Pglasgow

As roundball said, the top rifle is the older unimproved style.

Honestly, I can't see the benefit ofargueing which ignition system is the most primitive or least advantageous. Shooting buckhorns, PRB, and an external hammer type ignition is pretty much as primitive as it gets. We buy inlines, sabots, conicals and so on to gain advantage and range. It would bepointless to argue against that. It makes one seem argumentative and ingenuine if hetakes the standthat tech improvements in modern BP rifles don't make any difference.

I think Iwould approach this problem from the angle that there can be restrictions that make the improvements less significant and sufficiently primitive.

roundball

I agree the claims of lock time differences are reaching or splitting hairs and if there is even any difference at all, IMO it would not be enough to show up in the hands of theaverage shooter anyway.

And I agree with the rest of your comments...well put.

dmurphy317

Pglasgow,
While I see your point on sabots, etc. I think the advantage it gives is in flater trajectories more so than effective range. In the hands of a practiced shooter who knows his rifle there is little or no advantage in range. A medium to heavy lead conical is as effective at long ranges and in many cases has more energy at longer ranges than many popular sabot rounds. Trajectory can be compensated for as long as the range is known.

Having the flater trajectory does help, especially for those who don'tpractice often enough to know what their gun and load are capable of. A muzzleloader is still not going to compete with even a 30-06 on trajectory. For example a 150gr magnum load behind a 200 Shockwave launched at 2400fps will still drop about twice as far (25"+/-) and have little more than half the energy at 300 yards as a 180gr 30-06 launched at 2730. By comparison a 460 NE launched at 1470fps will have dropped about63"but have almost 200 fpe more than the SW. Few people would be trying to shoot that far but I use it as an example. Based on 100 yard zeros.

Pglasgow

dmurphy317,

I don't think you really dissent at all to what I think. Its just you are confused as what I think and what I was meaning. Particularly Imeant to definewhat the most primitive weapon would be and then Imerely classified all other changes as technological improvements. I actually agree that a full bore conical is on par with sabots for downrange energy though not for flatness of trajectory. I like them particularly for resistance to defection as well. But I consider the conical, just like I would a sabot,to be a considerable advancement in technology over the roundball.

I don't say this to dis the PRB, I am merely acknowledging thata conical can give me considerable extra range in the conditions I might find myself hunting in. Particularly in windy conditions at ranges I know neither you nor Iwouldn't consider distant. Out west, as windy as it gets, it takes an ordinarily windy day to reduce a PRB loaded rifle to a60 yard rifle or less.

I would agree that, in pristine conditions,the technology doesn't add as much to range, accuracy, and dependability as many would hope or think it does. It all boils down to this. What technologies or combinations of them are sufficiently primitive to warrant use in a special primitive season? I 'm not offering any suggestions for its answer.

sabotloader

Pglasgow

You guys talk like sabots are something new.... The Chinese used wooden sabots and bp centuries ago. And after all that is all that a cloth patch is.

Sabots are not new the materials may be but the thought is not... And the guns we (most) of are shooting are new also, again the thought is old but the material is new...

dmurphy317

I concede your point about the advancements from truely primitive designs. The matchlocks and wheellocks were even a step up from the hand cannons.

Personally my definition of primitive (action wise) is flintlock or older. I base that on the fact that the percussion rifle is about as reliable as a CF as far as ignition goes compared to a flintlock or older. I know some would argue that point but that is the way I see it.

As for the round ball, if you launch a .530 PRB at 2000fps and sight in for a 6" PBR it compares well trajectory wise to the 460NE launched at 1470fps using thea 6" PBR. Maybe an inch difference at 200 yards and around 10" lower at 300 yards. The energy, as you pointed out is significantly different, 346fpe vs 1249fpe at 300 yards.

Like you said, I don't diagree with you, I'm just looking at it from a slightly different angle, that's all. Have a good day.

Pglasgow

I guess the angle I'm looking at is that Icould easily find myself with a10 mph cross wind (even more is not at all uncommon in CO). Granted in pristine conditions, the trajectories are not to awful dissimilar. But look closely at the two trajectories below.

Yes, they bothhave a 6" PBR of around 140 yards in elevation. But what about windage? Less than 60 yards with the PRB, a little less than 100 yards for the 460 NE. An increase in PBR range of nearly 80% by using the conical in this kind of wind conditions. That is not insignificant.

Now a 2.2 mph crosswind will allow the 460 NE to remain in 6" windage MPBR at 200 yards (3" miss), granted, one will have to adjust elevation. The question now can be asked, with a 2.2 mph crosswind, adjusting only for elevation, is a shot with a .530 PRB worthwhile at 200 yards? The deflection by wind is just under 8 inches, so the question then is . . .is a 16 " MPBR (8" maximum miss) acceptable? For me it isn't and I figure it isn't for you either. Ergo, we use the conicals whose properties give us a remarkable advantage over the PRB.

I personally don't feel I need a special primitiveseason with the inline. More than happy to take it, mind you, I just don't need it and I will adapt to regulation changes if they happen.

sabotloader

Pglasgow

Can not tell you much about your numbers... but when the 460NE is shot through a chrono at the muzzle and another @ 100 yards - the BC computes out to .202 as fired by "Big 6x6." Do not know if that will make any difference in your calculation....

Quote:

Today I picked four represenative conicals to calculate the BC. The BC is the average of three shots fired thru two ProChrono chronographs simultaneously that were 100yds apart for each bullet. All calculations were done with Load from a Disk Version 4.0. The charge was always 80gr fffg Triple Se7en used in each of two White Rifles 97s.

.451s
Bullshop 420gr- 0.268
No Excuses 495gr- 0.326

.504s
Bobs NEW 496gr- 0.241
No Excuses 460gr- 0.202

These BCs are dedicated to Underclocked!

Pglasgow

Sabotloader,

The effect would beto reduce the windage MPBR of the conical.

I remember that you mentioned the BC's before (was it 6X6 that recorded them). I remember thinking that they seemed low, not by alot, and not necessarily so. One thing I would do for measuring BC this way. I would take a sample and then swap the chronysaround for the other sample. Have an equal number in each sample. Why?

Because if one chrony is not calibrated well with the other, this will cancel that effect. One set will have a higher drop in velocity than the other. By averaging the two sets, one eliminates error in calculation. Also, if one set has a significant difference than the other, the difference in their calibration can be precisely determined.

dmurphy317

Pglasgow,
In windy conditions shooting at game I too would limit my shot distance as you said. I'm not sure I would take a 200 yard shot at an animal with the PRB anyway due to the low retained energy.

One thing I noticed about your figures is that you ran them at sea level, I ran them at 6500 feet which is where I typically shoot. I figured the BC of the NE based on shooting at that altitude and calculated it based on range performance, i.e. sighting in at 100 yards and shooting at 200 yards and averaging the drop. Then I put it into the ballistics calculator and played with the BC until I got a match. I know its not the best way of doing it but figured it would get me close. I came up with a figure of .250. I also weighed the bullets and they averaged 455 not 460 +/-1 grain.

Most of the time I don't consider the wind when looking at the ballistic charts. Often when shooting in the mountains and shooting from ridge to ridge the wind can be going in opposite directions from where the shot is made from to the target. If the wind is strong and steady that can make a difference but if just a light breeze it could very well be swirling in different directions at different locations. There is no way to be sure in those conditions so it becomes too much of a brain twister to try and second guess what will happen in those conditions. If there is more than a light breeze I just limit my shot distance if I'm shooting at game.