Author Topic: 40 cal  (Read 23502 times)

Top Jaw

  • Guest
Re: 40 cal
« Reply #50 on: December 29, 2009, 03:48:40 AM »
I know we got off on a slight side-bar regarding a .40 cal as a multi-purpose rifle for small game & deer, so why we are here, I have a question. 

Regarding deer, I have purchased some .40 cal conical bullets that I will lube and place over some felt wads, to see if I can work up a deer hunting load that offers acceptable accuracy and has some improved punch from a heavier, higher energy, and expandable bullet (vs the roundball).  I know barrel twist will have some bearing on the accuracy (maybe a 1 in 48" would work). 

Has anyone had success using conicals in a .40?  If so, what did you use?  If accuracy was decent, it seems this would make it more of a cross-over caliber, maybe rivaling a .45 roundball in performance.

Your thoughts?

Top Jaw

Offline bob in the woods

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4544
Re: 40 cal
« Reply #51 on: December 29, 2009, 08:39:21 AM »
Going to a conical is heading in the wrong direction IMHO. Unless a fast enough twist,ie  like for a Sharps etc I'd stick with the round ball. I finally got my Sharps 40-70 to work OK on deer, but only after switching to a castbullet with a .300+meplat.   ie a flat nose.  In the usual muzzleloader, I prefer round balls, 'cause they work. Pressures are going to go way up with a conical of any decent length. Velocity will drop, over what you can get with a RB, so I don't see much of an advantage when talking deer hunting.  I have a .50, a .54,a .62,  and up etc so I don't use my .40 for deer;  but if I did, I'm certain that awell placed shot
with my load of .395 ball and 60 gr 3 F  would drop one.


  • Guest
Re: 40 cal
« Reply #52 on: December 29, 2009, 02:48:05 PM »
Bob's comments follow pretty much what I have seen.  One individual that I associated with shot something like 28 deer with his 50.  His claim was that he preferred roundball because they were more accurate and the conicals did not expand or blow as big of a hole.  Other sources have stated this.  I have also heard that the 40 cal BPC's like Bob referred to tend to push through with little or no expansion, probably with round noses.  My experience with my 45-70 is that the Gould hollow point expands very well and is very effective on deer, but that the heavier flat points are not as destructive.  Most of the slugs tend to shoot best at lower velocities, and for a ML are still not that ballistically efficient, such that their weight permits higher down range velocities but not all that much.  The 40 would be used within 40-50 yards where an ideal shot is presented.  Also deer do vary in size depending on age and location.  A very large buck in the midwest will weigh in at 220 pounds or better.  Some field dress at 200 that I see in the paper.  In warmer climates a large buck might weigh in a 150-170, Does and yearlings are alos proportinately smaller.  I feel a 40 will handle a 125 pound or smaller deer quite well, I would feel kind of silly holding one if a large 220 pound 10 pointer showed up.  It would harvest the 10 pointer but tracking might be a challenge no would I trust a shoulder shot.
Use the 40 with a RB and within its limitations.


Offline Ray Nelson

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 101
Re: 40 cal
« Reply #53 on: December 31, 2009, 06:21:45 AM »
The 40 cal is a great all around caliber and a favorite of mine. Perfect for almost every endeaver in Minnesota any ways. Is light for deer/bear/moose but fun to shoot and more than capable for the squirrel, rabbit, porky pine, fox, coyote and plinking. As in all hunting your limitations, effective distance and a 40 cal  gun is capable. There is nothing wrong with letting that buck walk away if it is out of killing range. You just have to learn to hunt closer. And if it's yer only will learn to do so or git abit hungry.