18th Century Rifle Accuracy

[Artificer]

The discussion of the American Flintlock Long Rifle’s accuracy was certainly notable in the 18th century and continues to be the “stuff of legends” today. I have been and continue to be an admirer of these fine rifles and the people who used them. However, I believe it is an injustice to continue legends and myths, rather than give an objective description of the kind of accuracy they were truly capable.

To be objective, I think it important we look at as many historic quotes/documentation as possible and question them. So in this thread, I hope to have an objective discussion from which we all may learn more. In this light, I will call this first post:

Part 1. EARLY REVOLUTIONARY WAR PROPAGANDA

1st Quote comes from the London Chronicle on August 17, 1775 ”“ “This province has raised 1,000 riflemen, the worst of whom will put a ball into a man’s head at the distance of 150 to 200 yards; therefore, advise your officers who shall hereafter come out to America to settle their affairs before their departure.”

2nd Quote comes from another London Newspaper in 1775 ”“ “The shirt-tail men, with their cursed twisted guns, the most fatal widow-and-orphan-makers in the world.”

Discussion: What is often missed with these quotes was they were, in fact, “Letters to the Editors” of these newspapers. The first quote seems to be attributed to a Philadelphia Printer by the name of Bedford. If he was in fact American Patriot William Bedford, then it is clear this quote was meant to shake the confidence of the British, if not outright scare some of them. I do not know for sure, but the estimate of 1,000 such Rifleman may or probably was also exaggerated?

However since the average human head size was/is a little over 5” wide and 8” tall; I can see how that was achievable at 150 yards from the prone or really good rest, but at 200 yards it seems more of “a stretch” (especially in a cross wind) though perhaps possible. There is a large ballistic/ball drop around 150 yards and much worse at 200 yards that they had to contend with. I don’t believe every one of them could have done it on the first shot, though, and certainly not “the worst of them,” as quoted above. I DO believe that unless there was some cross wind, and firing from the prone or very steady rest, that hitting a standing human torso (that was/is not moving) enough times at 200 yards with a flintlock long rifle was possible to be effective.

A .50 Cal. PRB leaving he muzzle at around 1900 fps and in a rifle sighted a little high at 110 yards, the drop at 200 yards is over 40 inches. So it would not be an easy shot, by any means.

I have not been able to find the author of the second quote, but I most strongly suspect it was also from a Patriot American attempting to undermine British Resolve/Morale. Of course, it is also possible the Author/s were trying to warn the British in an attempt to aid them, but also by exaggerating?

3rd Quote comes from Richard Henry Lee and claimed that six counties in western Virginia could provide 6000 riflemen with "their amazing hardihood, their method of living so long in the woods without carrying provisions with them, the exceeding quickness with which they can march to distant parts, and above all, their dexterity...in the use of the Rifle Gun...every shot is fatal." Lee went so far as to assert that these riflemen could hit an orange at 200 yards.

Discussion. I have not yet been able to find a date on the above quote or original source that may explain this quote better. I strongly suspect it was before he offered his famous Independence Resolution to the Second Continental Congress on June 7, 1776.

I looked it up and the Census Bureau estimates the total population of Virginia in 1770 to have been 447,016. That figure included slaves, but did not include the population of some of the lands claimed by Virginia, that were given up to make territories of other States later on.

Were there even 6,000 rifles in Virginia at that time, let alone that many militia men who were capable of going off for Soldiers? I don’t know, but that seems a large to very large exaggeration?

Now as far as the assertion that 6,000 riflemen could all hit an orange at 200 yards, that is at best “Patriotic Fever Exaggeration,” if not downright pure poppycock.

OK, Folks, just HAD to save “the best (or rather worst) propaganda for last.

4th Quote comes from a then recent Scottish Immigrant. Baika Harvey, to the region of Kettle Creek, Georgia. Unfortunately I do not have an exact date on this quote but it seems to have come from the very early part of the AWI. “I seed Eight Thousand men in arms all with Riffled Barrill guns which they can hit the Bigness of a Dollar between Two & Three hundred yards Distance”¦”¦”¦”¦”¦ the Little Boys not Bigger than myself has all their Guns & marches with their Fathers & all their Cry is Liberty or Death Dear Godfather tell all my Country people not to come here for the Americans will kill them Like Dear in the Woods & they will never see them they can lie on their Backs & Load & fire & every time they draws sight at anything they are sure to kill or Creple & they Run in the Woods like Horses I seed the Liberty Boys take Between Two & Three hundred Torreys & one Liberty man would take & Drive four or five before him Just as shepards do the sheep in our Cuntry & they have taken all their arms from them and put the head me n in gaile ”¦” 7]

7] Baika Harvey quoted in Robert Scott Davis, “Lesson from Kettle Creek: Patriotism and Loyalism on the Southern Frontier,” in Journal of Backcountry Studies. Volume 1, number 1, (March 2006): 2-3.

Discussion. I think this is a Pre-War or Early War quote by someone writing back home and trying to scare any Kinsman from coming here during the war. That number of rifles in Georgia at that period is just downright unbelievable and that sort of accuracy claim is full of Bovine Bowel Bulbs.

End of Part 1.

Gus

 

[Loyalist Dave]

Gus,

How about these?...

"..., in the Evening, however, they [the men of the rifle company] were drawn out, to shew the Gentlemen of the Town their Dexterity in shooting; a Clapboard with a Mark the Size of a Dollar, was put up; they began to fire off hand, and the Bystanders were surprized, few Shot being made that were not close to or in the Paper; when they shot for a Time in this Way, some lay on their Backs, some on their Breast or Side, others ran 20 or 30 Steps and firing, appeared to be equally certain of their Mark - With this Performance the Company were more than satisfied, when a young Man took up the Board in his hand, not by the End but the Side, and holding it up, his Brother walked to the Distance and very coolly shot into the white; laying down his Rifle, he took the Board, and holding as it was held before, the second Brother shot as the former had done. - By this exercise I was more astonished then pleased. But will you believe me when I tell you that one of the Men took the Board and placing it between his Legs, stood with his Back to the Tree, while another drove the center.”
- Taken from a letter from Fredericktown, Maryland, Aug.1st as published in the Pennsylvania Gazette 16 August 1775.

Unfortunately, it does not mention the distance.

"On my return from Richmond, I witnessed the mode that renders the Virginian rifle-men so expert in use of arms -- as great numbers were assembled, shooting at marks, and which I understand, long before the commencement of the war, was the constant diversion in this country; so certain are they of hitting, that they are not fearful of holding the board at arm's length; nay, some are so little apprehensive of danger, that they will place it between their legs for another to fire at".
- from a letter published in Charlottesville, Virginia, 4 August, 1779.

The Baroness von Riedesel, wife of German Maj. Gen. Frederick von Riedesel, during the cannonade of Saratoga: "We had no water because the enemy shot every man in the head who went near the river." American snipers finally permitted a soldier's wife to run to the river. (McDowell, The Revolutionary War,1970).

"He [the captain] to a board of a foot square and with chalk drew the shape of a moderate nose in the center and nailed it up to a tree at one hundred and fifty yards distance, and those who came nighest the mark with a single ball was to go [become a member of the rifle company]. But by the first forty or fifty that fired, the nose was all blown out of the board, and by his company was up [had the full compliment of men] the board shared the same fate."
John Harrower, June 1st, 1775, an indentured servant serving as a teacher at a plantation school in VA. He described the process for the selection of men for a rifle company from VA when too many men show up to volunteer.

I think we don't understand how accurate a person who shoots almost every day, at unknown distances at small targets, can be with a reasonably accurate rifle. One learns wind and deflection, and accurate range estimation, as well as trigger pull. The average modern hunter or shooter trains on a known distance course or range...even those in the military today often only qualify at set distances, never having to fire at a random target range. Sorta the same difference between a professional golfer (not necessarily in the top 100 in the world but somebody who is on the PGA Tour) and a weekend, hobby golfer. Both can use identical equipment on the same course...the former will often have more dramatic results.

So I AGREE that there is a lot of exaggeration to be found in period quotes. I noted in the first quote that some folks missed the paper, and not everybody was equally "near the mark". In the last quote, the contest for volunteers does show that at 150 yards the lads were probably hitting a mark about the size of an Eisenhower Dollar coin. Now if you take into account some error in pacing off 150 yards, it might have been closer to 100 yards flight distance. It's interesting to note that the contest was done at 150 yards, as the Captain obviously thought that a good distance to weed out the average and poor shots, and to determine the BEST shots...yet the observer noted it either wasn't far enough to accomplish the task OR...the boys from VA were mostly excellent shots..., and/or the Captain understood that distance or less to be where he knew riflemen engaged the enemy.

So..., I think that the quotes I provided for you do demonstrate that perhaps at reasonable distances, many of the fellows were pretty remarkable shots.

LD

 

[Artificer]

Dave,

I intended on including most of the quotes you mentioned in a follow up post for more discussion, but thank you for adding them.

I don't doubt that many of the period Riflemen were remarkable shots for their day and some were downright scary good.

However, to hit consistently and on the first shot at 150 and especially 200 yards, they had to do a remarkable amount of practice at those distances. I don't doubt they may or even did "sight their rifle in" at those ranges on something like a tree trunk, but where is there mention of frequent practice?

Would an 18th century frontiersman/rifleman had the money for the powder and ball required, since powder was so expensive? It would seem they were more likely to sneak up closer to Deer size targets so as not to take a chance on missing?

I ask these questions as I spent a career and many years since around some of the finest riflemen in the country today, who shoot the National Match Course at 200 through 600 yards and out to 1,000 yards. Those guys actually do practice or shoot virtually EVERY DAY (except the 4th of July) for a period of about 3 months before the National Matches. I am referring the "The Big Teams" of the Armed Services and some civilian teams. Even though they have more accurate rifles, much finer shooting equipment, and the ranges are "known distance" within inches of each other, a whole lot of them could not guarantee such a shot for the first time at 200 yards.

Gus

 

[SgtErv]

The scarcity of powder in the areas from which these riflemen hailed vs the frequent claims of amazing accuracy has been a constant source of curiousity for me.

Examining militia correspondence between officers in Revolution era western PA and VA (the Reuben Gold Thwaites reveals a pretty frequent refrain "for want of powder," or "destitute of ammunition." My favorite, from Gen Hand at Ft Pitt about how he lamented that his men were not proficient in the use of slings and pebbles, because that was the only ammunition around.

Couple of thoughts: soldiers never have enough ammunition haha. I carried twice the combat load and felt dangerously under-equipped. Perhaps those militia officers were embellishing a tad, hoping that the squeaky wheels would get oiled.

Also, there had to have been enough ammunition availab op: le for hunting most of the time. That doesn't mean they had enough to shoot at marks as much as it would take to achieve that level of proficiency. It must have been a lifetime of hunting to get that good. And that's where the claims might be at least somewhat buttressed; a lifetime of shooting probably the same gun.

(When I get to my computer I'll cite some things)

Good discussion though Gus. Keenly interested op:

 

[Loyalist Dave]

I agree that at 200 yards, that was probably a stretch, but you have a guy placing a target at what was thought to be 150 yards, and filling at least one company with the first 50 or so shooters...,

It's possible that the fellows simply shot at that range all the time, hence that was the distance chosen. The writer was amazed at the results, but perhaps the recruiter was simply making sure everybody who volunteer could meet the standard requirement, not something remarkable. The writer does not, for example, note anybody shaking their head and leaving without trying the mark at that distance because it was too great.

Also note, that nothing is mentioned about the position of the shooters when shooting, in that quote. I think you will agree that it's much much harder to be standing, unsupported at 150 yards, than shooting from a tight sitting or kneeling position, or as in the first quote, laying on their backs [some sort of "creemoor" position?] or breast or side. Yet (iirc) we fired service rifles at 200 yards, standing, unsupported. So these guys are not really rivaling modern expert marksmen.

As far as having the means, well they somehow paid for a rifle which was 1.5x a month's wages for a person employed as a hunter, or 6 months wages for a freeman/laborer. Plus they were known to recover the lead, having found a large stump, or tree, as a backstop, backstop having been chosen as the mark or to support the target, and then recast the recovered lead. So the only expendables were powder and flints.

LD

 

[SgtErv]

As far as the means, at least during Dunmore's War and into the Indian wars that accompanied the Revolution, we often forget "plunder." Some ambushes ended up being windfalls. Ransacking villages another source. The promise of plunder was quite a recruiting tool for expeditions against the Indian towns.

March, 1781 a party of fifteen men dispatched from Lowther's Fort. (Central WV) A party of fourteen Indians were killed. Plunder recovered, "Mr. Lowther well remembered that the plunder taken from the Indians at that time, when shared to each man, amounted to fourteen pounds, 17 shilling...that among the plunder taken were nine guns; six silver half-moons, one whole moon and one war club and spear, and a number of Tom Hawks and scalping knives, silver arm bands, earrings and nose jewelry, one cap containing 44 silver brooches, a number of (as he thinks) Kowaknick pouches (of otter skins) and paint bags."
-LV McWhorter, The Border Settlers of Northwestern Virginia

 

[BrownBear]

I have one single insight. Call it a single-point reference.

One of my hunting buds is a career bear guide up here and in his youth spent a year running through the Nam jungles as a cavalry scout. And as you might guess, a spectacular shot. More notable, his dad and granddad were also lifetime dedicated flintlock shooters and hunters, even when it wasn't cool. They have flintlocks that have been in the family for generations, always cared for and shot. To this day he does ALL his personal hunting with flintlocks, even as he makes his living with modern repeaters.

They trace their roots back to include a Pennsylvania gunsmith building guns at the time of the American Revolution. They also have one of his rifles, still in working order and in use. Since the relative died in 1788, there's a good chance it was even built and in use in the AR.

Caliber is approx 41. The bore is in remarkable shape, and it's mechanically sound. The stock is unadorned, but clean. I haven't shot it, but I've been on hand when he and his grandson were poking holes with it. With lots of experience behind him and a good rest, my bud can sometimes break 2" at 50 yards, but almost always 3".

Wanna send cool little chills up and down your spine, consider this: Grandson took his first deer at 10 years of age with that great family heirloom.

That's a single point reference, as I say. Who knows how much better it performed when new. But in its current good condition, it ain't going to be hitting soldier heads at 200 yards with any kind of consistency. It would certainly do it at 100, and worry heck out of any exposed head at 200. I'm betting it would teach soldiers to keep their torsos hidden at 200, for sure.

 

[cynthialee]

This is going to be in the realm of woo so bear with me or ignore this post:

Providence, the Good Lord, Vishnu, Fate or something uncanny, seriously intervened with the AR time period. Maybe even the shots from patriot rifles were effected by this force/power/entity.

Woo over.

 

[Artificer]

Dave,

I think you have an excellent point that for those "Dog and Pony Show" Shooting Exhibitions, the Good Captain probably had his men train at 150 yards and may even/probably chosen his best marksmen to shoot first and "put on a good show" to swell patriotic fervor and diminish Loyalist Fervor.

I definitely agree those shots were almost unquestionably done from some kind of supported rest/prone position and not offhand.

Gus

 

[Artificer]

"(When I get to my computer I'll cite some things)"

Looking forward to it. Thank you.

Gus

 

[Artificer]

Wow. Downright fascinating. Thank you for adding that.

Gus

 

[Artificer]

Trying not to run too far afoul of the guidelines of this forum, I definitely believe the belief in the Supreme Architect had much to do with winning the War.

I also don't doubt that lucky guesses or shots, combined with experience and bold action; also contributed greatly.

Gus

 

[Artificer]

This reply is to everyone.

For some strange reason, my monitor screen went almost blindingly bright on me a week ago. I've been trying all the suggestions to correct it, as well as got some online help, but so far to no avail.

So I hope you will excuse me that I can only add new information much slower than normally.

Gus

 

[SgtErv]

Marskmanship in general:

"Shooting at marks was a common diversion among the men, when their stock of ammunition would allow it; this, however, was far from being always the case. The present mode of shooting off hand was not then in practice. This mode was not considered as any trial of the value of a gun; nor indeed, as much of a test of the skill of a marksman. Their shooting was from a rest, and at as great a distance as the length and weight of the barrel of the gun would throw a ball on the horizontal level. Such was their regard of accuracy, in these sportive trials of their rifles, that they often put moss, or some other soft substance, on the log or stump from which they shot, for fear of having the bullet thrown from the mark, by the spring of the barrel. When the rifle was held to the side of a tree for a rest. When the rifle was held to the side of a tree for a rest, it was pressed against it as lightly as possible."
Joseph Doddridge, Notes on the Settlement and Indian Wars of the Western Parts of Virginia and Pennsylvania from 1763-1783. 1824. p 124

"A well grown boy, at the age of twelve or thirteen years, was furnished with a small rifle and shot pouch. He then became a fort soldier, and had his port hole assigned to him. Hunting squirrel, turkeys, and raccoons soon made him expert in the use of his gun."
Ditto p. 123

Ammunition scarcity:

"If there is not a possibility of obtaining lead, I wish (I) might be indulged with a cargo of bows and arrows, as our people are not yet expert enough at the sling to kill Indians with pebbles."
Gen. Edward Hand to Richard Peters July 10, 1778. Kellog and Thwaites, eds. Frontier Advance on the Upper Ohio, 1778-1779. (Pulled from Draper manuscripts)

Capt. Daniel Smith to Col. William Preston, May 30 1774. (Augusta Co., VA)
"There is a great scarcity of Powder and Lead in this Part of the Country, a Circumstance as alarming as any that occurs to me now."
Thwaites, Kellog, eds. The Documentary History of Dunmore's War, 1774

Maj. James Robertson to Col. William Preston Aug 6, 1774
"Pray Sir Send down some flower and Powder and Lead if Possible, Let it be Good or Bad"
-Ditto

George Adams to Col. William Preston October 4, 1774
"Ammunition is very scarce With us Which is ye occasion of abundance of Feare."
-Ditto

-Just a small sampling pulled from my general notes. The mention of the scarcity comes up much, much more often than any mention of abundance.

 

[Rifleman1776]

As an avid admirer and student of those riflemen who served in the AWI, I have read those and many other accounts and quotes with similar stories. While I am fascinated by them I long ago decided I do not belive most, or any, of those stories. The concepts of hitting targets at 200, 300 yards or more with an open sight ml rifle is simply nonsense. I doubt an orange can even be seen at 200 yards. One story that is passed around a lot has to do with recruting the best men possible for a legendary ranger unit. To qualify, the shooter must put several balls into a paper sketch of an Englishman's nose, drawn with pencil, at 300 yards. Gimme a break, a pencil sketch probably cannot even be seen at 25 yards, or possibly across a room. But, keep reading those quotes and stories, they are legend and fun.

 

[hanshi]

More than 25,000 Americans were killed in AWI and about a third of that number wounded. Considering the small population at that time, this figure is much more significant than one would imagine.

Round ball and muzzleloaders were all that was available and lives depended on the skill of the riflemen. I'm aware of some folks today who can shoot groups at 200 yards, with prb, that most of us can only shoot at 25 yards. I do not count myself among them, however. The typical man/boy with a rifle in 1775 would shoot circles around their modern counterparts. I do believe that a hit on a man at 300 yards with the first shot would necessarily involve more than a little luck, barring a simple accidental hit.

It's been proven time and again that a good man with a pistol can be dangerous at 600 yards. So why is it so difficult to imagine a 200 yard hit with a muzzleloader? The late Bob Munden easily hit playing cards at 100 yards with a 1911 and an egg with a micro .45acp.

There was plenty of exaggeration and error, to be sure, but also a lot of truth as to AWI rifle skills. If a gun means life or death one can bet that the shooter really knows his stuff if he's still alive.

 

[fleener]

In a few days at Friendship I will be shooting the large bore sil. match. The bear at 200 yards is 36" tall and I think around 11" wide. It certainly is not the easiest target to hit with a round ball. One match I had to aim 14" off to hit because of the wind.

No doubt if you know your rifle and practice at that range you can become quite good.

Fleener

 

[nkbj]

This is going to be in the realm of woo so bear with me or ignore this post:

Providence, the Good Lord, Vishnu, Fate or something uncanny, seriously intervened with the AR time period. Maybe even the shots from patriot rifles were effected by this force/power/entity.

Woo over.

That there's some fine woos.

 

[nkbj]

This might be a fer stretch but I'd like to float it on out there just the same...
Why would flinters be any more or less accurate now as then?

I'm one of those usual types that forty years before somehow had a big bunch more time to disappear in the woods with my front stuffer.
Back then we shot two ways. Being typical kids either we played the turtle game on shooting under them to see how far they would fly or else we were head hunting.

A red coat at two hundred, yeah, reckon we could have done that. Three hundred, well, maybe the first two shots don't count.

Look at these targets, uh, uniforms. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_...File:Battle_of_bunker_hill_by_percy_moran.jpg

 

[Artificer]

So why is it so difficult to imagine a 200 yard hit with a muzzleloader?

Please don’t take this as being personally critical of you or anyone else, but there is a huge difference between a "200 yard hit" and hitting an 18th century "Dollar" at 200 yards, as claimed in some of the original quotes (let alone hitting one as claimed at 300 yards). Just so we are all on the same track, perhaps it would be a good idea to describe what was commonly meant by a Dollar in the 18th century?

Coins were usually very difficult to get in the American Colonies in the 18th century, so colonists often used “foreign” coinage when they could get them. One very common foreign coin was the “Spanish Dollar” or “Spanish Milled Dollar,” and was what they meant when they normally referred to a Dollar, long prior to and during the 18th century. This coin was actually the Spanish 8 Reales silver coin. For smaller “change,” they cut these coins into 8 pieces and is the origin of the term “Piece/s of Eight.” Two of those 8 pieces made a quarter of a dollar and was the origin our term “Two Bits” for a Quarter. The Dollar that George Washington supposedly threw across the Potomac River (actually it was the Rappahannock River next to his boyhood home in Falmouth, VA, on the other side of the river from Fredericksburg, VA) was a Spanish Milled Dollar. The Spanish Milled dollar was also the forerunner of our own U.S. Silver Dollar. The point of this short Numismatic discussion is the size of the Dollar referred to in the aforementioned 18th century quotes was 38 mm or just under the 38.1mm of our more modern U.S. Silver Dollar, of which many of us are familiar. The U.S. Silver Dollar is a tiny bit larger and in more common inch measurement, is about 1 ½” in diameter. So when they meant when writing about “hitting a Dollar” in 18th century quotes, they usually meant hitting a target that was ONLY less than 1 ½” diameter. Hitting such a small target at 200 yards today on the first shot at other than a range or mark to which one is accustomed to practicing, with more modern and accurate rifles, shooting gear, etc. is not common even with the most practiced and best shooters in the country. So the 18th century claim of hitting it at 200 yards is even less possible and doing it at 300 yards was darn near impossible.

OK, so what about the 18th century claim of being able to hit “an Orange” at 200 or 300 yards on the first shot? This is only slightly more believable than being able to hit “a Dollar” at those ranges. 18th century Oranges were smaller than modern Oranges and they did not taste as good, either, according to agricultural experts. (The typical 18th century Orange would only be used in Marmalade or similar uses today.) The average size of a modern Orange is 2 ½ inches in diameter and an 18th century Orange was less than 2 inches in diameter and only ½ inch larger than an 18th century Dollar.

So with the above information, it is easy to see that many of the 18th century claims of accuracy were not just from a “touch of the Blarney Stone,” but actually from the “Blarney Boulder” rolling down the hill.

In an above post I mentioned hitting a human head (which on average was/is at least 5 inches wide and 8 inches tall from the front) and is a much larger target than an 18th century Dollar or Orange. Now that is a shot I believe many good 18th century Riflemen could have made on the first shot at 150 yards, when the target was not moving, a good rest or prone position was used (as mentioned in some original quotes) and not too much wind was blowing. This even though it is a target that is smaller than the 8 to 10 inch “killing zone” they were used to making when taking deer. An exceptional 18th century Rifleman may have been able to do it from the Offhand, but not by choice if a rest was possible. This kind of accuracy was still possible at 200 yards, but at that distance it almost requires a solid rest or prone positon when firing the first shot at an unknown range. It would have been much more difficult, though, due to having to aim a lot higher than the target at 200 yards because of the drop of the bullet at that range. This due to both the accuracy capability of a good flintlock rifle and how they most likely sighted in their rifles.

We do not definitely know how 18th century Riflemen sighted in their rifles, but we can speculate both from period documentation and from experimental archeology. Most likely they sighted in their rifles a couple or a few inches high at 100 or 110 yards. That way with the curved trajectory of the bullet in flight, they could aim “spot on” and not hold off for elevation from 25 to 150 yards. This way the bullet would hit inside the vital area of a deer at any range in between. However, for a 200 yard shot, they would have had to aim high or perhaps put the front sight higher over the rear sight when aiming, for the bullet to land inside the vital area of a deer. Considering the bullet drop at 200-225 yards, a Rifleman would have done well to aim at the top of an enemy’s hat and the ball would have dropped into the upper torso. This may have worked for 300 yards in conjunction with placing the front sight higher over the rear sight, though the larger bullet drop at that distance may have only caused a wound or a miss. However at 200 yards and beyond, the Rifleman also needed to be a very good judge of the wind or the shot would miss to the right or left of the target.

I lost the quote/s when my old computer crashed, but I had at least one or two quotes of Riflemen being ordered NOT to fire beyond 150 yards during the AWI. One quote I know was from the Southern Theatre and I think the order came from Light Horse Harry Lee, but will have to look more for those quotes. With the above information and in the heat of combat, that was a very good order for the Riflemen in the AWI.


Gus