Backwoodsman's Caliber?

[Joe Zakas]

When I first asked this question, I thought there would be a lot of help. O Boy, was I right. Just these few replies have sent me down a few rabbit holes. It made me wonder just who were these guys and what did they use as riflemen. So far, I narrowed it down to the battles of Quebec 1775, Saratoga 1777, and Cowpens. The roster had 204 names for Morgan's Riflemen in 1777. What would a backwoodsman's caliber have been in Pennsylvania and in Virginia in 1777 or 1781? Would the quality of powder have made a difference in the size of the PRB to have the best effect?

 

[bearbullets]

Id go between 50-60. Bear and hostile natives were still around at the time. After the Revolution with the dangerous stuff pushed further west, rifles became more ornate and lighter in caliber.

 

[Rifleman1776]

There is another almost identical thread going elsewhere on this subject. From what I have seen in museums and read, the caliber that were predominant were about .42" to .47". This would have been east of the big muddy.
Others have shown some documentation that indicates much larger.

 

[jamesthomas]

I would think it would be the smaller caliber, simply because you got more rounds to the pound of lead, plus you would use less powder. When your out in the boonies I would think having more rounds and a pound of powder lasting longer to be very important.

 

[Stophel]

For the 1770's, I'd say .45 was on the small end of average, with .60 on the big end of average. The average average would be probably .50-.58. :wink:

 

[Alden]

I would think it would be the smaller caliber, simply because you got more rounds to the pound of lead, plus you would use less powder. When your out in the boonies I would think having more rounds and a pound of powder lasting longer to be very important.

Really? I'd say having an impact, play on words intended, on what you needed to hit might be right up there near the top. Just sayin'...

 

[Ken Cormier]

IMHO A thought-provoking saying never shoot a large caliber man with a small caliber rifle. Just a thought.

 

[Stumpkiller]

From the balls found at the Fort Michilimackinac excavations, the average was .54 to .56 caliber. That's 18th century Western Frontier (Michigan).

But then we Northerners and our large game take more killing than Southerners and their whatever game. ;-)

 

[Loyalist Dave]

"Rifles of former times were different from those of modern date; [1824] few of them carried more than forty-five bullets to the pound. Bullets of less size were not thought sufficiently heavy for hunting or war." Joseph Doddridge p.124 of Early Settlement and Indian Wars of Western Virginia and Pennsylvania

45 to the pound = .470 diameter; .490 = 39.5 to the pound of lead, but that doesn't take into effect sprue and loss from fluxing, so probably somewhere between .48 and .50 caliber minimum.

NOTE that Doddridge explains the weight of the bullet for use in war and hunting, not just for hunting.

LD

 

[nit wit]

Most of what I have read suggests .38-.45 rifled
Smooth .62-.75.
I just killed a 275 lb bear with a .440 patched ball 50 grains of 3f in Bruce Beanes # 10 flintlock. Pretty sure you could make war with it too.
Nit Wit

 

[Col. Batguano]

So by 1824 they were in to smaller calibers, correct? Of course, it would be helpful to know more about the writer, his background, age, where he was writing from, as, people are always speaking relative to their own perspective. Guns of the Rocky Mountain fur trade were undoubtedly of larger caliber than those of the eastern woodlands.

 

[Rifleman1776]

But then we Northerners and our large game take more killing than Southerners and their whatever game

That might really be the key. A .45 will drop a small black bear or deer. No doubt it will do a number on an indian.

 

[floyd1350]

the following was compiled from rifles of colonial America

caliber and number of rifles
40-1 50-8 60-7 70-1
41-0 51-9 61-5 71-0
42-3 52-6 62-5 72-3
43-1 53-3 63-1
44-4 54-9 64-2
45-4 55-4 65-4 75-2
46-3 56-7 66-1
47-6 57-5 67-1
48-6 58-11 68-1 90-1
49-1 59-3 69-1

 

[longcruise]

Regarding the evolution of calibers, early gun calibers were possibly strongly influenced by the predominance of the military muskets and later the dutch/ European Jaeger styles. Large bores that may have only gradually given way to smaller bores as the practicality and adequacy of smaller balls became apparent. Speaking of the east of course and notwithstanding the eventual return of larger calibers in the west.

 

[nchawkeye]

So by 1824 they were in to smaller calibers, correct? Of course, it would be helpful to know more about the writer, his background, age, where he was writing from, as, people are always speaking relative to their own perspective. Guns of the Rocky Mountain fur trade were undoubtedly of larger caliber than those of the eastern woodlands.

Not exactly...Pre Revolutionary War rifles were as large or larger than during the fur trade era...Calibers started trending down as the deer were killed off, that's why Daniel Boone kept moving further west...

So, by 1800, calibers were getting smaller and once Lewis & Clark got back to St Louis and started telling of grizzly bears they went back up again...In that area of the country...

 

[Loyalist Dave]

Not exactly...Pre Revolutionary War rifles were as large or larger than during the fur trade era...Calibers started trending down as the deer were killed off, that's why Daniel Boone kept moving further west...

I thought Boone kept moving west due to human population rise, not the drop off of deer populations.... oh well not an issue...

I was taught that the earlier rifles were of large bores as that was what was being done on the Continent, especially in Germany...but as the utility of the smaller ball was found and coupled with the farther sight-plane (known in Germany for target rifles before the "American Longrifle" appeared) of the longer barrel, was better suited to the American primeval forests, as well as stretching limited lead availability.

But yes, as the Grizzly was known about, and the Corps of Discovery did not know what other animals might be out there, their rifles, and the later plains rifles increase in bore size.

LD

 

the following was compiled from rifles of colonial America

caliber and number of rifles
40-1 50-8 60-7 70-1
41-0 51-9 61-5 71-0
42-3 52-6 62-5 72-3
43-1 53-3 63-1
44-4 54-9 64-2
45-4 55-4 65-4 75-2
46-3 56-7 66-1
47-6 57-5 67-1
48-6 58-11 68-1 90-1
49-1 59-3 69-1

Seriously. Compiled by who? What time period (dates)? Location?

 

[32 ballard xl]

I have read in several places that in the east, during the Revolutionary War period that "the Virginians and North Carolinians from the far back country brought their rifles which did such marvelous execution at un-heard of ranges, firing a ball only as big as a garden pea." :hatsoff: The writer means a full grown pea, not those runty things put up in a can these days. A little less than a half inch in diameter. Another account related eye witnessing his grandfather killing an Indian across the river in the Fallen Timbers area. "The Indian was sure he was safe on the other side of the river, doing his bending over and flapping his buckskin at us. (Mooning). My grandfather took a rest (a tree limb), waited for the Indian to stand back up, and killed him with one of those pea- sized balls he used. We paced it off at 280 paces". :surrender:

 

[nchawkeye]

There are plenty of "romanticized" tales written about American Long Rifles and the men who used them...Describing a caliber with a ball the size of a pea certainly leaves a lot to the imagination...It's better to stick with the facts such as ball molds from the period, existing rifles, cherries and inventory lists from the estates of gunsmiths from the period...

 

[George]

Interesting references, sugarloaf, can you tell me where they're from, please?

Spence