Baker Rifle

[dgold]

I have wanted one for years, the militaty heritage is a smooth bore made in India. As one of the other posters said you can get a rifled barrrel. What got my interest was the Sharpe Movies made in England starring Sean Bean. Now you can order from the Rifle shop and get all of the parts to make one, but its an advance project I would have some one like Mike brooks put it all together.

John

The heck with the movies, read the books, they are great. There is also a truck load of them so if you get hooked you will have a fix for a long time :v

 

[Grizzled Roberts]

The movies are great but they can't hold a candle
to the books! :thumbsup:

 

[mmahlock]

If you think the Sharpe books are good try the ones by Harry Smith, John Kincaid, George Simmons, Joanthan Leach, William Surtees, Edward Costello, and Benjamin Harris. Cope's history of the 95th is good but Verner's history provides more personal information. :hatsoff:

 

[awp101]

The heck with the movies, read the books, they are great. There is also a truck load of them so if you get hooked you will have a fix for a long time :v
[/quote]
Yep, picked up Sharpe's Rifles one day before heading to 24 hour staff duty so I could have something to read and I wanted to expand my military history knowledge into an area I wasn't real familiar with at the time.

That's been 10 years ago now and I'm still reading them. :haha:

Someday I will have a Baker as well... :hmm:

 

[Dphar]

Earlier Baker rifles were made to shoot musket ammo but the recoil was too stiff so they went to the smaller ball. They used two balls with the Baker rifle. For long range shooting they used the .595 ball sewn in a cloth patch lubed with tallow. This ball was called the forced ball and was initially seated in the bore with a small hardwood mallet. Baker later ordered the mallets removed but some British Riflemen did not give them up. The Mexican Riflemen were still using loading mallets into the 1830s.
The second ball was the .615 Carbine ball. This ball was wrapped in a paper cartridge just like
a musket cartridge. This cartridge was used for close up and quick action.
The .615 cartridge was carried in a cartridge box, just like the muskets. The .595 Forced Ball were carried in a belt pouch. When you consider the Baker with it's wide range of firepower and then add the very nasty bayonet, it was quite a package. Did a number on the French. :bow:

The musket bore and carbine bore Bakers were made concurrently as were the pattern rifles for the 2 bore sizes.
Less than 10% of the first years (1800) delivery was musket bore. The majority 741, were carbine bore (.62).

Dan

 

[mmahlock]

To add to what you said, recoil wasn't the problem it seems from my reading that loading was. The rifled barrels made to use the musket bore (11/# if I remember right) were too tight for the balls and hard to load. Barrels made for 20/# were easier to load. [This is another example of our modern methods and standards deviating from the period methods and standards]

As for the recoil, I use a standard 110gr. load (the standard military load from 1810) for shooting beyond 75 yds and the only problem with it is that it sucks up a lot of powder real quick. :hatsoff:

 

[faw3]

Sorry have been in hospital till today, I shouldof wrote hey had a smaller ball to throw in to use like a smooth bore load if they needed fire power not aimed fire. ( I got DeWitt Bailey's book and maybe 15 more on this rifle alone - lots of hospital time and intrest in old sharpshooting.. ) Sir Michael, of all the books by the guys shooting them I've found a good hand full that say they would dump out some of the "factory charge" because it threw the aim off. Fred :hatsoff:

 

[mmahlock]

That's interesting. I've never seen that in any of the books I have. Which one's do you have?

 

[Cpl.Parker]

This book is a good read.

Wellington's Rifles: Six Years to Waterloo with England's Legendary Sharpshooters
by Mark Urban

 

[mmahlock]

Yes it is a good book. :thumbsup: I posted a number of authors earlier that were used to write it. If you want a good view of the Regimental history, read Cope's history and then Verner's. The two combined give a very good window on its service during the war in Spain. :hatsoff:

 

[faw3]

Can't remember books name off the top of my head ( I really feel dead last 3 days) I'll get it to you in a day or two, lots of "4 1/2 drams was to much for good shooting when 2 would do fine" ect it pops up i one book a hand full of times. Fred :hatsoff:

 

[faw3]

Sir Michael understabd I'm gettng this out of note books here I've written in the last 30 years or so....I get up out of bed here or in hospital Sooo I hope this helps,it's from a good book from Great Britain,"Miltary Illustrated" Rifleman Elite Soldiers of the Wars Against Napoleon" by Elliot and Wright ( no BS :rotf: ) I knew it was a Brit book when I ead the last few pages of round up and went on and on about how good Berdan's men had been a really :rotf: :rotf: 5 star they never held a 15,000 man Army with 3 guys Twice! But the rebs did. :shake: Anyway you'll find your dumping out powder said to be in 7 or so places and a ton of stuff I've missed in other books. ( Like Gary Yee I like the history of it each little part, just cant chase it anymore. These guys are the first true snipers not line troops unless they just had to be used for that, and the set up of how they ued 2 + 2 one to cover his bud shooting was used by some Confedrate snipers later. Try pages 74 thru 80 to find out about busting issued carts and dumping and why and how they made up the amount of powder needed. Hope this helps, all I can do without the book here or any of my others, sorry. :redface: :thumbsup: Fred (seems to have been some crazy and damn brave men, some shot bulls and had never even held a gun the first time. :shocked2: DUCK.....

 

[mmahlock]

Thanks. I've got a copy of the book. I just don't remember the reference. I do know that they routinely made their own cartridges since they ordered components. I also know that the Army changed the amount of powder in the issue cartridges several times. I just don't remember why. One of the problems with being on the road and away from references when questions like this come up.

Again, thanks. :hatsoff:

 

[faw3]

Good deal thought you would have it. 4 and a 1/2 Ds is a lot of fine rifle powder to be useing for pin point shooting .....I use about that in my 451 Vol for 550 grainers headed out to 1000 yards or more and BIG thing to shoot at :rotf: Fred :hatsoff:

 

[mmahlock]

Just got home and took a second look at Elliot-Wright's book, Rifleman and although he has a boat load of books listed in his Bibliography the 20 odd books of that list I have don't bear out what he says about firing the Baker rifle. Baily in his book British Military Flintlock Rifles 1740-1840 states in regard to powder loads, E. Baker recommended 4-1/4 to 4-1/2 drams (118 gr) but the Board of Ordnance went with 3-1/2 drams (96 gr) but after the war increased the load to 4 drams (110 gr). As for accuracy, the regulations of the Rifle Corps (95th regt) specified four ranges for target practice: 90, 140, 200, and 300 yds with ratings for Qualification:

3rd Class - Marksman
4 out of 6 in the round target at, at least 200 yds or
3 out of 6 in the man target at, at least 200 yds
2 out of 3 days for two months

2nd Class ”“ Ordinary Rifleman
2 out of 6 in the round target at, at least 140 yds or
2 out of 6 in the man target at, at least 140 yds
2 days out of three

1st Class ”“ Awkward Class
Anyone not able to make 2nd Class

This places considerable doubt in my mind about the accuracy of Elliot-Wright's statement that, "few riflemen proved able to strike reliably a target much beyond 150 yds. His statements about qualifying at distances are about 50 yds short across the board. He also states that "some Baker rifles came with crude flip-up rear sights, most did not, given that it was commonly held that sighting the rifle was superfluous when acting as skirmishers." According to BOA records, the leaf sight was put on all Baker rifles (not on Cavalry Carbines) until 1823 when that pattern was introduced. BTW the fixed sight on the 1823 pattern was sighted for 200 yds.

All this not to say the Elliot-Wright's book is of no value for it has a lot of good information in it but, like all research one has to review more than one source to confirm the validity of a specific subject.

I only wish that he had footnoted his book so that the specific sources of each piece of information could be cross checked and placed in their original context. :hatsoff: :surrender:

 

[faw3]

I just got out of that place again (hospital) and don't know that any of what youv wrote is wrong about his book , BUT I have read other books buy guys in the 95th that said they made his own powder cup to load with because of the bad govt loads. And it seems to me they made 4 Bakers over however many years and some didnt have the 2 sights and they added those ..whenever? Still I'd like to try a shot with one! :grin: Fred :hatsoff:

 

[robinghewitt]

Squire Robin was posting about shooting an original not long ago but he's been quiet lately. :hmm:

I have, haven't I

I got told off for directing people away from here to my Baker blog. Felt a bit unwelcome

Also been busy, haven't shot that Baker so far this year, will be shooting it in August.

Did have one minor success tho' :grin:

 

[paulvallandigham]

Is that a 3-pounder??

 

[robinghewitt]

Is that a 3-pounder??

Desperately trying to stay on topic so I don't get deleted/moved again...

The Baker shoots a 20 gauge, 1/120th of the gunnade :grin:

 

[davy]

Is that the same cannon ? Got it cleaned out finally? Give us an update! :thumbsup:

Davy