Finding the maximum effective range of a civillian flintlock smoothbored gun

[@GaryED44]

You've really opened my eyes about smoothbores. From a small boy i was always told they were useless after 20 yards

[@lindybeige]

A close miss is still effective - it will force the enemy to seek cover or run, or stop to return fire, or charge. Also, when firing at formations of men several ranks deep, missing the front man is not a miss against all.

[@TheOhgodineedaname]

Mitchells writing during the Napoleonic Wars noted that beyond 300 yards shooting at formations would be little more than a waste of powder if only because the soldiers were so inadequate at shooting!

[@martinwalker9386]

Lindybeige not always. Read about Rodger Young and his MOH citation.

[@ericericson192]

Not necessarily, military discipline does not allow those things. Stopping, running, seeking cover, etc. are acts of cowardice and will be treated as such. You must do as your officer commands. The line must hold.

[@samnathan1677]

Didn’t expect to find lindybeige here

[@martinwalker9386]

MOH is awarded for acts BEYOND THE CALL OF DUTY. Young’s Officer called for the troops to fall back. Young went forward even though he had been hit in the first burst.

[@tylerfields2733]

We’ll just pretend that the turnpike is the river flowing 😉

[@duelist1954]

Tyler Fields Thanks!

[@gerryjames9720]

Just pretend its early in the Revolutionary War, and that’s the sound of English Cavalry running down the Continental Army. Lends a sense of urgency to your reloading drills.

[@smegleydophercam2839]

duelist1954 I’m new to smooth bore, I was wondering if fiberglass insulation could be safe for a replacement for Flax tow? It’s getting pretty dry ‘round here, I wouldn’t want to set a bean field on fire

[@duelist1954]

Nick Groves I honestly don’t know...might be a bit rough on your bore.

[@smegleydophercam2839]

duelist1954 is there a way to make tow less flammable, something I could soak it in and let it dry? Thank you, I love ur presentations, been watching for years.

[@IIVVBlues]

Great video. My flintlock looks almost identical to yours. Generally I shoot a .60 cal.round ball with 75 grains for a 100 yard target and I get consistent 12 inch grouping. At the range, I shoot 60 grains for a 50 yard target. I get a consistent 6" group for 5 shots off hand. For the long gong (an empty oxy-acetylene tank hung in a tree) at rendezvous I load with 110 grains. I always shot 2F. The long gong is about 200+ yards and I can only hit it 25% of the time. It's been over 30 years since I've hunted with my flinter, but I generally wouldn't try unless the deer was within 50 to 60 yards. My hunting load was 80 grains. I was a fair shot, but I was lucky to place in the top ten shooters at rendezvous. In colonial times most militia men grew up with muskets and had to successfully hunt to survive. They knew their guns well and what they were capable of. At 100 to 150 yards, I think there would have been very few misses. I haven't even been to the range this year because of the Covid debacle, but after seeing this video, I'll have to get out my flintlock and give it a cleaning for nostalgia's sake.

[@dave-in-nj9393]

first off, you sir, are a shooter. standing up, no rest and hitting the target with iron sights at 100 yards. bravo !

[@mikewysko2268]

Enjoyed the trip back in time. Period firearm, tactics, clothing and eye glasses. Well done Sir.🇺🇸

[@mohammedcohen]

...Mr Peabody's 'Wayback Machine'...

[@mikewysko2268]

@@mohammedcohen 😁

[@OutsideTheTargetDemographic]

Stainless steel wrist watch... 🤓

[@History_Coffee]

I'd like to see this done with buck and ball loads, if memory serves that was a popular combat load for both sides of the 7 years war.

[@heofthebee]

What is shocking is the accuracy and lethality of the old flintlocks. You could deer hunt today with that weapon.

[@orckiller91]

William Terivani-Lincoln MD many do, I know I do

[@krockpotbroccoli65]

@@heofthebee The muzzleloader deer season here is literally called "Primitive Firearm Season"it was literally put there to accommodate people who want to hunt with flintlocks. The whole high speed low drag stupid modernated "muzzleloader" craze is nothing more than a ploy to allow dickheads to ruin that season for those of us who want to actually hunt with primitive arms.

[@mattwilcox3645]

@@krockpotbroccoli65 I regret Thomson Center Arms not making them anymore

[@krockpotbroccoli65]

@@mattwilcox3645The Thompson Center ones were always cheesy, manufactured widgets. It's no surprise they discontinued them. Good Muskets always have and always will be a cottage industry. if you want a real flintlock you need to either build one yourself or commission one from an artisan gunsmith who can make one you.

[@jamesvatter5729]

Mike, That's a certainly good, fast ignition on that fowler. Nice job!

[@Gooch072]

I had this question for a while. Thanks for answering it.

[@nikkolettguyer4913]

A well built Pennsylvania Fowler is a very accurate weapon I had a friend build one for me and it was a copy of one in a private museum, not an accurate copy as I had him pot a jagger button and a loop for a sling on it so it would never be confused for the original. Yes I like your Fowler .

[@catyear75]

Love love love! The Flintlocks!

[@Ensign_Cthulhu]

Flintlocks! Meet the Flintlocks! They're the AR of the 18th C....

[@Me2Lancer]

Thanks for the insights in to 18th century battle. An ancestor of mine from North Carolina enlisted in the revolutionary army the same day the Declaration of Independence was signed. He fought under Francis Marion and Nathaniel Green, fought at Camden where he was captured but escaped, Kings Mountain and Cowpens. He served for the duration of the war and received a land grant for his service north of Charlotte, NC. As a militiaman he no doubt used this type of firearm.

[@amerigo88]

Holy cow! May i ask the last name of your ancestor? We may be related.

[@mtslyh]

I would think the adrenaline of actual combat might have skewed the results a little bit. This would be more true for new troops than for seasoned veterans. You seemed way too relaxed while shooting. I think you need to repeat the test with a horde of perturbed lawyers bearing down on you, getting closer and closer with each miss.... Great content as always. I love the historical context and information. I always learn something on your channel.

[@luger_Mann]

Fun fact during the civil war (probably happened during the revolution also) soldiers typically panicked so hard when loading the rifle that they would end up shooting their ram rods at the enemy (don’t remember where I learned that but I guarantee it was this man or someone similar to him)

[@herbertgearing1702]

I think a horde of lawyers would be a great target idea!

[@COIcultist]

@@herbertgearing1702 and he gets to shoot lawyers too. what is there not to like?

[@krockpotbroccoli65]

It needs to be done on the clock. Like figure out the timetable of a typical engagement of the period, use that as the par time and then set up a course of fire where you have to fire a certain number of shots at 100, 75, 50, 25 yards and you have to run between shooting positions. I think that would be the only way to have any semblance of accuracy in this kind of test.

[@Tinman3187]

I think the point of this test was to demonstrate that in ideal conditions soldier could achieve 100% lethal accuracy at 50 yards using the tools of the time. The beginning of his video was about a commander telling his soldier not to shoot until the enemy was this close. The idea behind this was that if soldier could produce 100% lethal accuracy at that range in training, then in combat they might be able to score a high % of disabling hits on enemies even if they were stressed thus making speed loading and shooting less of an issue for inexperienced troops. They probably hoped that 100% lethal would at least translate to 40% seriously injured in an actual battle this allowing a victory despite not having the best troops.

[@BlackPowderTV]

Excellent video and educational as usual. Well done. Thanks!

[@BubbaRountreeOutdoors]

that's some danged fine shootin' with that old smoke pole Mike!! I appreciate the hard work that you put into these videos my brother... Wade

[@philb8338]

Mike I probably couldn't hit that target at 100 yards if I had a bench to rest the musket on, never mind off-hand. That is some dang fine marksmanship.

[@Rumblestrip]

Maybe noisy, however very informative. Been wanting to do this myself. Thank you Mike. Fine shooting. Very fine.

[@JamesThomas-gg6il]

I love the history that you put into prospective. Yes tactics and strategy and dates and places are great but as you just showed, if they are in range then so are you, that would be extremely intimdating id say. Thanks Mike

[@bubbadoolittle2812]

I really like the speed of your lock! It's obviously as fast a percussion rifle. How about a video of how you achieved this? A very nice video!

[@BurkeSchneider]

Very well done video! We all appreciate you posting this even with the noise. The noise didn't bother me at all, it was probably louder in person than in the video. Thanks for all your informative videos, your channel always has great content. I also want to add, that was some GREAT shooting! I've had some time behind smoothbores and you easily surpassed what I'm capable of.

[@stevesmolik24]

Watched this video after watching your Brown Bess accuracy video. Looks like a tie at 100yds for effective shooting between these firelocks. Thank you for another wonderful video.

[@tumblingdown8612]

Keep up the good work man. You consistently put out some of the most interesting content on YT and are really passionate about a niche subset of this hobby. You deserve way more subs.

[@richardelliott9511]

Thanks Mike, nice demonstration. Similar results to others I've seen and not as bad as you described. Had you been standing opposite a British Square, all of you're shots, save perhaps that high one, would have hit someone, so all effective. However the one thing that I hadn't thought of before is how close 100yds is when someone is running towards you and it may take you 20 or 30 seconds to reload. So no certainty that you'll be ready to fire again by the time they're upon you and without a bayonet to defend your self, the tendency would be to turn tail and run to survive to fight another day. Some food for thought about what we've always pecieved as the militia's poor performance in those 18th century battles.

[@markdesjardins3153]

You are describing, what we call in the infantry battle plan B, the faster you run the longer you live.😉

[@richardelliott9511]

@@markdesjardins3153 never having served myself, I would have thought that plan would have been a bit lower in the order of battle. Perhaps C, D or E. Lol

[@Matt_The_Hugenot]

When militiamen were most successful was when they were employed as skirmishers and marksmen, shooting from range and cover, avoiding direct contact with the opposition line of battle. Trying to use them as line infantry was not a recipe for success.

[@richardelliott9511]

@@Matt_The_Hugenot I believe that Militia men with smooth bore muskets would be most effectively used enmass, which was what this video is about. Skirmishers and marksman were more likely to be men that had rifles, where their improved accuracy could be better employed and their much slower reloading times wouldn't be such a handicap and the order would be specifically to fire one well aimed shot and run. Sorry I can't quote sources, this is just info that I have obsorbed over the years from multiple sources, which seems very logical to me.

[@Matt_The_Hugenot]

@@richardelliott9511 The first experiments with rifle equipped units in the British Army occurred right at the end of the 18th century partly as a reaction to defeat and experience in the War of Independence and partly due to improving technology. Prior to that skirmishers were raised from the best shots in line infantry and were musket armed or, like Roger's regiment, were recruited locally from loyalist frontiersmen some of whom may have brought their own rifles. The French were quicker to adopt skirmish units than the British however they remained musket armed well into the napoleonic wars. As Mike shows it was perfectly possible for a good shot with a well made musket to provide relatively long range harassing fire. The introduction of rifle trebled the range at which this was possible.

[@thomasflynn3584]

Excellent video Mike. I’ve been preaching the naked ball concept to my Ranger company for a long time now. I’m going to make them watch the video.

[@geneslodysko6150]

Great Flintlock video!!! Keep the flintlock videos coming!!!! Would love to see some of your flintlocks out omg the range that we haven’t seen shot for awhile. Thanks again

[@marynordseth2788]

I was in a junior rifle club in the early 1950's. My grandad, a Kentucky recruit in the Spanish American War. signed me up for the rifle club. Thanks.

[@michaelwalker6386]

Excellent video. Very interesting. Thanks!

[@OnTheRiver66]

And also you did very well for off-hand shooting at 100 yards for anyone!

[@bigd8766]

Completely enjoyed the video, & the commentary! Like the history and theories of the flintlock. Completely effective at 100yrds, believe they’d all have been hits on life size target. Thanks for this video. Best wishes!

[@terryschwartz6437]

Stumbled on your channel a few weeks ago. Evidently we are the same age I enjoy just the facts and abilities of the old firearms. No bravado which is so common on many firearms channels. Keep it up. Regards Terry54

[@sealboy1211]

I can’t remember where I read it, but a Frenchman detailed his units assault on British lines, and I was always confused at the ranges he stated that fire commenced. It felt far and away like longer ranges then what I had been lead to believe from popular descriptions. It took me on a journey of discovering line warfare tactics. These men are looked at as sort of brain dead with the way they fought but there is so much going on and they were making the best of what combat had become. They couldn’t just walk up to each other they had to outmaneuver each other, something I think the general populace discounts. Most of us that see combat as “50yards” and charge, would crap their pants at 200 yards when people start dying randomly to massed fire and run in panic, only to be run down by some dude on a horse with a sword and armor.

[@baileybrunson42]

You did great under the circumstances Mike. Improvise, adapt and overcome..! Keep up the good work.

[@threeoeightwadcutter2820]

Good to see you again! Thanks for sharing

[@cal9064]

Despite the road noise (A minor distraction at most)....I really enjoyed this insightful glimpse into warfare from times past. Your observations and results really put into perspective the limitations our ancestors faced, when dealing with mortal threats. Whether from hostile natives, or invading troops. Well done, Mike.

[@stevebuckskinner5482]

I can hear the traffic but at the same time I can hear you just fine. Well done!!

[@Hazeltonpeakroad]

Great video. I have been using your loads for the starting point to. work up loads for my fowler. So far they have worked very well. Your loading information on using shot has got me two turkeys so far. They hit the ground and just barely quivered. Thanks guru Mike!

[@normsamuels7955]

Even with the road and airport noises your audio was easily understood. Well done.

[@sargintrock2538]

Well done!

[@HaNsWiDjAjA]

Very interesting! I once read of a mid-19th century British hunter in India, Frank B. Simson, who shot a deer with a muzzle-loading double-barreled 14-bore shotgun at 120 yards. He was shooting from a rest and the balls were patched. As you have shown in this video it was surprisingly doable. Mr Simson did acknowledge that he was a bit lucky though, and wished he'd brought a rifle, but made do with what he had. The famous British hunter, Frederick Courteney Selous, also once shot a sable antelope with a 4-gauge smooth-bore elephant gun from 120 yards away, kneeling. As surprising as connecting at such a long range with the smooth bore was the fact that the antelope did not fall down dead right away; despite having a 1750 grain projectile travel through its whole body, it still managed to run a hundred yards!

[@EBthere]

I'm late seeing this but what an outstanding video. Informative and the shooting with a smoothbore flintlock was great. I paid no attention to the surrounding noise. The sounds of your smoothbore firing made it all worth it.

[@markj1424]

Love your channel Mike, but damn that highway is loud.

[@Bayan1905]

I'm in the process of reading a book called "Thundersticks" which deals with the Native American firearms and the entire trade in North America from the contact with Europeans on, and the Natives from the 1600's onward well until the mid and even the mid 1800's preferred smoothbore trade guns, usually anywhere from .60-.62 caliber. The tactics they applied later on against the Europeans in the French & Indian War and even the Revolutionary War were honed against other rival tribes. The most powerful for many years were the Mohawk because they were simply the best armed and their tactics were so aggressive, but all of them practiced the ambush where they would lay in wait for members of the opposing tribe to come through and then they would open up hidden from whatever position at the closest possible range. Accounts from Europeans at the time who would either find out about these attacks from survivors of them said that there wasn't a fighting force that could have equaled some of these tribes at the height of their power because of the techniques. At one time the Mohawk were able to put 1,000 armed warriors or better to attack tribes and French settlements and frequently sent out numbers at least 300-400 strong. When one tribe would attack another village, they would simply get as close as possible and fire into the wooden longhouses or huts as possible. There was no thought given as to who was given as these were raids of conquest by one tribe trying to dominate or wipe out another. It was those close range, ambush tactics that Robert Rogers and the French-Canadians ended up picking up and using, Rogers men went to shorter barreled guns like the trade guns the Native Americans preferred and to get close and ambush your enemy or leave someone to cover their rear guard after a fight to ambush them when they were retreating.

[@keyote3]

From Gt Britain again, this is a superb video/review. I have worked out my optimum charge with a smoothbore .50 Percussion Hawken, sometimes patched, sometimes not. I use 75 grains of Black Powder either way of patching. Effective range, like yourself is 100yds. I seem to be conducting an orchestra with the barrel on a longer range, and miss all the time. I tried shooting at flint rocks about a average foot size at 100 yds a while back, and got fairly accurate results, but my eyes tired quickly. Great fun though.....!!!! thanks for the sound effects, marvellous racket...!!!!

[@acratone8300]

'conducting an orchestra with the barrel', LOL, thumbs up!

[@paulmanson253]

Hello. Personal curiosity. What grade of powder are you using ? And what grades are available to you ? Swiss powder or other ? Cheers.

[@keyote3]

@@paulmanson253 Well now, as I am in Gt. Britain here, we have to undergo a monstrous amount of jumping through hoops simply to purchase a little Black Powder, and that is not cheap either. I have been lucky in past years to be able to freely access powder supplies etc, but that is in the past (companies gone bust). Nowadays one has to acquire an Explosives Licence first from the Police. They ask all manner of questions about usage etc, then the actual purchase has to be made, which involves tracking down a supplier first, then collecting it, or somehow a strange delivery gets into it......!!! It is weird in the extreme to be honest. I currently have a modicum of 'Black Silver' No 2 powder, and very few caps left, so I need to do the exercise again soon, or give up, which is really what the government want. The pleasure one derives from watching the video clips of 'serious' gun making, shooting, reviews etc etc make it seem a worthwhile experience, however, due to age getting in the way, one maybe has to reassess ones priorities. I really envy America and its history, and current use of arms etc, it seems so.... well..... just lucky I guess. I have no real desire to get into re-enactment, I tried it once, a long time ago, I had a .60 cal Remington 'Zouave' for a time, but when I used it for target practice at a range that used to be about (bust again), they asked me not to use the gun again there because it was destroying the backdrop shield.....!!!!! So I gave it up to a guy who was ell into the English Civil War experience. Revolvers were another thing, then a Firearms Certificate comes into play, more hoop leaping, not that it was not worth it for the fun, but........ getting varied grades of Powder etc, and ball, plus patches etc is so very difficult over here, or was.... I gave them all (three) up when the powers that be banned small arms, it was just easier that way.. I have vastly reduced income these days, so something has to give, so I indulge myself watching others doing the suffering instead..... sorry, rant over..!!!!

[@paulmanson253]

@@keyote3 Yes. My heart broke when I found out pistols were to be banned and destroyed. Actually Canadian here,lived for a year in London,1979,and used to go shooting once a week at Bisley with a locksmith friend. I had to sell my own firearms back in 2003,and what hurt the most was parting with the Luger. So I live vicariously with channels such as this. It is good to know a few stubborn buggers still keep the flame alive ( literally) in the UK. I have often wondered if the Churchill family had to give up the Mauser pistol that Winston said kept him alive at (Omdurman I think it was) while he was in uniform. At any rate,I asked about the details as I had a cap and ball Colt reproduction for a number of years. All the best.

[@keyote3]

@@paulmanson253 Aha, the Parabellum Luger. I tried one at the same gun club range years ago. I still bear a scar on my left hand forefinger from that. 9 mm if I remember right... I tried it when a chap from Harwich appeared one night. He later got a chain fire with an Italian .36 clone, it took his right hand fore finger right off as a result, I am not sure if they ever found the missing digit..... When the policeman (Firearms Officer) turned up at mine to check my weaponry for whatever reason later, he was so biased against guns it was unbelievable. It really got to me for a longtime and changed my pleasure quotient a lot........ take care and enjoy what you can..!!

[@Homespunmusic]

Awesome video, Mike!

[@peteandresenfamilyadventur8742]

This is truly classic research. Well done.

[@benjaminmelikant3460]

That lock time is *faaaaaast*... very nice looking gun too.

[@GovtWatchdog]

Mike may not be as young and active as some militiamen may have been back in the 18th century but I bet he has much more shooting experience than most of them did.

[@billmelater6470]

He might have been up there with a Samuel Whittemore or Hezekaih Wyman. Read up on them a bit if your'e not familiar. Some old guys were still pretty badass.

[@ralphralpherson9441]

Well, we ARE talking about a period in time when the average age of death was like 32. Our presenter here could have been LONG dead if he was born in their day. Luckily our average age has nearly tripled since the 17th and 18th centuries. This is back when strep throat, polio, smallpox, syphilis and just about any tooth problem or infection could kill your ass deader than a turtle crossing a congested 8-lane parkway. Also if you have ever had hard-tack you know they weren't eating well, probably had STDs, bad teeth, cold swollen feet, parasites, and other infections running rampant through the ranks, and a good deal of the men were probably nearsighted or farsighted and couldn't afford the crappy glasses of their day. I guarantee there were 15 & 16 year old "men" on that field and most of the other men were probably the same age as the bulk of today's fighting force in the infantry (18-24). In their physical prime? sure, but still decades away from what could be considered a "mastery" of firearms or a degree of mental fortitude. I was strong in my 20s too, but damn was I dumb. Those ranks probably had experience from hunting game or shooting around their farm, but I'd imagine very little practice up against a well armed foe and even less experience under fire themselves. Most white tailed deer and racoon didn't shoot back. 🤣

[@jefferyboring4410]

I doubt he has as much experience with 1 old smooth bore rifle than he has. They had 1 gun and shot it everyday. I have a old 1852 enfield smoothie csa and it’s been shot so much it completely burned away the stock. The butt plate is so wore the screw heads are completely smooth no place for a screw driver. They shot every day one gun every time they knew it like the back of their hand. So no I doubt he has especially if a militia man as he said brought his personal gun to battle

[@englishrupe01]

Really cool and really interesting video...thanks, Mike!

[@billietyree2214]

Thanks Mike. Very informative and encouraging. I own a pedersoli 10ga with one modified choke barrel and the other is cylinder bore, so a 75 caliber musket. I have to see how it does at 100 yards now.

[@david-g2c4p]

I really enjoy your videos. I have a 32 inch trade gun and I’m a living historian. I portray a Muskogee Creek Red Stick. If I’m allowed to make a suggestion, I’d like to see what you could do with something similar using wasp nest as a patch. History suggests that was the most common item used by the Southeastern natives.

[@Quincy_Morris]

It wasn’t “luck” it was tactics. You are right that there was a slight shift away from individual valor from the medieval era. But this shift wasn’t towards ‘luck’ it was towards generalship and drilling. The unit that could get into position first and be ready to fire had the advantage, and the unit that was disciplined enough and lead well enough to fire at the correct range and gauge the opponents formation and tactics would win. So in a sense it’s luck in that it isn’t based on individual skill, but the general who could command his troops could ensure victory. It’s one reason when we hear the word “general” or “armchair general” we think of figures from this era. Regardless… great video! Thanks for making it!

[@davefellhoelter1343]

I noticed the Confidence! of Ignition of every sighting and trigger Pull. and the Speed of that 2F in the pan.

[@herbertgearing1702]

The best thing about fighting British regulars is they march at you shoulder to shoulder in a nice pretty red line and a few of your misses are going to hit the guy beside him or behind him if you're lucky.

[@mohammedcohen]

...it was actually the bayonet that instilled fear...and that the redcoats never stopped advancing...

[@herbertgearing1702]

@@mohammedcohen I think the fear is instilled by the fact that if the British defeat you and take over you will be forced to eat English food, and spell color funny.

[@mohammedcohen]

@@herbertgearing1702 ...alway thopught it was pronounced colooor, favooor or honoor...

[@herbertgearing1702]

@@mohammedcohen if you keep wasting time with all those extra letters you will never put a union jack on the mooooooon.

[@nonsibi1087]

Vauban, (1633-1707), the great French military engineer who served under King Louis LIV, is generally considered the greatest engineer of his age. He built the unsurpassed scientifically designed fortresses in the star form. Into his calculation was the maximum killing range of the military musket. He insisted on defensive works in his construction that kept enemy infantry armed with muskets a minimum of 325 yards since that was the range that massed musketry would have enough hitting energy to kill defenders. We're not talking about sharpshooter accuracy at 325 yards, just a massed repeated rain of deadly lead balls. So, Sebastien LePrestre de Vauban referred to musket range as 325 yards. And he should know a lot better than any of us modern living history types. When asked what is musket range, I now state it at 325 yards since the projectile, shot at maximum elevation, will kill you if it connects with your weak flesh.

[@ardshielcomplex8917]

No matter what Vauban recommended, there's no way any calibre round smooth bore Musket ball will carry out to 325 yards even held at max elevation. Vauban must have been thinking Artillery prices.

[@lifebiker105]

That was interesting. Mike thank you for sharing. That informative video. Joe.

[@DavidVining1]

Very well done and informative.

[@cowstable]

A realistic test. Thank you. The smoothbore musket will shoot even better with patched ball and a tree rest, never mind adding proper sights. Formidable.

[@christophhaupt2520]

Wow! That was eye opening! Never imagined the humble smoothbore so effective at long range. Great shooting sir! Standing in rank and file the continental soldier could not feel safe at 100 plus yards. Great video, many thanks!

[@ENIGMAXII2112]

Very good work (and shooting) Mr. Mike! Pity that nasty and loud motorway.

[@krockpotbroccoli65]

Man, that range could really use a sound barrier of some sort. It would help mitigate The risk of stray fire going over the road too. The highway is literally right there. Very interesting content regardless.

[@johnprice5784]

I think the other thing that spoils the 18th century ambience is the 20th century wristwatch, only joking. :) Love the vids, best wishes from (old original) England.

[@zantimisfits4021]

Very interesting! Do more! One question: what are the sights like? Can’t quite tell from the video.

[@duelist1954]

Zanti Misfits No rear sight. Bead front sight.

[@wayneparker9331]

First, excellent video and explanation of the realities of using a slow loading flintlock musket in a firefight or battle!! Read enough of the original sources written by those who participated in late 17th and 18th century battles and you begin to comprehend that getting those first volleys to count made all the difference in the tide of any fight/battle. Once one side suffered enough physical damage from a couple of good volleys, morale broke down and men started thinking of fleeing for cover regardless of their officers' commands. Secondly, that is some damn fine shooting. You shot offhand from 100 yards with a smoothbore musket. That's no small feat as the inherent inaccuracies of that firearm as compared to a modern rifle are considerable.

[@gijoe508]

Love videos like this. Thank you for doing this channel, I have learned so much about black powder shooting from your videos.

[@johnkendall6962]

The tactic of 2 fires and then fade away proved brutally effect in the battle of Cowpens . The militia fired twice then ran making the British thought they had broke, dragging the British right into the waiting regulars. Most of the militia in that battle were armed with rifles though not smoothbore muskets.

[@woodsmanforlife1677]

Excellent! Thanks for sharing.

[@gregggibson3109]

Very informative video Mike! I appreciate you making this experiment available to us!

[@nigelmuir3363]

Great work Mike really enjoyable

[@Bashe1965]

thanks again for another great video !

[@griffin5226]

John Townsend made the assertion that most of the references to rifles were talking about guns with rifle sights and not if the barrel was rifled or not

[@duelist1954]

That is almost correct. Guns with rifle architecture were called rifles, even if the barrels were smooth. Those guns all have rifle sights, rifle trigger guards, carving, patchboxes etc. Fouling pieces, even with rear sights, were still recognized as muskets.

[@wayneantoniazzi2706]

Great demonstration! It shows a militiaman with his trusty and versatile smootbore could be pretty deadly. Personally though, if I was going into combat with a flintlock I'd still want that bayonet option!

[@OnTheRiver66]

Wow! A very informative video! It answers a lot of questions I had about smoothbore muskets. Very well done! I have to hit subscribe and watch your other videos. Thank you!

[@jayostrem6214]

At 100 yds, off hand, not bad for the average joe with a modern rifle. You've done well.

[@martinwalker9386]

Jay Ostrem I believe that that you haven’t been around as many shooters as I have. Offhand at 150 yards when I was twenty I think I could have call head shots. Certainly the rifles were capable of it. My father was capable of hitting a 12 inch target between 200-250 yards offhand with a 30-30.

[@jayostrem6214]

@@martinwalker9386 I was a law enforcement fire arms instructor for 30 years. There's a difference between between enthusiast's and utilitarians. My drill was a 200yd gong standing with a Garand. Under pressure the average Joe had alot of issues, especially the young ones.

[@jayostrem6214]

@@martinwalker9386 also, your Father was a heck of a shot with a 30-30, what you described would take great skill.

[@martinwalker9386]

Jay Ostrem he bought his first gun when he was 7 years old and shot gophers for a penny bounty with ammunition costing $0.35 a box of fifty .22Shorts. He said he normally had 10-12 cartridges left when he had bounty for the next box. This was during the depression. In high school he was the captain of the rifle team.

[@martinwalker9386]

Jay Ostrem he was good at judging range. My first pronghorn he had me sit down when it started running and when it stopped to look back at us he told me to put the crosshairs 2-4 inches above the hair on its shoulder and the bullet hit the bottom edge of the spine. The rifle was sighted 3 inches maximum above line of sight to a 275 yard zero on a 270 Winchester.

[@kevinkenyon4593]

Mike, thank you for both the great video and history lesson. It is always a pleasure to watch your videos. Stay safe.

[@danpos1971]

I enjoy the brief history lesson at the beginning of your videos. Makes them even more interesting. The 110 grains of 2F is much more powerful than I see my friends loading in their smooth bores. Very cool indeed! I was impressed when I shot my friends, and hit just two inches right of bullseye at 50m. His smooth bore didn't have a rear sight either. But with a proper hold, it didn't cause any difficulty at such a short distance. Next opportunity I'm firing down at the 100m target. Very cool video. Also appreciate the time period clothes. Adds to the atmosphere. Well done!

[@nicholasmccarty4742]

Another great video Mike. Can't wait to get to the range and test my 69yo. Effectiveness with my TVM English Fowler.

[@mickmoriarty7780]

Great video, thanks. Subtitles were handy though.

[@wrxs1781]

Great video Mike, one could ponder if the measuring of powder was done in the heat of battle, these guys lived every day with these rifles and probably knew from repetition how much to pour in the barrel, with countless practice.

[@tepx93]

Well explained. Knowing how ones shot group tends to drift at longer distances, up and to the right in this case, could let one stretch the effective range out a bit further.

[@josiel152]

interesting vide. that freeway, you can clearly see the cars over your shoulder, pretty close for sure. I would have been a deserter, ha ha, in the period you talking about.

[@peacemaker-du4hz]

even a close miss would scare the hell out of someone

[@drewames9629]

Very informative and interesting! Thank you. If your attackers we're in a line abreast, your 125 yard shots might have hit the guy to your target's left.

[@ericwilliams1659]

Not sure how this ended up on my recommendations but I'm glad it did

[@nomadpi1]

Informative demonstration. I never knew of the "patchless" ball shot, but it makes sense of what actual combat situations would make a soldier do. If he stood his ground for two shots before fleeing; I don't believe a "retreat" would occur when you can flee back behind a line of Regulars.

[@Curtislow2]

I was anticipating you using the word" guerilla" when referring to 2 types of warfare.

[@stevebuckskinner5482]

I enjoyed reviewing this video. 👍

[@VernonWallace]

Great information. Enjoyed this video.

[@craigcook1571]

Better than I thought it would be....👍

[@deamcn6548]

Man that thing fires with some authority!

[@ckbass32]

Even with the noise, still an enjoyable video, as always.

[@horkinyorkin]

Very interesting test. Thank you for doing all this work.

[@vanivanov9571]

Great video. This concurs with Prussian tests around 1805, with rifles, where their men were getting about a 50% hit rate on a 31x1.8m target at 75m (75% accuracy with the British rifles). The British, who gave their troops more training, could hit a block of cavalry at about 90m half the time with the Brown Bess, in 1811. At 185m, the Brits could hit the target about 30% of the time. So the fact you can hit a single man at 90m half the time or more... you'd be very impressive to continental troops.

[@bobmiller4383]

Interesting in that the 125 yaard group size isn't much larger than the 100 yard. Just shifted over to the right .

[@mohammedcohen]

...loading with 'bare balls'...don' mean the same thing it once did over 200 years ago...

[@knallis.hjemmelading]

Now you have 7.62 subs so maybe you could shoot some 30 calibers, love your channel

[@SeaWarriorSon]

I thoroughly enjoyed this experiment!

[@gregcampwriter]

You have a blaster that comes with accompanying TIE fighter sound effects.

[@bwhog]

Just as with a shower of arrows, volley fire can be devastatingly effective. Also remember that a close miss on the front rank might still hit someone in a second or third rank. Obviously Mike doesn't have the motivation of someone shooting back at him to help him load lickety split. :) I'd also suggest that for a muzzle loader, at any distance over 50 yards, compensating as best you can for any expected drop of course, aiming at his belt is better than aiming at his chest. More chance of at least a wounding hit (leg, arm, shoulder) which might well take that man out of the battle. I think the same thing applies even today if you're not using a scope and not a marksman but the distances naturally increase rather sharply before you'd have to think about that.

[@herbertsmith6416]

Good job very instructive. I enjoyed it.

[@jeffe.9904]

Thanks Mike, Very Entertaining Video! 👍🏻