'Blunderbuss' Question

[Mick MacAnselan]

Question regarding 17th/18th century flintlock pistols with flared barrels. Were these used like a Blunderbuss shotgun, i.e. to scatter shot? Or were they intended to fire a single ball, with the flare simply making them faster loading? TIA.

[blackjohn]

Fwiw, I have read that the flared muzzle of a blunderbuss has no affect on scattering the pattern of shot, beyond what would normally occur due to the diameter of the barrel.

[Captain Jim]

Blackjohn is correct, it really has no effect. This was known to gunsmiths at the time. The flare is generally held as being easier to reload multiple round- or oddly-shaped projectiles under adverse conditions, such as a pitching deck or coach-top. Looking down the big bore of a 'buss barrel also had an effect on your adversary's desire not to have that thing go off in his direction.

[Monterey Jack]

What's the general range / accuracy with one of these? Also, would operating one meet most safety guidelines for blackpowder / muzzleloading events?

[blackjohn]

I can't speak to the range of a blunderbuss pistol, but at 30 yards one of my friends hit 3 of 3 shots from a blunderbuss firing... spent CO2 cartidges as projectiles!!! One actually hit nose first.

As for safety... why not? It's just another muzzleloader. If anyone is concerned, just reduce the charge. :)

[Jib]

any truth to the rumor that these were often loaded with broken glass, rocks, or old nails?

[Cascabel]

any truth to the rumor that these were often loaded with broken glass, rocks, or old nails?

No truth to that rumor, except perhaps in cases of dire emergency.

That type of junk would damage the barrel, and can you imagine the result if a large piece of iron hardware such as a nail were to get jammed crosswise in the bore with the rest of the load trying to get past it ???

I can't recall where I read it, but I have heard of thick sheet lead being cut into projectiles with a hammer and chisel, which would create some rather nasty square pieces, but quite usable if regular buckshot was not available. I have not tried it yet, but it should work nicely if the pieces were kept about usual buckshot size.

My blunderbuss has a spread of 2+ feet at a distance of 50 feet with standard 00 buckshot. There were some fireing tests done back in the '50s with various different antique blunderbusses, and the shot spread eventually created a hollow pattern with few hits in the middle of the pattern as the distance increased.

The way to properly load one is to pour in your powder charge, followed by a thick wad to act as a piston to push out the shot load, (without a thick wad, much of the force of the powder would be lost passing between the individual pellets). Then another thinner wad is rammed down to hold it all in place. Not something that can be done in a hurry while you are being shot at !!!!

>>>>> Cascabel

[Mick MacAnselan]

Okay, maybe I'm dense, but I'm still wondering. What would have been the Usual load in a 'blunderbuss' pistol (as opposed to a longer barrel blunderbuss)? Would it have been a single ball or a load of shot?

[Captain Jim]

It could be anything, including shot, ball or a combination (Buck and Ball). The same applies to a blunderbuss, but you're talking about a 75 caliber ball or better. That's a huge chunk of lead to throw at one person and a waste of the gun's capabilities. Make a dandy door opener though.

Square shot would certainly spread the pattern, but in a completely unpredictable way.

While we're on the subject, I remember there being a prohibition against using "square" shot cut from sheet lead on Christians, but that it was OK to use it on non-Christian opponents. Anyone know/remember the reference on that one?

[Patrick Hand]

can't recall where I read it, but I have heard of thick sheet lead being cut into projectiles with a hammer and chisel, which would create some rather nasty square piece

I heard that without "shot towers" that was one of the ways to make shot .......

[blackjohn]

While we're on the subject, I remember there being a prohibition against using "square" shot cut from sheet lead on Christians, but that it was OK to use it on non-Christian opponents. Anyone know/remember the reference on that one?

You are probably thinking of the Puckle Gun...

James Puckle (c. 1667-1724) was a notary-public and also an author, his best-known work - reprinted as recently as 1900 - being The Club, a moral dialogue between a father and son. His 'portable gun or machine called a defence' - designed to fire round bullets against Christians and square ones against Turks - is one of his only two known ventures in the field of military technology (the other being a sword concerning which no details are recorded). In 1717 it was rejected for government use after trials at Woolwhich, but, despite this, he obtained a patent on 15 May 1718, and then made strenuous efforts to market the gun, raising a company for this purpose in 1721. In March, 1722 the Daily Courant carried an advertisement for 'Several sizes in Brass and Iron of Mr. Puckle's Machine or Gun, called a Defence....at the Workshop thereof, in White-Cross-Alley, Middle Moorfields'. At the end of the same month the London Journal reported that at a demonstration of one of the guns 'one Man discharged it 63 times in seven Minutes, though all the while Raining; and that it throws off either one large or sixteen Musquet Balls at every discharge with very great Force'

1 November

James Puckle of London, England, demonstrated his new invention, the "Puckle Gun," a tripod-mounted, single-barreled flintlock gun fitted with a multishot revolving cylinder. This weapon fired nine shots per minute at a time when the standard soldier's musket could be loaded and fired but three times per minute. Puckle demonstrated two versions of the basic design. One weapon, intended for use against Christian enemies, fired conventional round bullets, while the second variant, designed to be used against the Muslim Turks, fired square bullets, which were believed to cause more severe and painful wounds than spherical projectiles. The "Puckle Gun" failed to attract investors and never achieved mass production or sales to the British armed forces. One newspaper of the period observed following the business venture's failure that "those are only wounded who hold shares therein." (1718)

[blackjohn]

can't recall where I read it, but I have heard of thick sheet lead being cut into projectiles with a hammer and chisel, which would create some rather nasty square piece

I heard that without "shot towers" that was one of the ways to make shot .......

I've heard another is to pour molten lead through a sieve into a bucket.

[Captain Jim]

That's the reference I was talking about, thanks Blackjohn.

Pouring lead through a sieve into a bucket will acheive spheroids, but not perfect or near-perfect spheres. The lead doesn't have time to form into spheres before hitting the water, so they hit imperfect and semi-fluid, further deforming them. William Watts, a plumber, figured out that lead poured through a sieve had to fall a significant distance to form a sphere and to solidify enough to resist deforming on impact with the water below. In 1782, Bristol, England, Watts added three floors to his house, cleverly disguising it as a Gothic tower so as not to annoy the neighbors, and created the first shot tower.

He soon quit the plumbing business.

[Captain Jim]

Here’s something that just occurred to me: None of the testing done on blunderbuss patterns states that they are using period-correct shot, shot that is almost by definition odd-shaped. While perfectly round shot might not go astray while leaving the barrel, oddly shaped pellets might and probably would.

Also, the tests do not address the type or quality of wadding on top of the shot. Anything other than a flat felt pad is going to affect pattern.

Lastly, the wad on top of the shot and the wad behind would serve as a compressor, air resistance on the front wad working in concert with the gas pressure from the powder charge, collapsing the shot column before the gas can escape around the back wad. In other words, the front wad would start to decelerate as it hit the flare in the barrel while the back wad would still be accelerating, pushing the pellets outward and spreading the pattern out where the odd shape of the pellets would take over.

Just a thought.

[Cascabel]

Here’s something that just occurred to me: None of the testing done on blunderbuss patterns states that they are using period-correct shot, shot that is almost by definition odd-shaped. While perfectly round shot might not go astray while leaving the barrel, oddly shaped pellets might and probably would.

Also, the tests do not address the type or quality of wadding on top of the shot. Anything other than a flat felt pad is going to affect pattern.

Lastly, the wad on top of the shot and the wad behind would serve as a compressor, air resistance on the front wad working in concert with the gas pressure from the powder charge, collapsing the shot column before the gas can escape around the back wad. In other words, the front wad would start to decelerate as it hit the flare in the barrel while the back wad would still be accelerating, pushing the pellets outward and spreading the pattern out where the odd shape of the pellets would take over.

Just a thought.

Some interesting thoughts on the subject, Jim. Perhaps I need to do some patterning tests with different load variations. Keeping the powder charge and weight of shot load constant, but varying the wadding types and shot quality and type. Might be very enlightening...

>>>>>> Cascabel

[Captain Jim]

Aye, I just love science.

[Capt. Bo of the WTF co.]

I spent alot of time on the subject of eliminating the "do-nut" pattern a few years ago. I was having trouble developing a good charge to hunt turkey with that wouldn't blow holes in the pattern. Then one day it hit me to use a shot cup just like the modern shells. Not the plastic ones but make them from cardboard. Granted my research isn't period correct, but if you want results that work, then here's the answer.

Take a light weight cardboard and make a cross with 1/2" wide beams, and cut them to 2 1/4" long. After loading powder and cushion wad, start the cross down the muzzle, add your shot, ram it home and cover with card. I won't say anymore but TRY IT... you will be amazed!

[hitman]

Cascabel if and when you do the patterning I for one would love to see the results. Also this disscusian has left me with two odd thoughts.

1 Where did gentelman hunters of the GAoP get their gear?

2 Was their a GAoP version of Outdoor life and or pherhaps a GAoP version of "Shooting Flying"

[Story]

Cascabel if and when you do the patterning I for one would love to see the results. Also this disscusian has left me with two odd thoughts.

1 Where did gentelman hunters of the GAoP get their gear?

2 Was their a GAoP version of Outdoor life and or pherhaps a GAoP version of "Shooting Flying"

Ask and ye shall receive...

http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~rbear/walton/index.html

[blackjohn]

Hehheh... like I've always said, they were alot like us... right down to the specialized magazines.

[hitman]

Thank you Story was wondering if anyone would ever put The Complete Angler on the net. I also went back and found that PTERYPLEGIA or The Art of Shooting Flying is actually period (1727) So here is a link to it as well

http://members.aye.net/~bspen/ptery.html

No Pattern info though

[Hrothgar Addams]

Me old Grandpa had a 10 Ga double gun he liked ta load with rock salt fer more-or-less non-lethal encounters.

Mom used ta tell me he used it ta scare off boys he didn't like.

Grandma said ye could also use dry rice. It stung like rock salt and had the added hint of wedding!

Sadly, he never left any information on shot patterns of rice vs salt. . .