• Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

If I wanted a buffalo rifle.....

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, speculation aside --- I got invited on a buffalo "hunt" some years ago. There were four hunters in the field armed with an assortment of firearms: Two T/C "Hawkens, both .50's, one Resley percussion .38 caliber, and mine. The rifle I had was a .50 caliber Leman percussion so that's what I used. My load was a .495" cast round ball with a ticking patch lubed with YCA #103 ahead of 90 grains of 3Fg Dupont black powder by volume with some pre-patched and pre-lubed .490" RB's in a loading block for reloads that were never needed.
The bull I took was running on an angle away, traveling from left to right across my front at about 35-40 yards after another buckskinner `way off to my left burned him across the withers with a TC mini-ball. My shot took him behind the right shoulder and he went down in the next two strides and stayed down. My hunting partner walked up and - after asking me - popped him behind the ear with the Resley while I was reloading because the bull was still breathing ragged and blowing blood out his nose. When we butchered him out, we found that my shot had gone through the chest cavity and lungs, clipped a major artery, hit a bone on the left and diverted to exit his left shoulder near the base of his neck muscle. On it's way out, it left an exit wound about the size of a quarter. We never did find any part of the round ball.
I haven't hunted buffalo since then, but if I did that same rifle would probably be just fine. If chose something different it would probably be another .50, or maybe a .54.
 
This and the previous post should probably be deleted due to posting about modern firearms however while it is up let me say I have nothing but disdain for the Sharps rifle, it is a poor attempt to keep a rifle designed for paper cartridges viable in the metallic cartridge market. The firing pin design alone should be reason enough to reject it. The rolling block, Springfield trap door, Hepburn and later High wall were all better designs.
 
So if I'm correct, most of the Pennsylvania flintlocks were 32's and 36's etc. That would be fine for eastern buffalo that were timber critters and you could literally sneak up on within 20 ft. and plug em. But out west they'd be a bit further off and they'd of been used to humans hunting them so they'd of kept their distance. Don't believe that the small caliber Pennsylvania style rifles would have been the best for that situation. Buffalo can suck up a lot of punishment. Buffalo and bears, i.e. big critters, are the reason the Hawken was born.
Sort of. Most guns made east of the Mississippi for sale there cr 1820+ were small caliber.
The first rifles made in America tended toward large caliber.
Guns were made to fit the game.
Typically hunting was for the table or to sell hides in 1750. And for all the romantic notions of man and family in frontier cabin with ham of deer in the pot, the typical settler wanted pork. He was busy enough with farming he didn’t hit but on occasion.
By MM times east of the Mississippi deer were rare. Bigger game extinct. When a man went out rifle in hand small game was what he was looking for.
If we say an around .50 is needed buff, elk, deer and black bear that’s what we see when that games a plenty. And that’s what we see in early American rifles
And as soon as the west opened to Americans that what we see going west.
A jagar or theWalking purchase rifle and a Hawken are about the same gun but for stock stylistic changes.
 
So.... from say 1825? until cartridge guns take over around 1865? 40 years
So percussion rifles were in use for only 40 years? The immense number of reproduction percussion guns being bought and used today harken back to that very small window of history? I never thought of it like that. That makes me not want one even more. All the nice Thomson Center cap guns so valued today represent that short time period. Comparing that to the 200 years of flintlock use is kind of sad.
 
So percussion rifles were in use for only 40 years? The immense number of reproduction percussion guns being bought and used today harken back to that very small window of history? I never thought of it like that. That makes me not want one even more. All the nice Thomson Center cap guns so valued today represent that short time period. Comparing that to the 200 years of flintlock use is kind of sad.
You are referring to 40 peak years. --- Many people continued using flint and percussion firearms for many years after cartridge guns became available.
 
So percussion rifles were in use for only 40 years? The immense number of reproduction percussion guns being bought and used today harken back to that very small window of history? I never thought of it like that. That makes me not want one even more. All the nice Thomson Center cap guns so valued today represent that short time period. Comparing that to the 200 years of flintlock use is kind of sad.
I think the reason why a lot of people use percussion is some are just hunters and want what they believe is the most fool proof system for the ML season, they have no interest in history.

In that same vein, some believe that flintlock ignition is slower and the flash causes flinching etc.
 
You are referring to 40 peak years. --- Many people continued using flint and percussion firearms for many years after cartridge guns became available.
No, I didn't know it was only 40 years until French Colonial put that info on this thread. You make me wonder if it was really only 40 years or not. Peak 40 years? Do you mean there were percussion guns in use before that 40 years and after that 40 years? I reckon its one of those things I ought to look up. Thanks.
 
So percussion rifles were in use for only 40 years? The immense number of reproduction percussion guns being bought and used today harken back to that very small window of history? I never thought of it like that. That makes me not want one even more. All the nice Thomson Center cap guns so valued today represent that short time period. Comparing that to the 200 years of flintlock use is kind of sad.
J C. Vincent made muzzleloading rifles in Ohio until his death in 1918.
 
Hmm, that rapid evolution means our 1860's war could easily have been very different.
 
Yes, but my interest was just narrowing it down to the percussion guns actual use by the majority of folks in America and comparing that to the flintlock's time span. Might we say that the flintlock lasted 5 times longer? Percussion guns were "generally" used 1830 to 1870? Were the lever actions available about the time the War of Northern Aggression ended? I'm really not sure. Trying to learn, because my history fantasies are the very lengthy years when longrifles were born until their historic demise.
 
When the war of northern aggression started my Great Grandfather joined the First Ohio Volunteer Cavalry and was issued a Sharps carbine (paper cartridge), sword and 1851 navy, Three years later the Sharps were withdrawn and they were issued Spencer carbines which used metallic cartridges.

Once the civil war was over the future of ML rifles was sealed by the advances of technology.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top