I've been getting good accuracy and velocitys with .40cal QT 235 sabots, but while it seems to perform well and creates a viscious wound channel, I don't think it "shocks" the deer enough. My shot this year was a thru-thru that liquified the back half of both lungs and the liver and sent bone fragments into the heart, but the deer still ran over 100 yards before it dropped, and it was a fairly small deer.

The other deer I've shot with a muzzleloader two years ago was much larger, and I hit her with a .50cal 460 grain Hornady FP conical in the same place. She was thrown back 6' and completely flipped over and she died where she landed.

Since a long shot in an Iowa timber is 75 yards, flat shooting isn't a huge concern, so I'm thinking about going back to the heavy conicals.

My question is about the need for a wad over the powder. My dad has used these prelubed Hornady bullets forever without a wad, and so have I and never noticed any problems (good accuracy, etc...). Looking at the Triple 7 load data I see that all the conicals are listed as used with a wad.

My questions are: Are wads under conicals really necessary? What purpose do they serve, since these conicals have an expanding base to seal the bore? The only reason I can think of is to prevent hot gas from melting the bullet, but that would be an issue with any lead bullet firing cartridge guns (which don't have the luxury of using wads).

Thanks for the help,

Mike


Gun control means putting the second bullet through the same hole as the first- Ted Nugent
NRA Member
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Ben Franklin

I've never heard of using wads under a conical bullet. The only time that I have ever used a wad or patch is with round balls because the balls are slightly underbore and the wad creates a gas seal and creates more surface area to engage the rifleing. Now with black powder cartriges I know they do fill the empty space between the bullet and the powder with some type of wadding. The conical bullets are made to seal the bore themselves and the bullet isn't in the barrel long enough to start melting before it exits the muzzle.

I think they may have used a wad because Triple7 burns SO much hotter than the others. Without the wad, a conical could be melted and deformed far too much to yield any accuracy and might cause excessive leading. Some folks also think over-powder wads enhance accuracy. I believe I would use a wad (though it could be homemade from cardboard or other materials) if shooting a regular diet of T7 and conicals.

I've gone back to using Pyrodex P because of problems encountered with T7. And I shoot conicals almost exclusively. T7 is still new enough that all the possible problems still haven't been well documented. The fouling ring at the ignition point which makes consistent bullet seating a real chore, the sometimes brutal pressures and heat generated, primer blowouts, and excessive blow-back into actions are some of the problems being noted. Swabbing the bore after every shot is absolutely required with T7 but with Pyrodex I can shoot for a very long time before swabbing is required.

Edited by - Underclocked on 11/03/2002 09:38:06

Wads are not required with conical bullets, BUT, I have found that using a Wonderwad under a full-bore sized conical like a Maxiball or Buffalo Bullet, particularly when using heavy charges, tends to make my rifles shoot more accurately and keeps the bore a little bit cleaner. However, with 777, using a Wonderwad has made a great deal of difference, even when shooting round balls, in preserving the patch and making the guns shoot almost the same as when using other powders. With 777, omitting the wad has had dire consequences!!

Keep yore powder dry!!

If it puts the bullet where you want it without the wad, save your money.