I always laugh when the argument comes to "smooth rifle" The details that people get mired in are amazing. Smooth rifle , Fusil, Fowler? Really, Some minor difference in architecture or lock style and suddenly we have an entirely new breed of firearm etc., LOL, Not really. I am a firm believer that "rifles" per say were not the mainstay of the "frontier" at any time period you want to pick. Few people had the means $$ to have fancy firearms, and fewer still, had the luxury of multiple firearms etc. IMHO, the shotgun, fowler, smooth rifle or smoothbore was the most common choice, and much of the historical documents that we have support that, regardless of what name you give them. The smooth bore was a much more versatile firearm. The ability to use shot or ball was significant. Also, when you take into account where people were located and how they lived, there were very few "long" shots taken when hunting or even defending the homestead etc. How much did they shoot. Probably as little as possible. Powder & Ball was expensive, had to be imported long distance etc over poor infrastructure etc. No one was wasting anything. If you believed Hollywood etc you would think everyone in the West was wearing a sidearm 24/7 when the reality was quite different. Handguns were expensive and severed little practical use for most people. Farmers & ranchers used a shotgun or long arm to feed themselves and take care of business around the home/ranch etc. A handgun was a luxury. For every picture you see of an old time "cowboy with a handgun there were a hundred people who did not have one. The argument has been made many times that Colt and Winchester did not settle the West. It was more likely the single or double barreled shotgun. I say it was the same from the time they landed on Plymouth rock or wherever, the smooth bore firearm was the predominant firearm in use, Musket, Fusil, Smooth Rifle, Fowler or Trade Gun. Just one mans opinion!!
