AmericanLongRifles Forums
General discussion => Gun Building => Topic started by: clambdin on September 24, 2009, 01:04:21 AM
-
I am planning on fitting a new barrel on my semi custom hawken, it currently has a 36 inch GM 54cal roundball barrel on it and does a great job, I am thinking about having another barrel fitted to it for shooting maxi bullets or maxi balls and occasional roundballs, this barrel will be in .50cal and be 34 inches, I am looking for your opinions on barrel make and twist ? Thanks !
-
Clambdin, You would get a better response if you filled out your profile. Most members here are very friendly and free with their advise when they know who they are talking to. I have learned more from this site in the last few years than I learned in the previous 30 of my "experimental" gunsmithing career!!! Now for your question, I would advise you not to try maxiballs at all because the roundball is a very effective and accurate projectile and most members here agree they are not needed. If you still have to have one contact any barrel barrel manufacturer for their recomendations....Ed
-
If you must shoot Maxis, then think about a barrel for conicals only with a 1:28 twist. The do-all 1:48 works ok but is not ideal for either ball or conical.
-
I concur with Mike - you've already got a good roundball barrel, go for a fast twist bullet barrel. Green Mountain sells fast twist barrels for bullets.
-
I agree with Mike and Swampwalker, you already have a good round ball gun. I don't know why you would want anything else. But if you feel you need a maxi ball gun, why not get a whole new gun that only shoots maxi balls. Then have a separate pouch for each so you won't be likely to confuse the ammunition.
Bruce
-
There have been a lot of talk selling folks on these elongated "bullets" ever since about 1850 or so. I think it's a fad that will pass. :D
Seriously though, there are several mentalities to muzzleloading hunting and these span all the way from "just another way to get a another deer, so I might as well use a scoped inline and shoot sabots" to "I'll do it the way they did it."
Folks on this foum have shot everything from mice to mose with round ball and found them effective, used within their limitations.
Don't let the bias of most of the folks here (myself included) get in the way of having fun the way you want to.
-
Hey, Rich, what's a mose. Singular for mice. Oh, you mean a Moose. Dang the Minnesota/Scandinavian spellchecker failed again, or was it huked on fonics. ;D ;D :P
Bill
On topic what you have will take everything in North America out to 125 yards easily, if the nut behind the gun does his or her job with a roundball.
-
Thompson Center came up with a kind of universal barrel when they came out with that Hawken with the 1/48" twist.
It was OK for a bullet, and worked somewhat OK for a roundball, but was not ideal for either one. The 1/48" twist will
work fine for a round ball, however, it should have grooves deep enough to enable it to grip a patch rather well, I would'
recommend a depth of at least .010. By the same token, that same 1/48" twist will work OK for the Maxi-balls that TC
came out with, with that shallow rifling they had in their barrel, but is not the ideal twist to go with. So, you can see that
it is nearly impossible to come up with one twist and rifling depth that will work real well with both a round ball and a bullet..........Don
-
I am planning on fitting a new barrel on my semi custom hawken, it currently has a 36 inch GM 54cal roundball barrel on it and does a great job, I am thinking about having another barrel fitted to it for shooting maxi bullets or maxi balls and occasional roundballs, this barrel will be in .50cal and be 34 inches, I am looking for your opinions on barrel make and twist ? Thanks !
Yeah I am a wet blanket but her goes anyway.
I personally see this as an exercise in futility.
A bullet barrel is not usually a good RB barrel.
The bullet is not a panacea for the ML you can't make a 300 Win mag out of a ML by using a bullet. They don't really kill any better than a rb and some are worse performers even in the same caliber and a RB of the same *weight* out performs them. The typical modern ML bullet has other "issues" as well.
If loaded to velocities that give a flat trajectory the pressure is high so steel nipples will start to blow the hammer back in 10-50 rounds. Stainless lasts a little better. But the only real answer is a platinum lined nipple at $80 up. This is also a problem with the cloth patched picket.
There were reasons why the "naked" conical was not used in general purpose MLs back in the day, its not really practical and can be dangerous. The PP bullet was limited to target guns with the single exception of the Whitworth. The cloth patched picket it traditional but it has problems as well needing a piston starter or better a false muzzle to load it straight.
But of course the gun writers in the slick paper gun press just love the modern ML bullet and write glowing reports since the companies that make them are buying advertising.
If I want to shoot bullets I get out my cartridge guns.
Dan
-
Dear Wet Blanket, haahahahah, that's funny. I agree with a lot of what you say, but I wish to dry out some of the dampness from the blanket.
Harry Pope shot muzzle loaded naked cast bullets in a breechloader. The long range Irish team shot against the US with muzzleloaders shooting elongated slugs, some Paper patched, some naked grease grooved bullets.
I DO think you will need a rifled false muzzle, or, slugs that you have been pre-grooved to fit your rifling.
In any event, a slug shooter is more work to load than a round ball shooter. But in the wind, the long bullet will hold on target better, with a smaller frontal profile for lower wind resistance.
I have often thought of building a schuetzen flinter conical offhand rifle to shoot against the cartridge boys, but I don't think that's going to happen in this lifetime. It's such a specialty gun, can't be used against ball guns in the regular matches, it's neither fish nor fowl. Too many guns to build, too little time.
Anyway, if you must build one of these, look at the BP cartridge twists. .45 can be 1 in 18, or 1 in 22. I can't guess what a .50 might be, nor what the recoil would be like with a 500 gr slug. I say, make what you like.
-
An interesting point from one of the above posts. I once read an article by Jeff Cooper about moose hunting in Scandanavia a long time ago. I'm not sure exactly which country he was in, but in the scandanavian tongues, "moose" denotes a mouse (mus), & the animal that we call a moose is actually an elk (elg). Naturally our "elk" is really a deer. Apparently Olie & Sven had a little too much to drink on the way from the old country & got everything screwed up on arrival. This has been a public service message from the Ungulate Anti-defamation League ::)
Roger B.
-
Roger b, that is so off topic, I think you are a contender for first prize in the "National Off Topic Award".
So, uh, back to fast twist barrels.........
-
I've talked about this before, but , One more time. A few years back, I built a flintlock .45 bullet gun.
I used it to shoot in the 1000 yd matches in Ottawa. The barrel is by Longhammock, and it is a shallow groove, 1 in 18 twist. I shot paper patched bullets finally settling on a 80 gr FFg charge and a card wad.
The gun was competitive out to 400 yds for certain, 600 yds was OK . After much experimentation, I got it to shoot consistantly at 1000 yds, but that was with pre weighed charges [ electronic scale] , cleaning after every shot, AND changing the vent liner every target ie every 15 shots. These were commercial available berylium vents from Dixie. In my opinion, the target range is the proper place for these bullet guns.
I remember calling Dan P. 19 years ago, asking for advice because my recently purchased and treasured Sharps rifle had failed me in the loss of my deer. I ended up filing flat .30 tips on my bullets, and business picked up. I eventually went to a 50-70 Sharps for hunting, just to better the performance on game.
I now rarely hunt with it, because my round ball rifles just work better..period. At the distances we hunt here, mainly in the bush, a 100 yd shot is about the furthest we can expect. My .50 or .54 patched round ball flinters work exceptionally well for this kind of work. Going to a bullet is more trouble, and for ho gain . Stick with the ball.
-
Just to add more water to the blanket, a friend who believed all of the hype surrounding conical bullets in ML guns refused to shoot round balls in his TC.
Instead, he shot the standard 54 cal maxie in front of 120 gr pyrodex. After three shots, he was done. Shooting magnum loads from that TC soured him on anything to do with ML hunting...or shooting. Now, this guy is no a 90 lb weakling. He is roughly 6' 3" and weighs in at over 250 lb. He is also a hunter and shooter, but the TC was too much for him. He put that gun away, never to be shot again.
The moral of these ramblings is; beware of shooting the loads or believing the hype that is printed in the hunting rags, written by people who have an ulterior motive in getting consumers to buy their products.
God bless
-
Just to add more water to the blanket, a friend who believed all of the hype surrounding conical bullets in ML guns refused to shoot round balls in his TC.
Instead, he shot the standard 54 cal maxie in front of 120 gr pyrodex. After three shots, he was done. Shooting magnum loads from that TC soured him on anything to do with ML hunting...or shooting. Now, this guy is no a 90 lb weakling. He is roughly 6' 3" and weighs in at over 250 lb. He is also a hunter and shooter, but the TC was too much for him. He put that gun away, never to be shot again.
The moral of these ramblings is; beware of shooting the loads or believing the hype that is printed in the hunting rags, written by people who have an ulterior motive in getting consumers to buy their products.
God bless
Well at least one did not slide off the powder, form a bore obstruction and blow the gun up.
Acer:
Yes, LOTS of people shot bullets in MLs back in the day. I am very familiar with this. Many of the rifles weight 30-50 pounds too. BUT the naked and PP bullets were virtually all confined to TARGET GUNS. Because they did not like to say on the powder in hunting situations. Yeah I *tested* this years ago when the Maxi first got popular. The maxi also has a dismal record as a hunting bullet, thus the "maxi-hunter".
I try to no get into this since there are legions of experts that "have never had a problem" who jump in the tell me I am wrong. But my testing and "field" reports of deer running off to be killed *the next season* with healed bullet holes, hunters in the woods with maxis actually protruding from the barrel etc, paint another picture.
The heavy bullets used for LR shooting generally make very poor hunting projectiles anyway even in BPCRs. So ML hunting rifles shot short cloth patched picket bullets *if* the RB was not used. They stay on the powder and provide the flat trajectory and killing power needed in ML hunting situations. But they need a piston starter to shoot accurately and these are kinda heavy to pack around and are fragile as well.They also greatly increase breech pressures since they often require more powder than a RB too shoot well in same rifle. As a result nipples/vents get changed more often or the shooter needs a platinum lined or hard stainless nipple.
Them bullets are just wonderful.
Its America people can do anything they want so long as they accept the consequences. But people also need to know both sides of issues to make informed decisions.
Dan
-
Dan, I agree with you that the elongated is for target shooting, at least for me. I would not want the extra complication in the field.
I cannot speak for the Maxi's, never tried 'em.
tom
-
Just to add more water to the blanket, a friend who believed all of the hype surrounding conical bullets in ML guns refused to shoot round balls in his TC.
Instead, he shot the standard 54 cal maxie in front of 120 gr pyrodex. After three shots, he was done. Shooting magnum loads from that TC soured him on anything to do with ML hunting...or shooting. Now, this guy is no a 90 lb weakling. He is roughly 6' 3" and weighs in at over 250 lb. He is also a hunter and shooter, but the TC was too much for him. He put that gun away, never to be shot again.
The moral of these ramblings is; beware of shooting the loads or believing the hype that is printed in the hunting rags, written by people who have an ulterior motive in getting consumers to buy their products.
God bless
Well at least one did not slide off the powder, form a bore obstruction and blow the gun up.
Acer:
Yes, LOTS of people shot bullets in MLs back in the day. I am very familiar with this. Many of the rifles weight 30-50 pounds too. BUT the naked and PP bullets were virtually all confined to TARGET GUNS. Because they did not like to say on the powder in hunting situations. Yeah I *tested* this years ago when the Maxi first got popular. The maxi also has a dismal record as a hunting bullet, thus the "maxi-hunter".
I try to no get into this since there are legions of experts that "have never had a problem" who jump in the tell me I am wrong. But my testing and "field" reports of deer running off to be killed *the next season* with healed bullet holes, hunters in the woods with maxis actually protruding from the barrel etc, paint another picture.
The heavy bullets used for LR shooting generally make very poor hunting projectiles anyway even in BPCRs. So ML hunting rifles shot short cloth patched picket bullets *if* the RB was not used. They stay on the powder and provide the flat trajectory and killing power needed in ML hunting situations. But they need a piston starter to shoot accurately and these are kinda heavy to pack around and are fragile as well.They also greatly increase breech pressures since they often require more powder than a RB too shoot well in same rifle. As a result nipples/vents get changed more often or the shooter needs a platinum lined or hard stainless nipple.
Them bullets are just wonderful.
Its America people can do anything they want so long as they accept the consequences. But people also need to know both sides of issues to make informed decisions.
Dan
Yes, slide off the powder and form an obstruction." Back when we formed our ML club we banned the naked maxiball (which was popular then) and have stayed with he patched round ball....for that reason. Now, we are finding quite a few plastic sabots littering our range. We intend to find out if they result during our shoots or not!
-
Those modern muzzleloaders use sabots, do they not?
I can't stand to see junk all over a range. candy wrappers, empty bullet boxes, cigarette butts, spent shells, and used cleaning patches all frost my biscuit. Ever hear about 'littering'? Or, better yet, 'cleaning up after yourself' ?
Tom
-
Dan makes some good points about bullets sliding off the powder which is caused primarily by poorly designed and undersize bullets - a properly designed and sized bullet takes a tremendous amount of force to dislodge from its seated position.
The maxi also has a dismal record as a hunting bullet, thus the "maxi-hunter".
The same can be said for most ML bullets since everyone seems to think they need a "pointed nose" (same with the majority of CF shooters - just ignore the facts or performance in favor of sales hype pushing the "sexy looking") I've done quite a bit of testing too and when you read reports of Maxi's, REAL's, ect. going in the side on a broadside shot and coming out the front, bottom or top, it isn't BS trying to cover poor shooting because it can readily be duplicated on the range; even when they go straight, the wound channels are not very impressive either. And, you can just click over to the modern forums and read all the "hit it and it ran away" and "don't know what happened" stories.
I disagree with the complicated loading in the field because the right conical is no more complicated or time consuming to load than a PRB. Conicals do have their place in the field and the benefits of a properly designed conical for certain applications cannot be ignored but that by no means implies that there is anything wrong with the PRB. I've shot deer and hogs with many different guns from the .222rem to the .375 H&H mag and not a single one of them put critters down as hard and quick as the 0.715" PRB with a boiler room hit. So, why mess with conicals? Answer is simple and for the same reasons they did back in the day ... more range and more options. The right conical will easily provide in excess of 40" penetration and punch through heavy bone with ease while still creating an acceptable permanent wound channel.
Like it or not, there are many hunting areas and conditions where one needs to make an anchoring shot or loose the game to either the environment or another hunter. I don't dispute the fact that the right PRB chunker can do the same thing but many people don't have the desire for a 16 to the pound or bigger rifle and others prefer to punch steel or paper at 300+yds in the off season.
Where the problem arises with conicals and ML's is with the "for hire" stupid rantings coming from the likes of Toby Bridges, Randy Wakeman and the other gun rag prostitutes. Conicals in ML's are nothing new, they've been around for centuries but the problem lies with the BS "numbers on paper" associated with the gun rags. Since the 1980's there been a constant drift in two different directions: 1- is the excessively heavy and lesser-performing shotgun loads; 2- the focus solely on velocity in rifles by using lighter bullets. The lies and BS have been carried over to the ML community for many years including by those like Toby Bridges who didn't seem to have any problem bragging on PRB's when Dixie and other traditional ML'ers was paying his salary but now that the money is coming from the modern in-line side, suddenly the tables are shifted and the lies get bigger and the BS deeper.
It doesn't matter if you look at the .45-70 or the .50 flintlock, it's a continuous hammering of lies and dis-information fueled by whoever happens to have the most advertisement money. Several years ago a well known gun rag printed an article written by one of their staff writers. It was several pages of bragging on this new shotgun shell load and even included pictures of the wonderful patterns they produced from the author's "test gun". Months later it leaked out that the company paying for the article didn't even have that ammo in testing at the time the article went to print and when they finally did get to testing it, it proved to be completely useless.
This is the kind of stuff that has transformed into people associating conicals in an ML with something like the .300win mag just as the original 500gr round nose bullet in the .45-70 has shrunk to a 250gr pointed plastic tip and those who take the gun rags as gospel don't have a clue why they suck. The belief in this gun rag BS is what killed Winchester starting with the .375 big bore that was an absolute failure simply because they designed it around a too-light bullet.
I've put a lot of mass-production and custom conicals down range from the ML's and there are those that work and those that don't. Pointed bullet may be fine for ringing gongs or punching paper but normally they ain't worth $#@* for creating an acceptable wound channel. REAL's that will cut holes at 50yds are off in never-never land ten yards beyond that and if you don't put 120+ grains of 2F behind 'em, they won't even make 50yds without tumbling. Premium sabot bullets at $1.65 each consistently broke apart on impact giving less than 8" penetration yet in the same exact test medium at the same range, the plain old 0.535" PRB consistently produced in excess of 18" penetration and a ball cast from WW drove holes 24" deep - of course the traditional style .45 cal 500gr conical punched through the 36" of medium and another 5" of dirt before coming to a stop; permanent wound channel from the conical was slightly larger than that of the 0.535" PRB.
As for the twist, it must be a match between the bore diameter, bullet design and velocity. Conicals can be made to shoot from 1:48 or slower twists but they will always suffer from performance issues on big game because of the associated weight and design limitations. I run deep cut 1:18 in my .45 cal's.
This by no means is meant to imply that I'm discounting the PRB - I'm merely pointing out that properly designed and used conicals have their place and one needs to cut through the lies and BS in order to see the truth and accept the facts for what they are.
Side note, I'm also in agreement with Roger and Tom, nothing annoys me more than seeing the range or field littered with trash including plastic sabots and wads! Okay, I'm off my soap box now.
-
Warning: this topic is 4 years old. ;)
Yes I'm reviving another old dusty thread. Mostly for the last post there by FL-flintlock which is brilliant (and possibly enlightening for some). But also the other good content.
note:
Maybe in addition to the "Tutorial" section we should have a FAQ section with threads such as this providing the "answers". This would be very helpful for some of the new folks who miss good threads in their searches (every engine is has it's quirkiness) assuming they try to search, and a easy quick way for new folks to get a feel for the the general consensus or lack thereof (hot-button topics) here at ALR.
-
Yeah, the thread says i wrote stuff I have no memory of.
I spent the summer wing shooting carpenter bees with roundballs.
I muzzle loaded my Red Ryder with four or five peppercorns. I knocks the bees down, then I stomp 'em in the neck to finish them off.
-
I shoot just about anything that can humanely kill a deer.
Most flintlocks are "modern" compared to my recurve bow when it comes to technology so I will try and give you a suggestion directly aimed at your question.
I have lots of free time and like to read so I, over time, have read just about every opinion or testing with various elongated bullets shot from muzzleloaders (the web really isn't that big when you work 12 hour midnight shifts behind a computer - and your only job is waiting for the phone to ring).
Anyhow, there are a number of "bullets" out there from various big name and small name companies designed to be shot from muzzle loaders.
The thing is, not all of them got together and agreed on a rate of twist for all bullets.
I think before you decide on a barrel twist you should decide on what it is you want to shoot.
If it's short bullets (PA Conicals, Buffalo Ball-ets), then your roundball twist (1-70 through 1-48) is fine.
You may want to look at a 1:32 twist for others (heavy plains bullets) or even faster 1:28 or faster for something like the (new) Hornady FBT which is a 300 grain bore sized bullet without grease groves.
Even with sabots some will shoot fine in a 1:48, others recommend 1:32 or faster.
There is a couple barrel makers out there that can (cut) exactly what you want - Oregon barrel is one where you specify the twist, depth of groves, caliber, length (up to 35"), plug size etc.
I figure for under 200 bucks you can get a barrel that you can play around with and if you end up not liking it you aren't really out that much - besides you can always resell it, there is always someone else who wants to "try" and have their muzzle loader act like a centerfire...
-
edited for clarity
My main two points were echoing how the $$$ tends to distort the opinions of "experts" and "professionals" who later are quoted as references---which becomes legend/old wives'/writers' tales which the unknowing repeat to the newcomers who may believe it and never know any better. The writer gets paid, the advertiser gets a sales bump, and we the people...
And that FAQ could be handy.
The only reason i was looking at twists is because a sold a pal the T/C i had and he promptly put a new bbl in it with a slower twist. (He's never shot the new bbl, and I haven't cornered him on whether or not he shot the bbl it came with, but Tip sold another bbl, so that's fine.) It grouped fine for me.
My mind is made up on twists, as I already have 5 bbls on hand and the bestest thing is to let the bbl maker decide. I had other "well-readed" opinions earlier on, but have discarded them as a bunch of noise i don't need. I don't even KNOW what twist Charlie Burton put in the last bbl i got, don't care. It'll shoot when i get it built or it won't and twist won't be the issue if it doesn't. ;D
cheerios
-
...
I spent the summer wing shooting carpenter bees with roundballs.
I muzzle loaded my Red Ryder with four or five peppercorns. I knocks the bees down, then I stomp 'em in the neck to finish them off.
They all drowned here this summer. Hmmm, I do have a Daisy match pistol...
did you use the multi-colored 'corns or the all black? ramrod or gravity loaded? :D
-
OK, if someone will volunteer to look-up the FAQ's and the associated links to the answer/s I will put them somewhere they can not be replied or commented on. I just don't have the time to do the legwork. Just put the info/links in a PM and send it to me and I will take care of the rest.
Dennis
edited for clarity
And that FAQ could be handy.
The only reason i was looking at twists is because a sold a pal the T/C i had and he promptly put a new bbl in it with a slower twist. (He's never shot the new bbl, and I haven't cornered him on whether or not he shot the bbl it came with, but Tip sold another bbl, so that's fine.) It grouped fine for me.
My mind is made up on twists, as I already have 5 bbls on hand and the bestest thing is to let the bbl maker decide. I had other "well-readed" opinions earlier on, but have discarded them as a bunch of noise i don't need. I don't even KNOW what twist Charlie Burton put in the last bbl i got, don't care. It'll shoot when i get it built or it won't and twist won't be the issue if it doesn't. ;D
cheerios
-
THANKS Dennis.
Yes it's all work and time and stuff. I'll start working up some stuff-but am "under the gun" trying to get a build out just now.
wp
OK, if someone will volunteer to look-up the FAQ's and the associated links to the answer/s I will put them somewhere they can not be replied or commented on. I just don't have the time to do the legwork. Just put the info/links in a PM and send it to me and I will take care of the rest.
Dennis
edited for clarity
And that FAQ could be handy.
The only reason i was looking at twists is because a sold a pal the T/C i had and he promptly put a new bbl in it with a slower twist. (He's never shot the new bbl, and I haven't cornered him on whether or not he shot the bbl it came with, but Tip sold another bbl, so that's fine.) It grouped fine for me.
My mind is made up on twists, as I already have 5 bbls on hand and the bestest thing is to let the bbl maker decide. I had other "well-readed" opinions earlier on, but have discarded them as a bunch of noise i don't need. I don't even KNOW what twist Charlie Burton put in the last bbl i got, don't care. It'll shoot when i get it built or it won't and twist won't be the issue if it doesn't. ;D
cheerios
-
The other problem with conicals and bullets is rate of twist which can effect both accuracy and effectiveness if used fir hunting.
A maxi in a 48" twist which it will shoot pretty well in from all accounts. Still under stabilized and/or poorly designed bullets (and the Maxi is from the hunting standpoijnt) deflect easily. They may not track straight after striking the animal. I can assure the reader that this is a recipe for lost game or followup shots based seeing this happen with some other modern bullets.
The British Army surgeons found that the Minie ball fired from a 72 twist would deviate wildly from its course when striking a man sometimes turning 90 degrees.
The round ball actually has a pretty good reputation for tracking straight as do bullets like 300-400-500 grain FP 45 caliber bullets fired from twists between 18 and 22. A 50-70-450 bullet fired from a 36" twist (Sharps standard for 50) will shoot through a deer end to end on track and bones be darned.
But when we go to a little slower twist like a 48" 50 or 54 then problems can arise. Or so I have seen posted here by people who have used them. I read, either here or on another ML site the account of a mans wife shooting a deer with a 45 maxi and the deer was never found. She claimed it was a good shot but the deer was never found. Until next year when the husband shot the deer and found a well placed through and through fully healed wound in a buck he shot. This parallels a story Elmer Keith told of shooting a Coyote broadside with one of the 25 CFs and having it run off unhurt. Then sometime later killing a coyote and finding entry and exit scars in the hide then found healed wounds through the lungs.
Round balls track very well even from slow twists though near the end of their track, if still in the animal, they tend to deflect somewhat.
The failings of the ML conical for heavy game was well known by 1860. Europeans were still shooting Elephant with RBs well into the cartridge era (mid-1870s). The problem with ML bullets for heavy game was that they had to be SOFT to work in the rifle and being soft they did not work on heavy game. Th e RB was better since it could be hardened. The advent of large bore cartridge guns changed this allowing hardened bullets, smokeless changed it even more. But the fact is that the RB is very hard to beat as a hunting projectile when properly sized for the game and used within its limitations.
People really should read Forsythe's "The Sporting Rifle and its Projectiles" but of course it disagrees with the slick paper magazine writers a large number or which are greatly over rated in many things and MLs in particular. Hunting with MLs is another step down in quality.
As I have stated before I have shot or seen shot a considerable variety of most game animals in Montana, no Mtn Goats or Sheep but about everything else. Mostly deer and elk. Use within its range the RB will kill any of them cleanly and in pure lead will give about 30" of penetration if no heavy bones were encountered. But even then they work though penetration will likely be reduced. A 54-58-67 RB all penetrate about the same just bigger holes. Larger diameter balls (a .662 ball is the same weight as a 54 maxi but shoots flatter and makes bigger holes does not move off the powder and operates at much less pressure.
So far as "properly sized" bullets not moving. If "naked" they move too easy by the time they are seated on the powder they are no longer tight in the bore. Even more interesting is that most American rifles in the past had TAPERED BORES. They were very often loose at the breech choked at about 6" from the muzzle then cylindrical or perhaps slightly funneled to the muzzle. John Baird's "Hawken Rifle" describes this. So shooting a "naked" bullet in one of these in a hunting situation? BTW many of the ML slug guns were/are choked as well.
We know from the writings of the past and current experience is that bullets are special use target bullets. The picket in theory could be used except there was the heavy and FRAGILE starter. If the fitted nose on the piston is dinged its junk and takes lathe time to fix and money. Ding the edge of the muzzle and the starter may not fit on the barrel anymore. False muzzles are even worse being even heavier and complex and easily damaged or lost.
What we have is a significant amount of modern firearm inspired fantasy in the ML world that REALLY took off when the Rendezvous really took off and everyone needed a ML so the modern "Hawken" sprang into being for this and for the various ML seasons everyone suddenly discovered. Stocked more like a model 70 than a traditional ML. Then people could not seem to figure out the RB. Afterall it did not look like their 270 bullets did so they (and the gun writers and the people that made the guns) decided that with a bullet they could get rid of the patch which was apparently beyond some shooters ability to use and the bullet was long more like the 270 bullet. That it burned out nipples (so they vented these ::) ) tended to fall out the muzzle and kicked like $#*! did not matter it was new and improved so it had to be better. The gun writers and editors, who live off advertising, decided the RB was useless and would hardly get to 100 yards much less kill anything.
So now we have people shooting plastic stocked "mls" with scopes and semi-smokless powder and saboted JHP pistol bullets (which often have very poor penetration on game) over running the ML seasons set in place in most cases by traditional ML shooters who often had to PROVE or the various Fish and Game divisions that the ML would actually kill Deer.
So the under-informed ML shooter jumps on the bullet bandwagon thinking that the RB just cannot work.
That the whole premise of modern ML bullets is complete BS matters not in the least. Most people become instant experts as soon as the rifle is in their hands and will then try to lecture the guy the BUILT THE RIFLE.
So if somebody wants a bulleted ML have a barrel made with a 20" twist in .455-.456 BORE diameter with a 30" barrel. This will allow bullets like the 456192 or the heavier 457193 to be thumb started with ease and they will shoot pretty well with no hoop jumping in the loading/starting process. 1:40-1:50 tin lead alloy will cast easy compared to pure lead and should shoot well too. But they still will not stay on the powder so carry a rod in the bore and push it down and then pull it out before shooting if its a hunting rifle .
BTW I built a rifle around such a barrel we had Ron Long cut about 30 years ago. Far more trouble than it was worth for the match we shot it in. Never dreamed of hunting with it. Ate nipples at an amazing rate with a 457125 and 70 gr of Goex. Another "plus" for the bullet ML That means that if someone were going to the west back in the day they would need to take a bag of nipples along with their other stuff. There is a mention by Garrard of a Hawken that shot a bullet and inch long, about right for a 50-54 Picket.
Dan