How accurate are the original Buffalo rifles and schuetzen rifles?

[Wolfer]

I have Billy Dixons book. In it he talks about the adobe walls shot. He said it was luck but I don't agree. He states that the only entertainment in the buffalo camps was drinking, gambling, and target practice. He remarks that since he didn't drink or gamble he shot a lot. In later years after he owned the ranch at adobe walls he took a picture of the outcrop that the Indians were on. Just under the crest is a large white spot, a rock maybe. I could not live there without shooting at it. You can be sure Mr Dixon knew exactly where to set his sights to hit near the spot.
There were about 30 Indians setting on their horses at the crest. He didn't shoot at a man, he shot into the group. Quanah Parker was in the group and I think he said the man was hit in the arm but still knocked him off his horse. Woody

If I recall it was 1530 yds or thereabouts

[M-Tecs]

http://riflemansjournal.blogspot.com...arry-pope.html

“The superb accuracy of these rifles, properly handled, is unchallenged. Pope guaranteed that any of his muzzle loading rifles, with the exception of the 25 caliber, would shoot into 2 inches at 200 yadrs, loaded from the muzzle. Groups made by Pope, the late C. W. Rowland, dean of the old-time rest shooters, Donaldson, Roberts and others, that show ten shots at 100 yadrs and even 200 yards going into one ragged hole, have often been published. Pope himself has one 200 yard target that shows 10 shots grouping within 5/8 of an inch, center to center! Though temperamental, the Pope muzzle-breach loading Schuetzen rifle, under proper conditions and in the hands of a rifleman willing to study and master the methods that must be used to get results, will yet outshoot up to 200 yards any other type of rifle in existence.”


http://www.issa-schuetzen.http://cdn...d-defining.pdf

http://www.issa-schuetzen.org/histor...e-shooting.php

http://riflemansjournal.blogspot.com...ld-master.html

http://www.pbase.com/halp/harry_pope

http://riflemansjournal.blogspot.com...ling-pope.html

http://www.singleshotexchange.com/ob...fle-shoot.html

http://cdnc.ucr.edu/cgi-bin/cdnc?a=d...18980404.2.100

[M-Tecs]

http://www.assra.com/cgi-bin/yabb/Ya...m=1295241455/0

CW Rowland's benchrest record, (set at the turn of the century) with a Pope barreled Ballard, Rowland put 10 shots into a .722" group, at 200 yards.

[M-Tecs]

Jack Hinson's One-Man War, A Civil War Sniper http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums...over-100-kills

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Hinson

John W. "Jack" Hinson, "Old Jack" (1807–1874) was a farmer in Stewart County, Tennessee who operated as a Confederate partisan sniper against Union forces in the Between-the-Rivers region of Tennessee and Kentucky during the American Civil War.

Hinson, a prosperous plantation owner (who freed all of his slaves), of Scotch-Irish descent, was neutral at the outbreak of the war but took up arms after two of his sons were executed as suspected bushwhackers by Federal troops; their heads were cut off and stuck on the gate-posts to Hinson's home.[1] Hinson used a one of a kind custom made 50 caliber long-range 41-inch barrel Kentucky Long Rifle that weighed 18 pounds to target Union soldiers more than a half-mile away on land, transports, and gunboats along the Tennessee River and the Cumberland River, killing as many as a hundred. Hinson also served as a guide for Nathan Bedford Forrest in his assault on the Union supply center at Johnsonville, Tennessee in November 1864. He was the father of Robert Hinson, who served as the leader of a highly effective partisan band in the Between-the-Rivers region until his death in combat on September 18, 1863. Jack Hinson was never apprehended despite the commitment of elements of four Union regiments to pursue him, and survived the war, dying in 1874.

[Chill Wills]

If you wish to write about the Creedmoor era rifles and the accuracy you (all) might want to spell Creedmoor correctly.
There is no "more" in Creedmoor

It is commonly misspelled, even by some who should know better, like Remington 100 years ago - the text just did not get proofed before it was released from the printer. Paul Jones and then Browning misspelled it. Creedmoor, Long Island, New York. The sight of the .....Creedmoor Range and the birth place of the American NRA.

As to hitting a small (man sized) target at great distance..... the Rifle Accuracy needed is taken for granted but wind and exact distance rule on any given day and location and in the days before rangefinders other ways of the times would be needed to make a first shot hit. The Likelihood of hitting goes way down. Even Civil War sharpshooters (not using Sharps rifles but LR Muzzleloaders- better recheck your word origin) only hit on occasion and it is those rare times that are so well known.

In modern rifle matches on targets of known ranges these BPCR rifles are rarely a sure thing past 300 meters of so.
Just my nickel's worth....
-Michael Rix

[44minimum]

Thank you for the information gentlemen, at least now I have some sort of a general idea. And yes, you will all get autographed copies when it is complete. It will be an e-book, so I'm not sure how that will work, but yeah, I'll give you one.

[Lead pot]

The people that shoot these rifles a lot like the "rock busters" using the barrel and tang sights learn just how much to hold over or run the slide up on the rear barrel sight. It gets to be sort of like the instinctive bow shooter, draw back and let it fly.
I don't have too many rocks where I am but in the fall and winter the chisel plowed fields have a lot of dark clumps of dirt to pick out for a shot. I don't think that there isn’t a better way to tune yourself using a Sharps or roller getting ready for hunting season than busting rocks or lumps of dirt

[DIRT Farmer]

Check out researchpress, life in a Criminan (sp) rifle pit admitedly 1853 muskets but then they were not target guns or target sighted.

[ResearchPress]

I have a detail of a Frank Wesson No. 1 Long-Range Match Rifle on my web site. It is .45-100 though.

You might also find the article "A Short History of Long Range Shooting in the United States" of interest. Browse the site though, I have a few new and contemporary articles on long range rifle fire.

David

[Larry Gibson]

Realistically, under field conditions of questimating the range and not knowing the exact range as in match conditions, your expert marksman (if well practiced) could get 1st round hits to 500 yards if the target was standing and not moving. The trajectory of those older cartridges makes range estimation and accurate sight settings critical. At 500 yards the range estimation had to be within +/- 40 yards and the sight setting had to be absolutely know for zero and any changes due to different conditions......then there is always the wind correction which is critical on a 18 - 20" wide target at 500 yards.......they didn't have any range finders like we have today and he gets no "sighter" shots like you do on a range at bullseyes or silhouettes that just stand there at a know range.........time of flight of those older cartridges make the correct lead very difficult, especially if the target is horse mounted and moving........and unless your "main little hired killer guy " is a well practiced rifleman it won't matter how slick a rifle he has back in days of yester year.......consider also the sights were not quickly adjustable and the time needed to make adjustments............

So, unless you are going to build your guy up to be a very professional and practiced long range shot best to stick to 200 - 300 yards like most of the buffler shooters really did.......that is if you want the shooting to be believable by knowledgeable BP cartridge shooters.......or you can set the scenario where he knows the range (measured or paced) and he has his rifle set up for and practiced (confirmed the zero for that range) that shot in very good conditions where his target won't likely be moving........then out to 500 yards or so would be quite believable......Quigley's bucket shoot and that 800 yard target (wanted poster) was slick but it was a just a movie........

Larry Gibson

[Bent Ramrod]

James Grant covered Frank Wesson cartridges in his Single Shot Rifles series and in an article in one of the early Gun Digests. There was a mention of a .40-100 as a chambering in the Mid Range Sporting and Gallery Rifle (the light two-trigger breakopen job) in the print of the Wesson circular in Single Shot Rifles, but I can't find a picture or a good description. The rifle is advertised as changeable from rim to centerfire easily, so it might have been a rimfire cartridge of some sort. It may have been a misprint, since all the other numbers are .44 or .45. The pictures of rimfires show a .22-100, .32-100, .38-100 and .44-100, and all are straight-cased pistol sized rimfires. Grant at times seemed kind of nonplussed by the Wesson cartridges, since their dimensions seemed to be very imprecisely specified, and sometimes other manufacturers' cartridges, of different nomenclature and even caliber, could fit in rifles chambered for Wesson cartridges. As others have mentioned, Wesson chambered his rifles not only in his own proprietary calibers, but also in other manufacturers' offerings, like .42 Berdan. You might save yourself some quibbles in your fan mail and give the guy a .44-105-520 Wesson, or the 1/4" shorter .44-85-400 Wesson. These were listed as specific for the Wesson Creedmoor rifles and made by the US Cartridge Company.

From my reading, the problem with blackpowder rifle accuracy at long range had less to do with the capabilities of the rifle itself and more to do with the ability of the rifleman to estimate distance over different terrain in changing light and wind. Of course a soldier, a buffalo hunter or an Indian fighter would be getting in a certain amount of firing for effect and eventually get on target at long range. (A smart buffalo hunter, who wanted to make money, would sneak up closer, if possible.) A month later, with another landscape, weather system and range estimate, the shooter would maybe be a little more experienced, and have to take fewer shots, but still, firing one shot at a human sized target at long range and hitting would be a matter of educated luck. Herbert McBride was a Sea Girt shooter who became a sniper in WWI, and even with the distances between trenches pretty well surveyed, admitted that he fired a lot of single shots at a lot of enemy soldiers at ranges he figured were 1000 yards or so, and neither he nor his spotter could discern any effect whatsoever. He used a Ross rifle with a telescope sight, so he was not handicapped.

Charles Askins, in his memoirs, said one of his jobs in the military was training recruits in distance estimation. Most of the trainees were from urban environments and were pretty bad at it, even after a lot of practice. But there was one kid who was a whiz right from the start. Turned out that in civilian life he was a trackwalker for the Southern Pacific railroad. Maybe that could be your assassin's day job.

[44minimum]

Thank you for your input folks

[DanWalker]

WAAAAAAY back yonder in the last century when I was a shaved headed Gyrene, toting around various belt fed toys of the lethal variety, we were taught an easy and foolproof method of rangefinding. Being that the USMC is always the poor cousin, we never had any fancy lazers or doodads. What every Marine did have though was a THUMB. Just hold your arm straight out and place your target next to your upraised thumb. At 100 yards, a 6 foot tall man is as tall as the distance between the tip of my thumb and the bottom of my thumbnail. He covers half that distance at 200 and 1/4 the distance at 400. At 500 yards, a hummvee or light truck sitting broadside, is the width of the end of my thumb. You get the idea. We also used dog tags as rangefinders, using the same methodology.
I've been to the Museum in Cody many times, and drooled over the incredible collection of Scheutzen and creedmoor rifles they have there. Sadly they are just sitting in cases, with no thought given to their historical context.

[felix]

Only ONE shot out of a HUNDRED hit its target during battles between WWII battle ships (the Atlantic, mainly). And, any such lucky shot did little damage, except for only a known few against all odds. ... felix

[DanWalker]

Only ONE shot out of a HUNDRED hit its target during battles between WWII battle ships (the Atlantic, mainly). And, any such lucky shot did little damage, except for only a known few against all odds. ... felix

In 1991 I saw raggedy A$$ed Saudi Arabian tankers making first round hits at 2,000 yards with Vietnam era M60 tanks. We saw an area in kuwait that had been on the receiving end of some naval gunfire. There wasn't a piece of the corrugated metal buildings left, bigger than your palm. On Hackett Range at FT Knox, there is an old naval gun turret placed as a target. I wish I would've thought to take a picture of the AWESOME mushroom clouds that would shoot up out of the top hatch when we'd punch a 120mm HEAT round through it.

[Outpost75]

The arm's length thumbnail range estimate was in use during the Civil War, substuting a wagon or gun cason for the Humvee, and the standing man as being within the range at which gunners would change from bursting shell to canister. From Gillam's Manual for Light Artillery 1859. If your hero is reputed to be Ci il War vet, that's where he learned it!

[felix]

Right on, Dan. Those M60s were blessed with some good electronics. The electrons driving the NJ's guns during that time could hit a football field from 26 miles. Aren't these battlewagons on land and sea about extinct these days, meaning little or no development forthcoming? It appears an air force of some type is taking all the chips, like drones, etc.??? ... felix

[MT Chambers]

I believe that Dr. Mann's shuetzen score at 200 yds. off hand, still stands today, 120 years later.

[Don McDowell]

Only ONE shot out of a HUNDRED hit its target during battles between WWII battle ships (the Atlantic, mainly). And, any such lucky shot did little damage, except for only a known few against all odds. ... felix

Couldn't say about the battle ships never fired one, but I can tell you with a pretty good amount of certainty, that any of the folks that show in the top 10 or 15 at the Quigley or other gong match seldom if ever miss the first shot on any of the targets with their chosen bpcr type rifle.

[308w]

I personally have not done any BPCR shooting but I read a lot, print and internet. I am highly doubtful that the guys in the old days can do any better than the riflemen we have these days shooting these type arms. I look at the groups shot with the sharps rifles and the best of them hold 1.5 to 2.5 moa, at least these are what I see and read about. No doubt the shooter of the day was well practiced and knew what his firearm was capable of. I don't doubt there were and are men who could hold 2.0 to 3.0 MOA with their rifles. This figures to 10 to 15 inch groups at 500 yards or 12 to 18 inch groups at 600.
First shot hits on a man sized target, most likely moving, 300 and in would be my guess. But if the killer knew where he would shoot from and had a chance to zero his rifle and load prior to making the shot, and it was a stationary target, say a watering hole. Then 500 to 600 would absolutely be doable. Just my take on things.....