Kibler Brown Bess?

[Loyalist Dave]

That question as to which Model to offer would be a contentious point; re-enactors doing various periods would want their favorite Model!! Maybe choosing a variant that covers the most "mileage" would have to suffice.

Well a Long Land Pattern for North America. Which variation? I'd think prior to 1756, but use a metal rammer, and perhaps with the option to order a brass nose cape instead of the reinforcing brass band.

LD

 

[Eras Gone]

Yes! I'd buy a 1st Model Long Land Musket! I would prefer the 1756 version with the metal rammer, but would gladly take the 1742 with the wooden rammer. Rev War reenacting has been waiting for a good source of Long Lands forever. Right now, the Rifle Shoppe bag-o-castings is the only option.

 

[longcruise]

It would be really cool if Jim offered a Brown Bess kit.
However if he does I hope it’s after he makes the Hawken kit he has mentioned!

Almost two years until the 250th. He seems to be improving his overall way of doing things. I'd not be surprised if he did both during that time period.

Right now 34 guys say that will buy one BUT the reality is that maybe only 1/2 those 34 will actually follow through....maybe even less.

Up to 45 now! I'm surprised there's that much interest. I had no idea that there are that many who are into the AWI persona and had no idea there were so many different variants of the Bess. Trying not to go down that rabbit hole.

Pistol would be better choice in my opinion.

Maybe as a follow up to the Bess?

Putting the Bess out there for the anniversary would probably arouse lots of interest within the ml community and the general firearms community. Some people who might never pull the trigger would buy one for the wall. There would be lots of awareness of Kibler's business and that equates to selling more of his other products. Heck, I'd bet that if he broke even on the Bess he'd add an increment of sales that would be greater than he would have without it.

 

[Tumbledown]

Soldiers could just ditch their Charleville for a Bess ?

When you have to report for inspection what do you tell the armor where your charleville is that congress purchased on credit ? Laying on the battlefield next to a dead redcoat?

I doubt it happened that way, there would have been consequences to the soldier and they very much preferred charlevilles over the Bess simply because they were much lighter.


Either way my vote is for a long land brown Bess.

It did happen. Weight was not an issue. The Bess is a sturdier gun with better range. The Americans knew it but had to use what was available. The French guns wouldn't have been abandoned on the field but relegated to reserves.

 

[Ohio Rusty]

Then it wouldn't be a Brown Bess. It would be a fowler.

I have little interest in a 75 or 80 caliber smoothbore. Too much lead to shoot down range and they have a terrible rainbow trajectory to be able to hit anything, if you ever hit anything. With the cost of powder these days, the 20 gauge would be more cost efficient both powder and lead wise. A 20 gauge Bess would be the best of both worlds in my opinion.
Ohio Rusty

 

[Tumbledown]

For the 250th anniversary of the Revolution, the Bess could simply be made exactly like the ones being made on July 4, 1776.

And be totally out of place for Lexington or Bunker Hill.

 

[Clark Badgett]

It did happen. Weight was not an issue. The Bess is a sturdier gun with better range. The Americans knew it but had to use what was available. The French guns wouldn't have been abandoned on the field but relegated to reserves.

Oh no the Bess was not sturdier. You are the only source for this statement. Most of Europe went to the French system for combat guns, because it was sturdier and much easier maintained.

 

[Clark Badgett]

And be totally out of place for Lexington or Bunker Hill.

No they wouldn’t. Do some homework for once.

 

[FlinterNick]

It did happen. Weight was not an issue. The Bess is a sturdier gun with better range. The Americans knew it but had to use what was available. The French guns wouldn't have been abandoned on the field but relegated to reserves.

Right …… and that’s why we chose to copy the 1766 charleville to the 1795. @Clark Badgett

 

[Tumbledown]

Those saying a 1756 because of the metal rammer, the '42s can be retrofit with either new pipes or a retainer spring, just as the real ones were.

 

[Tumbledown]

Right …… and that’s why we chose to copy the 1766 charleville to the 1795. @Clark Badgett

We had bought tens of thousands of French guns to copy, and their barrel band system did make maintenance easier.

 

[FlinterNick]

Those saying a 1756 because of the metal rammer, the '42s can be retrofit with either new pipes or a retainer spring, just as the real ones were.

That’s a pretty complicated feature, it was overly complicated when they did it 250 years ago. Many of the unit commanders complained about it. @Artificer

 

[Clark Badgett]

We had bought tens of thousands of French guns to copy, and their barrel band system did make maintenance easier.

We also had thousands of Besses in stores. Along with Dutch, Spanish and other Germanic muskets as well. There have been several tests done both then and now, and the French muskets win every single time. The English muskets were prettier though, they were after all a beefed up fowler. French 1763 and later versions were designed from battlefield experience and made sturdy as a result.

 

[Clark Badgett]

Those saying a 1756 because of the metal rammer, the '42s can be retrofit with either new pipes or a retainer spring, just as the real ones were.

The 1742 was updated with a steel rammer in 1748, and many 42s in England were retrofitted. The 1756 was an improvement to the 1748 and it was in the colonies in 1775.

 

[fireman1]

It did happen. Weight was not an issue. The Bess is a sturdier gun with better range. The Americans knew it but had to use what was available. The French guns wouldn't have been abandoned on the field but relegated to reserves.

Better range? How?

 

[Clark Badgett]

Better range? How?

That extra 85grs of weight of the ball is total game changer.

 

[FlinterNick]

It did happen. Weight was not an issue. The Bess is a sturdier gun with better range. The Americans knew it but had to use what was available. The French guns wouldn't have been abandoned on the field but relegated to reserves.

Weight was an issue.

The heaviest French musket was a 1763, and it weighed just under 10 1/2 lbs, the ones sent to the USA were around 9.5 lbs, the 1766 was an incredible 8lbs. It’s also not just the weight of the gun. The total kit was lighter, the cartridge box was light as it used smaller ammo, the bayonet etc.

Remember these soldiers were starving, they had to march often on empty stomachs and then go into battle.

Furthermore by the time the continental army was outfitted with 1766’s and 1774’s while the primary arm of the British army was the short land brown bess after 1777, not the long land… so weight and size was also an issue for the British.

 

[sturmkatze]

The Brown Bess has been done already. I'd rather see (but probably won't live to see it) an American pattern gun.

I do know this. If Jim made it, it would be accurate, and function much better than the original.

The Doc is out now.

Again as has been said : both sides can use the Bess, only the frogs and Ami’s can use a Charleville.

 

[sturmkatze]

Yes! I'd buy a 1st Model Long Land Musket! I would prefer the 1756 version with the metal rammer, but would gladly take the 1742 with the wooden rammer. Rev War reenacting has been waiting for a good source of Long Lands forever. Right now, the Rifle Shoppe bag-o-castings is the only option.

“bag-o-castings"… lol lol lol

 

[French Colonial]

I will not be buying a Bess or a Charleville, if you are not into military reenacting why would you buy a clunky military gun when you can buy Jim's fowler?