QUESTION FOR TC HAWKEN 50CAL SHOOTERS 1:48 LOADS & ACCURACY ?

[Davemuzz]

Just my own experience with my Hawken 50 cal. M\L. I bot my Hawken new (kit) in 1979. I have tried many different powder\bullet\conical loads with the orginal T\C 1-48 twist barrel, but what I had settled on and always used was a 490 round ball and patch over 60 grains of Goex FF. This always gave me consistent groups at 100 yards. And this always....yes...always brought down the deer that I hit.

Now, I admit that I missed a lot of deer in M\L season. But that is M\L season. Just wouldn't be M\L season if I didn't miss deer. But that load, if I hit the deer, would do the job.

My biggest complaint about the T\C barrel was after 3 to 4 shots, the barrel had to have a brush run down it to get a good cleaning as it seemed that the "thin" rifling would "pack up" with fouling quickly and accuracy would fall off quickly if this wasn't done.

So, two years ago I bot a green mountain 1-66 twist drop in barrel. Now my load is 90 grains of Goex ff, 490 and .015 pillow ticking patch and at 100 yards this thing groups 3". Oh, leave the brass brush at home for the end of the day. Flyers are a thing of the past and my confidence level of hitting deer out to 150 yards has gone way up.

So, is there truth to green mountain accuracy? Yup.

Dave

[crow_feather]

It's nice to have eyes that can sight in on a deer at 150 yards and be sure not to be wounding it and letting it die a slow painful death.  I admire your shootin ability.

C F

[lostid]

Now, I admit that I missed a lot of deer in M\L season. But that is M\L season. Just wouldn't be M\L season if I didn't miss deer.
Dave

 That my friends,,,is what divides traditonal muzzle loading rifle and shotgun shooters from those that want an "extra season" using "muzzle loaders".
 And absolutley defines "accuracy" as I posted above. I truley hope that the idiousy of the above comment isn't found by some anti-hunting group and used as a common statement against "hunters".

 Please understand that "hunting" is different than "shooting". And that "shooting" usually involves "accuracy",,
 
,,And that an ethical hunter shoot's accurately.

No Davemuzz,, shooting during M/L season isn't about "missing deer"! ..

[quickdtoo]

I agree with Lostid, "missing" game isn't like missing a target, missed game will likely be wounded game, not a desireable outcome and certainly not to be expected and accepted as part of the hunt by any ethical hunter regardless of the weapon of choice.

Tim

[Davemuzz]

  This will be my last post on the black powder forum. Youse guyse must all be democrats. You cherry pick statements that you don't like, and then highlight them over and over again and again.

If you actually read my post (can you do that? read I mean?) my statement clearly says "I always bring down the deer that I hit". Yes, this statement is true. In the last ten years of M\L hunting (I have only hunted M\L the last 10 years, and only flintlock) every deer I have hit, I have hung, skinned, cut froze and grilled. Don't believe it? Ok, don't.

Your eyes bad? Go see an eye doctor. I don't need eye glasses. Wen't to the eye guy last month. Just need 'em to read. You mean you can't shoot an open sight gun at 150 yards at an 8" target? You must suck. Or be really really old. Like over 90?

So, your concerned about some anti-hunting group "finding" this statement and posting it somewhere for their purpose? Get a life. You have got to be kidding me. Are you afraid of the anti-hunting groups? Pull up your skirt and quit posting martha. Gheezzz. Oh....Clem.....there commin ta get me......oh my.....get me my diapers!!!! "cause the one's I have on are soiled!!!!

I'm glad you all agree. Nice group you have here. Nice and small, like your minds.


Please remember, shooting is different than whining, which is different than driving, which is different that putting one's self on a pedistool and painting a big red "S" on one's chest. Let the perfect man throw the first stone. Yeah....It's not right out of the Bible....but you get the drift.
Dave

[Idaho Ron]

I can shoot very tight groups at 150 yards. With my 410 gr Hornadys I have 2048 foot pounds at the muzzle, and 1265 foot pounds of energy at 150 yards.
Lets look at the bottom line of a round ball. With a 110 gr charge you have 1998 foot pounds at the muzzle.
That same load at 150 yards only has 400 foot pounds of energy left.
Your load is not this hot, therfore your foot pounds of energy is less than the one I posted. At 150 yards it is possable to "hit" a animal and the animal would never show it and run off to die. I can not recomend shooting a deer with a round ball at 150 yards. No matter how good the gun shoots or how good the shooter can see.  A round ball does not have enough energy at 150 yards.
 Would I shoot at a deer at 150 yards, you bet. My load has enough power and my gun shoots more than good enough to
 "get r done".  If you want to shoot game that far you need to have a better load in my opinion.   Ron

[Davemuzz]

I can shoot very tight groups at 150 yards. With my 410 gr Hornadys I have 2048 foot pounds at the muzzle, and 1265 foot pounds of energy at 150 yards.
Lets look at the bottom line of a round ball. With a 110 gr charge you have 1998 foot pounds at the muzzle.
That same load at 150 yards only has 400 foot pounds of energy left.
Your load is not this hot, therfore your foot pounds of energy is less than the one I posted. At 150 yards it is possable to "hit" a animal and the animal would never show it and run off to die. I can not recomend shooting a deer with a round ball at 150 yards. No matter how good the gun shoots or how good the shooter can see.  A round ball does not have enough energy at 150 yards.
 Would I shoot at a deer at 150 yards, you bet. My load has enough power and my gun shoots more than good enough to
 "get r done".  If you want to shoot game that far you need to have a better load in my opinion.   Ron

That's nice Ron. Except 'splain why when I hit 'em...there is hair...sometimes blood, sometimes not...and within 100 yards I will find 'em. I may need to take a finish shot, but I've seen rifle hunters do worse...lot's worse.  I think it has something to do with "thinking", "patience", practice and skill.

Miss 'em? Yup. Boiler room shots can go low. Free hand long shots? Nope. Gotta have a good solid rest. You gotta practice these.

But that's just my opinion.

These pin heads think a fellow picks up a gun, shoots it twice and runs out to the woods. I dunno....,maybe that's what they do.

[roundball]

Surprised to see you still posting after having read where you said 'that' post was your last...

And the comment:   "these pinheads" 


Kills any chance of your posts having credibility on the forum.

[Idaho Ron]

400 foot pounds of energy or less is not what I call a deer load. I will pass on trying this, Thanks   Ron

[Davemuzz]

Yeah RB....I'm concerned. I was way up dare to begin with. Oh ....my feelings are hurt. sniff, sniff. I must quit posting before PETA hunts me down!

[quickdtoo]

Davemuzz, if you want to continue your participation at GBO, I suggest you read the GBO Terms of Use Policy that you agreed to when you registered, personal attacks aren't tolerated here.

Tim

http://www.graybeardoutdoors.com/smf/index.php/topic,54070.0.html

[captchee]

 Accuracy is in they eye of the beholder . I would also agree that in the hands of a shooter that knows his system a 1 in 48  can be very accurate . As round ball states , there are a lot of myths surrounding this twist rate . The true nature of  the mater concerns the total weapons system  shooter and rifle . I think we to often forget that
 
 As to distance ?? 
If a person can consistently hit the  intended target   “IMO a  paper plate size target”  and feels that acceptable , who am I to say different . Is the round ball optimum for  say 150 yard  distance ?
 No probably not  however with proper shot placement 400FP is adequate  to do the job . Again  that really concerns shot placement and intended target  . Small white tail are much different then larger bodied white tail or mule deer , elk or moose  would also be different .

 Notice however I said proper shot placement . One must know where that  round is going  . That should always be the case be it at 20 yards or 150 . Myself I stay at 100  and under . If I estimate the target is farther and im hunting I get closer . If  the target takes off , heading for places un known then so be it , that’s  hunting … I would have to say thought that most  big game I have taken with my muzzleloaders , both smooth bore and rifle have been under 50

 I would also agree that hunting is not target shooting  in that if a person whishes to prove how far he can shoot and consistently punch holes  then  a paper target is the best place to do that . I have personally witness fellas who can hit with RB  on paper plate size targets out over 200 .
 Myself  I have hit human size targets  out to 400 with round ball  . I must admit though that’s  just hitting them anywhere. I also believe that more then enough to put a human out of commission  . I also have seen smooth bore shooters who can do this consistently as well  at 200+ but as said these fellas know their weapon and shoot regularly with it .

 If your into historical documentation then a person will find that  the requirements for a rifleman in the colonial army or militia units   were at these further distances  with way , way more accuracy then  my eyes “even with glasses “ would let me see .

[Graybeard]

I am tempted, VERY TEMPTED, to just lock this thread down right now. But won't YET!

There are a lot more folks than just DaveMuzz in violation of the GBO rules in this thread. One of them another of my perennial trouble makers who has been warned way too many times already both by me and the moderators. So I'm gonna give you guys ONE MORE CHANCE to act like adults and not a bunch of school children. If you can't the thread will be locked.

AND those who violate the rules to force me to lock it will get a ten day "time out" before they can post again to see if that helps jog the memory on following the rules. Davemuzz you get that now as the primary offender here even tho I admit you WERE NOT the first offender but reacting to an attack is not condoned here anymore than the original attack.

DO NOT make me get involved in this thread again.

[Idaho Ron]

captchee, I am not so sure about 400 FPE being enough.  I guess it would depend on the animal. Small whitetail doe well,, maybe. Large Mule deer Buck, I don't thik it would be enough. I know for a fact 400 is not enough for elk. I have shot several of them and I know they are a very tough animal to bring down. I would agree in colonial times I could see where only 200 FPE would be enough to put a man out of the fight.
Has anyone seen published data on FPE and requirments for big game? The only one I have seen was for centerfire rifles. It was 1000 FPE for mule deer with a modern rifle.  Ron

[Graybeard]

FPE is merely PAPER energy. It has no real world application in spite of what the rag writers wish you to believe. The BEST a compound bow can deliver is a bit over 50 FPE and they kill quite well.

It's the tissue damage done and where that damage is done not how many FPE that is transfered that counts. The ONLY thing that kills game is shutting down the Central Nervous System or CNS. You can do it by hitting it or you can do it thru blood loss to shut down the brain. All else is superfulous.

[roundball]

I know this post was not directed to me but I'd like to offer a couple of comments...

Centerfire energy stats put forth by various sources tend to be very much skewed to the high side for a variety of reasons when communicating reference info to the general public...wide variance of shooting skills, judging distances, shot placement, etc.

In reality, a well placed .45cal/128grn ball through the heart or low double lungs of a deer will kill it dead, yet only has a couple hundred ft lbs energy at distance according to 'ballistics tables'...doesn't take all that much to go through a rib (if it even hits a rib) and travel a few inches into the heart.

Muzzleloaders do not kill by the massive hyrodstatic shock brought on by big energy numbers...a lead round ball out of a muzzleloader kills by hemmoraging...the heart or double lungs...like you place your broadhead when bow hunting...hunting with muzzleloaders is basically like extended range bow hunting...so 1000 ft lbs of energy is not needed...ie: conventional ballistics charts really don't apply very well to muzzleloading...my .02 cents

[captchee]

  yep just as  round ball and gray beard state . while 400 seems low its not when you consider all a projectile needs to do is  get to the lungs or the hart 400 will more the do that .

 but with bigger game like elk  if you hit the shoulder bone  then you have a problem  . this is where shot placement comes in  if the shot is placed behind the shoulder in the hart lung area  the RB will still get there .
 if you  go for a neck shot , 400 will   do the job immediately.

 For bull elk I like the bigger conical  not because a RB will not get to the  hart . i have taken many bulls  with RB . but more that these guys during the rutt have a ton of stored  adrenalin in them and the heaver rounds carries more impact .

As said  center fire  ballistics are IMO completely  out of the realm of most traditional BP weapons
. I have personally seen  bull elk take  repeated  hits from. Magnum center fire round and still keep going.  Same with 30 .06  and 7mm . Yet these are very popular round  for elk today .

The key is the weight of the projectile as the heavier  the more energy it stores  and retains  to a longer distance .  Past that its shot placement you have to place the round , no mater what or how heavy it may be , in the correct spot   or the numbers mean really nothing .  i have taken more then a few elk with a 30.30 . is the round less then ideal ? depends on the range and the shooter .  i myself cant thing of one that went over  maybe 100 yards  and thats out to distances of 150 yards paced 

 but back to BP and round balls .

 Now if we bump the powder up to 120 grains  that 40 more grains what do we get ?
 Only 163 fps  faster  a with 333ft/lb  of increase at 100  yards  ?? That not even what you get from a 40 grain  basic charge at 100 yards  ?
 With a round ball the increase is even less
 Where with the 80 grain charge we had numbers of 1036 FPS and an energy of  422 @100
 That same increase of 40 grains only yields us  105 Fps increase and  90 ft/lbs  more of energy @100
 That same 40 grain charge by itself yields  911 fps at 100 yards  with 327 ft/lbs @100

 What does this show us ?
 Well basically that  by increasing the  charge we  don’t really achieve much for the increases..
 That when speaking of RB  the energy is at closer ranges

 If we look at the 45 cal which  was for a very long time a common big game round  when it came to deer and I would bet that  it  safe to say when it come to PB has probably taken the greatest number of north American game.  we see that even with a 120 grain load  we don’t even brake 400ft/lb  at 100 yards  and in fact comes in at  only 369 ?

 So how much does it take ?? Will apparently the old round ball does not take all that much to do the job .

[Idaho Ron]

Foot pounds of energy is not just paper energy, It directly relates to penetration. The Idaho Dept of fish and game put out a booklet back in 1991. The writer was Al Marion and Gene Autry. It is called " Idaho Hunter's Guide to Muzzleloader Performance and Limitations.

They tested many different bullets. 50 cal 177 gr RB,   50 cal 385 great plains,  50 cal sabot with a 240 gr XTP. They also tested some 54's.  54cal with a 45 cal sabot 300 gr XTP, and a 425 gr Buffalo bullet.
The 50 cal RB had 7.5" of penetration. the 50 cal 385 gr great plains bullet had 12.25" of penetration. The 240 gr sabot had 13.5" of penertration.
The best penetration was with a sabot using a 45 cal 300 gr XTP. it had 17" of penetration.

While the sabot had the best penetration the 385 great plains bullet had the widest wound channel with 50 cal bullets.

In the section where it talks about RB's it says " hunters choosing to use round balls will be wise to use at least 50 cal on deer and 54 for elk. Even larger round balls for both species would be better". it also says under the great plains bullet. " since testing was compleated Hornady has Marketed a new 50 cal 410 gr with a flat point, it should penetrate deeper than the 385 gr hollow point. Fifty cal users should view this newer design as a better choice for elk".

 I don't feel that compairing a RB to a broadhead is a fair compairson. A broadhead will penetrate farther than ANY rifle in about any medium.  Meat, sand, water, with the exception of heavy bone, a broadhead will out penetrate any Round ball bullet. The reason is it cuts at the tip. A RB does not cut at the tip in any strech of the imagenation.
 
 I am not saying that FPE is the end all. Bullet placement is priority when it comes to hunting. But I think we need to use enough bullet when we can. I think that a RB has it's place but not a 150 yards. For me I would not think of using a RB past 75 to 100 yards, and on small deer.
Ron
 

[captchee]

  ron the test you refer to was part of the push for  allowing conical  into BP season .
 it was found lacking  and the conical was  banned up until last year ?? year before . it is now only aloud as a pure lead  conical . there are also new recommendations coming forward that would make it legal for only conical of bore diameter thus removing sabots . seems the CO's in the feild are seeing a real problem  with the 45 cal . there was  some talk of removing the 45 completely . thus going to a bore sizeonly requirment ?
 At our last meeting we also discussed new lose powder  definitions    as well as  a cap definition  to solidify the  removal of the 209  in it  modern name changes .

 who can say what will happen  i do know a few new traditional only hunts are being recomended ?

[LEO]

To answer Zermatt7's question, I had a bit of a shocker last year with my Renegade 50 cal also 1 in 48 twist.  I was given some hornady SST 200 gr 451 bullets in sabots.  I loaded them with the 90 grain load of 777 that I had found shot best with my old bullet, and fired a round at a 50 yd target to determine point of impact.  I then fired 3 rounds at a 100 yd target, swabing the bore between shots and the three went into less than 3/4".  I thought it was a fluke so I fired another 3 round group and the same result.  I did have a scope on the rifle for load testing as I have found after about 10 groups with irons my eyes get tired and accuracy for me deteriotes due to eye fatigue and that defeats the purpose of load development.  I realize this is not a traditional load but the accuracy can't be beat.  My normal load was 90 grains 3F under a TC Maxi-ball but I was only getting 3 1/2 to 4 inch groups (still plenty good enough to kill a deer since I rarely have a shot past 50 yds where I hunt).  I switched to 777 because it is easier to clean up and mainly in my area BP is getting hard to get.  Hope this info is useful.

[Idaho Ron]

captchee,
I am a Reservist in the F&G. I was told a very different story. The story I was told about the booklet was to try to get more people to switch from RB's to a bullet that had a better chance to kill not wound animals. The conicals were only banned in the traditional hunts which made NO sense to me because there have been conicals since the middle 1800's. I am not sure what you mean that "it was found lacking" The conical bullet is a superior bullet for penetration and leaving a large wound channel. That is what is needed for hunting, a bullet that will penetrate and leave a big hole. The conicals were brought back because of the high wounding rate with the RB's. This is the word I got from our office.  While I do think that a RB can work I think the large heavy conicals work better for hunting.
 I am with you on the bullets being of bore diameter. There is NO WAY  a sabot should be in a traditional hunt.  In my mind a gun should be a side lock, mule ear, or a under hammer. The powder should be black powder or a lose granular black powder substitute ( I can't even get black powder). Number 11 cap or a musket cap. Open sights or peep sights only.
 We have finally got a few hunts. I am happy about that but I fear that with all the fighting we have between the muzzleloaders we are in danger of loosing ALL our hunts.  Our rules are ok now, not perfect but ok.    Ron

[captchee]

 ron  its not the conical that was lacking  but the study .
 the base for the study was soundly  behind the allowance of the conical . one of the problems i had  with the report was that the numbers   did not  emphasize proper shot placement .
 The gave the general perception that  conical  was the way to go  and actually opened the door for  the degrading of our seasons  and what the were originally based on  . IMO it was a very wise decision  by the commission to set  the report aside and stick with  our current rules .
 IMO  we have one of the better regulations  when it comes to  hunting and muzzleloaders . IE there is something for the modern shooter while at the same time satisfying the traditional shooter as well.
 While at the same time protection  the complete reasoning for the season .

 i grew up in the IF&G  . father was a CO and one of the leading salmon biologists in this state . the hatchery at redfish he  instramental in  getting started. as well as much of the steelhead recovery on the snake  in hells canyon  .

 we " father and I "were also one of the  original petitioners for  the muzzleloading season back in the 70's .
 conical are now allowed in traditional hunts  but only pure lead .
 as I said there are some recommendations for changes coming up .  that’s not just coming from muzzleloading groups but  some from the Co's themselves .

 I will tell you that  none I have heard of  are to weaken the current standards ., all but one are to make the standers more stringent  , close loop holes  in the current wording.

 this was however prior to the change of the region 3 commissioner ,, so   who knows what the stance for the  new commissioner  will be . While I know Mr browsky  well , I have not had the chance  to sit down and discuss  really anything past ; how have you been

 you know Travis Feldner ?

[Idaho Ron]

I wonder if they just assumed that proper shot placement was going to be used.  They do touch on it on page 2,3,and 17.
  As long as I can use my Renegade with my GM barrel, pyrodex select, Hornady Great plains bullets and a number 11 cap I am happy
I would hate to see a bunch of regulations like no stainless steel barrels, no fast twist, no conical bullets, no peep sights. If they take away my rifle I will quit hunting with a muzzleloader. That would bum me out because I have been shooting one for about 30 years. I won't fight it any more like I did in the past. if a great plains bullet and this gun is wrong then I don't need to go on the hunt.



A funny thing happened one time. I took a inline to a turkey shoot.  Nothing in the rules said no inlines, all it said was PRB only. Well I used a RB with 50 grains of powder. I took second place and won a turkey, and a cast iron fry pan with the longest shot of the day. One of the guys complained and wanted to check my bag for sabots. I didn't have any or use any I did let them check. They changed the rules to keep out inlines after that. I then joined the club and borrowed a 54 cal Hawkens. I only shot 3 shoots for the year and tied for third place shooter of the year. The scores I had on only three shoots beat most of the guys shooting for the whole year. After that they said I was not dressing traditional enough and finally I just quit. but not until I beat them out of a lot of there blanket prizes. Oh and I also beat the cr@p out of them at a archery shoot.  On that one I got first place.
Ron

[captchee]

good for you ron , good for you . some shoots allow modern weapons , others do not . myself i have very little problem with  the modern inline as long as its confined to the same  projectile and prim as traditional weapons . held to the same standards  traditional weapons in the trained hand is  IMO far superior to the modern .
 i also strongly beleive how one choses to dress has nothing to do with hunting . for VOooos and  traditional style shoots ? i have no proble with a club haveing rules  giving added points to those who do dress the part , kind of a , its their game play it their way or dont play

  i do know at the last meeting i  went to this past spring  the things that were being proposed were
 basically bore size conical  and  having no more the 2x the bore width  in length , no jacketed  conical  of any type . a suggestion  removal of the 45 cal from  a min caliber and going to 50 . This one  is being considered  for support by a couple groups but was started within the F&G itself .
 a re wording of the 209 rule  so as to exclude the modern inline caps coming on the market .
A stronger lose powder definition . A stronger  stance to secure not allowing smokeless  .
 Possibly the option for a couple more traditional hunts .
 I think the open site  rule is stronger then ever . I don’t see scopes anywhere in the near future .
 Even with Toby bridges letter of discrimination lol .

 There was some talk of a  water fowl season ? Not sure where that one went . I know for I while it had some strong backing and was part of the reasoning behind the allowance of double barrels . Myself I think that would be enjoyable . With the current stance on lead shot however and the price of bismuth  it could have hit  a dead end

Proper shot placement is never a given . This is why  we have had in archery  for the lat 15 years or so a no electronics what so ever rule .
 If you remember there was a company called game tracker who had put out a  product  that had a small transmitter that  snagged in the skin as the arrow went through . IMO this was a very good idea as it allowed the hunter to easily track down   killed or wounded game .

 However the state saw this as a big potential no no  and banned it right off, if I recall that was 85 or 86 ?.
 The same IMO was felt with the conical report . I gave the impression that  there was so much power in the heavy conical that even poor shots  would  level you  target .
 We both know this isn’t true  even for heavy magnum  center fire round ..
 My wish is that the state would implement a muzzleloading education course  just as they did with archery .

 Teach people  how to shoot the different projectiles  so they fully understand that  the round ball isn’t a long range  projectile . That the muzzleloader isn’t  for the purposes of this state a long range  hunting weapon  .
 I don’t know that it will ever happen but  I sure wish it would

[Idaho Ron]

"My wish is that the state would implement a muzzleloading education course  just as they did with archery ."

Amen brother. Only problem is do you think there is enough people willing to teach the class? On the classes I teach we probably linger a little longer on Archery and BP than most. I am already a hunter ed and Bow hunter ed instrustor I am not sure I have the time for one more.  It would be a great thing I think. In the units where inlines can be used I think you are right some people think if you shoot a sabot and two or three pellets you just need to hit an animal and it will be all she wrote.
Shot placement is so important. When my daughter was 13 she shot a great bull.  The gun was a 270 with 130 gr bullet at 2700 FPS. No this load might not have the FPE most guys say a elk needs but that is where shot placement comes in to play.
If she could have shot a bigger and faster bullet I would have but like you said shot placement.
Ron

[captchee]

  WOW! nice bull ron , she did real well . the 270 has always up tell a few years ago been a very popular elk round . i still se basically nothing wrong with it . but as you say , just as with  any weapon , shot placement is the key . the round has to make it into a vital spot  be that  hart lung , neck  or even liver area. the last not being ideal of course .

 i think there would not be a problem with getting instructors for BP  education .  what i do foresee as a problem would be folks that would be well rounded enough in  both modern and traditional disciplines.

 There are just so many miss conceptions  in BP .  With the modern guys it  IMO comes from the  manufactures and those who write for them . For me many of this verges on  plain fraud and miss representation of their products .

 On the traditional side you have the modern manufacture  propagating  miss information  and then  Hollywood  giving a  most time completely false view  of traditional muzzleloaders . This is really true when it comes to flint locks .  Its only been here in the last few years that  they have even came close to  showing how fast  the actual ignition should be   . They however still insist on showing  complete crippling knock downs “ IE opening seen of LoTM”
 I personally through the years have only seen this happen one time and it was with a  62 cal on a cow elk , standing and at close range , IE 25 yards  . It indeed would have been a very hard shot  on a running bull . IMO he would have most likely stumbled but kept right on trucking. they just have that much powder exspecialy  when being pushed to the point they are  flat out motating at mock 4  like this  young bull in the movie   .

All these things while neat on the movie screen only serve to propagate miss understandings  for both those learning and wanting to enter into muzzleloading  as a sport  .

[LEO]

Although this has gotten totally off the original question asked, I am going to put my two cents worth in.  Within its range limitations, so long as an appropriate caliber is used for the game being pursued, the round ball is certainly an effective hunting tool.  Does the conical kill better, maybe, does it extend the range of the given rifle, yes with in accuracy limitations.  Does the sabot round kill effectively yes if a proper bullet is used, does it extend the range of the rifle yes within accuracy limitations.  Now to the real point of contention.

Traditional verses in-lines, there seems to be a great deal of contention about traditional verses in-lines, open verses optical sights, and round ball/bore diameter conicals versus sabot rounds.  Well the bottom line is don't fault a person for chosing something different than you so long as what they choose is with in the regulations of a given state.  For example Mississippi permits certain single shot cartridge arms during the "primative weapons" season, so if a person chooses to hunt with a Sharps replica, don't give them a hard time they are legal.  In Kentucky there is an area set aside for primative weapons hunting, no optics, no inlines.  Traditional open sighted only, there is no restriction on bullet or powder but that is not a big deal based on the restrictions placed on gun type.  If you don't like the rules try to get the state to change them don't attack those who choose to pursue the sport different from you.  Ultimately if hunters continue to squable among themselves it will be all hunters who loose.  By the way my muzzleloader is a TC Renegade 50 cal and a CVA 36 caliber, both with open sights and up until last year I shot black powder the reason I switched was it got almost impossible to get black in my area.  I shoot patched round balls, bore diameter conicals and sabots.

[roundball]

"...don't attack those who choose to pursue the sport different from you..."
 

I completely agree on the not attacking a fellow hunter for his/her choice of muzzleloader.

"...If you don't like the rules try to get the state to change them..."

My understanding of one major bone of contention with the more traditional minded folks is that indeed they did just that with their states all over the country back during the middle of the last century...the seasaons available today were in fact started back then as "primitive" weapons seasons by the traditional muzzleloading enthusiasts.

I think there are stong feelings in those who pioneered all that work...they simply wanted a couple weeks to use their specialized, learned primitive skills to slip up on a buck and take him with a patched ball, maybe even a Flintlock...and I guess resent the fact that now someone can just walk in with what is for the world a modern high power rifle shooting smokeless powder with a leupold scope and shoot the  buck 200yds away that the primitive guy was stalking up on.

But I agree, the two camps attacking one another resolves nothing.

[Bear Rider]

The real solution is to limit the muzzleloading season to flintlocks only.

[roundball]

Works for me !!