My Hunting Loads

Share your tales (tall or otherwise) of hunting adventures.

Moderators: Kirk, Lucinda

Darryl
Posts: 233
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:00 pm
Location: Katy, Texas

My Hunting Loads

Post by Darryl » Tue May 10, 2011 3:03 pm

Here's a picture of my hunting loads:

45/70 Using Starline Brass
525 Grain Brooks Custom in 30/1 Alloy with a .310" Meplat
SPG Lube
70.0 Grains of Goex Express 2F Slow dropped and compressed to into a rock-like form.
Fed 215 Primer
Walter's .060 Wad and 2 paper wads
1208 fps out of my 34" Hartford (I have not chronographed it out of the 28" Business rifle, but I use the same load in it and my guess would be that I'm getting around 1180-1185 fps out the tube)

50/70 Using Starline Brass
532 Grain Brooks Custom in 30/1 Alloy with a .350" Meplat
SPG Lube
67.0 Grains Swiss 1.5 FG (Compressed .160")
Walters .060 Wad and 2 newsprint wads
Fed 215 Primer
1158 fps out of my 28" Green Mountain barreled rolling block. (This bullet smacks the snot out of game and shoots dots at 100 yards out of the roller).

Image

ole pizen slinger
Posts: 1400
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2002 9:59 pm
Location: East of yesterday and West of nowhere.

Post by ole pizen slinger » Tue May 10, 2011 3:14 pm

Looks like you've cast some really nice bullets.
OPS
Barry C Jolly

"I envy no man that knows more than myself and pity them that know less:" Sir T. Brown

Darryl
Posts: 233
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:00 pm
Location: Katy, Texas

Post by Darryl » Tue May 10, 2011 3:29 pm

Ladel technique - and many, many, many, many, many frustrating hours of pouring and dumping bullets back into the pot paid off.

Brent
Posts: 6197
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 9:40 am
Location: Fly-over Country
Contact:

Post by Brent » Tue May 10, 2011 3:33 pm

That .45-70 bullet looks about perfect to me. I should get one in a paper patch version someday.

Brent
Just straddling the hard line between "the arrogance of dogmatism and the despair of skepticism"

Darryl
Posts: 233
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:00 pm
Location: Katy, Texas

Post by Darryl » Tue May 10, 2011 3:42 pm

It's a pretty darn good hunting bullet. Notice the nose is short (relative to it's overal length of 1.300"). I did that on purpose because it's NOT a bore-rider. The nose is .445" allowing it to be chambered into an already fouled barrel without issues.

My .50/70 Bullet is a shooter. Something about the OAL of that bullet (1.050") and Nose/OAL, driving bands etc.. makes it a hummer out of my 1/24" Green Mountain barrel. I got lucky on that bullet.

The I have not been able to get the .45 Bullet to shoot as well - yet.

User avatar
Free_Stater
Posts: 1032
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 1:50 pm
Location: Brooklyn, Mississippi

Post by Free_Stater » Tue May 10, 2011 7:04 pm

How did you end up with the decision to add the two newspaper wads?
When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.

Clarence
Posts: 2064
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2002 7:38 pm
Location: Hill Country, TX

Post by Clarence » Wed May 11, 2011 6:52 am

Darryl,

Very nice looking bullets-I'd imagine they are almost perfect for hunting in TX!

Have you shot enough game with the .45-70 bullet to make any judgement on penetration?

The reason I ask is that I took a similar bullet, but with a 3/8" meplat, to South Africa 5 years ago. I used 1/20 alloy, but my velocity was ~1360 fps. I got very good expansion, but on four animals of widely varying size (impala, warthog, red hartebeest, and kudu) determined that penetration on angling shots was ~24-28 inches-all bullets were found just under the skin on the opposite side. Broadside shots on warthog and blesbok were pass-throughs.

I decided that the ideal bullet for my alloy and velocity would have a meplat in the 1/4-5/16" range.

My guess is that, at lower velocity, softer alloy, and slightly smaller meplat, you might get a bit more penetration, but there's nothing like a few data points to prove of disprove that idea.

Clarence

Darryl
Posts: 233
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:00 pm
Location: Katy, Texas

Re: My Hunting Loads

Post by Darryl » Tue May 17, 2011 8:30 am

I've been busy and not checking the boards lately.

I use the two newsprint wads in the .50 cal only because I read it in one of Croft Barkers books (50/70 shooters handbook).

Before I even got my .50/70 completed from Lonestar, I assembled loads using two newsprint wads above the primary. It shot so darn good, I never changed a thing. (It may shoot just as fine without, but I'm not fixing anything that works). In summary, the theory is - the .50 cal base is so big that bullets can become somewhat concave from the pressures, causing the primary wad to sometimes be "pinched" or stick to the base a part of the way down range - leading to inconsistencies. Putting two newsprint wads insures that the primary wad falls off of the base upon the bullet exiting the barrel. I can actually see the newsprint wads flutter down to the ground about 15 yards in front of my gun everytime I shoot - which tells me the Walters wad is not stuck to my bullet.

Again - I don't know if it really makes a diff. But my .50/70 shoots ragged holes at 100 yards. I don't care if they were wads punched from 100 dollar bills, it shoots and I aint changing a thing!

Darryl
Posts: 233
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:00 pm
Location: Katy, Texas

Re: My Hunting Loads

Post by Darryl » Tue May 17, 2011 9:47 am

Clarence:

I have not shot any game with large thoracic cavities using these bullets - therefore I cannot provide any reliable data on them. The biggest stuff I've shot with them are large Texas Hogs (up to an honest 275 Pounds), and various other sized hogs and Texas Whitetails.

I deliberately selected a flatnose design when ordering my moulds due to the relatively light structure of our whitetails in Texas. Since they are basically large coyotes (IE, varmints with thin skin and light bone structures) - I wanted a bullet design that would promote shock and cause some cavitation on impact in order to damage more tissue. I knew penetration would not be an issue with these animals. I've never recovered a bullet as they have all past through completely, including large hogs where the shot-path began frontal at the sternum and exited the hind quarters.

There is a very interesting site which covers the mechanics of penetration, cavitation, terminal performance and lethal wounding. By reading this long essay, one can learn a lot about lethal wounding and terminal performance.
http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ball ... nding.html

Clarence
Posts: 2064
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2002 7:38 pm
Location: Hill Country, TX

Re: My Hunting Loads

Post by Clarence » Wed May 18, 2011 6:29 am

Darryl,

You confirmed a suspicion I had. Your bullets are likely expanding somewhat less than mine did, due to the lower velocity, in spite of being slightly softer and lighter. It sounds like you have a very good combination of bullet weight and hardness for your velocity. I think the ideal is expansion, but full penetration on most shots, even on quartering animals so that the blood trail is good for tracking (I've not seen any animal shot go very far when properly shot with these big bullets).

You're right-the TX whitetails are not very big. I have a couple of yearlings hanging around the house, and I doubt they weigh much more than 80-85 lb. on the hoof.

Clarence

Darryl
Posts: 233
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:00 pm
Location: Katy, Texas

Re: My Hunting Loads

Post by Darryl » Wed May 18, 2011 4:31 pm

I believe there is an ideal velocity range for a given bullet and application at hand. Too many people think that higher velocity equates to deeper penetration in all cases. This is a false generalization to make.

In applications where bodies are fluid, or primarily water like (as in animal thorax), extremely high velocity actually works against penetration because it increases resistance. However, in penetrating or shattering rigid bodies such as bone, wood, glass, steel etc.. then higher velocity typically results in deeper penetration.

A good analogy is given in the essay I linked in my previous post:
Imagine if you were standing waist deep in a swimming pool and smack the water with your hand as fast as you can swing your arm. You will create a violent splash (cavitation) but your hand will actually be slowed immediately due to the opposing resistance of the water. You'll penetrate only 2-3 inches at most, but the cavitation or ripple effect through the water will be pronounced and violent.

Now, imagine if instead of smacking the water rapidly, you pushed your hand quickly into the water.
In this case, your hand will penetrate the body of water much deeper than it did when you smacked it rapidly, but you will not create the same violent splash (cavitation).

This is why these rifles hurling 500+ grain bullets in the 1100-1300 fps range do not cause a bunch of blood shot meat where the high velocity rounds - even as small as a 55 grain bullet out of a .22-250 at 3600 fps will turn meat black&Blue where it impacts.

Those high velocity rounds will not penetrate even close to what these black powder cartridge rounds will do (given the bullet weights and velocities we hum them at).

I'll also bet anyone that if you shoot a 1/2" steel plate at 100 yards with your lead round, you'll get a splatter mark. Do it with a 55 grain .22 caliber jacketed bullet at 3600 fps and you'll get a small crater in the steel. Do it with a 150-180 grain bullet out of a .30-06 and you'll get a huge crater that will dimple the other side of the steel. Put a 150+ Grain Barnes X, Nosler Partition, or failsafe bullet at 2800+ into the steel and you'll penetrate through at 100 yards.

The ultra high velocity has a shattering / ripping effect on rigid targets and penetrates. But on fluid waterlike bodies / targets they penetrate less and cavitate more.

Penetration is more important than cavitation for hunting applications, assuming you're working with a bullet in the sizes that we typically use. Being able to cut a wound channel entirely through vital blood bearing organs will facilitate a lethal wound better than a projectile that causes a violent but shallow cavitation wound.

If I had to go against a grizzly bear I'd much rather have my .45/70 shooting a 525 grain bullet at 1160 fps than a .22-250 shooting a 55 grain bullet at 3600 fps. The kinetic energies of both rounds are nearly identical (1568 ft pounds for the .45/70 and 1582 ft pounds for the varmint gun). But, energy has both quantity AND QUALITY. How that energy is applied matters.

The CHARACTER of the work done by that energy matters.

Here's another example of character and quality:
Imagine I had a 2x4 that was 6 feet long. You stand 10 feet in front of me and I hurl towards you at 30 miles per hour. But, by throwing it at this speed I do so by grasping the 2x4 with each hand near the ends of it causing it to hit you legthwise across the chest.

It would probably knock a person down, and bruise the skin across the parts of the chest where the 3.5" flat struck.

NOW, take that same 6' long 2x4 and again hurl it at 30 miles per hour. Only this time - it's thrown like a spear / arrow so that a small end of it strikes
first with all of the remaining weight an momentum of that 2x4 behind the point!

Kinetic energy is identical (a 6' 2x4 launched at 30 miles per hour).

But the damage that will be done is much different. In this case, skin is almost guaranteed to tear on impact, and there will be bleeding involved.

The character of the energy has changed.

These guns actually are ideal for killing withing typical hunting distances of 200 yards or less. They generally won't anchor game in their tracks and drop deer like a 150 grain Nosler Ballistic tip does on a lung shot deer at 300 Win Mag velocities. They may drop some in their tracks, but will generally do it much less often than a high velocity strike will.

BUT, due to the extreme penetration - any shot-path through major blood bearing vital organs with these weapons will put an animal down in short order. The key is, a decent placed shot WILL get through the vitals and out the other side. The deep penetration gives way to a high volume wound channel which causes hemmoraging and blood pressure to drop.

I love hunting with these tools. The old timers had it right without all of the scopes, jacketed bullets, white powder, and synthetic stocks.

KL
Posts: 117
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 10:26 pm

Re: My Hunting Loads

Post by KL » Wed May 18, 2011 10:18 pm

The character of nothing has changed and the argument that the "character" of the energy has changed is nonsense. Energy has no "character" or "quality." The mass x acceleration equals force, i.e, what we call kinetic energy. F=MA. By 1) the entire length of the board striking across a large area with X acceleration, as opposed to 2) the end of the same board striking a small area with the same acceleration, the energy is the same. The mass of the board is the same and the acceleration of the board is the same. F=MA in both examples is identical. The second could be expected to cause more localized damage at the striking point because the same amount of force was concentrated on a small area. Sort of like falling and landing across your shoulders, thereby spreading the shock across your upper body, as opposed to landing with exact same force on the point of your head, or maybe knocking Darryl upside his head with a high school book called "Physics."

Darryl
Posts: 233
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:00 pm
Location: Katy, Texas

Re: My Hunting Loads

Post by Darryl » Wed May 18, 2011 11:22 pm

KL:

Who died and made you the King to get off making a cheap comment as you just did?
Can you READ? Perhaps you need to be knocked in the head by a lesson in reading comprehension (if you want to throw rocks at each other).

Those are MY words In how I describe the effects of changing the way the force is applied.
You are essentially reiterating what I am stating with your formulas which I DO Know. I too have taken physics.
NOTE that I specifically said that the kenetic energy is the same (pay attention this time when you read). I also said that energy has both quantity and quality. Scientific? No quality is not a physical term. Did I say that was scientific or make claims to be Newton's nephew - Did I claim that? NO (in English).
It is MY way of explaining a difference of application. Does it make sense?

Last, recall my post begins with "I believe...."

It's incredible how some people throw rocks at their kind without pause.

KL
Posts: 117
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 10:26 pm

Re: My Hunting Loads

Post by KL » Thu May 19, 2011 12:01 am

Rather touchy this evening, aren't we Darryl . . . .

If you had a clue about physics, you would know better than to state what you did about "character" and "quality" of energy. What nonsense. You should admit your mistakes and move on instead of trying to defend a baseless argument.

rdnck
Posts: 1877
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2002 9:33 pm
Location: Woodlawn,Texas

Re: My Hunting Loads

Post by rdnck » Thu May 19, 2011 6:13 am

KL--You need to quit takling trash about these rifles and get out from behind your keyboard and get some real world hunting experience with them. It is a cold, hard fact that these rifles with the big slow bullets flat out work on game. Define the physics any way you want, a 45 caliber Sharps with a 500 grain bullet puts a wide variety of animals on the ground quicker than a 40 grain bullet out of a .223. BTDT, and so has Darryl. Have you? rdnck.
Chairman, Phd
Caddo Lake Chapter
FES
Charter Member FBASS

Charter Member OGANT

Post Reply