Rifle vs. Smoothbore

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Maybe the guys with poor, uncorrected eyesight that made seeing rifle sights and animals in clear focus were big shot customers.
I think that the reason for smooth rifles. Everyone around had a rifle, but a nearsighted guy could take deer or small game just as well as a rifle. And didn’t have to pay for a rifle but his gun looks like every one else’s
 
I think that the reason for smooth rifles. Everyone around had a rifle, but a nearsighted guy could take deer or small game just as well as a rifle. And didn’t have to pay for a rifle but his gun looks like every one else’s
I think you will find that the rifling was not what drove the pricing.

It was once thought that "smooth rifles" were once lower caliber and then as the rifle aged eventually the rifling would not be refreshed, but the barrel would be reamed. Today, it appears that most "smooth rifles" were made that way from day one. The question is what was the age range of the user ; were they bought by men with aging eyes later in life?

A Neat Fuzee was considerably cheaper than a rifle, at least according to the pricing of guns and rifles at George Morgan's store in the 1760 ledgers. He even had one of his hide hunters documented as having used one of those instead of a rifled piece. The rifle would cost almost two months pay for the hunter, while the fuzee [fusil] would cost less than two week's pay.

LD
 
Here’s my two cents worth (or less) on the matter. I have a Chambers .62 caliber flintlock smooth rifle. It’s a smooth bore (Getz barrel) with front and rear sights. Out to 50 yards, it will easily shoot a 4” group with a .600 round ball wadded with tow, if I do my part. The gun also shoots well using shot for small game since it’s a smooth bore.

Keep in mind, four inches is the average width of a man’s hand. And, a .600 round ball makes a big hole.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top