In the Napolean era men were much shorter and muskets long with a pretty good recoil. The recoil pushed the barrel up before the ball exited resulting in a high shot. For this reason there was not the carnage that movies portray. The Brits were taught to shoot very low, at the feet in some cases. Not having rear sights didn't help.
Why do antique rifles shoot so high???
- Thread starter gabrielguitars
- Start date
Firepower: weapons effectiveness on the battlefield, 1630-1850 is a great read and has much to say on its subject. The gist: massed muskets were effective to about 50m; what we would call pistol range. On a given volley, with trained men, you could expect 25%. The guns actually firing would decrease with each volley, as the powder-patch-ball mantra got lost along with rammers down range and loads stacked five deep without having been primed ( or sparked). Sights? Why bother?
Well, think about this......
Most soldiers in the "old days" shot very little, and generally were not good marksmen.
So.....
A bullet over the target's head (if it were shot that high) might hit something behind the target.
A bullet in the dirt ain't worth poop.
Most soldiers in the "old days" shot very little, and generally were not good marksmen.
So.....
A bullet over the target's head (if it were shot that high) might hit something behind the target.
A bullet in the dirt ain't worth poop.
Lots of good points brought up here, especially by buffdog, and I'm sure there is some validity to bullet weight theories ( actually 45/70 rifles used a 500 grain bullet with 70 grains of black powder, carbines used 405 bullets with 55 grains to reduce recoil), bayonet influence on military rifles, belt buckle hold, untrained soldiers etc, but I think the main culprit would be today's powder being of acknowledged less power. This problem is also universal with older black powder hunting and target rifles such as the fine British doubles and singles, both percussion and later cartridge, from the nineteenth century. They were normally cased with or engraved with loading instructions that not only gave the powder charge but also the specific powder used. The powders of the day were available in a wide variety of quality and strength, similar to modern powders in some respects( eg, 4350 vs 4831) and not really interchangeable for best accuracy. Some of these target rifles by Gibbs, A. Henry, Fraser and others can still hold their own against modern iron sighted rifles and definitely shot to the sights, as did the doubles. It is well known that in many of these the original velocities cannot be reached with any modern black powder and most vintage doubles, which were perfectly regulated when made can't be made to shoot both barrels together with modern black. In a rifle that has noticeable upward recoil ( prominent in older rifles with considerable stock drop) bullet weight and barrel travel time will have a significant effect on vertical bullet displacement. Heavier bullets and slower velocity equal longer barrel time, resulting in more muzzle rise and higher hits on the target. Given the same bullet weight, powder with less strength will result in lower velocity = high hits. This is very noticeable on modern hand guns fired one handed with loads of varying velocity or bullet weights. I don't buy the theory about poorly trained troops and longer combat ranges. Poorly trained shooter will instinctively hold the front sight higher to make it easier to see, which would make the rifle shoot even higher and actually as you go back in time combat ranges were progressively shorter, not longer. All armies practiced and encouraged marksmanship, noise, smoke and fire didn't win many conflicts by this time and the match results from Bisley, Connaught, Creedmore and others couldn't have been produced by "shooting at the toenails" of a target at varying ranges from 100 to 1000 and more yards.
I skipped reading the pages from 2 to 4, but I don't see anything new here on page 5. I strongly believe that the reason for shooting high was to allow soldiers to aim center of mass (roughly belt to mid chest) and hit their target at all ranges out to 200 yards or a bit more. I remain mystified why most of the late 1800s cartridge revolvers that I have shot, shot very high regardless of military issue or not. In the percussion era, I think that the calvary emptied their handguns at the enemy while charging towards the enemy and started firing at 100 yards or so hence the guns being sighted for somewhere around 100 yards
cheers mooncoon
cheers mooncoon
