AmericanLongRifles Forums
General discussion => Black Powder Shooting => Topic started by: m1garand_man on October 13, 2019, 03:17:25 PM
-
I am wanting to build a Jaeger at some point to shoot and hunt with. I want something I can take deer, elk, black bears etc with if I ever have the desire.
The natural choice is to go big or go home. From my calculations it looks like the bullet weight and energy difference between the two ball sizes (assuming the same velocity for both) is 25% more for the .62 caliber round ball. When pricing out round balls the .62 caliber ones are twice the price of .58 caliber ones That is not even considering the cost of powder charges since I don't have any numbers to work off of for that portion of the cost analysis. Like with any gun I own, even the ones I hunt with, this rifle will be shot way more on the range than it ever will be at live game so I am left wondering if paying double for 25% more performance is really worth it. What are your practical experiences with these two calibers on game?
-
Your not building the gun to save money,go big. The 62 will do any thing the 58 does and more. Why not build one of each, 62 to hunt and 58 for the targets. :)
-
I cant speak bout the 58 but I can bout a 62. I mold my own an have plenty of lead so its no problem. I hunt close thick thickets so large powder charges never enter my mind. I shoot 80 grns of FFg so its no more powder cost than a 54 or even a 50. What I can tell you is the 62 punches big blood leaking holes an THAT is why I shoot 62s for our bama whitetails. The few deer Ive had to track in these thickets have left blood trails like poured from a 5 gallon bucket but most have been DRT harvests. So in my redneck opinion go with the 62
-
Eventually I'll cast again and then it won't matter. For now we have two young kids and I'm not comfortable with casting while they are still growing. I suppose when it comes down to it I can still shoot my 50 cal if I want to shoot volume (that's a funny thing to say regarding a front loader).
-
I own both and cast with cheap Lee molds , outside away from every one . Works for me cause if I had to buy I would not be shooting /Ed
-
The second thing (following shortly after discovering just how doggone much fun it is) I learned about shooting muzzleloaders was just how inexpensive it is, compared with shooting modern missile launchers.
Personally, I wouldn't even consider the difference in cost between a .58 & a .62, if hunting any large game I wished is the goal for that rifle: I'd just go with what I thought would do the better job, which is one-shot kills, and dropped in their tracks.
Which would leave me with the .62
-
.58 with a 1 in 48 twist
-
If the cost of ball and powder is driving your decision and you already have a .50 with plenty of ball then stick with that rifle. Muzzleloading is the least expensive form of shooting, target or hunting, that there is. The cost difference between shoooting 58 and 62 is miniscule compared to the cost of any cartridge ammo.
-
I agree with Mike a fast twist .58. The late Frank Bartlett had all of his .58 barrels made by Getz 1 in .56 twist. His .60's were also in that twist. Shot accurate with a smaller charge 60 grs. or so. If I remember correctly the rifle he made for Bobby Dorris was also 1 in 56 twist. Frank and Bobby both won their share of matches. When they shot the 100 yd target or hunted they upped the powder charge to 85/90 grs.
-
For hunting bigger is always better, unless you are going squirrel hunting. For target shooting not so much. Working up loads for a 58 or a 62 will wear you out. Typically I only use larger calibers on trailwalks as far as target shooting goes.
-
For hunting bigger is always better, unless you are going squirrel hunting. For target shooting not so much. Working up loads for a 58 or a 62 will wear you out. Typically I only use larger calibers on trailwalks as far as target shooting goes.
I have found fast twist .58's to be very comfortable to shoot as you don't have to pour the powder to them to get them to shoot. Slow twist on the other hand has too much recoil for me for repeated shots.
-
If the cost of ball and powder is driving your decision and you already have a .50 with plenty of ball then stick with that rifle. Muzzleloading is the least expensive form of shooting, target or hunting, that there is. The cost difference between shoooting 58 and 62 is miniscule compared to the cost of any cartridge ammo.
Im not sure that shooting a muzzleloader is so cheap anymore. My .62 load is 120 gr. 2f with a round ball. The powder cost is about $.50. The balls cost $.40 each from track, plus shipping cost. The cap or flint cost is about $.10 each shot. Add the cost of patches and lube, plus cleaning patches and solvent, and it cost well over $1.00 per shot.
-
Okabow,
With all due respect, I think you'll find the $ per shot is less than $.50 by a good margin even at $20 per pound for powder.
-
Smokin buck, those numbers are right from the actual local and mail order cost for most people. Powder is now $30 a pound in my area. I get 58 shots per pound at 120 grains. That comes out to $.51 each shot. The .62 balls are $10.00 for 25, plus over $10.00 shipping. That alone is over $.80. Caps are $10.00 a hundred if you can find them. Flints are $2.00 apiece plus shipping. I get at least 20 shots per flint, but change them more often for hunting.
Sure, one can save a lot of money per shot by casting the balls from scrap lead, or even the $2 a pound lead you can buy, and if you order 25 pounds of powder online its cheaper. However, most shooters rely on buying a pound or two at a time and buying balls from a supplier.
Shooting the larger calibers is getting real expensive.
-
I have two .54's and two .62 rifles so I can't give you an opinion on a .58. I can tell you for hunting go with a .62 it punches a big hole
(https://i.ibb.co/zbJj1vC/Sept-doe.jpg) (https://ibb.co/RPyZ1wt)
-
I have neither but have had a similar desire to build a big bore hunting rifle, preferably the Christian Springs/Edward Marshall style.
My question to you is have you considered a .62 Fowler? It can do your big game hunting, albeit at closer range, and birds.
-
I hunted with a 20 bore for many years, Puts deer right down.
-
A number of you have mentioned a 58 with fast twist. I've been shooting for a long time and have read that with rifles firearms up to 25% of the energy in a powder charge can be used up by the act of twisting the bullet down the bore with the thought being that it really soaks up that much forward motive power.
But, is there really a discernable feel to the recoil with a faster twist? If so this is news to me.
I think a .62 cal might be the best choice after all. At least then I'll never say "man I wish I had gotten the big boy".
-
A .62 smooth bore is a very versatile gun, round ball for deer, shot for birds, rabbits and squirrels.
These two deer were taken with one shot. 80gr's of 2ff behind a patched round ball. The ball was recovered just under the hide on the opposite side of the 2nd deer
(https://i.ibb.co/C05RsFg/Two-deer-one-shot.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)
The ball on the left is the one that did the job, the other one is unfired
(https://i.ibb.co/Bs5wrBs/Two-balls.jpg) (https://ibb.co/cTSxCQT)
-
Fast twist = less powder to shoot accurately = less recoil.
-
Fast twist = less powder to shoot accurately = less recoil.
Exactly. Always wondered why todays barrel manufacturers produce their larger caliber barrels with slow twists. Never made any sense to me. From all I have read the 18th and 19th century makers seemed to settle on 1 in 48 twist for most everything. I dont know anybody that enjoys getting thumped by large powder charges.
-
RCA #15 is a .58 cal. Original barrel length is 26. The rate of twist is 1 in 26.
-
RCA #15 is a .58 cal. Original barrel length is 26. The rate of twist is 1 in 26.
And reported to shoot quite well too.
-
RCA #15 is a .58 cal. Original barrel length is 26. The rate of twist is 1 in 26.
That's very much a Germanic rifling twist, and yes, they Do shoot well with the right charge.
I tossed a coin between .58 and .62, couldn't decide for e Long time.
Coin came down on its edge...
-
280gr. ball or 315gr. ball (or thereabouts)?
-
Okabow,'We're way off the subject I realize but around her, even with inflated retail prices we aren't paying the kind of prices you are. Casting and cutting patches would go a long way toward cutting your cost. Cleaning with water, and a little detergent, is cheap and effective. Just saying.
-
The "Muskrat" says go with the .58. A well placed ball will drop any of the big game you are planning to hunt. Cheaper to shoot yes but the flatter trajectory is your biggest asset. A .62 has a trajectory like a thrown watermelon.
-
Again it all depends on what you are planning to hunt and where. If you re going to hunt in a tree stand or ground blind where your shots are seldom over 30 yards, then a fast twist is fine. If you are going to hunt open country where your shots are going to be 80 to 175 yards then a slow twist would be preferable. To MI man a slow twist barrel allows you to stabilize a ball with with heavy charges, which give higher fps and corresponding recoil. That being said I believe the faster twist barrels are more versatile, in that you can get a lower speed load to shoot accurately as well as a higher speed load. For example I have two loads for my .54 Hawken and also for my 54 Bucks County flintlock. The Hawken shoots very well with 60 grains of 2f an also with 100 grains of 2f. The BC likes 60 and 95.
So for hunting where the likely hood of a shot of 100 is high I use the upper load.
If I' shooting targets at 50 yards or less I use the lower loads.
I have found with fast twist barrels only one load that shoots well.
-
G-man
Throw away all your modern ballistical math computations and hear what these fine men are saying. Yes I had a head full of that stuff too (it's no longer relevant-many reasons why, but we needn't get into that). Also note how very SLOW a 48" twist is in comparison to all that theoretical modern stuff. So much modern ballisticals nonsense must be discarded to fully understand the truth of roundballs and game.
Another way to think of it is stabilization=centrifugal forces on the ball. Slow twist means the ball MUST be driven faster (more powder) to get the same amount of stabilization(cf) as would be imparted by a "Faster" twist at a lower velocity (less powder). If you are taking great long shots then yes you may need more velocity (or learn to manage the rainbow) and can go with a slower twist, but it's going to be a thumper.
-
There is a lot of math involved for sure and 99 % of the shooters will care less about it but all that math still comes into play on every shot. You can still make a good shot not knowing the math but if you do know it, whats the harm? I would still go with a 62 over a 58 if I could only have one. The small difference in cost is just that-small. Different strokes for different folks.
-
Exactly, AND the difference in trajectory between .58 and .62 rifles is quite immaterial, even at longer round ball ranges,
let alone, under 100yards, typical of most big game hunting. The larger ball is more powerful, the smaller ball, a little less
expensive to shoot, given all store bought components.
-
There is a lot of math involved for sure and 99 % of the shooters will care less about it but all that math still comes into play on every shot. You can still make a good shot not knowing the math but if you do know it, whats the harm? I would still go with a 62 over a 58 if I could only have one. The small difference in cost is just that-small. Different strokes for different folks.
I'm talking about using energy tables and other "power rankings" that are created around long projectiles-rather than round and don't quite translate into the real observed effects and usage of round balls on game.
Yes I'd go bigger, they're so very close. But I'd never expect the 62 or 58 to do anything the other one couldn't-'ceptin on fine target work like cutting a spider or scoring the next ring.
-
I sighted in a .62 for a customer once that had a 1in 66" twist. He insisted I sight it in with 140 grains. ??? It really started pounding me into the dirt at about 90 grains. Lucky for me 95 grains is where it shot the best. The customer was outraged I sighted it in with such a light load and decided 140 grains was what it needed anyway...with out doing any load work I might add...
So, I like big bores, just give me fast twist so I don't take a beatin'. Of course, If I lived out west where long shots were more normal I might change my mind.
-
That's why I shoot a .60 right in the middle 😉.
-
"It really started pounding me into the dirt at about 90 grains." Being on the light side(31" barrel) my .60 acts the same. Also the .62. 90-100gr. of 2F is about all I want. For our short shots it is all that is needed.
-
"It really started pounding me into the dirt at about 90 grains." Being on the light side(31" barrel) my .60 acts the same. Also the .62. 90-100gr. of 2F is about all I want. For our short shots it is all that is needed.
Yup, this gun I sighted in had a light weight 38" barrel. Probably a 7lb or so. Nice for hunting, not so nice for a day of shooting. :o I never was fond of big recoil, it doesn't bother some guys.
-
"It really started pounding me into the dirt at about 90 grains." Being on the light side(31" barrel) my .60 acts the same. Also the .62. 90-100gr. of 2F is about all I want. For our short shots it is all that is needed.
Yup, this gun I sighted in had a light weight 38" barrel. Probably a 7lb or so. Nice for hunting, not so nice for a day of shooting. :o I never was fond of big recoil, it doesn't bother some guys.
I made a drag bag about 100 years ago for adding several pounds of effective weight to benched bruisers.
-
"It really started pounding me into the dirt at about 90 grains." Being on the light side(31" barrel) my .60 acts the same. Also the .62. 90-100gr. of 2F is about all I want. For our short shots it is all that is needed.
Yup, this gun I sighted in had a light weight 38" barrel. Probably a 7lb or so. Nice for hunting, not so nice for a day of shooting. :o I never was fond of big recoil, it doesn't bother some guys.
I had a Westley Richards 16 bore stalking rifle with a 30" tapered barrel that carried like an M1 carbine. It had a 1/60 twist that fortunately liked 70 gr of 2F GOEX. Any more powder would have loosened my teeth. Like you said, nice for hunting but murder off the bench.
-
Got a couple of Hoyt 58s with radius bottom 1-60 rifling that love 80 grains of Swiss fff under a denim patched .565 ball. Accuracy all the way up to 115 grains of powder, where I stopped for my own physical well being. Fun was pretty much gone before I got to 100 grains (guns weigh in at 8 and 8-1/2 pounds). On the flip side, with 30 grains of powder, all shots touch at 25 yards, but find that .565 lead ball a bit aggressive on tree rats, with tracking being pretty much figuring out where they land.
-
I sighted in a .62 for a customer once that had a 1in 66" twist. He insisted I sight it in with 140 grains. ??? It really started pounding me into the dirt at about 90 grains. Lucky for me 95 grains is where it shot the best. The customer was outraged I sighted it in with such a light load and decided 140 grains was what it needed anyway...with out doing any load work I might add...
So, I like big bores, just give me fast twist so I don't take a beatin'. Of course, If I lived out west where long shots were more normal I might change my mind.
According to one of our best barrel makers (name withheld, to protect me!). If you want to shoot heavy loads for maximum accuracy in a .62 you need a 1 in 90 to a 1 in 100 twist to get the job done.
-
Mike Brooks...".58 with a 1 in 48 twist"...
Yup. I mostly stopped at .54 because of my light frame, but the power and accuracy of the .58 seems to make a great hunting gun...especially in the shorter barrel Jaegers.
(https://i.ibb.co/RH4y5k4/new-Jaeger.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)
(https://i.ibb.co/chYwCwj/yikes.jpg) (https://ibb.co/b5bF2Fk)
-
Doc White has been building and selling a lot of .54, .58, and .62 caliber Hawken rifles lately with 1-90 twist barrels on them.
I can't imagine the pain shooting those rifles with the heavy charges necessary to make them shoot accuratly.
-
A P.A.S.T. recoil pad will help a double lot for the pain at the shoulder but if its a face slapper its going to hurt. How the stock is cut/laid out will have a lot to do with the recoil management.
-
Doc White has been building and selling a lot of .54, .58, and .62 caliber Hawken rifles lately with 1-90 twist barrels on them.
I can't imagine the pain shooting those rifles with the heavy charges necessary to make them shoot accuratly.
That would be fine in a 16lb gun.
-
Decades ago I made up a Jim Chambers kit, (Mark Silver) in.58".
I asked Jim what charge was recommended for the .58 Don Getz barrel, and he said about 70 grains.
I tried 70 grs. and it worked so I never did fix it.
Hunted 9 or 10 years straight with that rifle and that load always worked, Very few balls recovered, and bagged a goodly amount of mule deer and whitetails.
If I was to hunt elk with it, I would up the charge a bit and see how it shot.
-
Too bad none of us can tote a 5" 38 cal gun around. Easy 7 mile range on an elk, and any hit within 20 yards would get you some meat. Of course the projectile alone weighs about 45 lb.!
My first ML was an 1861 Springfield musket. Fired a Minie' ball with about 100 gr of ffG. Now I have decided that, after I finish this c. 1770 Lancaster, I am going to build a .62 cal Dimick. Still liking the larger caliber rifles. With appropriate powder charges, they do not punish the shoulder, yet a hit carries a lot of energy.
-
My only big bore is a .58. It only weighs six and a half pounds. Ive always used 80 grains of fffg. And a .570 round ball. Deer find it deadly poisonous. It has harvested more big game than the rest of my armory combined. It only has a 28 inch barrel. Built as my interpretation of the Turvey rifle. Only one of the deer I harvested with it traveled 50 yards. This included a 25 yard slide down a steep hill. Being a recoil shy individual it does not bother me with this loading. Im sure it could be something like a derailer with more powder. I highly doubt that it would make it even a bit more effective. BJH