Author Topic: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do  (Read 44624 times)

Offline sonny

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 370
54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« on: July 26, 2008, 04:07:04 AM »
hello all,just started messing around with a new 54 cal 44"getz smoothie an was wondering,how much accuracy can i expect before i drive my self nuts trying to get results for match shooting/hunting.I went out to the range one time an managed three different combination with three different ball sizes/three different patch thickness/three different loads,an a three shot 2" group was the best i could muster upwith them all.Can anybody get a 1" group at 50 yrds with there 54 cal smoothies.It seem's like the barrel likes hotter loads  more then low loads  for accuracy.85 grains of 3f was best so far.I wondered if anybody out there shoots 90 or 100 gr loads with better results.If anybody can steer me with this i would appreciate it........sonny

Offline Dphariss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9741
  • Kill a Commie for your Mommy
Re: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« Reply #1 on: July 26, 2008, 07:54:22 AM »
Its a smoothbore, they always throw fliers that enlarge the group. Expecting 1" groups is unrealistic. It might do one this small now and then but it will not shoot this small on command.
I have a GM 50 smooth rifle barrel that will often do 3 shots pretty small 2-3" at 50 yards but if you shot 5 shots the group will invariably got out to 4" or more.
If smoothbores shot as good as rifles they would never have made rifles.
It does shoot better with a small ball (.480) and a heavy patch than with a thin patch and a 490-495. Likes a lot more powder the the rifled barrel does. At least in the testing I have done so far.

Dan
« Last Edit: July 27, 2008, 01:33:22 AM by Dphariss »
He who dares not offend cannot be honest. Thomas Paine

northmn

  • Guest
Re: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« Reply #2 on: July 26, 2008, 02:31:24 PM »
Here's my 2 cents.  Smoothbores may be most accurate at a charge range where a rifle can handle a broader range both lighter and heavier.  One thread pretty much was unanimous that smaller ball and thicker patching works better.  On a rifle I have seen the opposite.  Also I think you may need to sort ball a little closer as you do not have the spinning action to make up for irregularities.  A rifle places the center of gravity to the center of the ball.  I have seen some pretty wrinkled ball shoot well because of that.  One may not win bench rest with them but plenty good for offhand practice.  Theoretically a perfect ball will shoot as well out of a smoothbore as a rifle.  However molds are off round by a small tolerance and air voids form in casting.  Weigh a few ball and they do vary. Who knows maybe taking a trick from the BPC and punching a small dimple in a mold so one loads the ball all the same might work better.  If it does not that would not surprise me either.  Dan is correct about one thing, rifles exist for a reason.  Smooth rifles were made and were good for point of deer, moose or even squirrel at whatever range.  I believe it was Taylor who used a smooth 10 bore rifle on elephant around WWII due to ammunition shortages and found it plenty accurate.  Satisfaction depends a lot on whether you are hunting game at closer ranges or field mice at 100 yards.  As to target shooting smoothbores will not match a rifle on bullseyes at longer ranges.

DP

roundball

  • Guest
Re: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« Reply #3 on: July 26, 2008, 02:57:28 PM »
Can anybody get a 1" group at 50 yrds with there 54 cal smoothies.

Based on my experience with a GM .54cal Flint barrel, which has rifle sights so I guess its actually called a 'smooth rifle', is that consistently expecting 1" groups at 50yyds is a pretty tall order for a smoothbore.

I think my GM .54cal is outstanding in that it'll basically shoot cloverleafs at 50yds and having used it to fill deer tags, and on doves, crows, and skeet its one of the last barrels I'd ever get rid of.
 
With Hornady .530's and a .015" patch my 90grn Goex 3F hunting load I'd occasionally get a burned patch.
I tried an Oxyoke wad over powder to protect the patch but the wad caused flyers.
So I switched to a .018" pillow ticking patch so I wouldn't need a wad but it was way too tight with the .530's.

Then I dropped back to Hornady .520's with the .018" P/T and it shoots practially like a rifle to the 50yds I zeroed it with 70/80/90grns Goex 3F...usually most of the shots in the group are touching each other's edges, and very probably a better marksman would tighten up that group some more.

Offline Bill of the 45th

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1436
  • Gaylord, Michigan
Re: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« Reply #4 on: July 26, 2008, 04:31:23 PM »
I have to agree with the others above.  Heavy patch and a smaller ball, and one of the thick waxy lubes.  .520 ball over 80 to 90 grains of FFG powder, and a very thick denim patch.  To get better data try shooting 5 shot strings, and 4 or 5 of them before you change anything, then change only one component, and try only wiping between groups, as the fouling may help with the patch seal.  If your patch is tight enough , there will be minimum fouling.   Also though it's a rifle, I've found that FFFG with a lighter charge shoots better in my .54.  At .60 grains I get better accuracy, than with 75 to 90 grains.  So that's something else you might try.  This is the fun part of finding a sweet spot load, otherwise you'd be using one of them in thingy things and using two or three pellets, and plastic shoes with a pistol bullet, and complaining that your accuracy is only 8 inches at 50 yards, but you're getting almost 2800 feet per second out of a bullet designed to travel at 1200 FPS.  ;D

Bill
Bill Knapp
Over the Hill, What Hill, and when did I go over it?

Offline Dphariss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9741
  • Kill a Commie for your Mommy
Re: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« Reply #5 on: July 27, 2008, 01:59:36 AM »
The problem with smoothbores is the inevitable flier.
In my experience they ALWAYS occur and usually at the worst possible time.
I once had a Trade Gun that shot REALLY well from the big game standpoint. But it was impossible to actually kill anything with it. I gave up in disgust and traded it to a friend who was not only a very experienced hunter but a !@*%&@ fine shot as well. He thought the same thing I did and went up the hill behind the cabin he lived in and found a bull elk, range under 50 yards. As I recall he shot 4-5 shots at the bull and never touched hair. We still laugh about this thing when it comes up in conversation and this was over 20 years ago.
It was a 24 bore and I shot 530-535 RBs in it.
There have been others but I never hunted with them. I did finish off a deer wounded and left by slob hunters back about 1978 with a Brown Bess Musketoon.
I will not hunt with a long gun that will not shoot at or near 1" at 50. When hunting there there are just too many variables. Some glitch in hold or stance or light on the sights can make a 4" difference in point of impact on the critter at 50 yards.  Now if you have a gun that shoots 4-5" at 50 as my smooth 50 cal barrel does with the better loads and you add in a 4" hold or sighting error the ball lands 8"+- from center in worst case. Best case the shooter error cancels out the balls unpredictable flight and the ball hits center.
Its what a shooter friend of mine calls the "law of compensating errors". In shooting 10 shot groups the smooth "rifle" barrel will hold about 4-5" for 5 shots at 55 yards benched. I would bet on this.  Yes, it will shoot three into much smaller group sometimes. But one would not want to put a lot of money on its doing so on demand since it simply will not reliably do it. This encompasses something on 50-60 rounds of testing. With 490 balls and up to 90 gr of FFFG it would not reliably hit a squirrel at 25 yards. I have not tested the 480s at 25 though I may if I swap the smooth barrel back in.
I HATE missing. I HATE hitting critters in places I was not intending. Its purely practical to me.
People talk of hunting at 30-40 yards with their smoothbores. I would rather use a rifled pistol. Its lighter to carry.

Dan
He who dares not offend cannot be honest. Thomas Paine

northmn

  • Guest
Re: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« Reply #6 on: July 27, 2008, 04:32:47 AM »
Dan, your comments are going to set some folks off.  Part of the limitations on field accuracy with smoothbores is due to the use of competition guns that have to conform to the silly ass rules concerning no rear sights.  They may have been built that way but the users often put a form of rear sight on them.  More originals have been found to have rear sights added than didn't.  I love smoothbores, and if limited to one gun would have a smoothbore 12 gauge.  On the other hand I am building a 12 gauge now that likely will not see a deer.  I am not limited to one gun and will use my 54 rifle on deer because I can shoot one farther away and can shoot finer up close.  I think smoothbores can add to the challenge in hunting and can be a good choice, but need to be used within closer ranges.  People are getting game with them.

DP

roundball

  • Guest
Re: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« Reply #7 on: July 27, 2008, 04:38:43 AM »
Agree...the first year I bought my GM .54cal flint barrel I filled all 6 deer tags with it here in NC...as far as I was concerned I was just shooting a .54cal muzzleloader...the GM .54...and the GM .62cal smoothies would be the last barrels I'd get rid of due to their accuracy and versatility...deer, turkeys, crows, squirrels, doves, skeet...you name it

Offline Dphariss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9741
  • Kill a Commie for your Mommy
Re: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« Reply #8 on: July 27, 2008, 08:14:15 AM »
Dan, your comments are going to set some folks off.  Part of the limitations on field accuracy with smoothbores is due to the use of competition guns that have to conform to the silly ass rules concerning no rear sights.  They may have been built that way but the users often put a form of rear sight on them.  More originals have been found to have rear sights added than didn't.  I love smoothbores, and if limited to one gun would have a smoothbore 12 gauge.  On the other hand I am building a 12 gauge now that likely will not see a deer.  I am not limited to one gun and will use my 54 rifle on deer because I can shoot one farther away and can shoot finer up close.  I think smoothbores can add to the challenge in hunting and can be a good choice, but need to be used within closer ranges.  People are getting game with them.

DP

If I ruffle some feathers I apologise before hand.  But my experience with the smooth bore has been pretty dismal. I am not a shotgun hunter. I don't care for shooting birds or water fowl though in years past I have shot my share of grouse and pheasants with various pistols from 22 rf to 54 flint (its illegal in MT now). I just never liked shooting stuff with small shot. I have always been a rifleman.

I know about sighted smoothbores and those with no rear sight. I have had both. Many original trade guns have rear sights including a sawed off one, butt and barrel cut no front sight now, at the YNP Museum at Mammoth. I stopped at Helena to look at the "Bridger Hawken" and found a 3/4 +- of the trade guns on display have rear sights. Some upset from the barrel with a chisel some are add ons set into the barrel. The 2 I photographed were done in the latter manner.
I am not limited to one gun either. But IMO we collectively have been fed a lot of BS concerning smoothbores. We are told that rifles were virtually unknown in New England but we find the governor of New York mentioning their military use in the  1680s. That the natives used trade guns of one sort or another and they did. But we have accounts that the Indians were buying every rifle they could get their hands on by the F&I war period.
That the Shawnee and Delaware were rifle armed to some significant extent by the 1740s.
I feel the reason the rifle became so prevalent on the frontier was the use of the rifle by natives. It was self defense.
We are told by their proponents that they are far more useful. But this cannot be demonstrated when using a single ball and small shot has limited uses. There are comments from the 1760s that state that the rifle in Indian hands was "prejudicial" to the British due to the way the natives make war and further pointed out that they require less powder and lead and this is bad for trade. By the 1760s there was a concerted attempt to keep rifles from Indian hands. To the point of considering flogging people who sold their rifles to the natives.
Yes there were a lot of smoothbores. There were significant numbers of smooth rifles made and traded to the Indians as well. Whites used smooth rifles too.
But there were a LOT of rifles.
It is impossible to counter people in the woods armed with rifles when you are armed with a smoothbore. This is especially true if the people with the smoothbores are in a fort and the rifle armed people are taking pot shots at them from 150 yards out in the trees and STAY out there. It comes to us from the 1750s that the natives take a rest and "seldom misseth their mark". How are you going to be able to even look over the wall with people out there with rifles unless you have rifles to counter them? Going to shoot "swan shot" at them at 150 yards?
The smooth bore only out performs the rifle in very narrow criteria. Shooting shot or for linear battle tactics which were mortally stupid even in the 1750s. But it was "how it was done". I strongly suspect that this was part of the reason the Militias were known to run during the revolution, they lacked the "discipline" to stand in place and let people shoot them down.
When I was in the military had not yet abandoned what was then called "on line sweeps". I did not like them...

Yet people will use quotes by Rev War American Generals to point out how useless the rifle is when the General simply wanted muskets so he could line up people European style to get shot and the rifleman either would not do it or were ineffective if they did. Thus they wanted muskets and bayonets since they were too bullheaded to use riflemen where they were most effective. In reality were it not for Morgan's Riflemen at the Saratoga battles (especially) and rifle armed troops at other battles who performed critical roles, sometimes small, sometimes significant we might have lost the entire war. It is very doubtful the George Rogers Clark could have taken Vincennes had be been armed only with muskets.

I intentionally built a smooth rifle barrel just to test largely because of the things I have read here and elsewhere. I shot it to the best of my ability at 25 and 50 yards with numerous loads 2 ball sizes, 3 patch thicknesses and FFFG and FFG powder over several days and it will not shoot under 4-5" reliably at 50-55 yards. Under the same conditions on the same day a heavy recoiling rifle will shoot 2" with loads that don't shoot so great (testing wads under the patched ball in this case) and 3/4" with better loads.
 So I must ask if shooting solid shot why would someone use a smoothbore?  In the words of a friend "if you can hit something with a ball from a smoothbore you can hit it with a ball from a rifle better".
Yes they are "cool" and "different" they can be a lot of fun, but if I had to actually feed and protect myself with a ML it would not be a smoothbore. If I were looking at this from a purely economic standpoint I can eat better armed with a rifle than with a smoothbore. While I can get shots under 50 yards at times I am as likely to have one at 100 or 120.
Smooth rifles had advantages, they did not require as much maintenance as a rifle and they were cheaper to make. Someone wanting a fancy rifle who didn't have any intention of actually using or has such poor eyesight he cannot shoot a gun with any certainty past 20-50 yards no matter how its made or sighted is as well served with a smooth rifle, better since its cheaper.
Just for the record since the 1960s I have owned 1 18 bore double percussion and 4 flintlock smooth bores. a Bess Musketoon, a trade gun, a fowler and now I have a 50 caliber rifle with both rifled and smooth barrels fitted. While I hunted with them all I can count the animals killed on one hand. Shooting solid shot I have had far more misses than hits.
I really liked the Bess but it got traded for something else. I really liked the trade gun except it was totally useless for anything but shooting for fun. Try hunting antelope with one, I have done this as well. Near misses don't count. The fowler had "modern ML quality" barrel and I sold it back to where I bought the parts.

We have Indians of the F&I/Rev war telling people to use smoothbores for war. Some people liked rifles, some liked smoothbores.
I have a friend who told me he killed 3 whitetail in the river bottoms with one shot with a 20 both smoothie using buck and ball. I think he slept at the sight over night and the deer came to him. But I have another friend that shot 4-5 shots as a nice buck and never touched a hair... Kinda like my other friend and the elk.
If you hunt in the east and perhaps from a blind or tree stand the smoothie is probably going to work. I grew up in Iowa BTW.  But if you hunt were I often do.



You might find a rifle more useful.

Dan



He who dares not offend cannot be honest. Thomas Paine

Daryl

  • Guest
Re: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« Reply #9 on: July 27, 2008, 05:20:07 PM »
Indeed - location, location, location.

northmn

  • Guest
Re: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« Reply #10 on: July 27, 2008, 08:23:13 PM »
We have country very similar to that in North Minnesota where smooth bores are used quite successfully.  Just can't see it for all the trees.

DP

roundball

  • Guest
Re: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« Reply #11 on: July 27, 2008, 08:49:10 PM »
We have country very similar to that in North Minnesota where smooth bores are used quite successfully.  Just can't see it for all the trees.

DP
Yeah...big wide open areas are unique to look at but typically devoid of game except for the occasional Antelope and I woulnd't be hunting in all that open area...I'd be hunting the brushy ravines down low around all the areas of high ground.
We have large 40-50 acre farm fields all around through the Carolinas but I don't hunt them either...I hunt the thick woodlots and ravines all around them where the deer and turkey funnel &forage through as they move from one location to another...40-50 yard shots are the norm...taylor made for smoothbores.

Offline T*O*F

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5076
Re: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« Reply #12 on: July 28, 2008, 02:20:33 AM »
Every discipline has its detractors, usually based on their personal subjective experience.  This is usually because of a lack of exposure to what can be done.

If you have a chance to attend an N-SSA regional shoot sometime, do so.  Unfortunately, they are not usually open to the public.  Most of these guys shoot original CW muskets and rifle muskets.  There is a smoothbore class and a crack team can clear a rack of 24 clays at 25 yards or 12 two-litre bottles at 50 yards in less than 3 minutes, loading from the pouch.

I've also seen J.D. and his band of Walnut Rangers clean house, year after year at the Ft. desChartres Woodswalk, using smoothbores.  I'm surprised he hasn't joined this thread.
Dave Kanger

If religion is opium for the masses, the internet is a crack, pixel-huffing orgy that deafens the brain, numbs the senses and scrambles our peer list to include every anonymous loser, twisted deviant, and freak as well as people we normally wouldn't give the time of day.
-S.M. Tomlinson

Offline bob in the woods

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4526
Re: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« Reply #13 on: July 28, 2008, 03:12:51 AM »
Where I hunt, a 50 yd shot would be a long one. The longest range would be across a beaver pond..100 yards tops. The rest is hills, gullies, etc and heavily brushed. so the smoothbore is really not much of a diadvantage. On the contrary, that is precisely why I like to use my .75 smoothy. Tracking can be difficult, and it really puts them down. When on a stand at the edge of a field or pond, I generally use my .50 or .54 rifle.

Offline Dphariss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9741
  • Kill a Commie for your Mommy
Re: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« Reply #14 on: July 28, 2008, 08:08:36 PM »
We have country very similar to that in North Minnesota where smooth bores are used quite successfully.  Just can't see it for all the trees.

DP
Yeah...big wide open areas are unique to look at but typically devoid of game except for the occasional Antelope and I woulnd't be hunting in all that open area...I'd be hunting the brushy ravines down low around all the areas of high ground.
We have large 40-50 acre farm fields all around through the Carolinas but I don't hunt them either...I hunt the thick woodlots and ravines all around them where the deer and turkey funnel &forage through as they move from one location to another...40-50 yard shots are the norm...taylor made for smoothbores.

Depends on where you live. This section was devoid of deer on this day but had about 40 head of antelope and I killed one but not with ML. For my reasons related to my hunting companion I was carrying a "modern". However, if not for interference from a pair of Coyotes who spooked the goats I might have gotten within 16 bore range.
It is not uncommon to find mule deer 1/2 to 1 mile from the nearest tree on pretty flat ground. You will note the lack of trees or much terrain cover in this photo, note blood trail.

There were trees within 1/4 mile or a little more and enough "folds" in the land to get me fairly close then the doe walked up close and I shot her. Yeah it was 40-50 yards but I simply could not get this close the deer came to me. I might have gotten a shot had I crawled 50 yards or so.
I was in a creek bottom last fall and crawled a considerable distance on a whitetail, well 40-50 yards or so, its considerable when low crawling, got within rifle range (but not smoothbore) and still never got a shot.
So please refrain from telling me what the hunting conditions are where I live and where you will or will not find game.
Most of my hunting is done where there is little or no cover aside from terrain. Sometimes you can get a scrub pine between the game and yourself. I used to hunt in a brushy/broken BLM section and still do in about 150 acres of it but most of it is over run with people now about every day all year so its not as useful as it used to be. I can hunt the mountains but its more work and 40-50+ mile round trip and the wolves have kinda messed this up.

If the terrain is right its possible to get a shot with a flintlock. I often kill deer in the 40-60 yard ranges. But its not a sure thing. As I stated before I have tried smoothbores years ago. I never managed to kill an unwounded animal with one (except for a Hun with a load of #6s). As I stated at 40 yards a pistol is about as good and I HAVE killed one deer with one of these and made solid lung hits on 2 wounded ones. I could easily have killed this doe with a smoothbore I suppose. But I keep going back to what my rifleman friend said over a cup of tea last year. "If you can hit something with a ball from a smoothbore you can hit it better with a rifle". There is no *logic* to shooting sollid shot from smoothbores unless you are in the British Army prior to about 1850. But there is no logic to hunting with a flintlock period at this time period.
If you choose to, fine I really do not care. I just get a little jaded with people telling me how wonderful/useful/one size fits all they are when in reality they are far more limited when shooting solid shot than a rifle the rifle will kill large game at close range or far and has virtually no disadvantage over the smoothbore. The smoothbore only has an advantage when shooting small shot, in certain archaic military applications or where required by law.
Are they "cool"/historically correct/fun YES. Are they cheaper to shoot, no. Are they more effective on small game, no. Did the smoothbore take over in the east when the large game was mostly killed off, no. The rifle hung on because is more accurate. A small bore rifle, especially, will kill more squirrels and rabbits on less powder and lead than a 20 or 24 bore SB will. I always killed more squirrels than my cousins shooting my 32-40 cal ML and they will 22s and I killed probably well over 90% of the animals I shot at. At SB ranges a good shot can head shoot deer with a 32 rifle.
But when shooting solid shot they are inferior to the rifle in all regards. There is no advantage. But we have people who insist on telling everyone how accurate their SB is.
Thus people new to the sport who read the posts here and on other sites who do not understand that its "relative" and not absolute accuracy come to expect 1" groups at 50 yards. As a result I post the things I do in this regard.
My second reason for the 50 smooth rifle BTW, besides re-enforcing the things I learned nigh on 30 years ago, was Montana's Spring Turkey which requires a SB but no shot size limitation that I know of... But I will likely sell the rifle off to buy parts at some point...

Dan
He who dares not offend cannot be honest. Thomas Paine

northmn

  • Guest
Re: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« Reply #15 on: July 29, 2008, 04:29:42 PM »
Ah the debate again.  Actually I agree very definitely on one thing.  If you are shooting one ball, a rifle will do so better under any condition.  Part of the attraction to smoothies I think is due to the fact that they are lighter and handier than many of the heavier barreled rifles.  In the Great Lakes region where I live, the Ojibwe used smoothbores for many years.  But if one considers their use one can see why.  First, many, including museum curators claim that most MW Guns that have been found have been loaded with shot.  MN is called the land of 10,000 lakes.  We actually have a few more depending on the definition of a lake.  Mille Lacs, Leech, Winibigosh and Upper and Lower Red Lakes are definitely lakes.  Lakes attracted waterfowl which are much better harvested with shot, although some did use nets.  Geese were used not only for meat but for goose down as Minnesota gets fairly cold in the winter, 40 below is not uncommon.  A shotgun can also take more than one bird at a shot if aligned properly.  Heavy shot will within close range, say 25 yards also take deer, especially if one gets them in the back of the head.  I have known a couple of duck hunters who had taken a couple of deer with 4's.   In the heavy cover we have 25 yards is not uncommon.  I took one deer at about 10 feet and have had them come under deer stands.  The 24 gauge loaded with round ball could be used on moose and elk which were more common in the early days.  As Daryl stated location, location.  Were I to have one flintlock, it would be a large bore fowler.  The western Natives were traded rifles more than the Eastern because of different needs.  However the Metis in Manitoba as well as western Natives were noted for "running" buffalo on horses and liked the NW Gun. They would keep ball in their mouth and charge the rifle, spit in the ball and thump it on the saddle to seat it for fast reloading.  They also blew a few barrels that way.  Likely lost a few teeth too.

DP

Daryl

  • Guest
Re: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« Reply #16 on: July 29, 2008, 05:15:19 PM »
The same style of buffalo 'running' was practised in the States.  For this, about any style gun is recorded as being used, double barreled shotguns with balls, rifles, smoothbores, and in some areas with military settlements, pistols were popular.  Earlier, it was the flint military pistols and flint duelers of French and German made along with the English guns, but after the revolvers were developed, the .44 cal. Colts andother makes become most popular.  The .36's is would found, lacked penetration to do the job - of course.  Most favoured of all, were the big Dragoons - and the 1847 Walkers - those which didn't expload, that is.

Offline Dphariss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9741
  • Kill a Commie for your Mommy
Re: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« Reply #17 on: July 29, 2008, 07:34:24 PM »
Around the Great Lakes or in places like Minnesota its possible to keep yourself fed with a shotgun but in other areas I am not sure small shot was all that popular.
My dad, back in the 30's crawled on a pond full of Canadians in Missouri with a double barrel and an 1897 Win. He whistled to get their heads up then gave them the double and dropping it. picked up the 97 as they came off the water. All the nearby farms had geese to eat. So I know how it works.
But look at history.
Ned Roberts hunting bear in 1880 New England generally at very short range in berry patches. Everyone in his party was using rifles. This would be ideal for a double shotgun I would think. But they used rifles. His Uncle shot one so close he burnt the hair with the muzzle flash.
The frontier of the Revolution was populated with the poor. But they used rifles to a great extent. The natives used rifles more that some would think.
So far as the use of small shot.
According to Hamilton's "Colonial Frontier Guns" pg 133 contracts for suppling ball and shot for Louisiana in 1733 specified:
20000 livres (about 21500 pounds) of balls and a combined 10000 livres of 4 sizes of small shot.
A year later the contract was for 20000 livres of  balls 25-28 to the livre, 30000 of 28-32 to the livre and 26000 livre of small shot (bustard, duck, half royal and pigeon sizes). Hamiltion indicates in a table of sizes that 30 to the livre equals .547". So the ball sizes are ball park for 24 to 20 bore trade guns.
So it would appear that they were using solid shot from 50 to 56 caliber about 2 to one over small shot by weight. I would also point out that 20000 pounds of ball will produce more shots than 20000 pounds of small shot unless very little shot is used.
But this volume of small shot is still a LOT of ammunition. A ton of shot at 1 ounce to the load will produce 32000 shots if I figured it right.

Dan
He who dares not offend cannot be honest. Thomas Paine

Offline Dphariss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9741
  • Kill a Commie for your Mommy
Re: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« Reply #18 on: July 29, 2008, 07:41:32 PM »
The same style of buffalo 'running' was practised in the States.  For this, about any style gun is recorded as being used, double barreled shotguns with balls, rifles, smoothbores, and in some areas with military settlements, pistols were popular.  Earlier, it was the flint military pistols and flint duelers of French and German made along with the English guns, but after the revolvers were developed, the .44 cal. Colts andother makes become most popular.  The .36's is would found, lacked penetration to do the job - of course.  Most favoured of all, were the big Dragoons - and the 1847 Walkers - those which didn't expload, that is.

When the range is 5-10 feet the weapons accuracy is not a great factor.
Parkman describes the process and dangers of spitting a ball down the barrel in "The Oregon Trail".
I have often thought that the pair of 65 caliber Hawken pistols that are pictured in various books would have made great buffalo running pistols for anyone who could stand the recoil.
In "Journal of a Trapper" Russell related watching the natives kill something in the realm of 200 buffalo in a short time (one "run") without burning a grain of powder.
Dan
He who dares not offend cannot be honest. Thomas Paine

Offline Darrin McDonal

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 474
Re: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« Reply #19 on: July 29, 2008, 08:29:17 PM »
I think most will agree that to get "really good" with you fire arm you must use it, handle it alot, carry it alot. Not 4-5 times a year. The comment about missing a bull elk with 4-5 shots, at under 50 yards cannot be blamed on the gun. My opinion is the guy didnt know his gun. I know a smooth rifle generally can punch holes in a paper plate at 50 yards all day long. And ussualy a small paper plate at 50 yards if you are used to your gun. Off a rest for sure.
Darrin
Apprentice Gunsmith
Colonial Williamsburg
Owner of Frontier Flintlocks

Offline Dphariss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9741
  • Kill a Commie for your Mommy
Re: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« Reply #20 on: July 30, 2008, 04:42:48 AM »
I think most will agree that to get "really good" with you fire arm you must use it, handle it alot, carry it alot. Not 4-5 times a year. The comment about missing a bull elk with 4-5 shots, at under 50 yards cannot be blamed on the gun. My opinion is the guy didnt know his gun. I know a smooth rifle generally can punch holes in a paper plate at 50 yards all day long. And ussualy a small paper plate at 50 yards if you are used to your gun. Off a rest for sure.
Darrin

I shot this gun a lot, probably near 100 rounds. I knew where it shot to over 100 yards.
If you knew the man pulling the trigger and the gun you would not blame the shooter. He was an experienced professional elk guide so he was used to being around elk and he shot flint guns a lot and is a national champion shooter. He does not miss often and certainly not several shots in a row. I had the same problem with the thing I missed something like 4 shots total at deer and antelope with it plus at least one flash in the pan. It just would not kill anything with hair.
He felt the same way I initially did. It actually seemed to shoot pretty darned good to 70 yards or more. Plenty good enough to deer sized animals.
I was riding down a trail and spotted a little buck right in the trail. 40 yards maybe. Get off my horse walk a little ahead and shoot him, I thought. I was so sure of the shot I didn't even reload. But no blood. Finally see him looking at me but the gun is not loaded. Ride on down to the trail head and break a couple of rocks the size of my fist and similar distance.
I won't go into details since some the the people are gone now but we decided it was a Polish curse put on it because the original owner had shafted the maker in obtaining it. Good an explaination as any.

Dan
He who dares not offend cannot be honest. Thomas Paine

Offline rich pierce

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 18821
Re: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« Reply #21 on: July 30, 2008, 03:43:40 PM »
Good discussion.  Now I don't feel so bad about my 50 yard targets with my 20 ga smoothbore.  Keeping them inside 6" is a good goal for me (front bead only).  I consider it a 40 yard deer gun, about like a compound bow.  I have shot several deer inside that range over the years, but more outside that range.  So a rifle would be my first choice for deer anytime except thickest cover.
Andover, Vermont

Offline James Rogers

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3106
  • James Rogers
    • Fowling Piece
Re: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« Reply #22 on: July 30, 2008, 04:30:19 PM »
You are right Rich. It's a 40 yard deer gun. But it's also a bird gun, small game getter, etc.

The smoothbore gun has t's place in English cultural history where the rifle was only existing in small numbers.

A rifle is a rifle and shotgun is a shotgun. They are experts at different applications.
I will take a shotgun for most of my applications although I am not prejudiced and "hate'n on de rifle guns".  ;D 

Offline Roger Fisher

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6805
Re: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« Reply #23 on: July 30, 2008, 04:50:15 PM »
Good discussion.  Now I don't feel so bad about my 50 yard targets with my 20 ga smoothbore.  Keeping them inside 6" is a good goal for me (front bead only).  I consider it a 40 yard deer gun, about like a compound bow.  I have shot several deer inside that range over the years, but more outside that range.  So a rifle would be my first choice for deer anytime except thickest cover.
Ys, if you can keep them in the black on the 6 inch bull offhand at 50yds you will win - place or show in the matches.... ;D

Offline Darrin McDonal

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 474
Re: 54 cal smoothbore accuracy/whats the best they can do
« Reply #24 on: July 30, 2008, 05:18:28 PM »
Hi Dan,
Maybe it came out weird sounding ( reading) but I wasn't referring to his ability to shoot expertly but what I was saying was how these this sooooo differant from gun to gun. Sometimes I can pick up and shoot a couple of differant flinters in one session and do ok. Other times if I don't stick with one and only one for, ohh, 50-100 shots I cant figure out what "mood"either one of them are in.  Also I know there are a few factors that influence this is whether (weather)or not the the humidity etc. etc. is acting on it that day. Like the tenons under the barrel. Are they slotted and is the bbl being influenced by it. It still all comes down to, in my meager opinion is how well a person knows that one gun.
  Have any of you had the experience of the point of impact change as the bbl heats up? Ive had it fairly often until I slotted the tenons more than they had been.
Darrin
Apprentice Gunsmith
Colonial Williamsburg
Owner of Frontier Flintlocks