Re:Historic loading of round ball in a smoothbore

[LynnC]

BTW - Thanks Bentflint for relating your personal smoothbore shooting experience - all are interesting...

[SPG]

Bentflint,

I feel that you provided a very important insight with your statement concerning rapidity of fire with the wadded smoothbore. At close quarters this would have been highly desirable for obvious reasons. I apologize for the later time-period, but a similar situation was very common here in the West in the 1870's. Many times one reads of a group of frontiersmen being armed with both heavy caliber single shots and light caliber repeaters, i.e. a .45 or .50 Sharps and .44 Henrys or Winchesters. I have used the various .44 repeaters loaded with black in the field and for hunting they leave quite a bit to be desired. They are basically 50-yard rifles if one wants any killing reliability and even then one had better place his shot correctly. However, they are capable of a large volume of fire in a short time. I believe that the old timers realized this and covered all bases by having both types of firearms along. A .44 Henry would be great for repelling boarders at close range.

Possibly we have the same situation with the wadded smoothbore, especially in the case of the smooth rifle. My experience, though somewhat limited in comparison to yours, is that the patched smoothbore is more accurate, but I will not dispute that it is as slow as a rifle to reload. The more important factor is the range at which the gun will be used. 100-yard accuracy is relatively unimportant if 99% of the shots will be under 50 yards. Speed of loading will then trump extreme accuracy. When I was an elk guide this was a common mistake made by hunters-they brought a rifle set up for making 500-yard shots and were almost unable to use the same rifle effectively at 100 yards or less. One needs to prepare his equipment for the most often encountered situation.

Another factor to consider in this interesting-at least to me- discussion, is that the lone hunter, both in the East and the West, was a rarity. Groups spelled safety and to travel/hunt/trap alone was considered to be almost suicide. Here in the West permits were required by the government for those engaged in trade, and companies of men traveled together for safety. Any journal from the period clearly shows this. It would make sense then that these men would equip themselves with a variety of weapons to cover any circumstance, both long and short range. Possibly this is where the smooth-rifle fits, as more accurate than a typical musket of the day but still capable of the musket's rate of fire when loaded appropriately for each situation.

For the lone hunter, one accurate shot is still the most desirable, at least in my opinion/experience. However, the mistake that is being made is lumping the needs of frontiersmen from many different eras and locales together. Twenty men traveling the Northland in canoes are going to behave much differently than twenty men traveling the Santa Fe Trail or a lone hunter skulking through Kan-Tuc-Kee, not to mention the practical needs of a market hunter in an area that is relatively settled and safe. One thing I think we can agree on- if a person survived very long on the frontier under typical conditions he was adept at handling his chosen firearm and did not take a cavalier attitude towards it's loading or maintenance.

Steve

  

[pake]

Hello All!
pake here. I'm very new to the forum, as you can see from my (non) post count but, I've been shooting bp for awhile and have built a few guns. Actually I've started hanging around here to get some ideas for another build, but that's a different topic.

In reading this thread about historic references as to how civilians might load a smoothie with a ball, I remembered an interesting account I had read last year. Took a bit to find all the info again. You may find it interesting.

The reference can be found in Voyages of Peter Esprit Radisson 1636-1710.  Being an account of his travels and experiences among the North American Indians, from 1652 to 1684. Transcribed from original manuscripts in the Bodleian Library and the British Museum.

This account, occurred in the first of his four "journeys", each lasting from two to three years. He titles it, "The Relation of my Voyage, being in Bondage in the Lands of the Irokoits, which was the next year after my coming into Canada, in the year 1651, the 24th day of May."

"Being persuaided in the morning by two of my comrades to go and recreat ourselves in fowling, I disposed myselfe to keepe them Company; wherfor I cloathed myselfe the lightest way I could possible, that I might be the nimbler and not stay behinde, as much for the prey that I hoped for, as for to escape the danger into which wee have ventured ourselves of an enemy the cruelest that ever was upon the face of the earth." (There's a lot to consider in this sentence isn't there? Hunting for recreation, dressing for conditions, awareness and preparation for trouble... I wish I could quote it all but time and space prevent it. The three set out, and in spite of knowing the apparent danger from "the ennemy, made us look to ourselves and charge two fowling peeces with great shot the one, and the other with small. Priming our pistols, we went where our fancy first lead us."

The group shot some "duks", and two of the party decided they'd had enough. Radisson jibes them, they argue, he decides to continue alone for a time, during which he shoots, "three geese, tenn ducks, and one crane, with some teales." Returning later and on the way back home, he spied more ducks, but while preparing for more good shooting finds his two companions dead, killed, "murthered", as he says. Now, with his own hair standing on end he sees twenty or thirty Indians in the grass just ahead. But they hadn't spied him yet. This long winded introduction sets up the next quote; one that addresses the question, "How did they load their gunnes?"

"Mightily surprized att the view, I must needs passe through the midst of them or tourne backe into the woode. I slipped a boullet upon the shot and beate the paper into my gunne."

So in this case he shoots shot, and a ball; but it's a wadded ball, and things didn't work out too well after that either.

Respectfully,

pake

[LynnC]

Interesting read.  Chalk up another account of a wadded ball.  Doesn't seem patched balls were much recorded as used in SB's.

Thanks for the story and Welome to ALR.....Lynn

[Mike R]

I have a ca. 1820 smoothbore musket still loaded with a patched round ball [but no telling when it was last loaded]--that I have so far been unable to pull [I can see it with a flashlight].  That said, there are five gun types that may or may not have used patched balls: true rifles [plenty of old references to follow-up shots NOT patched], smoothrifles [set-up like real rifles and likely typically shot with patched balls], military muskets [the paper cartridge can act as both wadding and patching], the fowling gun [typically wadded] and the trade gun [a smoothbore typically wadded, but who knows?].  With all this known patch use, who is to say the fowler or trade gun user did not sometimes patch a ball for his gun?  The period lit seems to support wadding for smoothbores like fowling and trade guns.  The period lit seems to support that even rifles were sometimes, in haste, reloaded with bare ball [not even wadding!].  .....as to what is best for modern target shooting & hunting, one needs to try several options and pick the best for his gun.  As a reenactor, I try to stick with period documented ways...

[Jack Hubbard]

What Bentflint said I think is dead on...I have used leaves, grass, whatever would hold the ball down the barrel....Worked just fine....

[Vomitus]

   It surprises me that they weren't patched. I always thought that common sense would prevail. Patch my rifle, but not my "Fowling piece"? hmm.And I'm really surprised that nothing is recorded regarding a patched ball.Perhaps it was such a common practice that it never was recorded?
  In a "pinch", I can see loading with what was handy,but for Sunday afternoon deer hunting,I'd be using a small greased linen square!
  Maybe common sense back then was uncommon?  

[northmn]

We forget that guns were left loaded back then.  Worms were a common item on ramrods and an easy way to change loads would be to pull the over shot wad and change a load from RB to shot or vs versa.  Depeding on the hunters needs, he could go after waterfowl and if he saw a moose, might have a chance to switch loads and then sneak up on the moose, or go from a moose load to waterfowl.  With the powder contained by an over powder wad it would be realtively easy to do.  If the ball were patched it would not, so patched RBs may not have been common.  Just a thought.

DP

[rich pierce]

   It surprises me that they weren't patched. I always thought that common sense would prevail. Patch my rifle, but not my "Fowling piece"? hmm.And I'm really surprised that nothing is recorded regarding a patched ball.Perhaps it was such a common practice that it never was recorded?
  In a "pinch", I can see loading with what was handy,but for Sunday afternoon deer hunting,I'd be using a small greased linen square!
  Maybe common sense back then was uncommon?  

Maybe you're assuming that a rifleman is shooting the round ball in a smoothbore?  Many smoothbore users were not riflemen.  For example almost everybody in what is now Canada and most of "new France" from the 1600's to the 1800's shot smoothbores exclusively.  Second, anyone who had served in militia used paper cartridges.  No patched round ball.  Third, anyone who used a smoothbore with shot was used to an over powder wad and an overshot wad.  Of course someone today coming from a rifle background and trying smoothbores with round ball would use a patch- but there is scant if any historical evidence that this was common in the 1700's and early 1800s.

[Vomitus]

   Thanks Rich,
    Maybe they should have called them "foulers"!    I like the paper cartridge idea but stuffing grass,leaves and hornet nest for shooting a single projectile sounds like a nasty cleanup! Probably(but unknown to me) you could get 2 or three shots off before the bore needed a swish. I guess with me being a rifleman, it just seems odd to not patch a single projectile in any frontstuffer.

[bob in the woods]

I have said this before, but will repeat......I shoot my smoothbore a lot, and hunt with it. I tried different combinations of patched balls and was not happy with the results, Then I tried paper cartridges, and business picked up considerably. Round ball groups shrunk, and a 6 in pie plate off hand at 50 yds is not a problem.  Not 2  or 4 or 5 shots......12 or 20  .   The famous 3 in group always had a flier increased the spread so I assume that that one will be the one shot at a bear or a deer . 6 in is repeatable and I have confidence in my shooting when hunting. Besides, most of my game shots are at 25 yds .
I shoot patched balls in my rifle, where they belong 

[D. Taylor Sapergia]

Bob, what you say makes perfect sense, for a hunting gun.  I use .650 pure lead patched balls in my double percussion Manton 15 bore when I want a grouse load with shot in the right barrel.  I get saucer sized groups at 50 yards, and that's fine if Bullwinckle steps out on the trail in front of me.
However, in our smooth bore round ball competitions, many of the targets are too small and too far away to use such a loose shooting combination.  In this case, rifle-like accuracy is required if you want to be competitive.  So we use cloth patches, and load it like a rifle.
Still, I must try paper cartouches in my 15 bore double gun.  Sounds intriguing.

[Vomitus]

George C. Neuman for American Rifleman in Colonial Guns of America wrote:

  Hunting Ammunition: It is evident from the variety of buck and ball sizes combined in the same bullet molds that the 18th-Century hunter relied on mixed loads according to his prey and the prevailing conditions. Unlike the trained soldier who shot a round ball .04 to .06 caliber smaller than the bore to allow for blackpowder fouling (he would normally fire in excess of 60 rounds in battle), the hunter, limited to one or two shots against most game, would load his smoothbore with a round bullet wrapped in greased cloth or thin leather for large animals. This tightly fitted “patched” ball could easily make a 10” group within the normal range of 30 to 60 yds.

Is this guys facts and research off the mark?

[James Rogers]

George C. Neuman for American Rifleman in Colonial Guns of America wrote:[quote\)   Hunting Ammunition: It is evident from the variety of buck and ball sizes combined in the same bullet molds that the 18th-Century hunter relied on mixed loads according to his prey and the prevailing conditions. Unlike the trained soldier who shot a round ball .04 to .06 caliber smaller than the bore to allow for blackpowder fouling (he would normally fire in excess of 60 rounds in battle), the hunter, limited to one or two shots against most game, would load his smoothbore with a round bullet wrapped in greased cloth or thin leather for large animals. This tightly fitted “patched” ball could easily make a 10” group within the normal range of 30 to 60 yds.

Is this guys facts and research off the mark?
[/quote] 
facts? research? There is nothing here where he has supplied any information to substantiate his statement.
I would say this statement has bits of information that can be proven to be historical and bits that are contrary to the historical record of writings, documents, surviving originals, archeological evidence, etc.

[Vomitus]

I like to shoot all day long without swabbing so I guess I'm out of the PC loop.No grass,leaves or any flora and fauna will ever see the darkness of my bore. It's still an interesting thread but I just can't take the chance of feeding something foreign down my 310 dollar barrel at the risk of scouring the bore.With a clean patch,I know the bore will be fine.With the other stuff,there is a risk of scouring.(dirt,sand etc...)
  Anybody tell me how Smoothbore competitions at your local club or at the big shoots go as far as rules regarding their loading of round balls?

(I've read somewhere that English and French tradeguns dug up in some of the old forts and other archeological digs were loaded with patch and ball. Michilimilimac?(sp) )

[Dphariss]

Patching would slow the loading process but so would an over powder wad.
So in this context it seems that powder, ball and wad to hold the ball in place would be the best answer. Old blanket or much of anything else would work.
One other things that we moderns have to consider. If the shooter wanted accuracy he would likely not use a SB.

Its really difficult to get inside people's heads. When you start trying to get inside the NATIVE'S head things REALLY get strange. Since magic and "medicine" can get involved.
I read an account of a man who after being captured lived with the Indians for years. At some point he was shot by native but not killed. The recovered ball had various strings and other items attached to it as I recall. Apparently in an attempt to make it more deadly. ?
How this would effect the accuracy I could not say.
Dan

[Hungry Horse]

Something to remember is that moths are not newly invented, and they love wool blankets. So, every native village should have been full of wadding material.  Thinner tightly woven material would be rare in the wilderness. Unless smoothbore had a Knox patent breech, the fire enters from the side putting a spin on the ball, making it inaccurate. IMHO.


                                    Hungry Horse

[Robert Wolfe]

Hungry Horse - I gotta tell you I don't see how ignition from a vent is going to impart spin on the ball. And if it did, wouldn't that simply make it more stable/accurate. That's why we rifle barrels, to get that spin.

No flame - maybe I misunderstood what your'e saying.

[heelerau]

As a kid I had a Pattern 42 smooth bore percussion musket, this particular type looks a lot like a  Pat 53 Enfield that you would all be familiar with.  I used to hunt rabbits with it using a patched 65 cal ball cast from an old steel scissor mould belonging to a set of belt pistols !! I could knock the head of a rabbit regularly at 30 to 40 yards, and hit him in the chest out to 50yds. I found the old girl pretty reliable, I think I may have used dishwashing detergent as patch lube. She was a handy old gun until my late little brother put a charge of Nobels no 69 smokelsee in her, realised his mistake, laid it outside the outdoor privy with a lenght of string around the trigger, you can imagine the rest.

[Hungry Horse]

I've been shooting trade guns for thirty years, and IMHO the absolute best load I could shoot for accuracy was a patched round ball on top of an old hard fiber shotgun wad, that was about an inch long. When I ran out of those wads, I never found a load as accurate. I think the long wad allowed the patched ball to exit the barrel much like you would spit out a grape, with no spin. Stacking thinner wads didn't seem to do the trick. The next best load was a nearly bore size ball dropped on top of the powder, with a blanket wadding dipped in hot grease/tallow mix, and left to dry. These shoot best after the gun has shot a few rounds, oddly enough. The wadding load never needed swabbing during  a match. Not the case with the fiber wad load.
 I have tried patching of all kinds,even buckskin, as well as many different period materials as wadding i.e. rawhide wads,and cards, and found greased blanket wadding the best period load.
  Rifling imparts a controlled spin on the ball. If the spin is not controlled the ball will no fly true.

                  Hungry Horse

[Daryl]

This is true - the ball must spin around it's axis, left to right or right to left to be accurate, not rolling of back-spinning.

A ball launched without  any spin, it would seem to me, would then fly like a knuckle ball from a pitcher's hand, wobbling or bobbing in flight just the same, however, the faster it goes the less the wobble and the more accurate the shot and therefore the longer range of reasonable flight - at some point, probably at some range, and most likely due to a defect in it's shape, ie: standing sprue or air pocket inside, then takes on a spin which with more range becomes severe enough to make it fly like a curve ball, right, left, up, down or any combination of these - my theory. I have watched patched balls fly seemingly straight left to right, arcing with their trajectory, then zing off to one side or the other as they take on a sping.(I assume). They were travelling straight at the 100yard target, yet swerved off missing by a good 3 feet. The gun in both instances was a 20 bore, shooting snugly patched balls, but wiht only 65gr. 2F powder.

When watching Taylor's shot - the ball seemingly went in a straigth line, barely arcing due to the 85gr. of powder,and ont swerving off line. Sufice to say, Ross's shots did not all swerve off line, only some.

Much to ponder- if interested in this stuff.