This site best viewed at 800x600 or greater resolution. Please support Our Advertisers. They make this site possible!

HistoricalTrekking.com
Small Horizontal Row
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in
 CalendarCalendar   LinksLinks 
.54 or .58
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    HistoricalTrekking.com Forum Index -> Message Board
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Capt Mike
Guest





Real Name: Anonymous

PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 2:27 pm    Post subject: Huntin boys Reply with quote

Just for the record...I can not tell you how many whitetails I 'think' I have killed....DNR boys read these boards.

Im a big believer of dont send a boy to do a mans job,,,

lead round balls at muzzleloader veloc's kill by opening up a blood hole. With too small of a calibre,,,like a .40,,,your shooting basically one buckshot accurately (lets hope for the deers sake) into a whitetail. With a .62,,you are opening up a much bigger blood vent,,,and some more damage to the interior. This bloodshot thing just aint so. Not much. With modern hi veloc guns,,sure...but the blood hole with a .62 is just much more effecient...

and,,,

I shoot against .40cals all the time at the range with my .62 rifle and wipe butt big time..the .62 wins hands down esp on a windy day...esp then....

there is a LOT more to take into consideration than a perfect picnic clear day, optium shot, perfect placement....Murpheys Law comes into play,,but all you huntin' folks already know this...........:)

Boones 'Tick Licker' was a .69Cal rifle...he said it was the most accurate rifle he ever owned.....rekon o' Dan'l Boone was a metrosexual,....

Capt Mike
Back to top
Michael Archer
User


Joined: 15 May 2007
Posts: 290
Location: West of Fort Pitt
Real Name: Curt Schmidt

PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 2:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

How d' ye!

Yes, when the barrel "profile" is the same, the bore or "hole" being bigger makes for a lighter barrel.
Or vice-versa. I am reminded of the attributed Daniel Boone rifle in the West Virignia State Archives collection. It has a massive barrel profile with a tiny .45 hol ein it. No wonder when his "rheumatism" flared, he made his wife carry it on hunts. (I have hefted it, and I don't care for it myself...)

As an aside, we could mention the concept of "Ohio rifles," etc., etc, being an evolutionary trend in the early-mid, mid, and late 19th century when the forests were devoid of Indians, hostile animals, and large game animals and hunting became mostly deer hunted part-time by farmers.
Meaning, in brief and to over-generalize, the muzzleloading rifles in Ohio became smaller, shorter, lighter, and typicaly .30 to .40...
X

_________________
Michael Archer
Heretic
Rewardink. wery, wery, wery rewardink.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
SeanK
Guest





Real Name: Anonymous

PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 5:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fitzhugh Williams wrote:
Quote:
Going from a .54 to a .58 will require going up in barrel size for any given barrel profile.


Just the opposite. LC Rice, for instance, used the same profile for .50, .54, and .58. Going up in caliber will reduce the weight of the barrel.


For all profiles of swamp barrels A is for cals to I believe .40 or .45, B goes up to .50, C to .54, D covers the biggies beyond. You can get a D in .32 on special order, but you can't get a .58 A-weight from anyone. Average weights for for standard pattern Colerain barrels are published in the TOW catalog. Except for a rare special order from Getz, its much the same for straight barrels. You have a hard time finding a 15/16"x.58. For the same length a 15/16"X.54 is lighter in weight than a 1"x.58. You'll find the same is true for swamped barrels of similar profiles. Hence, all other things constant, a larger cal = a heavier rifle.

Sean
Back to top
SeanK
Guest





Real Name: Anonymous

PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 6:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pathfinder wrote:
Sean

I'm a big proponent of min. caliber because most of the guys who hunt muzzle loading seasons don't shoot their guns very much, if at all, thus don't know limitations a front stuffer has over their 7mm. mag..........…“but gosh .50 caliber is just so much bigger than .30 (7mm)”!


Unfortunate but true. On my M/L antelope hunt last fall, I was the only hunter in the unit using traditional equipment and half of the rest were using brand new inlines that they'd purchased within a month of the hunt and had maybe been to the range once if they were lucky. However, a larger caliber or a bigger scope won't generally serve as insurance against stupidity and lack of preparation. The only answer there as you know is through education and drilling it into people's head that hunting requires preparation, and that you owe it to the animal. I've not had a season in the last 10 years that I haven't seen something stupid enough to make me embarrassed to call myself a hunter. However, I won't give up and let stupid people drive me from something I love.

I think we're off track on the original thread and I just can't agree that bigger cals (within reason) will ever make someone a better hunter. I'll bow to a difference of opinion and drop back to saying that there should be little difference in results between the .54 and .58. If you were to practice with both and know their limitations, anything up to a bull elk or moose should end up just as dead.

Best regards,

Sean
Back to top
Capt Mike
Guest





Real Name: Anonymous

PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 6:20 pm    Post subject: AGreed Reply with quote

agreed on practice....the BEST gun in the world,,and there prob aint a 'best',,just personal fav's,,,but the best wont kill if it misses...

and,,modern types seem to be the worse,,but still,,iv see a few flint shooters that,,,whew! one scared the living stuff outta me one time..I dont think HE knew his own gun was loaded..he said he did,but he sure had a be-mused look on his face ......

practice IS the key,,agreed.
Back to top
Fitzhugh Williams
User


Joined: 15 May 2007
Posts: 388
Location: Greenville, SC
Real Name: Fitzhugh Williams

PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 7:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LC Rice sells .50, .54, and .58 in a "C" profile.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Capt Mike
Guest





Real Name: Anonymous

PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 7:04 pm    Post subject: Mr Rice Reply with quote

Mr Rice is one fine southern gentleman to , Fitz,,,,nice guy to chat with.

Id like to have one of his barrels on my next project ,,,
Back to top
Pathfinder
Guest





Real Name: Anonymous

PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 7:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sean,

We agree on most points. Bigger won't make you better! Bigger will make a bigger wound channel. If I have a .58 cal. and .54 cal. both setting against the wall and I can shoot them both equally and I have an elk or bear hunt to go on, I'll take the .58 !

Back to original question, I think Mr. Archer laid it out very well. I would also agree that weight difference is equally important. Speer round balls in (.440 R.B. weighs 128 gr.)(.490 R.B. weighs 177gr.)( .530R.B. weighs 224gr.) and a .570 R.B. 278gr.

To Diggler’s original question, and purely from a hunting perspective, I would suggest that either .54 or .58 is adequate to kill most North American big game animals. However as Mr. John Corn(ca 1978) remarked to me back when I bought my first G.R.R.W. Leman, he had just returned from a buffalo hunt in Nebraska where he had wounded a big bull, that he said they had to chase for sometime. When I asked how large a caliber he used he said .58, but added he would have Green River build his next rifle in .62 cal. Admittedly shot placement was an issue. But in his mind a larger wound channel was bigger medicine for one of North America’s largest big game animals.

Finally 110 gr. FF behind a .562 RB will travel the entire length of a average size black bear at 25 yds. Will penetrate through a running cow elk at a quarter angle, though the heart and exit opposite side at 80 yards and will do so without any punishment to the shoulder even with a narrow crescent butt plate. Oh yea drop them both when they were hit.

Hey Dirk, I hope all this has been helpful! Like Michael A. said, lots of difference opinion here but hopefully you can sort through all this and draw a conclusion. It’s sorta like the old Ford and Chevy arguments …………..you know mine’s better than yours!

Pathfinder
Back to top
Lloyd Moler
User


Joined: 16 May 2007
Posts: 297
Location: Priest River, Idaho
Real Name: Lloyd Moler

PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 8:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hay Doug,
The first Flinter ever I made was a .58 15/16" Green River Rifle Works Barrel and I left it a full 42 inches long. Old Carney Pace made that barrel for me and I built a nice extremely early Hawken flinter using it.
Carried it for a long time too, but sold it in '82 to a Lawyer in Portland.

Generally, I have to agree that a .54 is just as good as a .58 (my new Elk rifle that I recently finished is a .58 Early English Flinter)((not bloodied yet)). I also have to agree that a . 54 is inherently more accurate and ballistically better all around than any other round ball gun. (actually a .52 round ball) In the fight with gravity, the .52 manages to slip in just under the point of deminishing return. Getting the maximum ball weight out as compared to drop and loss of velocity due to ball size vs. passing through our atmosphere. .58, won't shoot as far without more drop. It also looses velocity faster than a .52. YOU GUYS EVER WONDER WHY MOST OF THOSE OLD HAWKENS AND JJ HENRY'S WERE .52 CALIBER? THOSE OLD BOYS WEREN'T DUMB. THEY FIGURED OUT THE BEST WITHOUT THE USE OF ALL THESE MODERN CONTRAPTIONS THAT WE USE TODAY TO FIGURE OUT THE SAME THING.... (I do occasionly fit into the above catagory....lol)

_________________
With this I remain, My Dear Sir, Your most Humble and Obedient Servant

Lloyd Moler
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Capt Mike
Guest





Real Name: Anonymous

PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 8:58 pm    Post subject: Lloyd Reply with quote

Lloyd,,,I wont say,,,that the .52 aint the most efficent,,,but,,I got to admit,,i dont understand the ballastics of the beast.

If you took a load with 'any' rb,,and increased the lead (mass) say by 10percent,,and then increase the powder equvent charge by 10 percent,,would you not have exactly the same deal ?

A .50 cal is a good rifle,,the .54 is good. ,,,heck,,they all DO have their own strong points,,,one thing about a .40,,,that I must admit,,they shoot so smooth,,it lends itself to making you a better marksman,,,,they move a tad on windy days,,,,but,,,we all argue,like path said.about guns like the ol' chevy vrs ford thang...Honestly,,,its good we all dont like the same gun,,,gives us more variety in toys to look at !! :)

but that ballastic stuff on RB and Powder equv,,,I just do not understand how its that way,,,fixed in concrete ??

Thanks Lloyd
Back to top
Pathfinder
Guest





Real Name: Anonymous

PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 9:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lloyd,

Carney was/is a gentleman and encouraged a very young new comer to the fraternity, by gently foundling my early Lyman Plains rifle, and as I stood there kicking the ground, making excuses for my less than cool brass laden .50 cal. cap gun, Carney paid me respect, that it was a “fine gun” and “all of us started some where”. Shortly afterwards we became neighbors and this greenhorn learned a lot from the likes of Carney, George Campbell, Monty Fritz, Kendall McDowell and many, many others. I was always a bit humbled to be around the “Skunk Springs” bunch and still am finding out years later how they impacted the muzzle loading fraternity. Now I can add to that list, Lloyd Moler…………………….I know, I know I’ve become quite the name dropper. I often wonder if I'd kept building guns after I built my first Green River....... I'd become as awesome as you and Carney.............Naaaah!

Doug
Back to top
diggler
Guest





Real Name: Anonymous

PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 11:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks ALL! for the great discussion.

Mick yer a regular wordsmith man. All good points. Lloyd and Pathfinder, Seank,, everyone, thank you for the good beta.

My reason for the question should be obvious. This week i firm up my order for an Early Lancaster rifle. in deference to this knowledge, then, bigger is better right. i will go with the .58

cheers,
Back to top
Capt Mike
Guest





Real Name: Anonymous

PostPosted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 12:46 am    Post subject: Pics Reply with quote

As an avid 'show and tell' guy with our toys,,,be sure'an post some pics when you have this rifle in hand.

A pic of a flintlock is worth a thousand words on some cop show on tv..rather be lookin' at ya rifle on here.

Capt Mike
Back to top
SeanK
Guest





Real Name: Anonymous

PostPosted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 12:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fitzhugh Williams wrote:
LC Rice sells .50, .54, and .58 in a "C" profile.


Fitz,

You're right. I checked LC's web page and he does list a C-weight Golden Age in .58. That's the only C he lists in that cal and straight barrels in .58 are listed at a minimum of 1". I've never seen a .58 C, but I've seen a Getz 13/16" straight in .50 so it should do fine.

Sean
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    HistoricalTrekking.com Forum Index -> Message Board All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You must Register or Log In to post new topics in this forum
You must Register or Log In to reply to topics in this forum
You must Register or Log In to edit your posts in this forum
You must Register or Log In to delete your posts in this forum
You must Register or Log In to vote in polls in this forum
Back to HistoricalTrekking.com
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group - This site created 11/24/99 by Historical Enterprises.
Photos, Text, Graphics, and Design Copyright © 1999 - Present Historical Enterprises. All Rights Reserved.
Exact Matches Only