200 Yards for a Smoothbore Musket-- Where did that popular number come from?

[Tom Arliskas]

Good Morning. My name is Tom Arliskas and I am right now writing a book on Infantry shoulder arms, which Regiments carried what, smoothbores or rifles at the Battles of Mills' Springs, Fort Donelson and Shiloh and it is getting there. MY QUESTION to all those Collectors and CW Shooters and CW people in general. In doing research I constantly read about the now "FACT" [a repeated fact like George Washington and his Cherry Tree] that the smoothbore musket, used in the American Civil War is effective out to 200 yards!!! That all who fought in the Civil War armed with Flintlocks, conversions, and Model 1842's could hit a man sized target at 200 yards easily or that was just the way it was done. "200 yards" or more even. is what I see everywhere, in books, articles, and Posts!!! 200 yards seems to be the part of the accepted collective of Civil War History for smoothbore muskets. WHERE DID THIS 200 yard figure come from? I can find Ordnance tests on Smoothbore Cannons, but not on Smoothbore Muskets from our US Ordnance Department. The Europeans did them all the time-- the Minie' Ball came from all that research and testing. I shoot smoothbore muskets in competition and have done so for 25 years. It is hard to hit a 10 inch bull at 50 or 100! That to hit a target at 200 the Europeans say you have to aim 18 1/2 inches or more over the head of the target with a gun that came with no rear sight!!. Another Veteran said you cannot hit people at 200 yards to effect an outcome. You do it at 65 yards and closer! That the smoothbore was for shooting at a man sized target, to aim at his belt buckle and never intended to hit a smaller target! So does anyone have information where the 200 yard figure in US Ordnance History came from? An actual test by the US Ordnance Department-- a paper? Thanks.

[Jim_Burgess_2078V]

Hi Tom,

I can't answer your question as to the original source of the quoted 200-yard range for smoothbores. As most of us who shoot them can attest, hitting a man-sized target at such range with an unsighted smoothbore, even with the fine-tuned target loads we shoot in the N-SSA, would be a challenge. To get this debate rolling let me speculate that such references might actually be talking about extreme range and not effective range. The service charge for the .69 caliber smoothbore musket was 110 grains of powder with a .65 caliber musket ball wadded with the cartridge paper. Muzzle velocity was in excess of 1000 fps and, at optimum elevation of the muzzle, the musket balls could fly 200 yards. It is also important to note that smoothbores, to be effective, had to be fired in mass, in line formations against massive targets- enemy line formations. The volume of fire would compensate for the inherent inaccuracy of individual smoothbore weapons. This distinction may have been lost to subsequent authors perpetuating the 200-yard statistic, especially if they did not have any direct experience shooting smoothbores.

Jim Burgess
15th CVI

[Jim Brady Knap's Battery]

...has interesting copies of targeting fired with different firearms of the period. The .69 Smoothbore targets are interesting. They show representations of the targets which are 10 feet square and show the shot placement. There is a description with each detailing the number of shooters, number of shots fired, number of hits and the manner of shooting, file, skirmisher. volley, single ball, and buck and ball. Ranges were 100, 200, and 300 yards. The 300-yard targets show 50 rounds fired and two with 7 hits and one with 9 hits, Again the targets were 10 feet square. The report of these tests is on file in the National Archives, Records of the War Dept, Office of the Chief of Ordnance, Special File, Box 26.

Interesting material.

[Tom Arliskas]

...has interesting copies of targeting fired with different firearms of the period. The .69 Smoothbore targets are interesting. They show representations of the targets which are 10 feet square and show the shot placement. There is a description with each detailing the number of shooters, number of shots fired, number of hits and the manner of shooting, file, skirmisher. volley, single ball, and buck and ball. Ranges were 100, 200, and 300 yards. The 300-yard targets show 50 rounds fired and two with 7 hits and one with 9 hits, Again the targets were 10 feet square. The report of these tests is on file in the National Archives, Records of the War Dept, Office of the Chief of Ordnance, Special File, Box 26.

Interesting material.

Thank you will look. This is what I need. Yes, we all know with a lot of practice at the Range, we can learn to hit a target at 200 yards. I accept that theory, but it is us and not the average newbie RAW recruit handed a smoothbore musket and fighting at Bull Run or Shiloh. Totally different. 10 feet Squares!!! Now that would be a great target. Will contact Tim Scanlan. Or........... just do my research. Thank you for your input.

[Tom Arliskas]

Hi Tom,

I can't answer your question as to the original source of the quoted 200-yard range for smoothbores. As most of us who shoot them can attest, hitting a man-sized target at such range with an unsighted smoothbore, even with the fine-tuned target loads we shoot in the N-SSA, would be a challenge. To get this debate rolling let me speculate that such references might actually be talking about extreme range and not effective range. The service charge for the .69 caliber smoothbore musket was 110 grains of powder with a .65 caliber musket ball wadded with the cartridge paper. Muzzle velocity was in excess of 1000 fps and, at optimum elevation of the muzzle, the musket balls could fly 200 yards. It is also important to note that smoothbores, to be effective, had to be fired in mass, in line formations against massive targets- enemy line formations. The volume of fire would compensate for the inherent inaccuracy of individual smoothbore weapons. This distinction may have been lost to subsequent authors perpetuating the 200-yard statistic, especially if they did not have any direct experience shooting smoothbores.

Jim Burgess
15th CVI

I have a quote from a Veteran that states that they knew these smoothbore muskets were not for sharpshooting but just for mass shootings at 65 to 100 yards-- then the bayonet!!! No the authors who write about CW combat and weapons most have never fired a smoothbore yet repeat over and over 200 yards for the smoothbore. Then I have another soldier stating you cannot hit a target at 200 yards or more! General US Grant in Memoirs said it! Amen-- and thanks for your comments-- Tom

[Mike McDaniel]

200 yards would have been a VERY lucky shot. WRT smoothbores, I recommend reading Brent Nosworthy?s books, With Musket, Cannon, and Sword, and Bloody Crucible of Courage. Smoothbore muskets were issued with undersized bullets, usually as part of a buck-and-ball load. Accuracy beyond 50 yard was pretty poor. ?Don?t shoot until you see the whites of their eyes,? wasn?t a slogan, it was good tactics.

[Tom Arliskas]

200 yards would have been a VERY lucky shot. WRT smoothbores, I recommend reading Brent Nosworthy?s books, With Musket, Cannon, and Sword, and Bloody Crucible of Courage. Smoothbore muskets were issued with undersized bullets, usually as part of a buck-and-ball load. Accuracy beyond 50 yard was pretty poor. ?Don?t shoot until you see the whites of their eyes,? wasn?t a slogan, it was good tactics.

We N-SSA folks no that--- But we have to convince the CW crowd who never fired a smoothbore at 200 yards. Will check the book, thanks. Tom

[Tom Arliskas]

Thank you will look. This is what I need. Yes, we all know with a lot of practice at the Range, we can learn to hit a target at 200 yards. I accept that theory, but it is us and not the average newbie RAW recruit handed a smoothbore musket and fighting at Bull Run or Shiloh. Totally different. 10 feet Squares!!! Now that would be a great target. Will contact Tim Scanlan. Or........... just do my research. Thank you for your input.

Sorry cannot locate that particular ordnance file--- can you recheck it or send me a link? Thanks Tom.

[Richard Hill]

I think Grant after Vicksburg said that with a smoothbore "...at 200 yards you could shoot at a man all day long without his ever finding it out." The Deep South did a 100-yard smoothbore event several years ago. Twelve-inch tiles weren't too difficult. Two-liter soda bottles took a little more doing, but we did it.

[Maillemaker]

Yes, we all know with a lot of practice at the Range, we can learn to hit a target at 200 yards.

I'm not sure practice will be of much use at 200 yards with a smoothbore. I don't think the gun would shoot consistently enough for the shooter to make much difference. In other words, you could mount the gun in a fixed fixture and you probably won't hit the target much.

Making historical cartridges for the US .69 caliber musket is pretty easily done. If you have access to a 200 yard range, it would be a pretty simple experiment to conduct.

Steve

[Tom Arliskas]

Hi Tom,

I can't answer your question as to the original source of the quoted 200-yard range for smoothbores. As most of us who shoot them can attest, hitting a man-sized target at such range with an unsighted smoothbore, even with the fine-tuned target loads we shoot in the N-SSA, would be a challenge. To get this debate rolling let me speculate that such references might actually be talking about extreme range and not effective range. The service charge for the .69 caliber smoothbore musket was 110 grains of powder with a .65 caliber musket ball wadded with the cartridge paper. Muzzle velocity was in excess of 1000 fps and, at optimum elevation of the muzzle, the musket balls could fly 200 yards. It is also important to note that smoothbores, to be effective, had to be fired in mass, in line formations against massive targets- enemy line formations. The volume of fire would compensate for the inherent inaccuracy of individual smoothbore weapons. This distinction may have been lost to subsequent authors perpetuating the 200-yard statistic, especially if they did not have any direct experience shooting smoothbores.

Jim Burgess
15th CVI

Hello Jim--- Thank you for your input. Yes-- there were two considerations or three if you go deeper. 1. testing for Range.-- They would line up and fire at 50, 100, 150, 200, 300, sometimes 400 just to see "IF" the musket or Rifle would shoot that far. They would do elevation, sight procedures, and test the impact strength into pine boards. 2. OK, now that you know that the gun can shoot that far-- lets try aiming and see how many hits we can get. So they would experiment with types of bullets, powder charges, sight training, and then come with measurements, suggestions on aiming and where-- and try to put as many balls as possible into a target. 3. Then they would come up with tactics and maneuver. The types of guns and effective fire differences would be given in training. They would state, "Hey, you have a smoothbore-- so your best bet is to wait until your target is in effective range 50 to 75 yards for the most destructive volley fire." The Officers in battle--- could try and have their men fire a smoothbore at 150 or even 200 yards but would soon realize we are missing a lot here guys, so cease firing and let them get closer." To simply state "smoothbore can shoot or are good up to 200 years" is true sometimes-- somebody will hit a target at 200-- but in a battle if you have 500 men fire a volley at 200 yards and you see six guys fall down and one gets back up-- that is a wake up moment.-- I believe I have the stats and the comments to make my point--

[Tom Arliskas]

I'm not sure practice will be of much use at 200 yards with a smoothbore. I don't think the gun would shoot consistently enough for the shooter to make much difference. In other words, you could mount the gun in a fixed fixture and you probably won't hit the target much.

Making historical cartridges for the US .69 caliber musket is pretty easily done. If you have access to a 200 yard range, it would be a pretty simple experiment to conduct.

Steve

True what you said-- They did do tests and impact studies-- and you agree with the initial statement-- not good at 200 yards!

[hobbler]

Smooth bores with rear sights?

[Jim Brady Knap's Battery]

Sorry cannot locate that particular ordnance file--- can you recheck it or send me a link? Thanks Tom.

Tom, Here's a link to the book on Amazon. This book has the report and target images of all the firearms tested. Also a lot on the muskets both govt made and contract versions.

I pulled the ordnance file info from the book. The image of the cover page of the report is marked, Records of the War Department, Office of the Chief of Ordnance, Special File, Box 26. It came from the National Archives. In the book there are around 90 pages of the report, and it seems to be the entire report. There are several types of infantry arms tested, commented on, and targeted along with several breech loading carbines. The report is dated Feb 1, 1860.

The rifled musket: Fuller, Claud E: 9780517031100: Amazon.com: Books (https://www.amazon.com/rifled-musket-Claud-Fuller/dp/B0007E23K4)

[Carolina Reb]

You can also get it used from Abe Books.

https://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?sts=t&cm_sp=SearchF-_-home-_-Results&tn=The%20Rifled%20Musket&an=Fuller

[Tom Arliskas]

Tom, Here's a link to the book on Amazon. This book has the report and target images of all the firearms tested. Also a lot on the muskets both govt made and contract versions.

I pulled the ordnance file info from the book. The image of the cover page of the report is marked, Records of the War Department, Office of the Chief of Ordnance, Special File, Box 26. It came from the National Archives. In the book there are around 90 pages of the report, and it seems to be the entire report. There are several types of infantry arms tested, commented on, and targeted along with several breech loading carbines. The report is dated Feb 1, 1860.

The rifled musket: Fuller, Claud E: 9780517031100: Amazon.com: Books (https://www.amazon.com/rifled-musket-Claud-Fuller/dp/B0007E23K4)

Awesome and Thank You again. Tom

[Tom Arliskas]

Smooth bores with rear sights?

Interesting on sited smoothbores like the Potsdam. When you watch our fellow team members shoot those Potsdams-- They do not do any better with those than a guy with a Macon. Seems, like everything else in shooting, first you have to have a good gun, a shooter, than you know if held right, the proper loads and point of aim will hit the target. I watched a fella with a Macon take a National First Place Smoothbore Musket.

I Battle, if you survived, over time you did get to understand hopefully-- where the gun you were issued-- where it shot and its capabilities. Doing Shiloh, the soldiers learned quickly to stand in the open was not the way to fight a War. They took cover in the trees, ravines, and behind walls when they could. Tom