Bow and arrow verses Flint Guns

[Clark Badgett]

I know an Archer can fire many shots a minute, but as I've said, not all hit a target, not all cause a fatal wound. The same can be said for flintlocks, but the bullet carries SOO much more Ft/Lbs of energy.
Also, IIRC, an ARW soldier was trained to fire 3 to 4 rounds power minute. That's 2 shots per TV commercial.

Now put that guy on line with 60-80 others doing the same with buck & ball rounds (4 projectiles each) and you can get an understanding of the shear wall of meaness flying at an enemy.

 

[Eterry]

Now put that guy on line with 60-80 others doing the same with buck & ball rounds (4 projectiles each) and you can get an understanding of the shear wall of meaness flying at an enemy.

Remember the OP asked about Mano A Mano conflicts. I picked that musket as a popular caliber in that time frame.

 

[Ashton Daniels]

As someone who does primitive archery and muzzleloading, I've had a lot of thoughts on this, since I've often thought bows would be very practical on the frontier, however their evidence is scant for use by Anglo settlers, aside from Mott's fort with Francis Marion.

These are my thoughts and not necessarily documented.
For woods warfare, especially in groups, muskets are the better tool.
A musket or rifle is :

- more maneuverable (while ready to fire) through brush

- you are able to expose less of your body from cover while taking effective shots.

- If you are in a group of men, you can stage a defensive line and safely load behind trees, while any approaching attackers expose themselves to fire if they try to attack a lone reloading man.

- you can reload a musket much faster than on the range with period fighting techniques. Look up the tap loading method, for example.

- musket balls will pass through brush that would otherwise deflect an arrow.

- you can load buckshot or buck and ball in a smoothbore which increase your chances of hitting a target.

- the "shock and awe" of a musket volley would rattle the senses of any person on the recieving end, especially from an otherwise quiet world. There are period accounts attesting to this I have heard of.

- I remember reading period accounts from out west, from a US army doctor during the indian wars, if I recall correctly, he indicated that arrow wounds weren't quite as fatal as expected, usually the trooper died after recieving medical attention, due to bleeding out from the wound and or infection. MOST importantly, they did not incapacitate the man shot...

- A .58 to .75 round ball will knock someone dead before they hit the ground. A mortally wounded man with an arrow is potentially a torpedo intent on killing without regard for life, since he knows he's done for. A man shot with a musket will trouble you no more.

- a musket or rifle can shoot flatter than a bow at distance. In thick woods warfare I could imagine trouble successfully arc-ing arrows on target that a rifle could point and shoot at.

Again, these are only my thoughts and observations, based on my experiences with hunting with primitive archery, muzzleloaders and historical reenacting.

 

[Gordoncourtney]

how about a compromise? A lead ball threaded onto the tip of an Arrow.

Not so daft I was thinking about that , but even modern arrows cannot beat a good flint tip I guess great for birds and rabbits , I must try one.

Well I did a .430gr. ,530 minie bullet. I must say the hot glue held up well no sign of it coming loose. I did heat up the bullet cavity with hot melt glue then stuff an arrow into it I could not hit the target at 40 yards. But at 20 I did much better the arrow bouncing off, but what impact, the problem would be hitting the Turkey in the first place

Using only 28 lb limbs

Only idiots on the forum will laugh at you great thinking outside the box. Perhaps you can try with a lighter bullet, but 10 mins of fun. Ha ha. Well done

The river Thames at Hampton
From out little sailing club

 

[Gordoncourtney]

Yeah, the Muslims did that

You made me think if Putin nuked London he would kill like 20m Moslems. Something for him to think about . I must add, traveled including Nigeria and I all that time never met a nasty or unpleasant Moslem !!!

 

[SPQR70AD]

Sigh. Colonizers took the Tribes' lands by force in most cases. No one forced the colonizers to use tobacco, however. Similarly, no one asked African people to step on board for a little voyage to the Americas.. . .

give your land and house to an indian to make up for the injustice but you will never do it. Ali the fighter said..." I am real glad my grest grest grandpappy got on that boat". for a 1000 years and more arabs had white slaves. millions of them. oops blacks were the only slaves

 

[Clark Badgett]

As someone who does primitive archery and muzzleloading, I've had a lot of thoughts on this, since I've often thought bows would be very practical on the frontier, however their evidence is scant for use by Anglo settlers, aside from Mott's fort with Francis Marion.

These are my thoughts and not necessarily documented.
For woods warfare, especially in groups, muskets are the better tool.
A musket or rifle is :

- more maneuverable (while ready to fire) through brush

- you are able to expose less of your body from cover while taking effective shots.

- If you are in a group of men, you can stage a defensive line and safely load behind trees, while any approaching attackers expose themselves to fire if they try to attack a lone reloading man.

- you can reload a musket much faster than on the range with period fighting techniques. Look up the tap loading method, for example.

- musket balls will pass through brush that would otherwise deflect an arrow.

- you can load buckshot or buck and ball in a smoothbore which increase your chances of hitting a target.

- the "shock and awe" of a musket volley would rattle the senses of any person on the recieving end, especially from an otherwise quiet world. There are period accounts attesting to this I have heard of.

- I remember reading period accounts from out west, from a US army doctor during the indian wars, if I recall correctly, he indicated that arrow wounds weren't quite as fatal as expected, usually the trooper died after recieving medical attention, due to bleeding out from the wound and or infection. MOST importantly, they did not incapacitate the man shot...

- A .58 to .75 round ball will knock someone dead before they hit the ground. A mortally wounded man with an arrow is potentially a torpedo intent on killing without regard for life, since he knows he's done for. A man shot with a musket will trouble you no more.

- a musket or rifle can shoot flatter than a bow at distance. In thick woods warfare I could imagine trouble successfully arc-ing arrows on target that a rifle could point and shoot at.

Again, these are only my thoughts and observations, based on my experiences with hunting with primitive archery, muzzleloaders and historical reenacting.

And even with modern compound bows, those that shoot them constantly will rarely set the sights beyond 30yds. And that is with sights. I spent a good many years reading of traditional archery hunting stories and there was usually 1 commonality. Most shots on game were preferred to be kept under 20yds. There isn’t a smoothbore made that won’t keep a ball on target at 50yds, and more is easily learnable. I would really like to see anyone post video proof that they can launch 3-4 accurate hits per minute from a primative hunting bow with primative arrows with primative points at 50yds.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

I agree with everything you stated except the "happy to become dependent" part. that was forced via the eradication of traditional food sources, enforced reservation internment, and the reality that the whites had better medicine to treat the diseases that were new to the people.
addressing the arrow verses flint gun, range played a big role. that and the above stated lethality of the firearm.
when i was a kid, i was given the chore of keeping rabbits out of my mothers garden. started that job with my self bow and obsidian tipped arrows. cedar shafted. i sometimes would get two rabbits a day and probably shot at six. some were struck and lost in the chapperal.
got a Winchester 67 when i was 12. best day was 9 cotton tails and 3 jack rabbits. i used 12 cartridges.
guns kill better.

Sorry, but that's a little too "plains centric". The Eastern Woodland nations until disease decimated the adults, had no problems with corn production. The Three Sisters food strategy was never eradicated. That idea came much later more than a two centuries after first contact in the 19th century, to remove the bison. The ONLY disease that was treated was the small pox. While it had a large impact, it has been over emphasized by historians. Influenza was a much bigger culprit, and there was no actual treatment for it, nor for whooping cough, typhoid, cholera, measles, mumps, and tuberculosis.

The Iroquois and Huron, Delaware, Shawnee, Cherokee, and etc. were quite happy to trade for wool blankets, metal hatchets and metal knives, and guns. Further, the "reservation" system is another 19th century policy.

As for arrows vs. flinters, folks always seem to neglect that first, most of Eastern Woodland nations had guns, and when properly organized, could achieve victories. Tecumseh came quite close to forcing whites back over the Appalachian mountains. Second, nations further west had problems when they didn't have flintlocks or caplocks because they fought on horseback AND the horses were not used to the noise of the white's guns. When their riders were not from peoples that had a good supply of firearms, there was no way to condition the horses to the noise, and no way for the warriors to control their mounts when exposed to the noise. And that's just from infantry. Touch off a couple cannon and a battle on the plains vs a bow-armed nation and that encounter was over.

You may find Guns, Germs, and Steel by Jared Diamond quite informative on what happened, and why for example the Europeans came from such a dirty environment and thus had immunity to a lot of stuff.

LD

 

[gustrolland]

Well thats the thing about a bow it can always be cobbled to work.
Caps or flints nor required nor weather dependent.
got the job done for thousands of Years.

I shot flinter all year long, but shot a hand made bow and arrows with napped points that I like to make when I have time.

 

[sussexmuzllodr]

Not so daft I was thinking about that , but even modern arrows cannot beat a good flint tip I guess great for birds and rabbits , I must try one.

Well I did a .430gr. ,530 minie bullet. I must say the hot glue held up well no sign of it coming loose. I did heat up the bullet cavity with hot melt glue then stuff an arrow into it I could not hit the target at 40 yards. But at 20 I did much better the arrow bouncing off, but what impact, the problem would be hitting the Turkey in the first place

Using only 28 lb limbs

Only idiots on the forum will laugh at you great thinking outside the box. Perhaps you can try with a lighter bullet, but 10 mins of fun. Ha ha. Well done

The river Thames at Hampton
From out little sailing club

Love it Gordon! Some out of the Box fun!

 

[hlhanna]

Wow. That went far afield. Injuns (no i am not going to use any of the politically correct bs terms) hated each other and killed each other (ina brutal manner) long before the evyil white man came here. There was bad things on both sides. Both. And, you can’t judge things with a modern lens or sensibilities…

One of my pet peeves is the condescending attitude of many of those pc creeps towards Indians.
They look upon them as if they were, and are, children.
My great-grandmother was Choctaw, and was proud to be the great-great niece of Pushmataha, chief of the Choctaw, called the Indian general.
He allied with Andrew Jackson against the old enemy, the Creek (Muskogee) in the Red Stick War, and is buried in Congressional Cemetery in DC.
My point is that the political and cultural differences among the various nations were as deep seated, and historical, as those between the nations of Europe. The whites were only a new, and potentially valuable, ally against the generational blood enemies, such as with the historical antipathy between the English and French.
To paint those people as if they were the cultural progenitors of the flower children and hippies of the 60's is unbelievably insulting.

 

[Clark Badgett]

One of my pet peeves is the condescending attitude of many of those pc creeps towards Indians.
They look upon them as if they were, and are, children.
My great-grandmother was Choctaw, and was proud to be the great-great niece of Pushmataha, chief of the Choctaw, called the Indian general.
He allied with Andrew Jackson against the old enemy, the Creek (Muskogee) in the Red Stick War, and is buried in Congressional Cemetery in DC.
My point is that the political and cultural differences among the various nations were as deep seated, and historical, as those between the nations of Europe. The whites were only a new, and potentially valuable, ally against the generational blood enemies, such as with the historical antipathy between the English and French.
To paint those people as if they were the cultural progenitors of the flower children and hippies of the 60's is unbelievably insulting.

The Choctaw allied with Jackson and still got moved to Oklahoma, right next to the Muskogee.

 

[sturmkatze]

One of my pet peeves is the condescending attitude of many of those pc creeps towards Indians.
They look upon them as if they were, and are, children.
My great-grandmother was Choctaw, and was proud to be the great-great niece of Pushmataha, chief of the Choctaw, called the Indian general.
He allied with Andrew Jackson against the old enemy, the Creek (Muskogee) in the Red Stick War, and is buried in Congressional Cemetery in DC.
My point is that the political and cultural differences among the various nations were as deep seated, and historical, as those between the nations of Europe. The whites were only a new, and potentially valuable, ally against the generational blood enemies, such as with the historical antipathy between the English and French.
To paint those people as if they were the cultural progenitors of the flower children and hippies of the 60's is unbelievably insulting.

Yet they do it. And they paint them with one brush as though they were not different from one another.

 

[reddogge]

Carbon arrows in a self bow is equivalent to dry firing the bow.

Wrong. They will shoot just fine. The trad police on the traditional archery forums will go nuts though.

 

[waksupi]

Wrong. They will shoot just fine. The trad police on the traditional archery forums will go nuts though.

What is the total weight of shaft, fletching, and point?

 

[snakebit]

Wrong. They will shoot just fine. The trad police on the traditional archery forums will go nuts though.

Red is absolutely correct. If they are weighted correctly, and especially if they are fletched with a 5" helical feather, they will shoot just fine.

 

[reddogge]

What is the total weight of shaft, fletching, and point?

If you have a 450 grain carbon arrow including point it will shoot the same as a 450 grain wooden arrow including point or the same as a 450 grain aluminum arrow including point provided they all spine the same. If shot out of a 45# bow they all will be 10 grains per pound which is perfectly safe to shoot out of any bow.