Which is historically correct, precut patches or cut at muzzle?

[smoothshooter]

Interesting! Thanks!

Both would be correct.
If loading block is used, precut patches are a necessity.
I shoot precut 100% of the time. I do them in my spare time while watching TV or listening to the radio. In a couple of evenings I can cut and lube enough patches for all year.
Remember, human nature does not change.
If it could be done, it was done, same as now.
If they are precut and lubed at home you don’t to carry so much stuff around when out walking around hunting or shooting. .

 

[smoothshooter]

When you cut at muzzle with the patch knife, you get a smooth, perfectly fit patch...

I don’t think a perfectly cut patch makes any difference at all in accuracy.
Uniform thickness and correct thickness does.
Variations in the amount of lube on the patches “might”.

 

[smoothshooter]

I don’t think a perfectly cut patch makes any difference at all in accuracy.
Uniform thickness and correct thickness does.
Variations in the amount of lube on the patches “might”.

 

[ETipp]

My guess is, back then it most likely would have been depending on the circumstance/situation. I would reckon that most of the real woodsman cut at the muzzle.

I can tell you with absolute certainty that if I only big game hunted, cutting at the muzzle would be fine, even though I have never done so. Conversely, for squirrel hunting I find it most conducive to use a loading block. Again precut patches are best for that situation.

I do not know the history of loading blocks.