How did American forces reload in battle?

[bronko220002]

Tip horn in muzzle, 1 Mississippi , 2 Mississippi, ............

I agree with this. Also when you have somebody shooting at you you just drop a ball down the barrel and fire back. No time to be messing with patches! I'm sure at one time or another someone in a hurry to load may have shot someone with their ramrod not haveing time to remove it. It may not have been pretty but just as effective.

 

[Flint Striker]

Plenty of rifles were 50-58 caliber leading up to the Revolution. I would shoot a nice sized black bear with any of those calibers and feel very secure. For the guns that were smaller than this his argument makes sense, but many were not that small at that time.

I’ve thought about this too - a Bess is basically a 11 or 12 gauge. Why did they think they needed to shoot balls in excess of 1 ounce to stop a man at 30 paces?!

I think it’s partly because infantry also had to stop charging horses with musket fire (if they could.) That’s about like stopping a charging moose, and we’d probably still want a 12 gauge with a slug for that.

 

[Daveboone]

Just a 2nd thought here on paper wrapped preloads....
We forget how rare paper was in the 1700s and early 1800s....many households never had a book, or anyone who could read. Making paper was as much an art as making black powder. Of course, the military could get it, and thier cartridges were factory prepared. I imagine in towns, there would be the occasional newspaper, etc.

 

[Artificer]

Not to be critical of anyone, but while paper was not as readily available in the 18th century and cost more than today, it was not "rare." Some types of 18th century paper was too cheaply made to be used for cartridges, but not all it by far.

Sources of paper used to make cartridges came from printers, book sellers (who also sold paper for letter writing), account books/ledgers, stores of paper in churches and court houses used to make legal documents, books, hymnals and even family Bibles. Though while many frontier folk may not have been able to read, many apprentices in different trades in towns and cities were taught basic reading, writing and arithmetic to keep their books, order from England, etc.

Gus

 

[Artificer]

Hi Tenngun,
I think muskets were of such large bore because it was a carry over from when their main purpose was to kill armored cavalry. There is so much gas escape when loading loose ball that the large powder charge and large ball were needed for penetration and effective range. In the 16th century, a smaller military gun was developed called the caliver. Caliver was a derivation of "caliber" and they were called that because they were the first group of firearms for which bore diameter was standardized. They were about 20 gauge. They were not popular with military leaders because they lacked firepower to accomplish the main tactical objective of muskets, killing armored cavalry. They disappeared during the early 17th century and were replaced by larger bored muskets. By the 19th century, improved powder and eventually rifled muskets made large bores obsolete but the tradition hung on right up through our Civil War. Also, during the 18th century, the musket with bayonet replaced pikemen. A larger, big bored barrel was likely a sturdier base for the bayonet.

dave

Additionally to what Dave wrote, as late as the mid 19th century when they made up the specifications for what became the M1855 Rifle Musket, it was expected to "STOP" the charge of a (cavalry) horse at 300 yards and be able to hit a man sized target at 600 yards.

Gus

 

[tenngun]

If you reread the comment, I Think he is saying that hunting calibers, not musket calibers where to small, average hunting rifle would have been around 40 cal or smaller

Not so much at the revolution. Pre revolutionary early rifles tended to be large. As the time of the revolution approached calibers tended to shrink. But .45-.50 would have been common. During the federal period rifles would get closer to the .40 and less of the ‘golden age’. Of corse frontier guns tended to be larger.
There was always some disparity. Upstate New York in 1774 wasn’t the same as Vermont, Maine or westren Virginia

 

[tenngun]

I’ve thought about this too - a Bess is basically a 11 or 12 gauge. Why did they think they needed to shoot balls in excess of 1 ounce to stop a man at 30 paces?!

I think it’s partly because infantry also had to stop charging horses with musket fire (if they could.) That’s about like stopping a charging moose, and we’d probably still want a 12 gauge with a slug for that.

That’s possible but we see where ever military rifles were adopted they tended to be smaller caliber then military muskets.
Light forces and artillery tended to be smaller also

 

[Tumbledown]

I am sorry but I dont see how this is remotely true. A .58 or .62 caliber ball are well below “musket size” and either can kill a bull moose or bison with ease. A guy on our forum got a pass through on a bull bison with a .62. How is this underpowered for humans? Your insides would be jelly if you took a ball like that through the abdomen.

I am not doubting the lethality of a properly placed shot at proper range.

If a smaller caliber was effective for military use, it would have been adopted for the economies it would offer in ammunition.

 

[Magungo1066]

I am not doubting the lethality of a properly placed shot at proper range.

If a smaller caliber was effective for military use, it would have been adopted for the economies it would offer in ammunition.

I doubt that the difference between them using a .58-.62 as opposed to say a .70+ had anything to do with its increased lethality. Again, if it can pass through a bison I don’t understand how it would be required to go larger to be “effective” on humans. I think the prevailing thought on here is that it had more to do with A. shot being the main use in a lot of these guns when not used for militia B. using standardized paper cartridges. and C. allowing for an undersized ball to slide easily down to facilitate faster reloading. I am not off on conjecture here. I am listing off some of the things I have heard mentioned frequently by many experienced members here.
I am no expert for sure and dont meant to come across as trying to act like one, but a lot of this just seems like it makes sense to me.

 

[Rob M.]

Its not difficult or slow to load a muzzleloader while standing up or even walking . I'm no expert but have done it for fun , to learn and for quick follow up shots as well . When in a big hurry ....you shoot your piece and when you take it down off your shoulder you put it at full cock , you grab your horn by the he tip with left hand , open it and fill your hand with powder , tip dangling ....prime pan , close pan , with left over powder cup over muzzle and left powder go down , bump if you have time , ball out of pouch or such , put in muzzle , if your bring chased just bump the butt on the ground , I never did that , too dangerous , or ramrod out and it goes down quite easy , rod out and stays in hand , point and fire .....repeat ...

Lots of variants but that the gist of it . Dangerous ? Sure ...Then dont try it but its interesting to learn and darn fast . Even when using my measure , but no patch , semi fast loading , I can get off three shots before the guy beside me gets of his second ....its fun . Obviously its a close range thing as well .... 20 ga. smoothbore , trade gun

 

[Daveboone]

It is my observation that larger bore rifles (my experience .50, .54, .58) are much quicker/easier to load and are much less affected by fouling, or breaking thinner ram rods than smaller bore (my experience .36, .40 and .45. Certainly, residual energy from the larger bores at 100 yards is greater with less charge than a small bore. If I wind up and pitch a .58 ball at you and smack you in the head with it, I am getting more response from you than doing the same with a .45.
.58 vs .62 vs .70 odd? Still on going......30-06 vs 8x57 vs .303 vs 7.62 on and on (sorry about the unmentionable comparison).
.

 

[Jedidiah]

I would think that it often turned into "eyeballing it" if you were in the heat of the fighting. If you weren't directly in the hot stuff, say 300-400 yards away, you would have enough time to measure a charge and ram it home unless it was calvary bearing down on you. This is assuming you don't mess up or delay. An average, reasonably in shape male can cover 300-400 yards in about 80-120 seconds. Add quite a bit of additional time considering their crappy shoes and the encumbrance from gear/gun. If you had a smoothbore, militia rules often stated that you had to use a gun around "standard" musket size. This is so you could use pre loaded paper cartridges that were provided by the government of that colony, and takes away the need to consider measuring your charge out. I am no expert but I hope this helps!

The 'paper" cartridge allowed a trained soldier(Civil War era) to load and fire approx three shots in a min or so, provided he was not hit during the process! I read several account where they have found four and five loads in a rifle where the soldier had obviously loaded but never capped the rifle, fired and loaded again!! Imagine when he finally did cap it?!! OMG!

 

[Tumbledown]

I doubt that the difference between them using a .58-.62 as opposed to say a .70+ had anything to do with its increased lethality. Again, if it can pass through a bison I don’t understand how it would be required to go larger to be “effective” on humans. I think the prevailing thought on here is that it had more to do with A. shot being the main use in a lot of these guns when not used for militia B. using standardized paper cartridges. and C. allowing for an undersized ball to slide easily down to facilitate faster reloading. I am not off on conjecture here. I am listing off some of the things I have heard mentioned frequently by many experienced members here.
I am no expert for sure and dont meant to come across as trying to act like one, but a lot of this just seems like it makes sense to me.

Pass thru a bison at what yardage? 30? 50? There is a huge difference in energy between 50 and 100 yards. Examples below.

• .58 cal 719 fpe/50 yds 508 fpe/100 yds
• .62 cal 1366 fpe 915 fpe
• .72 cal 2641 fpe 1685 fpe

A military caliber musket offered 3 times the power of a hunting caliber at engagement distances. If the smaller calibers were deemed effective for the style of warfare then common, they would have been used.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

You don't have time to use a powder measure but you are going to put a ball in the palm of your hand and then cover it with powder then hold the ball and dump the powder in the barrel. First problem I see is how are you going to hold the musket? How much powder is actually going to make it into the barrel?

So I've done this.... We wanted to see if one gets a decent amount of powder or not... and can it be done..., quite easily.....

The musket butt is on the ground, held upright by the right hand,
The shooter grabs a ball from his left waistcoat pocket with the left hand, and secures it in his left palm with his left thumb,
The upper portion of the musket held by the right hand is then moved to the left elbow,
The right hand then grabs the powder horn, moves the tip to the shooters mouth, and the teeth are used to pull the stopper,
The right hand uses the horn, and pours the powder into the palm of the left hand covering the ball ; the musket all the while is still cradled in the left elbow...
The right hand when done pouring moves the horn back to the shooter's mouth where the stopper is replaced, and the horn is released, but it's still on a cord around the body of the shooter so it does not fall...
The right hand then grasps the musket where it did before, allowing the left hand with powder and ball to be free to move to the muzzle, and the powder is poured in while the fingers keep the ball from falling...
The ball is then dropped in, and then the shooter removes the ramrod and rams the ball home to be sure it has reached the powder in the breech...
The musket is then brought up and primed...,
Ready to Fire

It sounds complicated, when written, but it's pretty quick.
We were quite surprise when we did this and checked the amount of powder, and it was enough to give the shooter a good load. Might not go much past 100 yards..., but that's whey they volley fired....

LD

 

[Campbell]

The 'paper" cartridge allowed a trained soldier(Civil War era) to load and fire approx three shots in a min or so, provided he was not hit during the process! I read several account where they have found four and five loads in a rifle where the soldier had obviously loaded but never capped the rifle, fired and loaded again!! Imagine when he finally did cap it?!! OMG!

Yeah, In battle with the adrenaline, noise, smoke, confusion and blood it would be easy to overlook a plugged nipple vent or a dry-ball load. Continuing to load, cap and “fire” never aware that no lead is going down-range. It’s really easy to see how weapons would wind up with multiple loads.

 

[Magungo1066]

Pass thru a bison at what yardage? 30? 50? There is a huge difference in energy between 50 and 100 yards. Examples below.

• .58 cal 719 fpe/50 yds 508 fpe/100 yds
• .62 cal 1366 fpe 915 fpe
• .72 cal 2641 fpe 1685 fpe

A military caliber musket offered 3 times the power of a hunting caliber at engagement distances. If the smaller calibers were deemed effective for the style of warfare then common, they would have been used.

“engagement distances” with a smoothbore musket were not much farther than the hunting shots. To 100 yards no one could tell the difference between a .62 ball and a .75 ball on a human. at 150+ an errant shot from either will crumple a man. I really don’t understand your point and I am tired of trying to discuss it with you. Thanks for your thoughts. I dont feel the need to change your opinion and you are not going to change mine so lets maybe leave it at that.

 

[Magungo1066]

Yeah, In battle with the adrenaline, noise, smoke, confusion and blood it would be easy to overlook a plugged nipple vent or a dry-ball load. Continuing to load, cap and “fire” never aware that no lead is going down-range. It’s really easy to see how weapons would wind up with multiple loads.

I always think about this! All it takes is a squirrel barking in the back ground to make me dry ball lol. Cant imagine how I would prevent doing it in the heat of battle…lots of drill hopefully. Otherwise I would be saying bad words and looking for a gun my buddy just lost the need for

 

[springfield art]

Tip horn in muzzle, 1 Mississippi , 2 Mississippi, ............

A live spark and you've got a horn grenade going!

 

[Magungo1066]

A live spark and you've got a horn grenade going!

In addition to worrying about getting shot you had to worry about your own kit taking your hands off! Arent we lucky we have brass powder dispensers haha

 

[ronaldrothb49]

So I've done this.... We wanted to see if one gets a decent amount of powder or not... and can it be done..., quite easily.....

The musket butt is on the ground, held upright by the right hand,
The shooter grabs a ball from his left waistcoat pocket with the left hand, and secures it in his left palm with his left thumb,
The upper portion of the musket held by the right hand is then moved to the left elbow,
The right hand then grabs the powder horn, moves the tip to the shooters mouth, and the teeth are used to pull the stopper,
The right hand uses the horn, and pours the powder into the palm of the left hand covering the ball ; the musket all the while is still cradled in the left elbow...
The right hand when done pouring moves the horn back to the shooter's mouth where the stopper is replaced, and the horn is released, but it's still on a cord around the body of the shooter so it does not fall...
The right hand then grasps the musket where it did before, allowing the left hand with powder and ball to be free to move to the muzzle, and the powder is poured in while the fingers keep the ball from falling...
The ball is then dropped in, and then the shooter removes the ramrod and rams the ball home to be sure it has reached the powder in the breech...
The musket is then brought up and primed...,
Ready to Fire

It sounds complicated, when written, but it's pretty quick.
We were quite surprise when we did this and checked the amount of powder, and it was enough to give the shooter a good load. Might not go much past 100 yards..., but that's whey they volley fired....

LD

Could work but sounds like a lot of steps to go through with balls going by your head. Saw another post this morning where a guy wrapped the ball in a patch and tied the end of the patch around the ball for a quick load. That with something that holds a premeasured load of powder would make more sense. If you look at illustrations of even the earliest matchlocks they were carrying premeasured powder.