R.E.A.L. vs PRB

[hanshi]

Although it seems to go against the grain, I've never had problems with a blood trail when the ball didn't exit.  The last buck (8pt) that I killed in Ga. gave me an angling shot.  The ball was flattened under the off-side skin.  He didn't go far and I heard him crash but he left a blood trail Ray Charles could follow.  Not just the on the ground but on the bushes and sapling stems.  I hit him with a .45 prb that left a gaping entrance.  This is normal with the deer I've shot whether it be from a .45, .50 or .54.  Without exception the exit wounds have been smaller than the entrance wounds.  And for this reason I've never even considered the use of a conical.

[Daryl]

Sounds great- in Ga., hanshi.   Up here the ungulates carry quite a lot more fat, that slips over and covers the entrance hole or slit as is normal in a moose's side.  With no exit, there is usually no blood trail, just a few cut-off hairs where he was standing.

[smylee grouch]

If you don't get pass through and still get a blood trail you made a good shot in the right place. If however you would have been just off your mark by even a small amount the critter would/could probably do as Daryl said and the entrance hole might seal up with fat/hair/entrails and not produce the blood trail. I know from my own experience so I like the pass through my self. That being said, if you hit him even with a very large cal ball in the wrong spot you won t get pass through. Bullet placement really is every thing.

[Daryl]

I found the 480gr. PLead balls or the 466gr. WW balls from my .69 stopped inside moose - there was usually a leg bone involved.  My buddy Keith could not keep a 580gr. WW ball from his 11 bore rifle inside a moose until he dropped his powder charge to 120gr. from 150gr.  With that rifle, the blood trail was always measured in feet anyway- or DRT. With my little 14 bore, a couple yards - moose in sight - gotta love it.

[sonny]

Yep, I'm with Taylor, if the critter has an entrance hole with an exit hole on the far side of the lungs, the critter is dinner.....The more holes, the faster the boat sinks!..............sonny

[Leatherbark]

If we never read a ballistic chart or a magazine article we wouldn't know the shortcomings of the ballistic coefficient of the round ball.  When I was in my early twenties I had a CVA Kentucky in .45 caliber.  When me and my buddies would shoot things such as cans, barrels or just stuff my holes would be gigantic compared to their 30-30s 30.06s and such.  They always thought that my 45 muzzleloader was a power house compared to their small bore smokeless rifles because it made bigger holes in stuff.  This is because they never read Elmer Keith and Jack O'Conner or Jim Carmichael like I did.

Because of my reading about the poor round ball ballistics I was ruined for a while.  I later got me a T.C Hawken and used the 50 Maxi in several deer.  All were pass through shots even one a 125 yards.  I shot the thing a lot and it kicked and bruised my face like a mule. Then I started reading traditional Muzzleloading magazines and read stories about using round balls on deer.  I was getting the urge to use a long rifle with a proper projectile because I was reading stories that the word "Coefficient" was no where to be found in the book.  Just lead, patching, powder, flints and dead deer.

 I shot a lot back then and I came to the conclusion that I could shoot more if I would use a round ball and it wouldn't hurt so bad either.  Low and behold how amazed I was when I shot the first deer with a round ball in .50 caliber.  At normal hunting distances of say out to 40 yards they bled out quick even out of one hole sometimes. Then I tried the .45 CVA on a deer at around 50 yards.  I still have that ball somewhere. It looks like a miniature flying saucer.

I don't think anything could survive a round ball through the lungs at high speed if the round ball is matched to the game.  Make a good shot, sit back and pour a cup of coffee, light up a Camel, relax and say to yourself "man that was a good shot and a good hit".  Every time I have heard someone say certain rifle either modern or Muzzleloading failed to kill the animal , I always came to the conclusion that it was a poorly placed shot.  Sorry for the long winded post.


Bob

[Smoketown]

  "Make a good shot, sit back and pour a cup of coffee, light up a Camel, relax and say to yourself "man that was a good shot and a good hit". 
Bob

All too familiar Bob,

It appears we read a lot by the same authors ... Now, which one actually said it?

Unfortunately, most of todays 'scribes' have no idea how to 'spin a yarn' or tell a story.

Cheers,
Smoketown

[hanshi]

Curiously, About the only deer I've killed that didn't leave a blood trail were shot with modern rifles, even up to the 30/06.  I've taken scores of deer with two different .250/3000 rifles; they never went far and I usually saw or heard them crash.  The very first deer I killed with the .250 was a nice buck.  I fired, he ran.  I heard him coughing a couple seconds later and then crash.  When I got to him I thought he must have died from a heart attack.  There was NO entrance wound and NO exit wound.  It wasn't until I field dressed him that I saw a tiny red dot on the inside of the hide; that was it!  I opened him up and discovered the lungs and heart were mangled.  Under the off side skin I found what was left of the 100 grain bullet.  There was just a small piece of gilding metal with a dab of lead stuck to it.  Still no hole was observable on the inside of the skin; just the tiny red dot.  I never found the "hole" indicated by the red dot but the bullet path showed it had to be it.  In every case with a prb, regardless of caliber, the entry was always huge and gaping.   

[Daryl]

   Did the buck yell out "OOOF!!!" 

Moose do that when you hit them with a ball from a 14 or 11 bore rifle, literally stagger from the blow.