Rifled Matchlocks

[benvenuto]

Very good point!
If i recall correctly from reading "Espingarda Perfeyta" (a book written by 3 portuguese gunsmiths around 1700) many moons ago, they reccomend the tightest fitting ball possible for sporting use and hardly discuss rifles at all.

now who whats to do some experiments for the forum? anyone with a chronograph and a fancy shooting rest?

 

A book from the Landeszeughaus Gratz ("Von alten Handfeuerwaffen") documents very detailed shooting tests performed with original guns and pistols from various ages. One smoothbore pistol that stood out in accuracy had a 12 shot group of only 9,2" x 7,0" at a distance of 30 meters, with 50% of the shots whithin 3,9" x 2,7". A wheellock pistol also provided a nearly similar accuracy.

One result of the tests is also that accuracy varied very greatly on the tested arms, smoothbore as well as rifled.

 

[Light Dragoon]

Von Alten Handfeuerwaffen is a GREAT little book! Although I can barely slog through the technical German, there is a LOT of nifty stuff in there (BTW, Hall gives some good data from this book in a MUCH more readable format!) One of the things noted was that the worst shooting of the long arms fired in their tests was actually a rifle. They discontinued shooting it because of the danger factor to the pit crew! Of the original pistols they used, they were actually in the same accuracy range as the modern pistols that they were using as constants to test against, and all were smooth-bores. The range was decent pistol range too, 30 meeters. Interesting that the wheellock was among the most accurate of the original pistols used. Of course, it also was the smallest bore (12.3MM/around .50") with the longest barrel (480MM/almost 19"). The coolest bit though is the experiment where they shot the original breastplate with the original pistol!

Cheers,

Gordon

 

[ewan]

what happenrd to the breastplate... :: you can't tell half a story like that :blah: the wondering will kill me :boohoo:

 

[benvenuto]

One result of the tests is also that accuracy varied very greatly on the tested arms, smoothbore as well as rifled.

exactly
I think we should be very careful about generalising and saying things like "all matchlocks were inaccurate" or "handgonnes were too crude to aim". Accuracy in a firearm is a mater of individual weapons and individual loads - as well as the skill of the shooter of course!
The only thing that has changed in the intervening years is guns are generally more consistant in quality these days.

I was reminded of this today when i made my first one hole group ever at 25 metres with UNPATCHED balls out of my rifle...

Every gun is an individual, thats all i can say...
:m2c:

 

[Light Dragoon]

what happenrd to the breastplate... :: you can't tell half a story like that :blah: the wondering will kill me :boohoo:

Sorry about that! Pistol ball went through the breastplate like butter: BUT! The two layers of linen cloth in place BEHIND the breastplate, placed there to simulate a wearer's doublet or arming coat, stopped the bullet. The wearer of the armour would probably have survived, but at the cost of a very nasty bruise, and would probably have been unhorsed in the process. So whatever the results of him living or dying, he would be out of the fight, which is all you ask of a weapon anyway.

Cheers!

Gordon

 

>like butter

Heck, they used 6 gram = 93 grain of powder! Quite a charge for an original cal. 50 pistol. The 907 joule that they measured at impact would be in the range of a .357 magnum.

 

[Light Dragoon]

>like butter

Heck, they used 6 gram = 93 grain of powder! Quite a charge for an original cal. 50 pistol. The 907 joule that they measured at impact would be in the range of a .357 magnum.

What's worse is that according to Ulrich, they were using 4F!!!! :shocking: That those weapons survived at all is amazing! But also it goes to show that the powder charges in use at the time (there is historical evidence to back this up) were pretty darned stout by our modern concepts of what a muzzle-loader can take and can do. And indeed, that pistol's power was up there with a .357! Then you add in the rifled turn-off pistols such as Rupert had, mentioned above. Kinda get's you to thinking, doesn't it? No wonder the commentators of the period spoke of pistols with respect.

Cheers,

Gordon