So, it seems we have this thread some time every year. Sometimes more than once.
I'll ask again...why is anyone worried about this?
If you see me in the woods with my flintlock, can you tell what charge I'm shooting? If you can, I'd like to learn how.
If you see me at the range, can you tell? Maybe from the report/flash...but probably not.
I don't care if someone wants to take a 45-cal to the woods shooting 45gr of 2f or a 69cal shooting 150gr. Why would I? It's their gun, their money on powder and lead...not mine.
I've said it before...if I just told you what I shoot in my 62, you'll say "that's dumb, you don't need to shoot that much." And you'd sort of be correct.
I don't have to shoot that much if I want to drift and file my sights. But through time and experimentation, I determined that, without touching my sights and by putting in the charge I do, they are spot on and I get a nice trajectory that lets me point and shoot to 100 yards. Do I waste powder? Perhaps. I'll argue that even if I waste half the powder I shoot, I'm still not seeing powder as my limiting factor in how much I shoot.
I sometimes think we've got "anti-magnumitis" issues at times, too. You have people who want to have the bigger, badder gun, and then you have people who, for similar "look at me" reasons, want to shoot smaller/lighter to show it can be done.
And I'll never....ever...understand why anyone cares what anyone else shoots. I shoot a 62 for a few reasons, as if I need to justify it....
1- The rifle I have is based on the rifle built by Johannes Schreit in Reading in 1761. This is a known and historical long rifle, and my rifle is built in a fashion resembling it. The original, as it sits now, is a 60, I believe. The early guns were bigger bores. I decided to do likewise, and a 62 would actually lighten the rifle a bit because it was going to need a D-weight barrel either way, so a 62 would take a little more metal out of the blank.
2- I'd hunted many years with a 50 and I wanted a 54 or bigger, just for a bit bigger ball because I prefer it.
3- It's different.
4- I can.
So, when I got my rifle, I started at 80gr of 2F. Then I worked up 10gr (by volume) and really didn't see tons of difference in groups. It does group better hotter than lighter, though, to a degree. The Hoyt barrel is slightly quicker in twist that might be expected, in hopes of a smaller charge being accurate (it's a 1:56). 80 was ok, so was 90. 100 was better in groups, and I noticed they were getting closer to POA as I worked up. I kept going.
At 120, they were smack on POA without touching the sights.
The rifle is big....2.5" wide buttplate with a 46" D-weight swamped barrel. It's not a toothpick. Recoil from that charge is not even close to difficult to absorb. It's nowhere close to a magnum bolt gun. Not even comparable. The Schreit rifle was big, and I'm 6'2, so building it to my LOP and with my preferred barrel length resulted in a pretty big gun. I don't hunt the mountains, so that's no big deal for me.
The rifle hits about 2" high at 50, and about an inch low at 100. So...point and shoot to 100. Perfect.
So I roll with the charge of 120gr of 2F for all of those reasons. But....if I just said "I shoot 120gr," I'd likely be accused of doing it to make some statement about my masculinity, hunting prowess, or whatever. It's nothing of the sort. I shoot it to get the results I wanted for regulation of my sights and trajectory along with desired accuracy.
And again...why do we care what others do?