How far?

[squirejohn]

I agree. I read the article and also his book and have a hard time believing that kind of accuracy at 200 yards with a Bess. At 200 yards my front sight on any of my smoothbores would subtend my entire back backstop never mind a paper target.

 

[Roy]

back to the original question. I was getting good grouping at about 70yds with a .62 smooth rifle (I still hate that term :haha: ). I believe I could have gotten good results past that, but I sold it before I could find out. :thumbsup:

 

[rabjr]

Yeah, well judging by your pie plate I'm sure you did! :blah:

 

[netoleon]

I've had a .62 Smoothy with a 46" barrel for a little over a year now. The only load I've used consistently is a "running ball" (.610, unpatched) with a OP card/fibre wad/OS card combination. I'm getting a group that's a few inches at 50 yards, fired from a rest. There's no perceptible difference from my sitting position groups at that distance. At 75 yards, the group opens considerably, to more like 7 to 9". I haven't shot it enough at 100 yd.s to have any good data.

I might get slightly better results with a different load, but I don't reckon I can get to a reliable load for hunting at 75. So I'll only use it for hunting ranges up to about 50 yards. There is some consensus as to that being about the max. effective hunting range. You can certainly target shoot up to a couple hundred yards, but you'll need a big target. My 18' x 24" sheets look mighty small even at 75 yards.

 

[Roy]

Still sore about that? :blah: :blah: :grin:

 

[faw3]

SHARPSHOOTER did you ever find a answer out of all this? Ive been trying to get some kind of test results useing a scope at 100 yards and cant get 2 test the same or even close. Fred :hatsoff:

 

[paulvallandigham]

Swuirejohn: You have obviously never learned how to shoot long range targets with open sights on a revolver. The front sight covers up lots of target at 200 yds. Yet pretty small groups are shot by men all the time. The " secret " is that you " draw " an Imaginary line down the middle of your front sight, and place that where you want the ball or slug to go. Center that imaginary line in your rear sight, and you are going to shoot a lot smaller groups than you ever thought possible. Start this with hand guns at 50 yds, and 100 yds, before working your way back. Using iron sights, I shot 4 .30 carbine 110 grain bullets into a group at 200 yds, that could be covered with the palm of your hand. I was shooting in a creedmore style rest position, but I did it.

You can too. Even with a Brown Bess, assuming that you have a good ball and patch combination and the right powder charge. For the most part, we have forgotten how to shoot iron sights accurately since scopes became so popular and cheap after the Korean War. Read Elmer Keith's Book, Sixguns, to learn how to shoot long range. Everything he tells you to do with a handgun can also be done with a long gun with iron sights.

 

[PreglerD]

I agree with paul. In Germany this method of aiming is called "Haltepunktverfahren", don't know the correct english word. I think shooting by aiming point. this method is always used when it is not poosible to zero a sight to the distance you want to shoot at, because you can't zero (nothing to click or not possible to click large enough). Tactical military shooting or even hunting is done sometimes in this way.

 

[Mike Brooks]

I've been sighting rifles according to Paul's method since I was 9 years old. That still won't produce a 200 yard target like the one illistrated , shot with a brown bess. :shake:

 

[paulvallandigham]

I am as sceptical as Mike Brooks is about that 200 yd target. I would like to see it done in person before commenting any further. The fact that the gun is not rifled is the biggest deterent to accuracy at extended ranges. Round balls, no matter how well cast, worted by weight, patched with the correct thickness of patching, and lovingly seating on the powder are going to obturate when the powder gases hit them in the backside, making them even poorer projectiles than if they remained round, like a steel ball bearing. And, because each ball is going to obturate differently, and face different air currents on the way down range, getting that kind of group, even off a rest, with a smoothbore is teasing my experience and years of observation to the max. Spin that round ball and all kinds of better things occur. Having said that, there used to be a slug gun club that shot smoothbore shotgun matches at 200 yds, and they produced some amazingly small groups with old stye, Foster slugs. And, I know from seeing time lapse photography that those slugs do not spin, regardless of the vanes cut on their sides.

 

[hawkeye1755]

I'm honestly surprised MB printed this BS. :shake:

Just looked through my old Muzzleloader Mag. and find in the Nov/Dec 1994 issue two comments.
Disputing the Shooting
Editor's Note:
In an effort to stay current we are publishing the following letters without reply.Copies of the letters were sent to Jim Byrd,but we have not received a reply from him.If a reply is forthcoming, we will print it as soon as possible.

I didn't find an answer from Mr.Byrd in the 1995 issues .SO maybe NO ANSWER.

For those of you,who have the Nov/Dec.'94,on page 6 are the two letters.I can only say, poor Mr.Byrd

The whole story should have started,'Once upon a time,long,long ago in a place far, far away....'
say Mr.Ted 'Pathfinder'Jayson in one of the two letters.
Mr. Stuart L. Chapman writes:
Another thing puzzles me as well. My old Speer handloading manuel says your mv should be about 1250fps,give or take some, with your 75gr. Fffg. Given these factors your roundball mv erodes to about 820fps at 200 yards and the drop at 200yards, with a 100-yard zero should be over 36 inches. Yet you say your drop is only 9 inches. Nine inches is what a .30-30 gets at 200 yards,but it has an mv of 2100 fps with a 150gr. Conical bullet.Matching that trajectory with your roundball , should require an mv of more than 2700 fps.I don’t think that is possible in what you are shooting.


:hatsoff:

 

[faw3]

I think the word is right it's "point shooting" useing a line from your index finger at the target, every team from SEAL's to GSG9 uses it, in the late 60's we tryed a shotgun in the R V N that shot a wasp body that was really good out to 100 yds, you could hit a man with it (see The Fighting Shootgun I think it has some of the ammo used and how it worked) But the Bess would have to have some kind of barrel to shoot that at 200 yds, Ive never shot a Bess but useing a barrel made for tight loads I still havent got tight grps at 100, 200 I wouldnt even try, 2 out of 5 no matter how I try to load it go off someplace Im not aiming for and this is at a rest with a scope. Just dont see how a ball with no spin can stay in line. :shake: Fred :hatsoff:

 

[Mike Brooks]

I've spent many years shooting RB's out of smoothbores. My findings can be simply put. The larger the ball the more inacurate the gun. I could get very good accuracy with 28 bores, I litlle less accurate with 20 bores, and the least ammount of accuaracy with 10 bores
That target is just pure bull. I'm a respectable off hand shooter, but I seriously doubt I could shoot a target like that with a 28 bore let alone a brown bess.....even if I were holding my tounge "just right". :haha:

 

Yep! It's a big windy. I used to know the fella that wrote this article and he was full a bluster. The Good Lord rest 'is soul. We all have our foibles but this is one a those stories akin to the pertrified birds singing petrified songs in the petrified forest of Bridger fame. :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: And there was no response to the letters in response to the article. I remember this well.

 

[hawkeye1755]

Did you guys know Baron Münchhausen?The Baron who rode on a cannonball?
I think Jim Byrd is his successor.
:hatsoff:

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

Ah, but what size group did the good Baron achieve with his cannonballs?

 

[Wes/Tex]

Ah, but what size group did the good Baron achieve with his cannonballs?

"Minute-of-Baron"?? :rotf:

 

[G. W. Gill]

Now I'm picturing Uma Thurman as Venus! I have totally lost my concentration. :haha:

 

[faw3]

Thanks Don ,I think we all hought so, shooting that good with a rifle isnt bad at all at 200 yds with a ball that big. :rotf: MIKE , that about smaller ball size for smooth only right? Fred :hatsoff:

 

[Mike Brooks]

MIKE , that about smaller ball size for smooth only right? Fred

I've had far more experience with smooth bores than rifles. I've shot everything from .29's to .62's and found them all to be accurate in rifled bores.
I've shot some 40's that were incredibly accurate.