Matt, I did order the UL 1 Spitzer and should be here any day.
T43, I re-read your post and not sure if you mean Cecil's effective range by energy or distance. I assume you mean energy. I get that all he is saying is that try and choose bullets that deliver lots of energy vs those that don't. That just sounds humane to me.
You say why not hunt with a rifle??? Big difference between an open sighted muzzleloader, as required by most states, than a scoped rifle. I don't think choosing a bullet that can deliver way more energy at 100 yards than a round ball is getting away from the roots of muzzleloader hunting. A rifle can be effective beyond 500 yards by many people and is a whole different ball game than what we are talking about here.
The bullet mentioned above has enough energy to kill deer at 175 yards, BUT, that doesn't mean anyone can put a bullet in the kill zone at that range with open sights. In fact, most can't. The front sight on most muzzleloaders will subtend enough angle, that you can't even pick a spot to aim at on a deer at more than 125 yards.
It's the sighting system to me that makes the muzzleloader a challenge. I personally don't want to handicap myself in the energy department if I don't have to. Most guys I know will not pass up a 100 yard shot with a ball at 100 yards. The deer looks close, the sighting is capable enough, but if they are shooting a round ball, that is not a humane shot.
The minnie ball was introduced in the civil war and gave the North a huge advantage because they could get them in mass quantities (due to the industrialized North) to their troops who could shoot them further than the guys shooting round balls. I only mention that because if we want to truly be "traditional" then we need to only shoot guns/bullets designs made before about 1860 and keep our shots close. Many of the Civil War rifles were capable of killing beyond 200 yards.
Just my opinion. Yours is welcome, too.