Hunting load group size

[FRJ]

I have a hunting load for my GPR that I like a lot and that the rifle seems to shoot really well. It is 110 gr of Goex 2F with a .125" felt over powder wad .18" pillow ticking lubed with mink oil and a .547" home cast ball of pure lead. I have a new barrel on this gun and figured I had better go test it with this load as all I've been shooting is a light target load. I tried it at 55 yards and it grouped 1.110" for a 5 shot group. I think thats more than fine but I've never hunted elk with a ml before and I need opinions about the load and accuracy. Thank You  Frank

[hanshi]

You're there!  Forget about "one holers", They're irrelevant  for your purposes.

[wattlebuster]

I would be happy with that load at that range but I would stretch it out to 75 then 100 to see what it does. You might get a longer shot than 55 for elk

[Daryl]

Is your ball perhaps a .527" or .537", Frank?  Most people here have difficulty loading a .530" ball with a .015" patch in a .54 - let lone one that is .007" larger than the bore & an .018" patch. Personally, I can see a .537" (could be normal for a .535" mould) with an 18 thou patch as being a very good load in square rifling.  The .547" should of course show better bench accuracy for longer range target accuracy.

Using Swiss powder, that 110gr. charge sounds about right to me. With GOEX, just for my own peace of mind and a flatter trajectory, I'd probably increase the load to 120gr. or 125, and test that for accuracy.  I'd think 110gr. is giving you about 1,450fps to 1,500.  It's probably enough but, increasing that to 1,750fps would flatten the trajectory enough to give a good point blank range to 125yards.
 
Checking your rifle at longer range before going would be a must, for me. The heavier charge should also be more accurate at 100yards and further as well.

[FRJ]

Thank You Daryl it is .537".  I usually hunt elk with a longbow and getting within 50 yards isn't a big problem. Getting inside 20 becomes more of a job and inside 5 you start to wonder what you are doing there. Those bulls and the cows get real big at that range. Have a good un. FRJ

[FRJ]

Daryl, one other question, will just 10 grains of powder increase the MV several hundred fps? Sure glad there are knowledgeable people like you around to help me on this. If you ever need help making a longbow shoot let me know I know how to do that real well. FRJ

[Daryl]

I'm sure an extra 10gr. will add only 100fps - maybe in the .54. Since the accuracy of your load is good to 50 yards and your game is always inside that, obviously, you may not need more of either power or accuracy.  If you have to take a shot at 130yards or go home empty handed, perhaps a longer range load might have proven to have been valuable preliminary testing.

[Stormrider51]

I have to say that I've never really grasped the concept that a "hunting load" is less accurate than what the gun is capable of.  I was schooled that a shooter experiments and determines the most accurate load for a given gun.  Then you learn the trajectory of that load at different ranges and apply what you know when hunting.  A slower ball put in the heart/lung zone beats a fast ball put in the guts or non-lethal area from a greater distance every time.  I don't know how many deer I've taken with a muzzleloader.  I know I killed my first when I was 8 years old and that was in 1959.  There have been a few since then.  I've passed on a lot of shots because I wasn't comfortable for one reason or another.  I've never been in a situation where it was get game or go hungry so I had that luxury.  Had I been in such a situation I wouldn't have been using a muzzleloader in the first place and I doubt I'd have been hunting during daylight hours.  Simple truth.  So Frank, if your load works well at your hunting ranges I'd say to go for it.  Enjoy the sport.

Storm   

[Steve-In]

I use about 115 grains of 2f Goex in my .54s on whitetail.  Shoots a little high at 25, dead on at 50 and about 4"-5" low at 100.  I tried bumping up the charge to flatten it out and give POA at 100 but I could not get a charge that did much that I could stand.  My only experience is on whitetails but I have recovered 4 balls from under the skin on the off side.  The balls that fail to pass are flattened out and loose very little weight.  I have wondered what that kind of expansion would do on Elk and Moose.  Most of my shots come at less than 50 yards.

[Daryl]

I personally suggest slightly harder than pure lead for large game, ie: bigger bears, moose and elk.  a 50/50 mix of pure and the lead clamp-on weights would work.  Do not put zink wheel weights in your lead pot. 

Bear bones are quite light, but pack massive fat and muscle while a moose or elk leg, rib, blade or spine can badly flatten a soft ball and turn it away from it's intended lung or heart target. You need straight line penetration and on heavy game, a pure lead ball of light weight, might not work as expected. 

Pure lead worked for us in the .69 and Brown Bess, but were badly flattened and woudn't exit on a moose. For this reason, I purchased slightly smaller mould (Tanner) so I could accurately shoot harder balls.  In the .69, that meant a .677" ball (15 bore) for the .69 rifle (14 bore), for example.

The Bess already had a small enough ball for shooting WW alloys - .735" for the .774" bore. Taylor used a .030" patch in that one - yes, it was tight, but loaded nicely and gave pretty fine accuracy for no rifling. I once shot a 2 1/2" group with it at 50 yards - probably a fluke, but I was happy. That big gun seemed to handle round balls very well as long as the powder charge was decent.

[northmn]

I have to say that I've never really grasped the concept that a "hunting load" is less accurate than what the gun is capable of.  I was schooled that a shooter experiments and determines the most accurate load for a given gun.  Then you learn the trajectory of that load at different ranges and apply what you know when hunting.  A slower ball put in the heart/lung zone beats a fast ball put in the guts or non-lethal area from a greater distance every time.  I don't know how many deer I've taken with a muzzleloader.  I know I killed my first when I was 8 years old and that was in 1959.  There have been a few since then.  I've passed on a lot of shots because I wasn't comfortable for one reason or another.  I've never been in a situation where it was get game or go hungry so I had that luxury.  Had I been in such a situation I wouldn't have been using a muzzleloader in the first place and I doubt I'd have been hunting during daylight hours.  Simple truth.  So Frank, if your load works well at your hunting ranges I'd say to go for it.  Enjoy the sport.

Storm   

Yes and no.  Most hunting loads are not so inaccurate that they cannot be placed where you want them.  Generally I can get an 90 grain load out of my 50 to shoot about as good as the open sights let me.  I knew an individual that was very successful that did as you did but used a load of 70 grains in his 50.  Where some look at hunting loads is where they shoot about 50 grains out of the 50.  Still at close range the lighter load will work.  I just have not seen where a heavier load in a good rifle will cause a gut shot where a "target" laod will not.  You are talking about a 1-2 inch variation and the heavier load will shoot better than most shooters can in the field.

DP

[FRJ]

I think Dpkec has it right. I'm not looking for a load that wont group at all just a load that will hit with all the resonable accuracy available and still mortally wound the animal I'm looking to kill. It doesn't take much to poke an accurate hole in a piece of paper but that same load may not punch a hole in an elk. I'm building a larger caliber right now, a 58, but it wont be ready for hunting season. It looks like I might not be either as I have to get a new knee. Haven't missed a hunting season in over 50 years and it scares me to think of it. FRJ

[Daryl]

Heavy loads are NOT innacurate - unless you are still learning what a proper patch and ball combination is all about. In that case, even the squib load is innacurate.

[Stormrider51]

Gentlemen, I believe we are all saying the same thing based on different experiences.  In my case I worked as a gunsmith for quite a few years on both modern and muzzleloading firearms.  I saw people trying to "magnumize" their muzzleloaders by using huge charges in the belief that it was necessary for hunting.  Their view was that since muzzleloaders were so inefficient they had to increase the powder charge to compensate.  The same people often went to some sort of conical or maxi-ball in this search for "efficiency" or adequate "knock-down power".  Others wanted to extend their effective range to what they were used to with their modern cartridge guns.  I remember one gent who came into my shop all proud of himself because he was able to put five maxi-balls into a paper plate at 100 yards from a bench rest.  He was shooting a .54 cal and used 180 grains of FFg.  Another came in and wanted me to sight-in his rifle because he had missed a deer completely at an estimated 250 yards with open sights.

So I repeat my original statement.  I have never grasped why there is a difference between an accuracy load and a hunting load.  In taking up the traditional muzzleloading firearm we accept, or should accept, the limitations of said firearms.  We accept a less-efficient patched round ball projectile.  We accept a shorter effective range.  We accept less-than-smokeless velocities.  What we do not have to accept is less accuracy.  Within their limitations, muzzleloading firearms are every bit as accurate as any modern arm.

Storm

[Daryl]

So I repeat my original statement.  I have never grasped why there is a difference between an accuracy load and a hunting load.  In taking up the traditional muzzleloading firearm we accept, or should accept, the limitations of said firearms.  
Storm

EXACTLY - my hunting loads also happen to be my rifles' most accurate loads - in every one of them.  With a good ball and patch combination and actual testing at 50 to 100yards, you will find the rifle demands you put in a powder charge that gives close to maximum velocity for that calibre.  This will produce quite a reasonably flat trajectory over our normal round ball ranges - to 130yards even.  This accuracy/hunting load will not be 60 to 70gr. of powder in a .50, nor 75 or 85gr. in a .54.  If your accuracy degrades with loads heavier than this, perhaps you need to look at the material you use for patching. The gun can do a LOT better in the accuracy department.

[catman]

Hunting loads for me all about the same point of impact, period..

[Leatherbark]

Whatever your front sight "Subtends" on the target is a fine hunting load. It will always be sufficient. That is if all of your shots are covered by what your front sight subtends at all distances that you will be shooting. Cant get no better than that for hunting.

Bob

[Hungry Horse]

IMO, you don't need a "hunting load" if you shoot the game in the correct end. A bad shot, is a bad shot, no matter what powder charge is behind the ball. Wild hogs might be an exception. I have seen good shots made on big boars, that didn't get the job done. Bad shots, and overly long range attempts, account for most lost game.

                                   Hungry Horse