Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
Paper Cartridges shoots Buck & Ball… at 300 yards!?! Range Day III
Вставка
- Опубліковано 23 лют 2023
- We know how effective .69-cal smoothbores with buck and ball was at close ranges, even well into the “rifle era” when the smoothbore was supposed to be technically obsolete. But what about at longer ranges, at distances the rifle was supposed to rule the field? We chuck a lot of lead, time, and money into the vast beyond, in the name of Science.
Old Russian proverb “Man pulls the trigger , but the Devil guides the bullet”
An excellent demonstration. Moral of the story. Don't stand in front of someone shooting your way no matter how supposedly inaccurate something is. .
And the fact that they were still lining them up side by side. The 69th had spent the time prior to Pickett-Pettigrew-Trimble gathering up dropped Confederate smooth bores and each man had 4 to 5 loaded rifles with buck and ball. And you wonder why it was the "High water mark."
Yes, smoothbores are inaccurate, but like you said in the video around 6:57 that you would not want to be at 300 yards with a regiment or battalion armed with the 1842. Its essentially a gigantic shotgun at that point, and having even one company armed with them would still be devastating. Excellent video overall myth busting the reenactorism that smoothbores were useless.
Pickett "that man (Lee) had my troops murdered".
"First one goes high, second one goes low, who the hell knows where the third one goes?"
I’m thinking the French or a German state did testing shooting a sheet of cloth six feet high and eighty feet long, the size of a company front, at three hundred yards. This was flintlock smoothbore days cr 1780. And got 17% hits.
Now a company isn’t solid but that would still be man killing
So the whole thing about smoothbores being inaccurate seems to be wildly exaggerated, sort of like the old myth that longbows would penetrate through fully armored knights. I remember reading somewhere that smoothbore muskets only hit someone a few % of the time, but after seeing this, that seems hard to believe, especially if they were firing at each other from shorter ranges.
Bit more truth to both than you might expect. By the Battle of Agincourt, longbows certainly had trouble penetrating the armor of men-at-arms, but the English began making organized use of longbows something like a century before that.
And while a musket might be good enough to score hits on a formation size target at 300 yards, that doesn't mean the soldier holding it was. Depends on the date and the army, but it was common for infantry to receive shockingly little marksmanship training by today's standards.
Watch lindebeige’s video on it. No matter how accurate the weapon, most soldiers don’t actually want to kill another human. Many would aim above/below.
One time they set up a sheet during training to see how many shots landed on target. I think 98% of shots hit the sheet. In battle they found only around 5% of shots hit the enemy
If you shoot at anything enough you're going to hit it. I believe in one shot, 1 hit. What's the size of shoot and a half a dozen times
"So the whole thing about smoothbores being inaccurate seems to be wildly exaggerated" You miss the point: Most soldiers were not taught to estimate ranges and to aim carefully. The result you see in the film is somewhat artificial with a shooter who has much better training than 95% of the soldiers in the 18th/19th century. The next issue is that firing salvos in formations dramatically reduce accuracy. There were tests on this topic already around 1812 by the Prussians. There is a reason that the Prussians stayed with skirmishers and columns after the Napoleonic wars despite the fact that they had enough time to train their soldiers.
One Rebel said he preferred his smoothbore with buck and ball over the rifle musket he was later issued, as most shooting was done at fifty yards.
My own Great Great Grandfather was wounded by buck & ball, receiving a head wound at the Second Battle of Corinth, as a member of the 64th Illinois Infantry.
This was a great demonstration, why the smooth bore excelled in volley fire and speed of loading, yet the rifle, though somewhat slower to load, is individually effective at range.
Thank You for this video demonstration!
Lol I read a book from the 18th century on European musketry. They did open fire at 300 yards with smooth bore . They didn’t hit as often . The effect was on morale more than any thing ess . I think the hit rate was 15 percent according to Frederic the second of Prussia . These results didn’t surprise me . Just shows you two know your weapons well
I visited our local 4H blackpowder team a few weeks ago as they tried shooting their rifles at 100 yards, in preparation for the nationals competition. They had only been shooting at 50 yards. They're going to use future range sessions to tweak their loads and learn how their guns shoot at various ranges for the competition. It's also the first time a team has gone to Nationals from our area.
I brought a couple of "fun guns" they could try out after the practice. 4 of the kids took me up on my offer of shooting a replica British Ship's Carbine (.75") and a replica Springfield 1854 musket rifle (.69"). I had some paper cartridges I had made using Lee .68" roundballs and 60 grains of 2F Goex for the Ship's Carbine and Lyman .68" minie balls with 60 grains of 2f Triple 7 for the Springfield. I loaded and fired the ship's carbine (loading the pan from a separate flask for safety) using the paper cartridge for the main charge and wadding the paper up on top of the ball. I picked the girl to shoot first (Ladies first). She's a very competent shooter. Unfortunately, even though she had spend a couple of hours shooting a percussion TC sidelock during practice and we were all wearing eyes and ears, she was intimidated by the flintlock, so she closed her eyes when she pulled the trigger. None of us hit the 8" steel gong at 100 yards, but we all came close enough to kill a British soldier if they were in ranks. Then I demonstrated loading the Springfield with a paper cartridge, again wadding the paper on top of the ball to keep it from getting dislodged. They were all impressed by the size of the musket caps compared to the #11's they use on their sidelock percussion guns (their coach owns a mix of Lyman and TC, either .50" or .54" for them to use, assigning rifles to them so they use the same guns every practice and match). Again, the girl closed her eyes and hit a couple of feet low, but the others would have successfully hit a Union soldier, if they were in ranks. Not bad for first shots in their entire lives of a full sized musket and musket rifle. :) That Springfield kicks with a minie ball compared to patched roundballs.
Well within musket shot meant up to 300 yards when laying out defences.
Awesome! This really makes me want to try this myself.
I accidentally found two pure lead .68" round balls fired with a patch through my .69 caliber replica 1854 Springfield rifle musket. They were a bit ovoid shaped with the weave of the cloth embedded into them. I just found them laying on the ground near my 150 meter target stand after shooting at 100 yards. They passed through the target stand at 100 yards, hit the ground and rolled to a stop at about 140 meters. :)
When I had a replica Mississippi rifle, I shot at a target at 50 yards with my brushpile behind the stand. When I went to check out my target after firing 5 rounds of patched roundball and 5 rounds of Lee minie ball (all cast out of pure lead by myself) I found two thick pecan branches, about 5 inches thick. One had the remnants of a round ball laying on the ground behind it, flat as a pancake, and another was torn in half with a very flattened and deformed minie ball laying behind it.
Likewise surprised bearing in mind that in the old days we would be speaking of under 100 yards in combat but shooting the eye out of a squirrel at 300 yards we might leave to another day!
This comes as absolutely no surprise whatsoever to me. People don't understand that smoothbores could be used effectively in volley fire at 300 yards. Buck and ball makes a single shot firearm into a shotgun or "mini volley".
at 300yds the lack of a proper sght is a big problem for smoothbores; they have the same or worse trajectory problems that early rifled muskets had so most people would just naturally aim too low/high with them; this is on top of the innate inaccuracy of the projectile at those distances; still, two shots managing to hit within the area of a formation of line at that distance shows that smoothbore muskets can remain a threat even out to long ranges, sure, the chance of hitting a single man are nil at such ranges though and once you take misfires into consideration it makes sense why infantry would not generally shoot at that distance; a unit's effectiveness drops with time (due to misfires, fouling, ingering smoke, ftigue/hearing damage etc.) so it makes sense not to waste the first handful volleys firing at a distance where only a fraction of bullets will hit at the best of times.
Man those people are so rude shooting AR's and whatnots ! Don't they know that anything below .69 caliber is weak and inferior ? Thanks for this video, very cool ! =)
Throwing smoothbore shots down 300 yards is an odds game, but that just goes to show there are still some odds left at that range.
Seems like the limiting factor on effective range might have been less the weapon and more the amount countries were willing to spend on practice?
Having sights on the musket might make a difference. And Nessler ball cartridges!
Results are what I expected. The P-53 is inherantly far more accurate, but the bucknball load still has range, so where ever it lands within the rank and file is likely a hit. If a battalion was lined up per drill, I can see lots of casualties starting within 400 yards just by random chance from a smootbore volley of bucknball. Within 150, it would be a mess real quick. In another video, the point was posited that most volleys were held to within 150yards due to poor training. I do believe that to be the case. But, I can't help but wonder if those same rookies got a lot better very quickly.
keeping volleys to within 150 yards is part because of training, but another part is that a unit of men can not maintain peak performance for very long; factors like fouling, smoke buildup, misfires, the geeneral hearing damage etc. build up quickly to make a unit less effective after every volley; saving your first (and as such, best) volleys for 150 yards means a unit might end up performing better over-all as they can put more volume of fire out at the ranges where muskets (especially ones firing buck and ball) are vastly more deadly.
Funny, I own some AR’s but I think you are the cool kids.
Even a blind pig finds an acorn sometimes.
Fantastic Display of marksmanship. Great video.
It certainly would have been effective on a line formation. Which then begs the question, at what distance would a defending line start to fire?
Lesson is clear, do not be 300 yards downrange of even one, let alone many smoothbore musket shooters and expect to have a nice day.
I'd never seen buck and ball described so clearly before, I can see why it was so devastating at shorter ranges especially in massed ranks.
Thanks. I figured I didn't want to get in front of anyone shooting the smooth bore. I have a family heirloom of an 1816 model from 1831 retrofitted for percussion cap for use by my great great grandfather out of Iowa. It still works, but I don't put a full charge. That would be for the more modern reproduction. Thanks again
Can you please do a history/shooting video on a US conversion muskets. I want to learn more on these types of arms, I recently acquired a US Model 1816 Type III made at Harper's Ferry in 1837 that was converted (breech/bolster) for the ACW with rack number and various inspectors marks. It's in perfect working order minus the mashed up ramrod. I'm in the process of preserving/conserving the old girl and would love to see her bark fire once again. Love your videos!!!
That same cardboard cutout is at a local historical fort.
That’s his brother, Corporal Snuffy.
Snuffy lost his femur and got a pension :)
Have you ever tried a patched round ball at three hundred?
It’s military science! Short of 50yds Buck and Ball delivers more energy to target. Past 50 yds a round ball bleeds energy faster. That whole ballistic coefficient thing. I’d love to see the pine board penetration done with smooth bore. Seems smooth bore you may hit the front rank at 100 yards, Minnie balls could pass though the first man hitting a second?
If those guys with the semi auto ars would just read the range guidelines, they would know you're only allowed to have 3 rounds loaded at a time. Can't be shooting 30 rounds at a pop. It looks like range 230? That's the one I use. Great video and I'd love to own a smooth bore, just for fun.
I hope you're joking.
For the smoothbore throe enough at the wall and some of it will stick
What is powder charge and ball size ? The British long land 75 cal fired a 69 cal ball with 130 gens / 120 gens for shorter Ranger cut down. The report sounds as a rifle. The British often waited for target within 100 Yds gave lethal fire power .Classic example Plains of Abraham battle with French
110 grains with .650 ball.
The round balls from the smoothbore musket lose over half of their energy at 300 yards but they could still do some lethal damage even though the Minnie balls from the rifled musket clearly are much more accurate and the Minnie balls hold onto more of their energy at 300 yards
Just found your channel.. I am really enjoying your videos
Glad you found me! Enjoy
Старинная Русская пословица: "Пуля - дура! Штык - молодец!"
General Ggeorge Washington during the Revolutionary War had his troops load with buck and ball continually, because it was vary devastating.
My understanding, such as it is, is that the smoothbore was developed as a skirmish weapon and the Brown Bess in particular to be loaded and shot rapidly and hitting into the adversary's line. The rifled musket was actually inferior in that scenario but undoubtedly superior for gorilla warfare.
What allows for rapid loading and shooting vs Kentucky rifle? I thought they were the same other than rifling
@@galaxyknuckles9000 They are until the fouling inside the rifled barrel builds up. The rifled rounds have a tighter fit to the bore by design so a fouled up barrel could possibly make it more difficult to ram the projectile all the way down over time, slowing your ROF. Which is why special cleaning rounds were given to troops not long after rifles became more popular. They would shoot a cleaner round off every so many shots to try and keep things operating properly. With smooth bores, the rounds were usually a looser fit so fouling while still a problem was never as big of a problem in longer battles.
@@MrBottlecapBill super interesting, thanks for the explanation!
I'm going to assume "gorilla" was your spell checker's interpretation of guerilla.
@@bills6093 never assume.
@Paper Cartridges....Something I've been wondering is during the early pioneering days (When Eastern Kentucky was considered "The Western Frontier" ) Was there ever any mention of shot cartridges being made or used? And also if you were you attempt to make such shot cartridges how effective would they be in use and how much faster would they be over the standard popular reloading method?
dude puts the paper so deep in his mouth to rip it off 😂😂😂
That's great, I don't understand how they fought in the past with a gun with such a slow rate of fire.
Oh, and this is the second vid of yours I've watched now so I sub'd for you. Looking forward to watching others.
Is that private TODD Snuffy, the genius YT commenter?!
Most good.
First shot low so you can see how the weather is effecting the round never high you will not have a message you can use
A minha dentadura iria parar longe.
Why are we complaining about people shooting AR's at a gun range?
Why you hating on the semi autos ?
Oh so satisfying!
Love you and BMUZZ
While that looks like a lot of fun where did you find musket caps? No.11 caps are non existant. I parked my percussion guns cause I can't find any.
I’m lucky enough to find musket caps at some of the retail shops here in Gettysburg PA. Maybe they just have some old stock leftover from when they were available?
i don't think he likes semi-autos, guys lmao
im like wait! isn't that the musket they used in the series 1864?
The buckshot will not carry as far as a round ball that approximates the barrel diameter, causing the pattern of the buckshot to be waaaaay lower at extended range. No surprise that you were unable to record hits with buckshot at 300 yards.
I clicked on everything and you shot a deer in the nuts
Are you guys in WV, that looks like sleepy creek
PA
You fired hiw many rounds of B&B? And hit with one. Thats just luck
Black powder worked well for hundreds of years if they can see you there Is a good chance you will have a bad day don't be over impressed by modern fire arms a rifled black powder musket is a nasty weapon hard to survive a 58 cal round
Is this video at odds with another of your videos that said rifled muskets did not influence the Civil War.
There’s a significant difference between the theoretical capability of a weapon system, and how that system is actually used.
This would be a better test if you were to shoot off of a rest, that would remove some of the human variable, shooting off hand is not a steady position. Also in a combat situation is some one going to shoot off hand?? Not likely, prone or kneeing more likely.
Well, if he got a round ball on target, and others close, while standing, then that tells us something. It tells me that I would not stand 300 yards away and claim that you might as well shoot at the moon because you'd never hit me...
the human varible is far more important than the theoretical accuracy of the weapon shot from a vice; and off-hand shooting with a smoothbore musket is period completely accurate for units of line.
Definitely not the most effective of civil war era long arms, but the 1842 is still my favorite anyway. Is it just a myth that you can load a smooth bore faster? I have heard this theory put out there once or twice but I don't really know.
A really well trained soldier could probably load the rifle just as fast, but the smoothbore is definitely easier overall. The bullet is a real loose fit in the barrel so it almost drops in by it’s own weight, and it’s quick to ram down. The 1842 was devastating in the Civil War once you got within a hundred yards.
@@papercartridges6705 Thanks!
The comparison comes from the AWI/Rev War. A trained soldier with a musket could fire three or four shots for every shot fired by a rifle using a patch etc. Please also note that the rifle would be fouled after a number of shots and require cleaning. The minie ball increased reload time for rifled muskets to equal that of the old smoothbores. I would like to see how many times you would hit the target at 300 yards using a rifled musket. Thanks for the demo.
Depends on the rifle; early rifled muskets were much slower to load because they used solid balls/bullets that needed to be fitted tightly to the barrel to engage the rifling, this made them not only slower to reload by default but also meant they were far more vulnerable to fouling-related problems that furtherreduce rate of fire; once we're talking the time of minie balls though, this issue had ceased to exsist as the minie ball only engages the rifling once it's been fired; the rifled musket would not be too much harder to reload than the smoothbore musket in this era, you might save a second or two on a reload but it's not a world of difference for a trained soldier.
May not hit what your aiming at but most likely took out the guy to the left or right of targeted man. Get the elevation right your going to hit someone.
What was the powder charge?
.69, nice
Well part of your problem is you don’t believe that a smooth bore can drop rounds in routinely at 300 yards but Hickok45 has used modern 12ga (smooth bore near same caliber) and off the shelf foster slugs and put all on target at if memory serves he said 275 yards or something close to that. I’m saying the problem isn’t smooth bore or even projectile shape but load and shooter. Take it how you want but using historically accurate best you can find loads exactly won’t serve you very well as in the 1700’s wars were fought in linear formations, with rows of men shooting at opposing rows of men at very close ranges. It was always until the American Revolution war of attrition, who can lose the most men in any given engagement and come out the victor. Americans learned from and adopted more modern warfare tactics from the American Indians “gorilla war fare”. They didn’t have the numbers but did have acclimation to and knowledge of the terrain and were skilled marksmen because they had to be, and used those advantages to their advantage. Of course rifles are more accurate than smooth bores at given distances but they totally work fine for hitting a man sized target at 300 yards at the time as evidenced by Hickok45 with his slug shooting video
Foster slugs are spin stabilized. The spin is imparted by drag on the slug rather than rifling. Very different from a musket ball, which is aerodynamically unstable.
As for the rest of your comment, it's nothing but myths. Pretty common myths in the US, but myths nonetheless.
Did you really expect to display accuracy this way?
Freehand and aiming for one second? These results are random and proof nothing!
Hung up and carefully aiming would be much more meaningfully.
Just my two cents....
Take your time slow down.
The range is infested with semi autos? What about you and your new fangled 'detonating rifle?' Young whipper snappers are all high and mighty with their gimmicky detonating rifles! What is wrong with the good old dog lock?
There was another guy down the line firing his hooped bombard with a slow match, complaining about the annoying rich kids with their silly pyrite wheel locks.
@@papercartridges6705 😁 I noticed in one of your vids(?) you mentioned some of the recovered rb's showed signs of slugging. Have you tried firing minie balls through your 69 caliber smoothbore musket? If so disregard if not it would be an interesting test series.
Brett, you totally are not into longrifles, are you? Because thats my recent field of interest and I would really appreciate your deep insights on that topic.
I admire long rifles for their beauty and craftsmanship but my focus is military rifles after about 1850, especially the rifle-musket. Some day I would like a long Kentucky flint rifle. Tiger striped stock… oh yea. But I have very little experience with them now.
@@papercartridges6705 Im saving money for a Kibler Colonial kit. Almost there and starting to think if I should not buy something realy authentic instead. But here in Germany I would be the only Revolutionary War reenactor in the entire country. So, I dont need to convince anybody but myself. ;-)