54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do

[northmn]

Those references I saw were about 30 cal for the buckshot.  Buck and ball was three to 6 pellets over a round ball which would push the lead charge to over 2 ounces, unless you meant they went up to 15 over the ball?  They even had a comment on this load being used in the Civil War.  Actually, to me it makes more sense for a lighter charge to be more accurate in a smoothbore with a single ball.
55 grains will still drive a ball of one ounce fast enough so that no one wants to get hit with it at smoothbore ranges. When I read your original comment the 45-70 cavalry or carbine load popped into mind as they had to lighten that load due to recoil. 
In my readings on shot towers there was some reference to the fact that the military had trouble getting consistency in ball and used the smaller ball so every load would load.  By 1820 the military used tower shot and more consistant. 

DP

[Daryl]

The normal buck-shot ctgs. were 9 to 15 balls. These were merely buck loads, not buck and ball.  At some forts, the night gaurd were prone to firing off at night just to wake up the camp commmander, whense orders came down that any shots at night must be able to show evidence in the morning as to the reason for the discharge. Shots during gaurd duty every night ceased immediately.  Due to the darkness of bush surrounded forts, many of these along with route camps came to favour a buck charge over a ball or buck and ball, as more howls in the dark issued from the blackness after just such a discharge into the blackness as 'sounds of wolves prowling around". 

[northmn]

Anyone ever tried buck and ball to see what they do?  As stated it would make a rather impressive load but might be h--l on the shoulder.

DP

[Leatherbelly]

Dave,
  I think buck and ball was for close in fighting,not really for performance but for effect. Imagine repelling boarders or blasting away at a charging skirmish line! Yikes!

[Dphariss]

Dave,
  I think buck and ball was for close in fighting,not really for performance but for effect. Imagine repelling boarders or blasting away at a charging skirmish line! Yikes!

According to the reading I have done ("Firearms of the American West, 1803 -1865" has this IIRC) the US Army used MOSTLY buck and ball (musket ball and 3 buckshot) for "ball" loads for the SB muskets. With a smoothbore musket everything was close in fighting.

Dan

[Daryl]

LB - with buck and ball, there was more chance for a wounding shot, than a complete miss at ranges beyond 30 yards or so.   
; Taylor and I played with buck and ball loads in our pistols - THAT was a blast! I was using the Flinter .54 with .526" ball and 3 #1 buck with 40gr. 3F and Taylor was using a .595" ball and 3 #1's in his flint English pistol.  Shooting silhouettes at 12 to 15 yards was most enlightening.
; The rifled pistol (mine) put the ball in the centre of mass each time, with the balls striking outwards 4" from centre radially in a perfect pattern each time.  THIS would be a very good Self Defence load for a muzleloading pistol.(not that a .54 cal ball at 1,000fps isn't)