[blockquote]quote:

ORIGINAL: Pglasgow

We have two choices in Muzzeloading as I see it.

1. Heavy, powerful, looping full bore conicals

2. Lighter, smaller thanbore, flatter shooting saboted projectiles.
[/blockquote]

Sabinajiles wrote:

Now, as far as I, and many others,are concerned, using traditional rifles, propellants and projectiles is still classified as muzzleloading and whether you you use roundballs, or not, it is still a choice for some.

That, it most certainly is. I should have said "I have two choices". I really do mean that.

WhereI hunt, being responsible with a roundballmeanspassing onalmost every opportunityI would havehad if Ihad just pickeda better projectile.

I know of no measurable attribute related to a projectiles effectiveness in killing deer that a roundball has over any other choice in projectile. EG

1. Sectional Density

2. Ballistic Co-efficient

3. Momentum from a given charge

4. Energy from a given charge

Furthermore,I never once said the roundball was ineffective. That is something I would never say without qualifying the statement.I have learned that I will never say that it is inferior in sectional density, ballistic coefficient, momentum, energy, and range to other projectiles. Or I will offend someone who feels they are not. I really don't want to offend you. The strange thing is, we aren't laughing about how silly all this really is. One would think that it would be impossible to offend someone by saying something about a chunk of lead, or in this case, for failing to say anything about it?

Happy Hunting, Phil