45 or 50 cal?

Bobby, my sale of a rifle in the EE has nothing to do with this thread, but thanks for bringing it up.
.45 cal MLs have always held a fascination for me ever since I bought my first one in the 1970's. I was quite dismayed to see the popularity shift towards the .50 cal. For those of you newer to BP shooting, it should be noted that .45 cal rifles were the standard of the day when BP shooting regained popularity in the 60's and 70's. I think you will also find more original rifles in .45 than you will in .50. The .50 has become popular due to manufacturers catering to a standardized accsessory market, not superior ballistics.
Believe me, you will notice the difference in trajectory between a 128 gr .440 RB and a 177 gr, .490 RB, given the same powder charge.
Bobby, since you've called me out on this one, I would like to know more about your experiences comparing .50 and .45 cal ML's. How much experience do you have in this matter? Your figures and your postings make you look like a 'book learned' pro.
 
nearnorthguy said:
well i was able to find some pyrodex pellets from epps...ordered the 225gr. powderbelts i see what you mean, it was hard to find stuff for the .45's...oh well live and learn...
Click to expand...

Better buy a 50, and then you have a choice.

I have a 50, wanted a 45, but a 54 at a good price has caught my eye. I use loose powder and want to just use patch and ball in the new one, if I cave in and get it.
 
Smokepole said:
The .50 has become popular due to manufacturers catering to a standardized accsessory market, not superior ballistics.
Click to expand...
The .50 became popular when the pistol bullet in the sabot became the projectile of choice. A huge selection of cheap 44 and 45 bullets was too much for the .45 to compete with. Because of the way black powder and substitutes burn the larger 50 cal tube is much more efficient and develops more velocity from the charge while taking up less room in the barrel leaving a longer combustion tube.
Believe me, you will notice the difference in trajectory between a 128 gr .440 RB and a 177 gr, .490 RB, given the same powder charge.
Click to expand...
Kind of a non starter too as niether is a great example of a hunting choice in a round ball. A 177 grain 50 cal crossing my chrono at 1900 FPS is below 800 FPE by 47 yards, the .45 is even more dismal. When hunting with PRB .54 and .58 are much better choices.
 
Smokepole said:
And powder charge.
I always load with a round ball and shoot traditional style MLs. I guess my statement was way too general.
Click to expand...

The .45 lost the speed race to the 50 cal about 10 years ago when the need for speed by conical and sabot shooters made the 45 popular - briefly. The truth of the matter was there is a limit to the amount of powder you can get burnt in the barrel and the long skinny powder column in a 45 was far less efficient than the 50. The 50 can fully consume powder charges the 45 can't compete with. I haven't played around with PRB in .45 but I can't see the shape of the projectile changing the physics involved.
 
Smokepole said:
800 FPE is enough for a complete pass through on a deer, with a round ball.
Click to expand...

Didn't say it wasn't. That number has been tossed around as a standard for minimum ethehical energy for deer sized game for some time. Right or wrong. All I was showing was the inefficieny of the smaller RB. The real numbers on the .45 PRB go like so:
Range Elevation Velocity Energy
0 yds -1.50 in 1900 fps 1122 fpe
25 yds 0.36 in 1651 fps 848 fpe
50 yds 1.43 in 1429 fps 635 fpe
75 yds 1.42 in 1246 fps 483 fpe
100 yds 0.00 in 1109 fps 382 fpe
Or that pass through starts getting chancy at about 30 yards.
 
nearnorthguy said:
So what are you saying here...if im shooting 100yards with a 195gr. powerbelt i wont have enough energy to pass through a deer?
Click to expand...

Nope, not for a second. A Powerbelt is a bore sized conical and much different than a round ball. The ball has a BC of .068 and the Power belt of .230 - roughly. The Powerbelt with the much superior BC holds onto its energy much farther down range than the inefficient round ball.
 
If anyone ever asked if your .45 was a traditional sidelock or a modern rifle, I missed it. That's a pretty important consideration. A lot of the early posts assumed you were using a roundball. If that's the case, and you're using a slow-twist sidelock, Powerbelts likely won't work, and the .45 roundball is pretty limited in range.
If it's modern, true, there are more omponents available for a .50 cal, but you can certainly make it work and it will serve you about as well as a 50 would have.
 
Omega said:
Didn't say it wasn't. That number has been tossed around as a standard for minimum ethehical energy for deer sized game for some time. Right or wrong. All I was showing was the inefficieny of the smaller RB. The real numbers on the .45 PRB go like so:
Range Elevation Velocity Energy
0 yds -1.50 in 1900 fps 1122 fpe
25 yds 0.36 in 1651 fps 848 fpe
50 yds 1.43 in 1429 fps 635 fpe
75 yds 1.42 in 1246 fps 483 fpe
100 yds 0.00 in 1109 fps 382 fpe
Or that pass through starts getting chancy at about 30 yards.
Click to expand...


I've been reading the hunting regulations from several US states regarding deer and muzzleloaders.
Seems the lawmakers in most states feel a .40 or .44 Cal muzzleloader with a round ball is adaquate for deer.
Here is a neat little snip from the Wisconsin Regs

"• Muzzleloading handguns must be .44 caliber and larger with a minimum barrel length of 7 inches measured from muzzle to breech face, and fire a single projectile weighing 138 grains or more to be legal for deer hunting."

BTW - I know that a 138gr round ball will not fit most .44 cal handguns, but a .50 handgun would be legal with a round ball.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom