• Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

When did small caliber rifles become a thing and why?

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I can’t add to any to the all correct answers given. Except to emphasize that the economics of carrying ball & powder for a smaller caliber as Widows Son said was more than mythology.

Even with our limited experience now, anyone who’s carried a pouch full of musket balls very far can tell you that the weight makes a difference. Contrast 25 .715 balls with the same number of .490 or .390 and you really notice a difference. Now imagine transporting lead for ammunition at scale, being transported by horse, loaded by manpower on to boats or barges, etc.
 
This is an interesting topic and it leads me to a further question, though it is a bit off-topic..

What was the prevalence of ex-military and unused surplus arms? Or put another way, was there a civilian market for them?

(I’m referring to the mil surp market, not weapons individually scavenged from a battlefield).

I seems to me that a well made, strong ex-government musket, purchased at a discounted price would be an attractive option for people of modest means, regardless of the .69-.75 bore size.
 
The mythology I learned many years ago is that powder and lead were more expensive and not as abundant as in Europe. So, in contrast to the powerful large caliber arms, like a Jager rifle, the colonial Americans learned that a smaller bullet and powder charge fired from longer barrel was much more economical and yet still effective for hunting and fighting. The longer barrels also allowed a longer sight radius which promoted accuracy.

Was that actually why smaller caliber rifles became a thing? Perhaps it was a factor, but I don’t think we can say with certainty.
To conserve cost, powder and lead use the smallest bullet and smallest charge that would still do the job.
 
This is an interesting topic and it leads me to a further question, though it is a bit off-topic..

What was the prevalence of ex-military and unused surplus arms? Or put another way, was there a civilian market for them?

(I’m referring to the mil surp market, not weapons individually scavenged from a battlefield).

I seems to me that a well made, strong ex-government musket, purchased at a discounted price would be an attractive option for people of modest means, regardless of the .69-.75 bore size.
Unused military arms would go into storage. The used arms such as the contract rifles of 1792 went back to the armories to be evaluated and perhaps restored into service. The used smoothbored muskets if serviceable were returned to stores and if the stores were full of unused and serviceable guns the excess would be surplussed out.

At the conclusion of the Corp of Discovery's travels, Lewis sold the used rifles by auction in St. Louis.
 
David Crockett’s first rifle was .48 caliber…The State of Virginia’s specifications for their contract rifles was a barrel of 48 inches, 48 caliber…Now, fast forward to the rifles made in Jamestown, NC during the 1840’s and up to the Civil War, most were in that .35-.40 caliber range, stocks were slinder, they were half stocks and had inlays for decoration…No relief carving…Hundreds of these went west, they were too light and the barrels too thin to be bored and rifled to .50-54 caliber…They were made for small game, much like the Vincent rifles made in Ohio…Some think that every other mountain man carried a large bore Hawken, that is simply not true…Yes, gunsmiths could make and did make different caliber rifles but by the early 1800s there were many guns that were mass produced..In the east the majority were about .40 caliber by 1820…When gunsmiths moved to a new area they tended to make guns that conformed to their local customers needs..
 
The other thing is that gauge was used, the caliber rating, I'm not sure when that got started- mid 1800's?
 
I think a gunsmith would make any caliber the customer wanted, regardless of where the gun was built.
The gunsmiths knew many of these guns would be taken west so requests for some larger calibers would not have been unusual at all.

I think it is a mistake to assume gunsmiths only built rifles along the guidelines of the predominate regional style where they lived. A good South Carolina gunsmith would have been able to build a Lancaster rifle, and a Pennsylvania gunsmith could build a southern mountain rifle if he had to. And remember, gunsmiths sometimes relocated to another region hundreds of miles away.
That may not have been their preferences at times, but it was more than possible.
It would have been foolish to pass up work for a paying customer.
Immigrant German gunsmiths followed settlers into the then wilds of Pennsylvania. Lehigh Valley, Reading area, Lancaster County, York County and on west. They were intelligent, observant, and adaptable. They came here building Jaegers. Realistically, the evolution from Jaeger to Long Rifle was very quick.
 
While it seems as if gauge and bore were used interchangeably, Guage is often associated with the diameter of the barrel and bore with the size if the ball. Then sometimes they would use caliber in place of bore. The gun would be a 30 gauge shooting a 32 bore ball. Sometimes the bore would be called caliber. In the Liver Eating Johnson book, reference is made of his first Hawken rifle being 32 caliber when it is clear that the reference was to 32 balls to the pound.
 
I think large calibers were originally because smithing and machining simply was crude and not particularly accurate. Hence the 100 caliber Arquebusses and Muskets of the very early days. As metallurgy and machining became more accurate, calibers dropped., although some fine small caliber guns were made. for the wealthy. (I remember reading about a small caliber gun used in the 1500's or 1600's to shoot pigeons in Rome.) The Pennsylvania rifle evolved in large part, as stated above, to conserve lead and powder. However, I still wonder about the calibers of guns produced, because specimens that have survived may well have been rebored several times from their original configuration. One of the original long guns I had, a smooth rifle made near Valley Forge about 1810 was a 42 caliber, as I received it. And it had been chopped up and shorted before my possession. Another original gun I had, from the 1830's,, perhaps from Ohio, was a 48 caliber rifle as I received it. ( It had an odd number of grooves and showed indexing marks on the muzzle. ) Some of the original guns we see had an active life span of 70 or 80 years and may have been reworked several times.
 
Immigrant German gunsmiths followed settlers into the then wilds of Pennsylvania. Lehigh Valley, Reading area, Lancaster County, York County and on west. They were intelligent, observant, and adaptable. They came here building Jaegers. Realistically, the evolution from Jaeger to Long Rifle was very quick.
The first of the Angstadt family of gunsmiths, set up shop in Rockland Township, Berks County in 1747. No known examples of his work survive. But there are numerous examples of guns made by his brother, sons, nephews and grandchildren. His shop was less than 3 miles from the area settled By Hance Yoder , brother and others in 1713. And less than 10 miles from New Hanover, which was settled in 1700.

Gunsmiths may have gone where there was demand, but they also stayed where there was ability to pay for their products.
 
This is an interesting topic and it leads me to a further question, though it is a bit off-topic..

What was the prevalence of ex-military and unused surplus arms? Or put another way, was there a civilian market for them?

(I’m referring to the mil surp market, not weapons individually scavenged from a battlefield).

I seems to me that a well made, strong ex-government musket, purchased at a discounted price would be an attractive option for people of modest means, regardless of the .69-.75 bore size.

Yes, there was a civilian market for them. Sometimes the government issued or sold them to settlers and contractors as a cheap means of protection.
Some rifled muskets were bored out to smoothbore for using shot while foraging.
Sears and Roebuck listed for sale Civil War rifled muskets as-issued, and cut-down smooth bored versions for use as shotguns in the 1890’s.
A lot of people needed a relatively inexpensive gun to keep around the house or farm for protection and occasional use for hunting or getting rid of predators and other nuisance animals. Sometimes these guns would not be used for years at a time.
My great grandfather had a Civil War musket that had been bored out to about 20 gauge or a little smaller that he used in the 1890-1910 time frame, I think. When I was a teenager I remember asking him how well it worked as a shotgun. He said it worked just fine for squirrels and rabbits, hawks, skunks, coons, and all sorts of things that he sometimes had to shoot around the farm. Said one day he got several rats with one shot that were lined up side by side outside his barn drinking water that was dripping down from the eave of the roof during a rain that came at the end of a very bad drought one summer. The water had formed a little stream parallel to the wall on the ground and a dozen or so of the rats were lined up close together and focused on drinking the water. Got almost all of them with one shot.
I also asked him if he ever knew anyone else that had a bored out musket like his, and he said yes, several of the other farmers and other neighbors around there had them at one time or another, and liked them because buying the powder, caps, and shot was cheaper to buy than the shotgun shells for the cartridge guns, Most families had both muzzleloaders and breechloaders.
This was in the SW Missouri Ozarks region, where I live.
 
The first of the Angstadt family of gunsmiths, set up shop in Rockland Township, Berks County in 1747. No known examples of his work survive. But there are numerous examples of guns made by his brother, sons, nephews and grandchildren. His shop was less than 3 miles from the area settled By Hance Yoder , brother and others in 1713. And less than 10 miles from New Hanover, which was settled in 1700.

Gunsmiths may have gone where there was demand, but they also stayed where there was ability to pay for their products.
In 1718 Martin Meylin acquired ground in what is now Willow Street, Lancaster County. His gun shop preceded the formation of the county and its government by 11 years. He built his gun shop from local stone. Neither he, nor other smiths, were likely to move to follow the expanding frontier. But they had apprentices who would eventually need to strike out on their own. And more smiths would migrate from Europe.

Meylin's shop still stands and is maintained. Unhappily it is not open to the public.
 
In 1718 Martin Meylin acquired ground in what is now Willow Street, Lancaster County. His gun shop preceded the formation of the county and its government by 11 years. He built his gun shop from local stone. Neither he, nor other smiths, were likely to move to follow the expanding frontier. But they had apprentices who would eventually need to strike out on their own. And more smiths would migrate from Europe.

Meylin's shop still stands and is maintained. Unhappily it is not open to the public.

I live in what was once part of Philadelphia County, once part of Lancaster County PA, and also what was once part of Maryland. Cresap's War, between Maryland and Pennsylvania was all around me (8 miles south of Wrightsville) Meylin, was also in the area contested between the two colonies. Settlement in the area around Willow Street also extended up from Wilmington DE, and Baltimore, MD, which were both closer and easier traveling than Philadelphia.

Martin Mylin was part of a syndicate of a dozen Mennonite families that purchased 10,000 acres from Penn. Their Leader was Rev Hans Herr. Their land warrant was dated 1710. Mylin did not just settle out in the wilderness by himself. He was part of a group of nearly 12 families with over 100 people. (Talk about an instant town.) (Of course Penn had no problem selling land which was in Maryland)
 
Immigrant German gunsmiths followed settlers into the then wilds of Pennsylvania. Lehigh Valley, Reading area, Lancaster County, York County and on west. They were intelligent, observant, and adaptable. They came here building Jaegers. Realistically, the evolution from Jaeger to Long Rifle was very quick.
I do THINK style effected that transition. Although some Central European rifles were long the majority were short.
On the other hand Dutch French and English guns were long.
Early rifle makers in America might be Schmit but the buyers were Smith
And they expected guns to be long
This may have been because they thought longer barrels were more efficient, or they found longer sight radius handy, but I wonder if the reasons weren’t after the fact
“Caint ya make one of these har rifle guns with a full sized barrel Dutchy?”
 
Just to throw gas on a fire, Mountian men didn’t hunt😳
What I mean is most were in a brigade. There were trappers, hunters and camp tenders in the brigade.
So when traveling there were a few hunters bringing home the bacon while most were just moving to the next ground.
When traps were hitting beaver beaver were dinner, and one two or three per man per day is far more meat then a hungry man can eat
Guns in the hands of the average mountain man were for protection of the brigade
Real life Bill Tylors were few and far between
 
There is an American Indian creation story that tells how Buffalo Calf Women gives the people buffalo. I’m thinking it’s a Cheyenne story. One rule is to never show sorrow for the game killed.
After a hunt a women sees an orphan calf and says ‘ah poor thing’.
The Buffalo then disappear. Only via complex ceremonies are they restored after a starving time for the people.
Plains Indians were know to chase a heard off a cliff killing more then they could process. Or killing just for tongues for a ceremonial feast.
We want a quick clean kill. And shoot with that aim.
But our frontiersman hunter ancestors were not so kind.
A .40 or even .36 on a low charge will kill a deer if shot through the lungs or liver, or even belly.
It’s not a quick kill, and you may spend a day trailing it. But what’s that matter, a hundred pounds of meat lies at the end of the trail.
Two or three shots may be fired and importantly found in the body when cleaning.
For all the big rifles in colonial times vs small rifles after we have the testimony of a British officer during the revolution who described American rifles as 7/16 bores, about .45. And says he never saw one bigger.
It was better to recover the ball then have a quick kill.
Take a look at the bows used by the plains Indians for horseback buffalo hunting. 30-40 pound draw weight at 24” or often less. We would just consider that adequate for grouse let alone a 1500# beast. Sportsmanship took a far back seat to eating.
 
The first of the Angstadt family of gunsmiths, set up shop in Rockland Township, Berks County in 1747. No known examples of his work survive. But there are numerous examples of guns made by his brother, sons, nephews and grandchildren. His shop was less than 3 miles from the area settled By Hance Yoder , brother and others in 1713. And less than 10 miles from New Hanover, which was settled in 1700.

Gunsmiths may have gone where there was demand, but they also stayed where there was ability to pay for their products.
Zimmerstutzen, I have been researching the Angstadts and was hoping you would share your source material for your belief that Hans Georg Angstadt was a gunsmith. My email is [email protected] Thanks, Mark
 
Zimmerstutzen, I have been researching the Angstadts and was hoping you would share your source material for your belief that Hans Georg Angstadt was a gunsmith. My email is [email protected] Thanks, Mark
Early tax records for Rockland township. I believe he was also identified as a gunsmith in records for Gumbrechtshoffen in Alsace before he left for America. I ran across a possibly conflicting record that said he was an apprentice gunsmith in Saxony when he left for the new world. But there was no reference to any records and he would have been rather old for an apprentice. He was here in Pennsylvania for about 15 years before he settled near New Jerusalem. IIRC, there were some Angstadts at the New Hanover settlement around 1740. Several families moved from New Hanover about 15 miles north in the 1740's. to the area around New Jerusalem. The baptism records for the New Hanover Church are on line.
 
Last edited:
The mythology I learned many years ago is that powder and lead were more expensive and not as abundant as in Europe. So, in contrast to the powerful large caliber arms, like a Jager rifle, the colonial Americans learned that a smaller bullet and powder charge fired from longer barrel was much more economical and yet still effective for hunting and fighting. The longer barrels also allowed a longer sight radius which promoted accuracy.

Was that actually why smaller caliber rifles became a thing? Perhaps it was a factor, but I don’t think we can say with certainty.
I would not call it “mythology”.
 
I would not call it “mythology”.
I think this is way over thought. The calibers in the west we're certainly associated with buff and grizz but in the east I think it was just a gradual reduction in caliber to what was adequate. Growing smaller from the common big bores of muskets and the association with warfare.
 
Back
Top