Quote:

---

I'm done with them, they shoot well but other than that, I think they're crap!


BS-

---

I agree - although the guy who invented them, Mike ?????is a really nice guy.
Round balls kill all big game more quickly, within proper range, than does any slug from a muzzleloading rifle. One merely uses a bore size appropriate to the game being hunted.

I also agree on the big bore, while I have friends who've taken moose and elk with .50's I'd prefer something .54 or larger.

My own big game hunting rifles start at .58, then .62, then .69(14 bore). I personally prefer the 14 bore as a hunting rifle for moose and elk. It's .684", 482gr. ball makes an impression on the animals that is unmistakable to the eye, whereas the smaller balls or bullets make the animal take off in a mad dash as if only firghtened. I've seent his time and again with moose and .54's. I've not shot anything yet with either the .58 nor .62, so cannot coment on their 'impact' effectiveness. Only one moose ever walked off after being struck with a 14 bore ball, and that one shook end to end at the impact, then slowly struggled along for 20 yards, then collapsed.

I do not condone wimp charges for round balls on big game, nor do I condone big charges with slugs. The pressure difference is incredible. A large bore round ball, such as my 14 bore shoots, or a 12 bore Pedersoli for instance, will rarely generate over 10,00PSI with 150gr. of 2F GOEX powder, whereas a .50 cal rifle shooting a slug with the saem charge is pushing 30,000PSI. There are no barrels being made for muzzleloaders that I am aware of, made from 4140 chromemoly steel. They are made from softer materials, even 12L14, a leaded steel. GM barrels are stronger than that, but still not made from 4140. Heavy powder charges and slugs are dangerous - please don't use them. I don't care what the mfgr's and shooters of inlines say - round balls kill better than slugs on our game. We don't need something that works at over 200 yards - try hunting and getting closer. All my muzzleloading moose have been inside 95 yards & only one of those shot with a modern rifle was 200 - all the rest were inside 100 yards.

Ed Rayle will make any bore size and twist you want in a barrel.
Google Lt. James Forsyth's book, 'The Sporting Rifle and it's Projectiles". Either download it or I think you might be able to buy it somewhere. It's excellent reading and was the reason I had the 14 bore built back in '86.
If doing the same today, I'd probably have one made in 16 bore, to shoot a 1oz. ball, which shoots well with a mere 140gr. 2f. The point blank trajectory of these big bore rifles is 115 yards, where the ball is neither 2" above nor below the line of sight. They also have the power and accuracy for killing big game to 200 yards, if need be.

The last bench group I shot at 200 yards with the 14 bore was last July put 6 consectutive shots into a group 1 1/2" wide by 3 1/2" high. - open Express-type sights with a bead front. I was gong to fire 4 more, but decided 6 was enough to prove the rifle - and I didn't want to destroy the group - which I lost - of course.

A top of the back hold on a deer at 150 yards, is a deer shot through the middle, dropping on the spot or a short, huge blood trail.

--------------------
Daryl


"a gun without hammers is like a Spaniel without ears" King George V

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

P.s., Before you give up on your inline rifle, you might want to try Sierra 300 gr 0.4515" pistol bullets in black MMP sabots.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Not sure anybody else has had this experience, but this year I threw down on a nice Mulie Buck with my 50cal inline. I hit him square in the shoulder and he lurched, then proceed to leave the area at near light speed, leaping over a fence up hill in the process. I searched for him until we lost the light and never saw a drop of blood. WTFO?

I used a 150grain charge and the 260grain bullet speer tip. Is this bullet junk or what? I pulled one from a sand bank and it was totally fragged...after the above experience.

I'm done with them, they shoot well but other than that, I think they're crap!

I have a 12 bore double, but I can't use it in CO during ML season. So I'm on a quest to build a really big bore single for Elk, Moose and Deer ML hunting.

BS-

---

I would not go too large. The 69 is big enough for about anything even large bears and the 54 is suitable for most game if used right though its little light for Elk sized or larger if heavy bone is encountered.
62 is an excellent compromise.
Willam Drummond Steward used a 62 (20 bore) and Ruxton 58 caliber (24 bore) back in the day. Stewart claimed his 20 bore killed more game on less powder and lead than any rifle at the 1833(?) Rendezvous.
If you contact Ed Rayl he makes a bore size that will use a .662 ball. This is near perfect since it weighs 437 grains in pure lead.
I shot a Mulie buck in the shoulder with a .662 last fall at about 90 yards and he went down in his tracks.

Dan

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

the barrels used on Swing-Lock firearms are ordered through well known custom barrel manufacturers and are of premium grade highest quality chrome moly, stainless or carbon steel

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

260's are WAY TOO LIGHT --- especially with that bullet. Powerbelts have always had penetration issues - but 50 cal round balls have issues as well if you hit any type of shoulder bone. You should really get up to 300 grains and those issues might start to disappear. Most people don't want to go heavier because it affects trajectory.


I like full bore diameter bullets although my side lock does not seem to like the conical slugs past 60 yards. I've been using 270gr Harvester Saber Tooth bullets with incredible accuracy from my 1:48 twist (3-4" groups at 100 yards with open sights) and have killed 6 deer over the last 3 years. None have as much taken a step after the shot (of course they are all neck and shoulder shots at less than 75 yards). Now I will say the entrance hole has always been bigger than the exit hole and on some occassions the bullet has not exited. If they hit the main shoulder bone, the bullet will explode - of course what's left of the bullet and bone chucks will shred the lungs.
I need to get more before next year and I'm unsure whether or not to go to a bigger size. If it's not broke, don't fix it but your experiences might vary especially if you shoot past 75 yards. I'd personally feel more comfortable with the 300 or 350 grain because they'll plow through the deer with no problems (especially the 350) but I'm unsure if my jack of all twist will be able to shoot them.

My recomendation would be to go over 300grains with whatever you choose.

http://www.harvestermuzzleloading.com/in...=1&Itemid=3

This is a picture from one of the whitetail does I killed last weekend. The bullet went in high in the shoulder (the thin blade bone), through a rib, through the lungs, through another rib, and I found it lodged up agaist the hide on the other side.

---

What if you had to shoot something big and toothy with this thing? Or just big?
I shot a Mule deer buck at about 40 yards a couple of weeks ago. Very bright snowy day and since my new glasses had not shown up I lost the silver blade and shot him too high. I was shooting down at about a 45 degree angle. The ball ruined a 3" chunk of backstrap, continued on track and exited through the shoulder blade.
I also had to shoot him again and got about 20" of penetration on what I would call a "difficult" raking shot ball lodged in the shoulder muscle.



Note the chunk of bone imbedded in the ball. The back shows the weave of the patch. This was about a 60 yard shot 495 Hornady ball, 75 gr on FFF Swiss. Range was longer since I had to get the right angle on the deer and could not get a head shot. I suspect it retained at least 80& original have not weighed it.
You are over driving the bullets you are shooting and they are far too fragile for shooting game larger than Coyotes.
The photo and description are classic examples of why I would not use them even if I could get past the other problems they cause in the rifle.
I had some Hornady factory loads with the 320 gr bullet with the soft plastic point 45-70 "Leverrevolution" they call them I shot 2 deer with them and would never shoot a game animal with one again. They veered off course is both cases and made a real mess of one deer and I had to shoot the other twice even though the first shot was near perfect.
For some years I have wondered how someone could scoff at the round ball then use something as frangible as your photos show in its place.

The pistols bullets on the market are, for the most part unsuitable for velocities over that of 44 magnum and pretty poor in many cases at 1200-1300 fps. If you do some research you will find a lot of handgun hunters shoot hard cast SWCs instead.

I can't see where the conicals you use are superior to the RB and I KNOW then are inferior to the larger bore RBs.
BTW 260 grain is the same +- weight as a 58 RB which is not too light. Read George Ruxton's accounts of his experiences in the west. He was using a 24 bore.
Or read Parkman's "The Oregon Trial". It gives some accounts of rifle performance when properly sized for the game. In this case *probably* a 54 caliber. 2 Buffalo in 2 shots at 175 yards or so for example.


This was he result of a caplock pistol shot at 30 yards. Ball broke the bone going in got the heart and lodged under the far side hide.
530 RB.



Dan

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

I can't see where the conicals you use are superior to the RB and I KNOW then are inferior to the larger bore RBs.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Bullets are for ctgs. or for competition at long range in purpose-built muzzleloading rifles, not for muzzleloading hunting rifles.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Anything larger than a 13 bore lacks a flat enough trajectory for easy hitting past about 175 yards.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Anything larger than a 13 bore lacks a flat enough trajectory for easy hitting past about 175 yards.

---

I no not dispute this, but I wonder why it would be true? If the velocity is the same, the trajectory of the larger round ball will be better. This is because the air resistance of the ball increases with the square of the radius, and the mass of the ball increases with the cube of the radius. That means, counter-intuitively, that the BC of a round ball increases as the ball gets bigger. So, are the larger bore guns fired at a lower velocity because of intolerable recoil?

---

To get, say 1,550fps with a 14 bore, you'll need 155 to 165gr. 2f powder. This charge is Ok to shoot with a 480gr. ball, whereas, for instance, a 600gr. ball shot from a large 12 or 11 bore, will require 200gr. to get the same speed. Recoil is the deciding factor. Most agree that 9 to 9 1/2 pounds is a good hunting weight. In order to reduce the recol to the same comfortable level of the 14, the 12 or 11 bore would have to be 12 pounds or more. More powder plus more ball weight, while being the better killer, just kicks too much for most people to shoot accurately and this recoil usually prevents serious practise which is necessary to become familiar with the rifle over different ranges.

The 14 bore is easy enough to shoot that I use it for rendezvous conpetition shooting when I want to seriously contest for first place - it seldom lets me down.

I have a buddy with a .75 rifle, similar to my 14 bore. Both guns weigh the same and mine is easy to shoot, while his gets used only for hunting as it recoils too much. To deliver good accuracy, both guns demand to be fed a decent charge and the most he's comfortable shooting in his 9 pound rifle, is 130gr. This only gives him about 1,250fps with the 600gr. ball, and his drop at all ranges is more, demanding more accurate range doping even at fairly close ranges.

After using this .75 calibre gun for some 20 yards, many years it's the only gun he used for deer, elk and moose, he's of the opinion he should have had my bro make him a 14 bore instead just because it's powerful enough and is much easier to shoot well. Although his gun has more power, it's more difficult to shoot and not as accurate as it wants more powder for equivalent accuracy, which is more than he's capable of handling. Reducing the charge makes it easier to shoot, with about 1/3 more drop at any range in comparrison. With the 14, judge a deer as 100yds. when it's actually 120, even holding in the middle and you'll end up with a low or mid heart shot with a centre hold. The same scenario with the .75, and the ball will miss low, just barely punch the brisket or hit a leg, both of which are bad wounding shots. On a moose, the difference isn't as noticable due to the huge kill zone, however, add another 40 yards and adequate accuracy begins to enter the equation. Although the .75 is quite powerful enough on any continent, much more than necessary for N.A., the gun quite literally kicks too much to use an appropriate charge to maintain accuracy, so he reduces the charge and limits his range. My 14 bore as it's loaded is good to at least 200 on ungulates & has the power and accuracy for even farther shooting which has been demonstrated quite often.

--------------------
Daryl


"a gun without hammers is like a Spaniel without ears" King George V

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I can't see where the conicals you use are superior to the RB and I KNOW then are inferior to the larger bore RBs.

---

I wouldn't exactly call full bore jacketed bullets conicals. I think bullets like the powerbelt and sabertooth are closer to a pistol bullet as opposed to a true conical is pure lead and which weighs around 400grains or more in 50cal.


Round balls in my gun aren't accurate past 50-60 yards, that would be the disadvantage in my situation. Plus with 75 grains of powder, they are losing quite a bit of velocity and energy. At 100 yards, I think a bullet would give you better penetration.

---

I guess I could use the term "cylindrical bullet", its more accurate.

The round ball will shoot through deer reliably to 150 yards or so considering 50 cal or larger and broadside shots. Based on actual deer shooting and testing penetration using baffle boards.
A friend shot through a doe from side to side at 120 yards with a 45 cal RB last year.
Can I shoot one in the butt going away and hope for a clean kill? I suppose the 16 bore will with a WW ball would do this shot if I were tempted to try it. I would pass on it with a 50-54.

Penetration must be ADEQUATE. It need not be excessive. But the idea that a 260 grain cylindrical bullet is too light for deer is simply silly. A bullet that blows up on a deer's shoulder is USELESS totally USELESS. Why people would even use such a thing is beyond my comprehension.
A pure lead 255 from a BP loaded 45 Colt revolver will kill deer very well with decent shot placement, but the velocity provides "adequate penetration".
The same with 45-50 or larger caliber RBs.
A round ball of 260 gr driven by 30-40% of the ball weight of blackpowder will kill any deer or elk shot with the shot placement (shoulder) that caused the bullet blow up that started this discussion. At least to 100 yards on elk and likely much farther, probably 200 for lung shots. (If Parkman's guide in "The Oregon Trail" could kill 2 buffalo in 2 shots at 175 yards penetration with a 50-54 will not be an issue with deer at that range.)
Even if the 260 gr RB strikes the shoulder bone on a deer at the distance the deer was shot by the bullet it will GO THROUGH it and kill the deer. Likely at much longer distances but I lack data since I almost always do lung shots.
Apparently the 260 gr bullet will not.
If the rifle will not shoot RBs then you apparently bought the wrong gun or it needs more load development. If it has a 48" twist it should shoot 90 gr of powder unless its rifled too shallow. I had a 48 twist 50 with RB rifling that would shoot into 1" at 100 for 3 or 5 shots if I did my part, 90 gr of FFFG and loaded with just the rod, no starter. But my eyes were a lot better then.


Dan

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Much game has been killed with the 50cal, but I'm still convinced that a large round ball in the 69+ cal range is what I want.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Daryl,

When Steve built my 16-bore rifle I asked him to keep the weight as low as possible, which he did. Thus, the recoil is somewhat enhanced.

---

Have you weighed it? 9 pounds seems to be about normal for a properly made single or double in that calibre. Even my .32 longrifle runs 9 pounds, with the .45 being 1oz short of 10. The weight helps with offhand shooting, of course.

This was taken during our 200 yard offhand match & shows almost top movement of a mere 140gr. charge. I use 165gr. for moose with the 480gr. ball.(466gr. in WW) This rifle made a 6 shot bench diagram that day of 1 1/2" wide x 3 1/2" high.



--------------------
Daryl


"a gun without hammers is like a Spaniel without ears" King George V

Edited by Daryl_S (11/12/09 03:35 AM)

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

If interested in paper ctgs. making and loading, I suggest you go to the Underhammer Guild's web site and check out Bruce Strickling's article on paper ctgs.

---

Post Extras: