Trying to decide between .58 and .62 cal for the next rifle

[m1garand_man]

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?

[smylee grouch]

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. 

[wattlebuster]

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 

[m1garand_man]

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).

[stikshooter]

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

[Dave Patterson]

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

[Mike Brooks]

.58 with a 1 in 48 twist

[smokinbuck]

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.

[sqrldog]

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.

[alacran]

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.

[Mike Brooks]

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.

[okawbow]

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’m 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.

[smokinbuck]

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.

[okawbow]

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 it’s 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.

[Lobo]

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

[taco650]

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.

[Mike Brooks]

I hunted with a 20 bore for many years, Puts deer right down.

[m1garand_man]

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".

[Lobo]

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




The ball on the left is the one that did the job, the other one is unfired

[Mike Brooks]

Fast twist = less powder to shoot accurately = less recoil.

[Frank]

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 don’t know anybody that enjoys getting thumped by large powder charges.

[Stoner creek]

RCA #15 is a .58 cal. Original barrel length is 26”. The rate of twist is 1” in 26”.

[Mike Brooks]

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.

[Pukka Bundook]

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...

[Daryl]

280gr. ball or 315gr. ball (or thereabouts)?