Rifle vs. Smoothbore

[Rebel bull]

A rifle always has the advantage with round ball. Especially if your smoothbore has no rear sight. They rifled barrels for a reason. Accuracy. Instead of testing a rifle versus smoothbore off the bench, test both at 50 yards in a woods walk situation where you have to fire within 5 seconds, to simulate hunting. 3 shots each at a regular piece of paper with a 3” black square in the middle.

When hunting I’m not interested in what guns will do off the bench or when time doesn’t matter.

no sir they rifled barrels for ease of loading after multiple shots, the first rifled barrels were straight rifled. the twist was added later and was found to be more accurate.

 

[Rebel bull]

I think Thompson/Center developed their .56 caliber Renegade to be compliant with regulations in one of the New England states, which apparently prohibited rifles. I don’t know if any such laws still exist… Maybe some of our forum members who live up that way can comment. The rifle was essentially a bone-stock Renegade except for having a .56 caliber smooth bore. It had the same adjustable sights and double-set triggers as the standard rifled version. I’ve often thought it would have made more sense for them to have made it in .55 caliber, which would have been a true 28 gauge. Standard 28 gauge wads would fit, and balls in a variety of standard sizes that would work (.530”, .535”, .540”…) were readily available. As it was, T/C recommended a .550” ball. Both balls and moulds in that size were pretty scarce.

However, the Renegade SB (smoothbore) was an interesting idea, developed to meet a specific need.

Notchy Bob

I have one that is bone stock as it came from from the factory except for the rear sight. if i do my part it will hold a 3" group at 100 yds it's a percussion. i personally have never seen a flint version or a catalog page offering one, so when i wanted to compete in the NMLRA smooth bore class i had to modify one i bought a hunter version and replaced the lock with the l&r flint ( don't even get me started about that lock) removed the rear sight and machined off the snail breech ( the easiest way to convert to flint ) drilled and taped the existing fire channel to accept a t/c touch hole liner
and then started the work training my self to shoot with out a rear sight still working on it !!!!!!! 20 years later.

 

[ronaldrothb49]

How far a rifle can accurately shoot number one depends on YOU and number two on the load development for that rifle. Any rifle I have ever owned will shoot a 1 inch group at 50 yards. Once you get that then the human factor takes over. Then it becomes does the rifle fit you or are you doing something that affects the accuracy. All of my rifles except the first one I have made to fit me because the average that production rifles are made to do not fit me, LOP, drop at the comb, the balance point and cast off in the stock can all effect how you can shoot offhand. A good thing to do is ask a friend to observe you shooting and then get feedback from them on what they see.

 

[Relic shooter]

Smoothbores with 'regulated' barrel can be accurate !
This Fusil has won several 50yd rifle matches.
Back when I was building custom Fusils I 'regulated' the barrel on my personal display gun where the centered decorative notch in the tang aligns perfectly with tip of the turtle front sight blade.
At 82 with bone loss & severed rotator cuff I can no longer shoot long guns so will be posting it for sale on the forum later this month.
Relic shooter

 

[PUFFER2]

For deer I what I use. {{trad. only ( no "inline"
Rifles - Flintlock * 54 cal
Picture #1 = Petersoli Jager (use in brush & dense wooded areas { ease of carry } 50 -75 yd.s
Picture #2 = Petersoli Mortimer ( open aeras ) 75 - 200 yd.s

Smoothbore - Flintlock 12ga
(Have but not for Deer IMHO)
Pictuer #3 = Petersoli Mortimer * {w/ball - 50 yd.s - w/buckshot - 20-25 yd.s

***NOTE*** Flintlock vs Cap Lock
Cap locks are easier to use (learing Curve)- they will use "fake
BP"-more reliable - Less "flash"distraction
Flintlocks harder learning curve - must usereal BP not "fake" - less reliable (striker & frizen) - Flints (loose,dull,chipped,etc)- More Flash distraction (causing flitching)

BTW = The Jager & Mortimer are avail. as caplocks.

 

[R Ellis]

The Bess scratched a long-standing itch. I'm still determined to take a turkey, a deer, and a squirrel with it all in one year. I'll have it out for Spring Gobbler this year.

Having said that, I'm already beginning to see the limitations of the 'Bess. It is an absolute brute of a piece.



That's another itch. I'm a big fan of Frederick Gerstaker.
https://www.amazon.com/Wild-Sports-Rambling-Classics-American/dp/081173174X

He described a piece he carried on his first ramblings in America that was a double-barrelled affair with one barrel smooth and the other rifled. He hunted everything with it. I've thought that might be worth pursuing. I'm currently exchanging emails with the head of the Gerstaker Museum in Braunschweig to get any details they have. I've already heard that the original piece no longer exists. Drat.

A Pedersoli 58x12 gauge double barrel is for sale on this site now for $1000 if you are interested it is percussion should fit your needs very well

 

[wiscoaster]

....if you are interested it is percussion should fit your needs very well

The OP said he wanted a flintlock.

 

[Rob M.]

Oh yeah .... If you ever want to build a NW trade gun just PM me and I'll send you a building manual , via email , to do so . Be a great project and save you lots of $ ....

 

[R Ellis]

The OP said he wanted a flintlock.

did you happen to see the part where I said IF YOU ARE INTERESTED 0r did you overlook that part

 

[wiscoaster]

did you happen to see the part where I said IF YOU ARE INTERESTED 0r did you overlook that part

No, I didn't. I think you overlooked the entire OP. The OP's premise is already that he wasn't interested in percussion.

...

I'm thinking about my next one. I want it to be a flinter.
...

 

[R Ellis]

No, I didn't. I think you overlooked the entire OP. The OP's premise is already that he wasn't interested in percussion.

Well seems he said he was also interested in a combo gun and he did not say that he wasn't interested in a percussion gun .I was not suggesting he overlook his desire for a Flintlock but that he may be wanting to scratch the combo gun itch . So i am thru with you and will not entertain you or your post any longer so reframe from commenting on or about my comments in the future. That is what happens when you try to be helpful some one else wants to butt in with a smart comment Good Day

 

[shaman]

For now, I will stick with flint.

Well, I hit a brick wall today. The guy who runs the Gerstäcker Museum does not have any of Gerstäcker's original firearms. I'll have to go with what I can glean from his writings. We'll save that for another day and another thread.

Back to my original question. Given the same firearms, and the only difference was one was rifled and one was not, how much usuable range would a fellow be able to gain from the rifled barrel? Let's make this even easier: Let's make it a .54 cal Kibler Woodsrunner on whitetail deer.

 

[Johnny Too-Tall]

I've got a .45 (rifled) and a .62 smoothie. The smoothie produces fairly good groups with roundball at my 75 yard range (probably 5", whereas the rifle is 2-3"). The biggest shortcoming on the smoothbore capable of shooting roundball is the lack of a choke, which makes shooting shot for small game a decidedly difficult thing -- it's really only good to 25 yards in my experience. I've seen jug choked guns do much better... but I hear that it can really mess with roundball accuracy.

I grew up hunting deer with a modern smoothbore shotgun with interchangeable chokes. Logic says shooting slugs you want less choke, same with round balls (ML'ers). However my shotgun shot slugs much better with a modified choke tube than it did with cylinder, or improved cylinder chokes. But in the same respect it shot worse with a full choke tube installed. Just goes to show nothing is certain and each gun is different.

 

[rich pierce]

For now, I will stick with flint.

Well, I hit a brick wall today. The guy who runs the Gerstäcker Museum does not have any of Gerstäcker's original firearms. I'll have to go with what I can glean from his writings. We'll save that for another day and another thread.

Back to my original question. Given the same firearms, and the only difference was one was rifled and one was not, how much usuable range would a fellow be able to gain from the rifled barrel? Let's make this even easier: Let's make it a .54 cal Kibler Woodsrunner on whitetail deer.

50 yards with smoothbore. 100 with rifle. Not all shots are broadside in the open.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

Let's say I have a choice between 54 cal smooth and a 54 cal rifled. Take the Kibler Woodsrunner as an example; it's available in both. What's your guess on the difference in usuable range on deer sized game?

First, consider WHERE you hunt. I live in western NY, shots at game, large or small, are close.

Folks haven't mentioned, how well do you see at 100 yards? Are you using an optic on that modern version of a rifle that shoots black powder? I know of a fellow who is an amazing shot with a fowler out to 80 yards, but he also has amazing eyesight.
While yes terrain is a big factor in some choosing a smoothbore over a rifle, eyesight is also part of the equation. Having a rifle that will reach 100+ yards with accuracy, from the bench, is not the same when one's years get advanced, and the eyes won't let the shooter exploit the rifle's capability, eh?

That's another itch. I'm a big fan of Frederick Gerstaker.
https://www.amazon.com/Wild-Sports-Rambling-Classics-American/dp/081173174X

He described a piece he carried on his first ramblings in America that was a double-barrelled affair with one barrel smooth and the other rifled. He hunted everything with it.

You might also like this, The Still Hunter, by Van ****. Although he uses a modern cartridge rifle, the hunting principles and methods are the same for us, especially on moving through the woods.

Gertaker used something like this, eh?

"Paints-His-Shirt-Red" from Jeremiah Johnson

LD

 

[waksupi]

In my opinion, anything smaller than 24 bore in a smoothbore is a waste. No gain for round ball, not enough payload for shotgun.

 

[mikesto44]

Wiscoaster your statement is interesting.. I know several people who shoot in lines at 100 yards who have consistent 5 shot groups under 2 inches. Plus theirs people who can do better than that at a lot farther. Just saying but none the less you are shooting very well.

 

[shaman]

Wiscoaster your statement is interesting.. I know several people who shoot in lines at 100 yards who have consistent 5 shot groups under 2 inches. Plus theirs people who can do better than that at a lot farther. Just saying but none the less you are shooting very well.

With my LHR Redemption, that's about what I'm getting. I know I could keep pushing it, but that's all i really need under my current circumstances. I shoot Lee cast R.E.A.L. over Triple 7.

 

[tenngun]

I would note that rifles would become THE gun for American frontiesman. However while the white mountain men were chasing beaver the Metis were building an economy on pemmican production. Almost all was buffalo pemmican. And they stayed loyal to smoothies
Levin, an HBC official providing a guide for HBC would be managers in 1847 poh-pohed rifles. Telling fairly well to do whites to get a smoothbore, as with PRB it shot as well as a rifle to sixty yards and that was enough range for hunting.
A rifle of course can easily produce two inch groups at that range and smoothies won’t generally group as well. However you don’t need two inch groups to put meat on the table. A six even eight inch group will easily drop deer or elk, and just a bit tighter will bring down a buff with one shot
Before 1900 I would hazzard lots more game was killed by smoothies then rifles

 

[tenngun]

By the by Levin said ball in the end of the fingers of worn out gloves. I’m thinking ten shots would be used faster then one wore out gloves so would hazzard thin leather or cloth was the most common patching