Musket ball or shotgun slug?

[Canyonrun]

Musket ball or shotgun slug?
Over a coarse of several years my wife and grand kids found these 3 round lead balls with a metal detector on the ranch along with other more modern bullets and much smaller round ball like the size of buckshot. At first thought it was a slug from a shotgun but those three dimple make me believe they were ram down a mussel loader. My question is these musket balls and why would a ramrod leaved marks like this. The second ball picture is in the best shape measuring at the flats made by barrel measure .746 to .755 there are no rifling marks, thought maybe one of you old timers would know.
Lyle

[Eric Laird]

The first thing that jumps to my mind is a buck and ball load out of a musket - one large projectile with three buckshot on top.  Those almost look too "new". Most dug rounds that I've seen that were 100 years or more old were covered in white oxidation. Has anyone been shooting muzzleloaders on your ranch in the past 40 years or so? Just some thoughts.
Eric

[Daryl]

Eric- my thoughts exactly. Buck and ball loads.  The raised band or 'welt' makes the large ball look like a swaged one - poorly done at that. I'm not referring to the compression wipe. The US military used swaged balls of .65" in the post 1820 .69 musket loads.

Lyle - what do they mic?  Do one or two without the wide-compression wipe on it.

It's possible the ones back east form the civil war are generally more oxidized due to more moisture in the soil, or different acids/oxides/pesticides/fertilizers being present as well.

[Canyonrun]

Thanks guy’s that sure explain the dimple’s what animal would you used that load on?
The first RB picture was found by my grand daughter last month I wipe it clean with just my hands and kept it in my pocket thinking about those dimple mark remembering the other two found a year ago had same markings but those were scrub by the kids with soap and water and put away in the shoe box. You can see the first RB picture has white milky appearance to it. Little history I been told the Apple Gate Trail went through my property and there was a fort built in 1853 to protect local Indians from gold miners and other pioneers of the Rogue valley of Oregon during the Rogue Indians wars which lies about ¾ miles as the crow fly’s between me and the river, call Fort Lane, named for Joseph Lane, Oregon’s first territorial governor. Woops I see I read the mic wrong the first time I stated they measure around .750 not so its .6 well anyway her goes the first RB picture walking the mic around the ball measure at the wipe between .650 -.630, front to back .640, measure at the point halfway between front and wipe .660-.670. Second RB measure at wipe .658-.650, measure front to back .638, measure at the point halfway between front and wipe .657-.650, third RB picture measure at wipe .658-.638, measure front to back .650, measure at the point halfway between front and wipe .667-.660.  Hope That was clear on where I measure the sun down now and can’t see $#@* now oh well thanks for the feedback.
Lyle   

[Ezra]

Canister shot maybe?  You guys are probably right though, buck & ball makes more sense.


Ez

[BrownBear]

Here's a thought for you.

When I was a kid in the Southwest, we used to dig up 30 cal fmj bullets all the time in the yard.  I bet we had a 2 pound coffee can full, if we'd have collected them all in one container.  Quite a mystery till I came across a map of Black Jack Pershing's camp when he was chasing Pancho Villa and guarding the border after the Columbus NM raid.  And by the sketch, our house was just downrange and in line with the firing range next to his camp.  Used to find all sorts of stuff when I was a kid poking around his old camp.  Wish I had paid more attention (or remembered more!).

Enough nostalgia.....

The thought is, what are the chances your place is on or near the firing range for the old fort?

[Daryl]

Judging form those measurements, Lyle, they probably are from issue buck and ball ctgs. for the .69 muskets commonly used by US military up to about 1850- maybe even later in the 'open range'.  There would be some expansion, which shows up in the slightly larger size from the nominal .640" and .650". the .64-0's were usually cast, I believe with the .650's being swaged- which would explain the tiny belt.  Those with the belt must be .650's originally.

What animal - native men, women and children - mostly the men were the normal recipients of those loads.  They were much more popular than normal single ball loads at about 4 to 1 ratio being used - 1800 through into 1850's and into the civil war as well.  By 1850, most of the .69's that were in good enough shape, were rifled for the hollow based Minnie ball, although most forts kept a few muskets of earlier patterns for guard duty, etc.

Buck and ball is quite effective and extends the 'wounding' range of a musket to an easy 100 yards - generally.  The 'early' charge of powder was 165gr. minus the priming taken from it and after 1820, the powder quality improved and only 130gr. was used.  I find this interesting in light of the charges most 'guys' use today .  For the .69's there was no 'light' charge, so the very lightweight Carbine Sapper's guns also fired the 165gr. and 130gr. charges. Some complained of recoil.

The tri-imprints are from the big ball accelerating before the buck, which sits on top of the big one. Now, if you could have those little dimples all over the ball, in a regular pattern, the musket ball would have been more accurate. As it was, there dimples certainly wouldn't help and would probably start a spin earlier in flight to produce less accuracy of the big ball, than a single ball load - speculation only.

[Dphariss]

Buck and Ball

The US Army used buck and ball more that the ball load by a significant margin but the book is too far away right now to get the numbers.

Dan

[Daryl]

Buck and Ball

The US Army used buck and ball more that the ball load by a significant margin but the book is too far away right now to get the numbers.

Dan

 The book Dan is referring to might be this one " Firearms of the American West, 1803-1865"  page 109 -" from 1835 to 1840 , the Ordnance Department issued the regulars more than 2,700,000 buck-and-ball loads, as opposed to some 950,000 ball cartridges."

[Levy]

Lead ball with the buckshot still attached to them have been found in Florida at forts dating to the Seminole Wars (3).

James Levy

[Daryl]

Found buck and ball 'clusters' minus the rest of the ctg.

buck and ball ctg. with the powder section torn off.

Cross section of buck and ball ctg.  The bottom is ripped off, then priming is poured from it into the pan, frizzen closed, then the rest is pured into the muzzle and shoved down the bore.  The paper wads up against the powder and creates a type of 'wad' to help seal powder gasses behind the ball(s).  This works very well. In my own tests, using a ball that is only .006" smaller than the bore, with 3 wraps of .003" paper, the seal was such that hard lead balls could be fired as accurately as patched round balls.  Brush Strickling (BS2) has found the same, as has Dan Pharris and Buffalogun, in calibres as small as .54. Bruce used a .73 rifle, Dan his 16 bore rifle and Buffalogun, a double rifle in .54 - all with single ball loads.  I used paper ctgs.  for shooting moose in extremely cold climates where no liquid based lubes would work.

[Canyonrun]

I sure would like to see one of these paper Cartridges, a drawing or diagram on how they were made. I did a search on buck & ball (.69 cal ball + 3 buckshot) cartridges and came up with Model 1842 Springfield Manufacture by Harpers Ferry (VA) about 250,000 were made between 1844-55 and used in the civil war. The question I have did and when did these guns end up in the hands of civilians and Indians and could they still get their hands on buck & ball cartridges. “Shoot-em” if you got them but can’t imagine someone loading that load to hunt or target practice.
Lyle   

[Canyonrun]

Thanks, I didn't  scroll down the screen far enough to see your photo of buck & ball

[Daryl]

Taylor and I fired a number of these buck and ball-type loads from our flintlock pistols.  We used the appropriate ball size, plus 3, 000 buck. I was shooting a .54 rifled barrel pistol, while Taylor was using his .60 smoothbore.  At 12 yards, they were quite devistating on a B27 silhouette target. The big ball would strike centre of the 'group' with the buck radiating outward in a circular fashion, stiking about 4" from the centre hit.  All were inside the torso - rather impressive play.

[Daryl]

These are my 'loads' for moose hunting. Note the taper of the ctg.  This allows faster loading and less powder loss. I tear off the tiny tip with my 'two front" teeth, then shove the rest into the muzzle, butt on the ground. The taper of the ctg. makes fitting into the bore easy by funnel effect. By the time I have the rod out, the powder has drained to the breech- or enough for igniton, then the ctg. is shoved down onto the powder in one push.  The ball is a tight fit in the bore as the paper wrapp on mine, engraves just a bit.  Time to load and fire using a leather 'wheel' type capper, was 8 seconds.  It takes some practise.

Here are the French directions on making paper ctgs.

[Canyonrun]

Thanks Daryl, this is good info it took me a few minute to figure step 7 the paper pull off the stick, flip and fill with powder. Like to try this at the next Fort shoot but what about fouling need to be able to get off dozen shot or more. Been using a spit patch for trail & paper shoot with out wiping after twenty shot still load easy I read all your post.
Lyle

[Daryl]

My .69 would allow up to 10 accurate shots before having to fire off a wet, spit patched pure round ball with 3 drams 3F which effectively cleaned the bore - then another 10 ctgs. could be fired.  In the .69, 3 drams (82gr.) is a very light load with very light pressure. The paper ctgs. I was shooting in it, held 165gr. 2F.  The rifling of that barrel is .012" deep.

A friend has a .75 cal rifle barrel with what looks like .025" deep rifling, and he has fouling problems after only 3 shots.  If he loads a ctg. for the 4th shot, he has no idea where it's going, but it won't be in the group.  Deep rifling is no help with paper ctgs.

The military's of the world used very much undersized balls in their muskets. For expample, the US and French used .63" to .64" balls until about 1820, when the US military went up to .65" swaged balls for better accuracy. What the French did about ball sizes, I don't know.

[Canyonrun]

I’ll make some time to experiment making paper cartridges and give it a try, Daryl what kind of paper do you used or is that a family secret. All this raises more questions for me plus having problem with consistent accuracy at 100 yards ball dropping short. It’s shop time now and plan on shooting later, most likely will have more questions when the day is through.
Lyle

[Daryl]

I used printing paper- thickness doesn't matter.  20 pound paper will do, 24 pound if you need more windage taken up.  The ctg. should be a tight fit in the rifling, with the rifling impressing into the ctg. - if you want accuracy for hunting.  The military didn't care about accuracy - they (the Military Rulers) wanted volume of fire most of the time, while the soldiers wanted both volume and accuracy - unfortunately, accuracy was poor past about 60 yards with their loose combinations.

 Shot off the bench by a good shot, a 'well-bored' musket made a pattern of 8 1/2" at 50 yards using the larger issue .65" cal ball ctg.

Also, it was said with the larger ball, in continuous fire, a soldier could hit 1 in 4 turkeys at 100 yards - I guess they figured a turkey was about the size of a man's vitals.  I guess that means with the smaller ball, more random would be the hits.

[Clark Badgett]

Have made many hand rolled paper cartridges of various types in the past. Some of them can get quite involved. US minie ball cartridges as shown in the drawing posting by Daryl are about the easiest to make, with English military Pritchet style being the hardest. Buck and ball cartridges are pretty straight forward. Basically the steps are,
1. Get .69" former, I made mine from metal on a lathe and dome one end and cup the other. Arsenal formers were made from wood.
2. Cut thin paper trapazoid of appropriate size (blank newsprint is perfect)
3. Roll paper around former and tie end with linen or cotton thread. Leave tail of thread long enough for next 2 steps.
4. Drop in 3-.32" balls, insert round end of former and loop thread around balls and tighten.
5. Drop in .65" ball and insert cupped end of former and loop thread around ball and tie off.
6. Charge with correct amount of powder
7. Press the tube together from end of powder cloumn to the end of the tube.
8. Fold tail 90 degrees.
9. Fold in the sides of the now flattened tube until you have a tail, then simply fold tail back 180 degrees upon itself and then fold it once again until the tail lays along the side of the now finished cartridge.