqueak. The .69 (14 bore) showed me almost everything else was of lower cast - not worth while, and the 14's amazing long range accuracy really made me appreciate big heavy balls travelling at a descent speed. Then, even the .58 seemed rather quaint.
When I started shooting the .45 Longrifle, it seemed a little tiny squirrel rifle in comparrison, although I felt it might be OK for deer and that a .50 then seemed quite powerful. The .40, with it's 94gr. ball enhanced that feeling of adequacy for the .45's deer prowess and now that I'm shooting a .32 (42gr.), even the .40 appears powerful in comparrison. I'm looking forward to the day when Taylor gets around to making his .25 - WOW- what a squirt! Will the .32 then look 'big"? I don't think so - still prefer something called 'bore' and less than 18 in it's number for big game. Those are big game rifles - however, maybe even the little .40 (75 bore) would work.
-
The concept of a "dual purpose" rifle is an interesting one. The 32-20 was said to be one which could be used for both small game and deer. Its not really good for either, but it was a favorite "trappers" gun in its day. In MLs we see the 32-40s that may have been used in that manner. Personally I do not care to hunt deer much with a smaller bore. One of my winter projects is to finish the 58 I started for a deer rifle. Got sidetracked making the 25. However in certain circumstances where I expect the shots to be close and I can pick my shot, as in some tree stands, a smaller caliber is not all bad. Also, we have intensive harvest permits to take antlerless deer. I like to take the 1 1/2 year olds for meat which are not large deer. I might feel a little undergunned if a 200+ pound buck shows, but I think the 40 would be ok for the 125-150 pounders. I shot a red squirrel (pine) with the 25 and it pretty well tore it up. We have to load the little ones a little hot for accuracy, and then they require head shots. A 40 loaded lighter is not to gross for head shots. The bigger bores take a different discipline to shoot accurately over the smaller ones.
DP
-
;D I found the .69 would kill a squirrel, if you hit him right. :D
-
;D I found the .69 would kill a squirrel, if you hit him right. :D
So will a pickup truck, but it takes skill to save any meat...I have always liked the challenge of head shots with a small bore, but around here I get flack 'cause the locals eat squirrels brains!
-
HA! - with our little pine squirrels, that's almost like eating hummingbird tongues.
-
;D I found the .69 would kill a squirrel, if you hit him right. :D
Wound him, though, and you might not make it back home! :'(
-
Believe it or not, but my Tenn. .40 likes 50 grains of 2F Goex. Yep that's not a typo, FFg Goex.
-
The law says .36 or under for small game and .44 or over for big game--thus ruling out the .40 both ways. I was told this was so that 'they' could control poaching better by eliminating the .40 which some use for both big and small game. You are not allowed in the woods with a big game rifle in small game season--nor any buckshot loads on you when shotgunning for small game.
[/quote][/sup]
I never cease to be amazed at the fool laws we are burdened with. Most poachers do not use BP rifles, and a 36 will do for poaching as well as anything. On that note the 40 is kind of a dual purpose rifle, but is likely loaded a little heavier for deer. Since a 40 is legal for deer in MN I did carry mine for that purpose with a 45 grain load of 3f which I felt was adequate for up close deer (especially smaller ones) and head shots on squirrels. Can't report success on either, but I suspect it would be a little dramatic for squirrel but still not really ruin anything with a head shot. Been wanting to try one on deer. In a worse case situation I do have a four legged tracker to help, but on a good shot reasonably close I suspect I would not need one. The concept of dual purpose is interesting but usually results in something too big for one use and too small for another, although I do consider a 40 a good small game getter if one also is including coyotes or similar varmints in the bag.
DP
[/quote]
How do you cook the little wolves?
-
with sage butter and garlic ;D
-
with sage butter and garlic ;D
Don't hurt to go a little heavy on the garlic.
DP
-
;D I found the .69 would kill a squirrel, if you hit him right. :D
So will a pickup truck, but it takes skill to save any meat...I have always liked the challenge of head shots with a small bore, but around here I get flack 'cause the locals eat squirrels brains!
Ain't that how "mad squirrel disease" gets its start?
;D
Dan
-
Believe it or not, but my Tenn. .40 likes 50 grains of 2F Goex. Yep that's not a typo, FFg Goex.
Not a surprise. Best groups with the 40 picket bullet (so far) have been with 80 gr of FF Swiss. A friends highly accurate 45 uses 55 gr of 1.5f Swiss.
But for squirrels if it will cut a 1" circle at 25 yards you are probably good enough.
Dan
-
Mine likes 2F as well, as does the .45. One must target the rifle though, to find what load it wants with that particular ball/patch and lube combination. Picking a load arbitrarily and using it will undoubtedly leave one with a load less than optimum. I really shouldn't post this as many of the guys I shoot against do just that. They're tough enough to beat even though they are shooting less than the best load for their rifle. Were they to develope a good load, they might be unbeatable for someone of my meagre tallents.
-
I'm still in the learning process with my 40. Was using 50gr a .395 and .010 patch. I started having trouble driving the ball down the barrel, so I decided to step up the way I cleaned the bore. Now it seems I need a .015 patch but it still has a tight group on paper. Have only had one shot on a doe, I go for headshot and she now has a pierced ear. Was starting to wander if I need to go to a larger cal for deer. and keep the .40 for paper matches. (tight group@ 100yrds)
RICH
-
Rich - a .50 or even .54 will provide you with much satisfaction as a deer hunting rifle, while the .40 is a wonderful 'tool' for trail walks.
-
I absolutely enjoy shooting my .40 period. And hunting with it for small and medium sized game. However I don't consider deer to be small game. I would never consider a .40 to be adequate for deer, and I wouldn't be comfortable on antelope given the longer ranges. My personal limit on deer is a .50 and I actually shoot .54's.
I'm not saying a perfect shot won't kill a deer with a .40, I'm saying the marginal shots is the problem. And in deer hunting you never know when the unexpected might happen.
For instance, while making a head shot someone shot a hole in a deer's ear. What if you'd shot off the jaw? Still wouldn't have venison but coyotes would after a lingering death.
Small calibers sometimes force us to shoot at small targets for compensation. Just doesn't make much sense to me.
But that's just my opinion.
-
I aggree whole heartedly that the .40 is too small for deer, I use a .58 and now a .54 but a deer shot in the jaw, or anywhere else not in a vital area, even with the larger calibers, will not die, so shot placement is still very important even with larger calibers.
Regards, Steve Chapman
-
Head shots are really considered a poor choice with any caliber, unless they are looking away where the back of the head can be taken, but even then it may be queastionable. Deer have been taken with a 40, and as I stated I would likely use one on the permit deer or young ones and off of a stand where 50 yards would be a very long shot. As to a primary deer rifle for all circumstance hunting a larger bore is better. My primary deer rifle will be a 58 next year, and I also have a 20 bore smoothie in the works. May not even use the 40, but it is a possible choice. While squirrel hunting this year I had a small spike buck almost step on me while I was sitting in my chair. He might have weighed 125, more likely 100. While I do not like to shoot small bucks, he would have been tasty. I took out a forkhorn, with a straight on shot with a 36 C&B revolver. He went about 50-75 yards and was stretched out when I found him. The ball went in between the shoulder blades and went the whole practically the whole distance of the rib cage. About the biggest complaint I have with small bores is the blood trail and as mentioned peripheral hits, such as a liver shot where they can go a ways. Gut shots are bad with any bore.
DP
-
You gentlemen have painted a picture the to be quite frank, has left me sick to my stomach thinking about the possibility of a lingering death from using the .40 as a deer rifle. I will have to stop using it for deer. I love to hunt them and see them (as long as it's not on the road) we have a population problem hear, way too many.
So how are .58s?
Thanx Rich
-
.50, .54 & .58 are all good calibers for deer. Of course the larger the ball the larger the hole but there is often a tradeoff which is recoil.
In the end I would choose the one which I thought I could shoot the best.
-
One of the things a gentleman mentioned that shot a few deer with a 40 was that it pays to let them have "time to bleed out" I think we sometimes forget this with any caliber. People shoot then matbe relocad and go looking fo rthe deer. If hit in the liver, this may cause the animal to run a bit further. Archers are told to wait for at least one half hour before getting on the trail. The few liver hit deer I ahave seen with a firearm will run a ways and then usually become weak and go down. Often if tracked right away one finds them with their head up yet. One I shot with a 45-70 was stretched out and already dead. A buck I helped track, shot with a 300 mag had his head up but was too weak to move. A deer hit with a broadhead had to bleed out overnight as it got up again on me after waiting until after supper. It probably pays with any caliber to wait just a bit before tracking. I would not pick a 40 as a primary deer rifle, but would a 45 as a lot of deer have been killed with 45's.
DP
-
So how are .58s?
The .58cal is a caliber which has what I call "serious whompability" L.O.L.
As a general purpose big game caliber its hard to beat...the .570" / 279grn ball carries energy a long way compared to smaller calibers, going through bones, etc...yet with a flatter trajectory than an even larger heavier .62cal.
If where you hunt you're certain you won't need energy at longer ranges, then the .54 or .50cal are excellent deer choices as woods guns...even the .45calif you're truly into short to moderate distances.
But IMO, if you're considering possibly buying another caliber, since you already have the little .40cal, I'd suggest stepping up a couple levels to a .58 or .54 cal and then you've got a broad range of hunting uses covered...
-
RB, DP and others suggestions for a .54 or .58 are good ones - that's a fact. You can never go too big IF and that is a big "IF", you are able to handle the increased recoil without flinching. Even a .75 isn't too big - however, to shoot the big bores well with loads that give them a flat enough trajectory to 'hit' well, requires very stern nerves that most of us lack. "The bigger the hole in the beast, the better is the benumbing effect of the blow" - IF there is enough driving force behind it to flatten trajectories & give good penetration. Shooting very light loads in a big bore is worse than a proper charge in a much smaller bore. For this reason, my choice would be a .54 - although I've never owned one, which is strange.
I've had a number of .58's though and can attest to their usefullness for hunting here, in North America. I would not load a .58 lighter than 110gr., even for deer. Yes, less powder will still kill, but, you need to be able to hit, and having to judge range due to an arched trajectory can leave one with poor hits due to misjudged ranges. This is the reason slugs are very poor choice for hunting. They are slow with loads that don't kick badly. As well,they greatly increase pressures and are hard on equipment.
As recoil goes up with ball weight, we shrink from it and reduce the charge thus lose lfattness of trajectory needed for quick shots. Having the same sight setting for shooting from 25 to 125 yards is a wonderful thing - it is not to be had from the very large bores without tremendous recoil, something most today are not willing to accept. As I noted, less powder in them will still kill - if you can hit the vital spot and therein lies the 'trick' - to hit well over unknown ranges requires a flat trajectory and for this reason, I'd pick a .54 (or perhaps a .50) for deer only. If I included Elk and Moose, I'd go to a .58 or larger - probably larger, much larger. ;D
I can see using a .54 with as little as 110gr. 2F, 100gr. 2F in a .50 - flat trajectory and enough oomph for deer at any range they are likely to be shot at. In a .58, I'd consider 120gr. 2F, but would shoot the most accurate load in any gun I chose to hunt with and THAT my friends usually is just about double what many people actually shoot at the range - not all, mind you, but many. My current .58 is the only one I've had that actually shoots well with less than 140gr. 2F. I've had Zouaves with 72" twist, a Hawken with Large barrel with 66" twist and a 72" twist H&H underhammer - all demanded 140gr. to shoot well at long range. My current .58, a 48" twist shoots well to 100 yards with a mere 110gr. 2F and that is probably more than most guys ever shoot in their .58's. 110gr. 2f is about equivalent to 90gr. 3F, but produces less pressure. Although it kicks a tich more, I've never noticed any granulation as giving more fouling. With the patch/ball combiantions I use, they all seem to shoot cleanly without any change.
A .54's lighter ball kicks less when driven fast enough for flat shooting and that's why it would be a good choice for deer. I know it will also handle moose and elk quite well, even beyond normal muzzleloading killing ranges, yet can be loaded with as little as 30gr. for crushing bunny or squirrel heads. A 'dual' purpose gun if ever was one. I use 30gr. in my 14 bore for bunnies, and 165gr. fo moose - Ureka, another dual purpose gun. It's also my favourite for competition shooting. It's a winner BUT, it kicks appropriately to the charge used.
-
I would have to concur with Daryl's comments, especially to the point recoil vs power. Since there is a trend for some to start picking a "light weight" for deer hunting I would tend to favor a 50 as a deer rifle and the bigger ones for big game. I have a 54 in a Tennessee rifle and have cut back to 90 grains of 2f Swiss due to the design and recoil. RB uses a Virginia rifle in 58 which is a good design as is earlier designs with a wide butt plate. My current dream "deer rifle", which is partially constructed, is an English inspired 58 using the 2" wide straight butt of an English design. "Early" longrifles are also a good design in a big bore. I have also had experience making fowlers which I used for trap shooting and know a little about designing such that I can alleviate recoil sensations. Even so 110 grains in even a 54 gets your attention where about 80 grains of 3f in a 50 is relatively easy to shoot as is about 60-70 in a 45. The 50 is a better choice for longer shooting as in over clearings and fields. Another consideration, especially in the woods hunting is that a larger bore gives a certain advantage in shots that are not picture perfect. When I mention the use of a 40 as a dual purpose rifle, I consider discipline to be the major factor. Loading larger bores, from the 45 or 50 on up works as well as a pipsqueak caliber but use a lot of lead. To be frank its more a matter of aesthetics than being practical as I have shot a lot of squirrels with a 45. I would only use a 40 for both in the situations I have sometimes run into as this year when deer have seemed to have disappeared, I already have put one in the freezer and squirrel hunting looks like a nice diversion for the day. In that instance a 40 can be used as effectively as a very lightly loaded big bore.
DP
-
Gee and i wanted was a squirrel load, not deer or moose :'(
-
Mine is 35gr. of 3F Swiss for these critters. Early season when You can get much closer, I use 30gr.
-
sorry - got carried away - as usual.
-
Gee and i wanted was a squirrel load, not deer or moose :'(
We go carried away. Muzzle loaders in general offer a kind of ease dual use only found in centerfires if you cast bullets, and often are willing to change sights. I had once read that the 99 Savage in 358 was popular in Alaska as it could be used with pistol bullets for small game and full house for bear. We can do that without the need of a loading press or an inventory of different bullets. One individual a while back talked of shooting squirrels with a reduced load in his 54. If head shot it will work very well, Daryl about shooting very reduced loads in a very large bore for rabbits. About like throwing rocks. I think a lot depends on whether you have a "dedicated" squirrel rifle like my 25 or want to use a deer rifle to hunt small game. The American Hunter Magazine just had an article listing their recommended squirrel rifles, all 22's and all very accurate bolt actions. While a 40 can be used "dual purpose" in my opinion it can also be a dedicated small game rifle where one might want to shoot a little larger game as well. Such as calling coyotes. Load development would depend upon ball patch combination and powder charge. I have used 400 ball in my 40 which were a tight fit, but seemed to shoot best. Out in the field for a squirrel load it may be a bit tight to suit your uses. The use of 2f by a couple of contributors I think is worth pursuing. Especially 2f Swiss. Getting that final edge of accuracy is as important for squirrels as for targets as their heads are not all that big. What I love about them is that they are to me a true rifleman's sport. I do not find the brain to be a delicacy so I head shoot them. I suppose a very reduced load would work for a body shot, but I suspect a lot get nailed with a shotgun.
DP
-
FWIW I have yet to use my .40 on squirrels but have used my .45s. The small calibers make more sense as dedicated squirrel rifles than even the .40; though the .40 gives you power for the larger small game & varmints. As a mostly woodland hunter my shots tend to be close. My dedicated deer rifle is a .45 with which I've taken numerous deer. While I've taken even more with various .50s, one shot is all I've ever needed with either. From experience I know the .45 works at 75 yards and the .50 works well past 100. These distances are unusual, however.
Bigger is better as there's no such thing a "degrees of dead". But what ABOUT the .40? I've taken lots of deer with various .357 revolvers with 4" & 6" barrels. All were one shot kills and the deer all dropped within a few feet, with one exception when I hit too far back. The .40 beats the .357 hands down so I would think it would make an "okay" deer rifle (say 30-40grns 3f squirrels & 60 for deer). I always shoot for both lungs and it doesn't take a lot when you do that.
For some time I've been planning my "dream" deer rifle; early Lancaster in .54 and that caliber is a deer gathering machine. So is the excellent .50 but the .54 really does whomp 'um with less recoil than the .58. I can't argue with what's been said so far as it's more a matter of one's particular hunting conditions and experiences. The .40 is a great all around IMO. Merry Christmas and prosperous new year to you all. :)
-
What surprised me when I started reaading this forum was how popular the 40 had become. I think I built the first 40 and used it for the local Rondy's I used to attend. It wasn't all that bad of a match gun but mine was a little "fussy" as compared to the 45's and 50's as far as getting fine accuracy. Yet some really like them for chunk shooting so accuracy is not an issue. Mine shot but I didn't seem to find that "right" combo one likes off of things like X sticks. Tried a pile of loads and both 400 and 395 ball. Think I just needed to play a little more but did not think of 2f in that small of gun. 3F was the powder of choice locally for targets as it was felt to foul less. As I now have a 40 cal barrel on order I should work on loads again. My old 40 is a good bang around gun as it has a repaired wrist. Still I think they are a better gun for targets and small game than some of the smaller bores as the 40 holds up better at longer ranges. Being legal for deer it could be used in a pinch, but as stated I would not use one as a primary deer rifle. Like Hanshi we tend to want to go bigger even though experience has taught us that a smaller cal works OK. Mostly the big ones help in tracking and may give an edge in marginal hits that can occur in close range woods shot easier than one thinks.
DP
-
Speaking of which, way back when I recall the .40 being very common and available. This was when DGW listed more .40s than just about anything else in their longrifles. This is what inspired me to get a .45; I considered it a cannon. Ever since then I've used .45s for everything from squirrels up to deer with great results. I played around with the .58 in the 60s & 70s but liked the .45 better.
Then the .40 kind of "died out", or at least you rarely found one unless you built it or had it built. I guess it just lost favor. Now, it has reemerged and is becoming quite common again. I think my personal .40 will make a splendid small game/varmint rifle. I also won't hesitate using it for deer when legal. Still, if I go out for deer I'll likely carry the tried & true .45. I honestly don't see any real need for anything bigger.
Where I now hunt bears are common. I trust .45s there, too, but folks tell me you need to break shoulder bones, especially if he's close. There's also the "possibility" for elk. I already have a percussion .54 but I just like flints. Before I make any commitments on one, though, I will work with my .62 smoothie. Might not need anything else. I'm convinced the .40, along with the .45, is one of the two best all around calibers extant.
-
My .40 barrel loves 2F (or 3F) with LHV lubed patches. This slippery lube requires 65gr. 3F or 75gr. 2f to shoot well. Anything less, is useless for making small groups at 50yds. plus. The barrel has a 48" twist, quite normal for that size.
My .45 GM barrel with 60" twist also likes 2f as well as 3F - there being a 10gr. spread with it as well, when using slippery lubes - 70gr. of 3F, 80gr. 2F. Neither load 'fouls' the bore, loading being identical - no wiping at any time same as in the .40.
Spit or water based 'lubes' will shoot well with less powder - interesting, I expect due to them being less slippery and building up the correct 'pressure' with softer loads.
Chronographing, I found the velocity of both 2F and 3F to be virtually identical for their respective accuracy loads.
-
Some friends are using water soluble oil, mixed as for machine toll use. Soaking the patches then setting them to dry.
The results in a dry somewhat oily feeling patch with more friction. Requires wiping but when the conditions are right it makes some very small groups.
I had to buy some for a project I was doing and will likely make some up for the over the chunk matches at Cody
Dan
-
The two opinions I have just read concerning lubes remind me of those that claim that bores can become to slick after shooting a while and need roughing up a bit. Intersting concept, whcih I think may have merit as I have seen "shot in barrels" require a different load.
DP
-
You gentlemen have painted a picture the to be quite frank, has left me sick to my stomach thinking about the possibility of a lingering death from using the .40 as a deer rifle. I will have to stop using it for deer. I love to hunt them and see them (as long as it's not on the road) we have a population problem hear, way too many.
So how are .58s?
Thanx Rich
Rich, for what it's worth, I've got a little different opinion about what is or isn't appropriate for game afield. You seem to have taken the thread as contrary to recommending a .40 for deer, but I'm not reading it the same way. I don't argue that larger calibers are not suitable by any means, but experience has shown me that reliance upon numbers found on paper are a poor litmus in determination of suitability for what one uses to hunt. No comment rendered here on the legality as prescribed by different states either.
As previously mentioned, muzzle loaders offer flexibility for hunting. They may be loaded down or up as the shooter deems appropriate. To the point of what is used, inclusive of caliber and load, one must first be able to put the ball where it will result in a decisive kill. In context of the original post that started this discussion, there are two eventualities here. One is that you smack a squirrel with far more oomph than necessary and in such manner there is little left but red mist. The other limits the shooter to precise placement and doing little if any damage to the edible portions by way of a head shot. Apologies to those who eat tongue and brains. In any case, if a head shot is successfully made, it matters not what caliber or charge is used, only that it be accurate enough to enable such placement.
I find little difference between head shooting squirrels and taking the necessary steps to down larger game with a round ball. First requirement is placement and that requires one to know the gun, load it appropriately and use it within one's limitations. Secondly, there is a requirement that the ball perform within certain parameters, ie. be reasonably predictable in the terminal phase. That means that it tracks more or less in a straight path thru the animal and neither over or under expands. Barring deflection by heavy bone, round balls do a fair job of the former if they don't deform erratically. Brittle alloys or very high velocities can contribute to such errant travels. Lastly, the ball needs enough momentum to reach the vital organs and hopefully exit on the off side if the shooter's intent is to ventilate the cardiopulmonary system completely.
In very brief summary of round ball ballistics...they suck....as compared to conicals. Round balls do not begin their journey with a great deal of energy, and will shed that quickly. Regardless of that they are quite lethal and they tend to penetrate far better than most of the unwashed masses would imagine.
There was discussion earlier in this thread that compared the .357 mag to a .40 cal round ball. In my opinion, it is an apples and oranges comparison on the face of it, but if one looks into the issue a little deeper, maybe not. Sectional Density is a measure of mass to cross sectional area and is used in the calculus of exterior ballistics and terminal ballistics, in the latter case as a comparative measure of a bullet's ability to penetrate. A 158 grain .357 slug has a sectional density of .177, and a .40 caliber round ball is about .102. For comparison, a .22 short bullet is about .105. None of these numbers are impressive on the face of it, but where it gets interesting is what happens when they strike a game animal.
Bullets usually expand or in some cases fragment when they penetrate flesh and bone, and when this occurs it very rapidly degrades sectional density. Bullets expand in relation to their hardness and impact velocity: Hard = less expansion, while high velocity tends to increase it. It is a world of nearly infinite variables and difficult to pin down precisely, thus we look for something that is reasonably predictable.
In the end, it is up to the shooter to decide what will or won't work for any given circumstance. A previous poster said the .357 was good for deer. In the hands of a competent shooter, I agree. So is buckshot when used within its limitations, and the shot size is smaller than .40 caliber in all buckshot. I've seen #3 buck (~.25 caliber) pass thru and thru on mature hogs more often than not. I've killed over 60 hogs with CB shorts, with one exception, all one shot kills. So, is the .40 caliber round ball adequate for deer? Yes, if you can put it where it needs to go. That means knowing your rifle, your quarry and yourself. If you aren't up to speed in any of those departments, get a larger caliber. Or, you can learn what you need to know to address perceived shortcomings. One thing is certain however, one can wound and lose a deer with very large caliber muzzle loaders, just like the small bores. Happens every year this time because a lot of folks just think a larger bore relieves them of the need for holding up their end of the bargain. Ain't so.
Dan
-
Good treatise, Dan.
-
I know we got off on a slight side-bar regarding a .40 cal as a multi-purpose rifle for small game & deer, so why we are here, I have a question.
Regarding deer, I have purchased some .40 cal conical bullets that I will lube and place over some felt wads, to see if I can work up a deer hunting load that offers acceptable accuracy and has some improved punch from a heavier, higher energy, and expandable bullet (vs the roundball). I know barrel twist will have some bearing on the accuracy (maybe a 1 in 48" would work).
Has anyone had success using conicals in a .40? If so, what did you use? If accuracy was decent, it seems this would make it more of a cross-over caliber, maybe rivaling a .45 roundball in performance.
Your thoughts?
Top Jaw
-
Going to a conical is heading in the wrong direction IMHO. Unless a fast enough twist,ie like for a Sharps etc I'd stick with the round ball. I finally got my Sharps 40-70 to work OK on deer, but only after switching to a castbullet with a .300+meplat. ie a flat nose. In the usual muzzleloader, I prefer round balls, 'cause they work. Pressures are going to go way up with a conical of any decent length. Velocity will drop, over what you can get with a RB, so I don't see much of an advantage when talking deer hunting. I have a .50, a .54,a .62, and up etc so I don't use my .40 for deer; but if I did, I'm certain that awell placed shot
with my load of .395 ball and 60 gr 3 F would drop one.
-
Bob's comments follow pretty much what I have seen. One individual that I associated with shot something like 28 deer with his 50. His claim was that he preferred roundball because they were more accurate and the conicals did not expand or blow as big of a hole. Other sources have stated this. I have also heard that the 40 cal BPC's like Bob referred to tend to push through with little or no expansion, probably with round noses. My experience with my 45-70 is that the Gould hollow point expands very well and is very effective on deer, but that the heavier flat points are not as destructive. Most of the slugs tend to shoot best at lower velocities, and for a ML are still not that ballistically efficient, such that their weight permits higher down range velocities but not all that much. The 40 would be used within 40-50 yards where an ideal shot is presented. Also deer do vary in size depending on age and location. A very large buck in the midwest will weigh in at 220 pounds or better. Some field dress at 200 that I see in the paper. In warmer climates a large buck might weigh in a 150-170, Does and yearlings are alos proportinately smaller. I feel a 40 will handle a 125 pound or smaller deer quite well, I would feel kind of silly holding one if a large 220 pound 10 pointer showed up. It would harvest the 10 pointer but tracking might be a challenge no would I trust a shoulder shot.
Use the 40 with a RB and within its limitations.
DP
-
The 40 cal is a great all around caliber and a favorite of mine. Perfect for almost every endeaver in Minnesota any ways. Is light for deer/bear/moose but fun to shoot and more than capable for the squirrel, rabbit, porky pine, fox, coyote and plinking. As in all hunting cases...no your limitations, effective distance and a 40 cal gun is capable. There is nothing wrong with letting that buck walk away if it is out of killing range. You just have to learn to hunt closer. And if it's yer only gun...you will learn to do so or git abit hungry.
Ray