It seems like I've seen some listings for old loadings using, "strong powder," which would imply there were different power levels in black powder. Goex may be unchanged, but there were many, many different brands of BP back in the day, most of which died along with the production of BP cartridges and front stuffers.
Why do antique rifles shoot so high???
- Thread starter gabrielguitars
- Start date
- Location
- Queen City
A "deep" 6 o'clock hold was indeed necessary with most early firearms well into the smokeless powder era. So, your observation about aiming at the toe nails is completely correct. Also, remember that with old guns the butt of most firearms were held less on the shoulder and more out onto the upper arm and this will greatly change where the sights line up. It wasn't until scopes became common place in the 1950's that more precise lining up of the butt, the eye and the cross hairs became more critical. Modern rifle stocks thus changed to help the shooter more critically align the cross hairs on target.
This a very common misconception, and totally wrong.
Higher velocity bullets will shoot LOWER POI, not higher, for the same sight settings. This is true in handguns and rifles.
I concur. That's what I've found with handguns for sure. Not so informed an opinion with long guns, keeping it realistic.
I've had some reasonable results tailoring special loads to make the POI more reasonable on several antique handguns and rifles. Faster velocity and lighter bullets make them shoot "lower".
I had a webley MKI 455 that shot 6" high at 20 yards, almost a foot high at 50 yds, and dead on at 100 yds using the 265 gr HB load at 710 fps. The same pistol shoots almost perfectly to POA at 20 yds using a 200 gr bullet driven to 825 fps.
I had a webley MKI 455 that shot 6" high at 20 yards, almost a foot high at 50 yds, and dead on at 100 yds using the 265 gr HB load at 710 fps. The same pistol shoots almost perfectly to POA at 20 yds using a 200 gr bullet driven to 825 fps.
I have experienced this with revolvers, when - either through bullet weight or charge - the recoil is significantly increased. The explanation given earlier is that it's because the barrel tilts before the bullet exits, which I can't argue with. I haven't experienced it with rifles. But the volley-fire and long-distances of battlefields would explain it. The sights on Swedish mauser m96 were designed for 300 metres, to zero at anything less required replacement of the standard front sight blade with a longer (higher) blade.
fingers284
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Alberta Cowboy Ranges
Not really... while the shooter doesn't feel anything until full force recoil is being exerted, recoil does start the instant ignition & bullet travel start. It may only move the muzzle a few thou of an inch at the start but that is still enough to change point of impact from aim point before ignition. Muzzle movement of a few thou will transpose into inches down range.
Every rifle that has been lined up since gunpowder was invented has a built in tolerance to the aim point to allow for the recoil of the bullet travel in the barrel. This is why Heavy barrel guns are so popular with target shooters. The extra weight and rigidity help counter balance the recoil jump and harmonics (caused by the recoil as well). Heavy Barrels don't do away with the recoil, they just allow for less of a tolerance to be added to the sight plane.
This is true; there is a change in the barrel's attitude (up and down angle, not whether it's mad or not) following ignition. This is simple physics, really - equal and opposite reaction forces. The moment the projectile starts to travel down the bore, there is an opposite force given to the rifle, however mitigated by the weight of the rifle and the resistance offered by the shooter's shoulder, etc. I am quite sure this is even more pronounced the larger the bullet (read heavier) and the slower the velocity of said bullet (more actual dwell time in the barrel which is recoiling). Add to this rifle construction in terms of sheer mass and allocation of that mass - I'm sure this is why offhand target shooters preferred a muzzle-heavy rifle, beyond just holding it steady. The longer barrel with lots of weight out front makes for a very difficult lever to lift, which should bring the recoil impulse's levering effects on the barrel into tolerable levels. This even more brings into focus the target shooter's admonition to keep absolute consistency with shooting technique and hold. What all this still doesn't answer is why the effects of this recoil-induced barrel rise becoming high POI vs. POA is different for us in the modern age compared to our long-dead brethren. If this force was present then, it should be present now, and vice-versa. If I was continually hitting high, I would change the sights, regardless of the reasons for the higher bullet impacts (assuming both consistency and accuracy). Why not then? I do understand that it makes sense to aim lower, because your sight is not obscuring your target like it would if you had to aim higher (Kentucky elevation???), but I still see some issues. If I was facing a hostile combatant, I would not want to concentrate on their belt buckle, I would want to keep their eyes in view. I believe (my theory) that this is indeed the volley-fire/long-range idea. It seems with the rainbow-trajectories of Sniders, Martini-Henrys, etc., a 200 yard zero would result in a close-range shot over the bow, if you know what I mean. I expect that they would have considered a close-range enemy to be a subject for a bayonet instead. Old ways of thinking, indeed.
Most Vintage Military Rifles/Muskets were configured for Point Of Impact with Bayonet fixed....it has the result of bringing the barrel down a bit due to weight.
Even the WW2 No4 Enfield POI is based on an attached spike bayonet in it's calibration, hence it will generally shoot a couple or 3 inches high when using the range calibrated sights.
Lots of comments from guys having the sights all the way down but still shooting high....just an observation about commonwealth rifles/muskets in general.
Cheers Paul
Even the WW2 No4 Enfield POI is based on an attached spike bayonet in it's calibration, hence it will generally shoot a couple or 3 inches high when using the range calibrated sights.
Lots of comments from guys having the sights all the way down but still shooting high....just an observation about commonwealth rifles/muskets in general.
Cheers Paul
Simple explanation. These old military rifles were made according to the military strategy of the time. They were designed to hit point of aim at 200 yards because that is the range where shooting started. Sighting was "centre mass" from 200 yards in to point blank. Soldiers of the time weren't given much credit for understanding the mechanics so they were ordered to follow their training. Sniders, P1853 Enfields, Mausers and others of the same period all will shoot twelve to sixteen inches high at fifty or one hundred yards with sights held properly. Pulling the front sight way down into the bottom of the rear sight V notch helps but wont fix the situation. Most of us have fashioned higher front sights to slip on when shooting. I have even had a new, higher sight silver soldered on my shooter snider to permanently remedy this. Accommodate the problem. Dave
