Sabotloader wrote:

I am cheap - I'll be the first to admit it - I can not see spending that money for that bullet.

I think everyone has to eventually settle on something. This conical is something I worked up for a sheep load. The lighter bullet and high BC lets me, with scope, reach out and touch, (with 16 clicks), to 210 yards. But it is certainly not a bullet I would recommend for plincking.

I sensed that you like a flatter tractory than conicals supply in general. Hence the lightest bullet I could think ofwhile still havingvery good ballistics, with cost being comparable to the powerbelts.

Happy Hunting, Phil

Pglasgow

You are right I am a old relic left over from the centerfire age of 270's and 300 Win mags - shooting flat partitions and boattails.

In Idaho we can shoot sabot during ML - if we couldn't I would be looking hard at conicals. My biggest problem with conicals well ML's in general is the effects of xwinds down range. I can handle the drop becuse I can factor that in but varying Xwinds are a killer when shooting a distance down range. Here in the mountains of Idaho shooting across draws, up and down ridges winds exist almost all the time most of the time at different rates and most of the swirling. Conicals are really adversly effected by winds.

Good talking to you - mike

Sabotloader,

In reading your post I find myself grinning from ear to ear. What I really love about the muzzleloader, is that it becomes a personal rifle. In that sense, it is a part of the hunter unlike no other rifle. When one considers all the options available to us and how we custom fit our loads to fit our particular hunting situations and preferences, no other hunting firearm gives us such flexibility. What a great sport we have.

Happy Hunting, Phil

Pglasgow

You know you are right - I really enjoy shooting and I really really enjoy shooting ML's, but I have to admit I am trying for performance - but yet I am not interested in "magnum" loads - well that statement doesn't make a hole lot of sense does it...

Just shot you a PM also...

mike

Question #1 - How many of you use PowerBelts because of the ease of loading? ME!

Question #2 - How many of you use PowerBelts because of the ease of loading the follow-up shots... (when you do not have time to run a damp patch)? ME!

Question #3 - How many of you use PowerBelts because of their performance, both down range and their peformance on bringing the animal down? NO, any full bore-sizelump of pure lead would be the same.

Sabot loader you forgot one other thing. I walk into Wally worldthere is a wholerack of PB's. I go to Dunams and there is again a whole rack of them, gander mountian too. They are all over the place in amazing numbers for 50's any way. Shock waves are a bit harder to find on store shelves and I have yet to see a barnes bullet in any store.
So the avibilty plays an important role in what people use.

Al

eldeguello

good to hear from you, I was wondering when you were goingto ring in...

And this is really what I am looking for - I propose that you can load sabots, if you get the right one, with little more effort that you use to load a PB.

PLUS! now thisis just me talking - you can use a stonger powder load if you choose, you really do not have to worry about the bullet falling off the powder, has actually happened - actually the bullet has fallen out but the skirt stayedin the barrel, and my personal bias I believe you are shooting much better bullets than soft lead elongated round balls - and within that statement there is nothing wrong with that if that is what you prefer - I'm just hooked on performance especially down range and on thick skinned game. I know they work and the continue to work - but ask mostshooters in Washington or Colorado if they had their choice - What would you shoot? Yes, some would still say give me a full big bore conical - I want to make a big hole but most would choose a more efficient flatter bulletfor themselves and the animals. If everyone shot as well as you, Roundball, Cayugad, Triple Seven, and others it would not be a problem, BUT how many hunters especially new hunters and there a bunch of new ones coming on board are that really qualified to shoot the big looping conicals estimating range - wind - drop and adding all of that into a calculation? Then make a shot...

Oh well my soap box - I know

Thanks for your reply

Sabotloader said

I know they work and the continue to work - but ask mostshooters in Washington or Colorado if they had their choice - What would you shoot? Yes, some would still say give me a full big bore conical - I want to make a big hole but most would choose a more efficient flatter bulletfor themselves and the animals.

I am not sure whether efficient necessarily means flatter. For a moment, lets just consider what efficiencies one may wish to have. Energy efficiency for a given charge for example. Here one wishes for the maximum energy to exit the muzzle for a fixed powder charge. Generally, this will be a heavier bullet. Greater efficiency at retaining energy down range. That entirely depends on the bullet. But my 460 grain conical has a B.C. .260 which is better than any 45 cal pistol bullet which can stabilize with 1:28 twist. If efficient means doing damage. The full bore conical at minimum is making a bigger hole with no expansion than its saboted cousin. If the full bore conical is softer and expanding more than its saboted cousin, then the full bore conical is much more efficient at creating a larger, more devastating wound channel. []

Flatter trajectory has its benefits but it also has its costs. Again, one weighs the pros and cons, there is no single load which pleases all people at all times. I truly believe that there are no deficiencies in the heavy full bore conical which can not be overcome with range practice and patience in the field. The effiencies lost to lighter bullets are just lost altogether and the hunter can not make up for them with skill, but rather, must accept and incorporate the lost efficiencies in hishunting plan.

Happy Hunting, Phil

Pglasgow

In my mind efficient means - quicker to get there hence flatter - less time in flight hence quicker to the target - more velocity hence more energy. Heavier bullets really do not always produce more energy - velocity produces energy - same reason I can shoot a 200 grain bullet in my win mag and far out produce the energy of the 460.

In my mind effiecency at the target means - penetration through what ever it hits bone or tissue - hydrostatic shock (still think it should be hydraulic shock) sponging the vitals, a good sized exit wound losing blood fast. Spinning copper knives cutting their way through and each time the animal moves more cutting.

I guess you will just have to look at these two ballistic charts and show me where I am really lagging behind. I see a whole lot of advantages,of course I want to see advantages. Can not imagine me shooting 200 yards but a 9" drop isn't bad. Even if you compare a more realistic 75 yard target i really do not see where I am hurting. The only difference is the one that I see people use all the time "make a big hole" granted your hole going in is bigger not sure that it is any bigger on the way through or when it exits.

Speed does kill and bigger is not always better

One last thing - I hunt all year with this gun while most everyone else is using their centerfires. I do have a small handi-cap no 209's or scopesduring ML season

These charts were using 100 grains of t7-2f loosefor the Speers and shot across my chrono the 1750 was the average of 9 shots, the 460 were 80 grains if my memoryis correct and only took 3 shots. The ballitics of the 460 are rather good - I think good enough I would have to do moreresearch if I had to choose between them and apowerbelt.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v130/sabotloader/Ballistics460NE.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v130/sabotloader/300gr.jpg

thanks for the input...

mike

Sabotloader said,

I guess you will just have to look at these two ballistic charts and show me where I am really lagging behind.