Smoothbore vs rifled barrels

[pepperbelly]

Why did they continue making smoothbore muskets after the rifled barrel came out? It seems that the better accuracy from a rifle would have made the smoothbore musket obsolete.
Jim

 

[Stumpkiller]

You can get four shots out of a smooth-musket with paper cartridges for every one from a rifle (two if you're good). In formed ranks, accuracy is secondary to a sustained mass of fire.

It was also considered ungentlemanly and poor form to aim at a specific enemy . . . I kid you not.

Around the time of the Revolution a British Regular might get to practice with four or six shots A YEAR! These were not skilled marksmen. Rifles require practice.

 

[Cruzatte]

I suspect too, that muskets were cheaper to make, than rifles. Rifling the bore was an extra step and still takes a bit of time.

Cruzatte

 

[dodgecity]

As has been pointed out, the rate of fire, and ease of loading were considerations for the military. The military smoothbores were also designed for the use of the bayonet, which the rifle was not. From a civilian stand point, the smoothbore was much more versatile for frontier defense and putting meat on the table. The smoothbore could serve as both shotgun and short range ball gun for the person who for what ever reason, could only possess one gun to do it all. Inside of 70 yards, you can hit game or men with a patched round ball just as well as you can with a rifle. The military of that time was predicated on putting the most lead into a given area in as short a period time as possible. The smooth bore will do that much better than a rifle will. In the case of the Americans, buck and ball is only possible from a smooth bore.

 

[Gary]

The soldier was an ignorant clod who was unthinking or incapable of thinking - so thought the officers. The key to victory layed in shock and firepower. Hence the higher rate of fire which the rifle didn't offer (they fouled, became difficult to load and most did not take the bayonet). To ensure that mass could be brought to bear for shock & firepower, linear tactics were adapted which would allow for quick movement over open terrain, good command and control.

Someone, it failed to impress the Redman at the Monogahela. The Redman was too ignorant (facetious mode) to stand in the open in linear formation like their British Counterpart. They "skulked" and hid behind trees, bushes, depressions in the ground and presented an almost invisible opponent to the baffled Britishers. But ff:

 

[musketman]

Why did they continue making smoothbore muskets after the rifled barrel came out? It seems that the better accuracy from a rifle would have made the smoothbore musket obsolete.
Jim

Same reason they still make shotguns today, some people like to use scatterguns...

The smoothbore can shoot both round ball and shot, even at the same time (buck and ball), this proved deadly during the Civil War when the opposing force was closing in...

 

[Tumblernotch]

Like was said in some of the other posts, ease of loading. A smoothbore could be loaded without a ramrod with a slightly undersized ball and no wadding, removing three steps in the loading procedure. The invention of the expanding ball (Minie) made it obsolete, although it was still popular because of the buck and ball load. Thousands of smoothbores from the M1816 to the M1842 were rifled as soon as possible after the adoption of the M1855 and the Minie/Burton bullet. Actually, the concept of multiple ball loads carried on through the rifled musket development. In the trials done at Harper's Ferry and Springfield in 1854, tests were done showing the feasibility of loading 3 undersized musketballs in the rifle musket.

Also, one reason that smoothbores were so common during the Civil War was because there were thousands in inventory on both sides and the tactics used throughout most all of the War were adapted to that system. The rifle in turn made those tactics obsolete, though the armies were somewhat slow to adapt.

 

according to the American Fur Company trade catalog, in 1842 a musket (NWTG) cost $4.97, while a rifle-gun cost $8.97.

And like Stumpy said, volume of fire was the strategy over accuracy. You don't have to shoot a man in the heart to make him stop fighting, just hit him anywhere, especially when you're talking about a .670 to .760 diameter ball.

the Confederates really liked the .69 smoothie because you could fire buck and ball loads in them with great results...and they were cheap.

 

[flintlockmdj]

Whoever gets the most lead in the air first will usually win. :results: :crackup: :crackup: :crackup: