buck and ball failure

[George]

I've seen so many references to the use of what we would call buck and ball loads in the 18th century, both military and civilian, that I decided to try some of them. I spent a few pleasant hours doing some shooting, but that's about the only good that came of it. I decided to test a bare ball and 3 "swan" shot, a bare ball and 6 or 7 swan, and 12 swan with no ball. I shot all three types of load with just a card over powder, with 2 cards and with a card plus lubricated Circle Fly cushion wad. I used my usual 80 grain charge of Goex 3F for most shots, but dropped back to 70 grains for a few.

I was shooting my 46" cylinder bore fowler. The balls were .600" home cast, the swan were .295" home cast made for my .30 caliber rifle. Three swan would fit in a layer in the bore. The targets were some old 100-yard muzzleloading targets, a 6" bull on a 15" x 24" paper. Most targets were shot at 30 yards, a few of the swan-only ones at 20 yards. Most shots were fired from a rest.

Results were uniformly poor. On many of the shots the ball would be in the black, but only 1 or 2 swan were on the paper, usually barely so. In a few with ball and 6 or 7 the ball was also near the edge. The best target with 12 swan put 8 on the paper, widely scattered, only 2 in the black.

Ball plus 7 swan, 30 yards

12 swan, 30 yards

My conclusion was that for a man-size target a buck and ball load would probably be of some advantage, but not for anything much smaller. I've read modern descriptions of targets shot with buck and ball which claimed a ball in the black and most of the buck clustered fairly tightly around it. That didn't happen for me. I fired about 20 shots and didn't find a single one which made buck and ball seem worthwhile.

As is usual when I play around with loads from the old days, I feel there is something missing, something I don't understand, something else I should be doing. It's still fun though, so I plan another trip in a few days to try some of the old wads I've read about... tow and brown paper..., and hornet's nest, which I've never read about.

Spence

 

[Tumblernotch]

What you have there is a standard result for this load so don't feel bad. This was not designed to be a hunting or target load, but to maximize damage to a line of battle. Ideally, you would be able to kill a man with the big ball and at least wound if not kill the man on either side of him with the buckshot.

 

[ericb]

I think of Buck & Ball as a military thing - for Volley Fire at closed ranks at 50 yds & under. Your results are pretty much like mine. Not much use at individual targets, but if you were firing at closed ranks you would no doubt do a lot of damage, even if the shots were rushed and no time for deliberate aiming, which was often the case. Another thing to consider is the lone sentry at night, having to shoot quickly at close range at something rushing at him in the Mountain Laurel (with a Tomahawk). - Buck & Ball might be just the ticket then.

Your results are not a failure - you just graduated B&B 101....

Eric

 

[Ranger1759]

My only question is, how did you load? I have had good success with the B&B loads out to 25-30 yrds with the buck loaded first and the ball on top...

Ive seen and heard if you load it ball first, the ball will basiclly blow through the shot leaving a large hole in the center and spreading the shot pattern wide...if the shot is first it follows the RB abd has normal seperation and a tighter pattern...

I don't really know, thats how it worked for me

Ranger

 

[George]

I understand the usefulness of a buck and ball load in a military situation, but I also see many reports involving buck and ball in civilian incidents. It's obvious from the reports that they are used in hunting, self defense, by highwaymen, etc. Even the results reported in a military situation make it sound as though they are much better than my results would indicate.

For instance, describing the death of Thomas Cresap in the F&I war, 1956:

".... Cresap, after running above a Mile, came in Sight of some of his Party, who were pursuing one of the Indians, and coming up gave his Pistol to one of them, and passed on till he saw the Indian, and getting within 20 Yards of him, the Indian got behind a Tree, and fired at him; Cresap also stopped and fired, but had not Time to take to a Tree. They fired at one another so close together, that it seemed like one Gun. The Indian, with a fine French Gun, mortally wounded Cresap with a Bullet and seven Swan shot in the Breast. Cresap, with a Rifle, mortally wounded the Indian through the Right breast, being the only Part to be seen of him."

That's a pretty good pattern.

Spence

 

[George]

My only question is, how did you load? I have had good success with the B&B loads out to 25-30 yrds with the buck loaded first and the ball on top...

That's one variable I didn't think to try, I'll do that next time out.

I'm not a believer in any part of the load column blowing through whatever is in front of it, whether it's wads, shot or ball, because they all accelerate at the same rate in the bore, but I can't prove that, and I could be wrong. It certainly is true that the smaller balls will slow down from wind resistance before the large one will, but I'd be surprised if that occurred to an appreciable degree within 30 yards.

Thanks, good suggestion.

Spence

 

[Macon Due]

ranger 1759 asked exactly the question I was going to. I have seen certain wads blow right thru the patterns and ruin it so I wonder if the heavier ball is blowing thru the swan after a few feet as the swan loses velocity?
Macon

 

[tg]

I got pretty good groups out to 15 yds, good enough for Deer with a .600 ball and 6 .30 shot ball was always in the middle of the shot cluster and all on a paper plate sized area shot was atop the ball I did not do well with rhe shot loaded first, I patched the ball and used an overshot card to keep the shot down 70-80 gr 3f as I recall,it opens up real quick any farther out and is better at 10-12 yds, I hear that shot which stacks in the barrel works best but here .30 is the smallest allowed for Deer, I would not hesitate to use the load I had as a close up heavy cover ambush load on Deer, I guess that would depend on whether I could duplicate it again as I no longer have the gun I used with it.Real Swan would be quite a bit smaller than the .295

 

[bangfxr]

Buck-n-Ball was designed for use in the smoothies.
Fired into mased formations of troops in volly. That is all it was designed for. As it was to produce mass casulities from close in up to 75 yards. The english didn't like the load as it was a barbaric and inhumane way to fight a war. The american military ued this round from 1812 to the end of the civil war. I was not designed for hunting

 

[Bon Sauvage]

My only question is, how did you load? I have had good success with the B&B loads out to 25-30 yrds with the buck loaded first and the ball on top...

That's one variable I didn't think to try, I'll do that next time out.

I'm not a believer in any part of the load column blowing through whatever is in front of it, whether it's wads, shot or ball, because they all accelerate at the same rate in the bore, but I can't prove that, and I could be wrong. It certainly is true that the smaller balls will slow down from wind resistance before the large one will, but I'd be surprised if that occurred to an appreciable degree within 30 yards.

Thanks, good suggestion.

Spence

I feel that 3 buckshot loaded first followed by the roundball was standard for the buck n' ball loads. A piece of evidence for this can be found at the Gettysburg battle site.

There is a monument there dedicated to the:

12th Regiment New Jersey Volunteers
2nd Brigade, 3rd Division, 2nd Corps

They were armed with 69 caliber muskets and at the top of the monument you can clearly see a typical buck n' ball load with the roundball on top.

That is not the only monument with a cartridge load on it. I have also seen a different monument with a mini ball on top as well as several artillery monuments with cannonballs on top.

 

[tg]

I have seen at least one reference to Washington telling troops in the Rev war to load a ball and as many shot as their "piece" would stand.I suspect there were various methods used in the past

 

[George]

Buck-n-Ball was designed for use in the smoothies.... It was not designed for hunting

Not sure who you think is doing the designing. From published reports in the 18th century it is clear that the load was used in hunting situations by civilians quite a lot. And, the ammunition requirements for troops in both militia and the line usually call for ball only, not buckshot. So it seems it was sometimes used by both but not always by either.

Spence

 

[tg]

Hey Bob you're not gonna go and bring up that period written documentation stuff and spoil all our opinions are ya?

 

[Capt. Jas.]

Spence,

I would omit the "modern" cards and wads and reverse the layering order as was mentioned. Another thing to employ for period reconstruction would be to make up the loads in cartridges.
Looking forward to more of your field test results.

 

[tg]

If buckshot was tied in patchingball hit pretty much poa +/- 3" shot was in a fist sized cluster a few inches away (random direction) Hunting guns of the early 18th century might be .58-.60 bore as well I wonder how common the cartridge was with these and with NA's? I suspect wadding top and bottom no matter what the projectile/s

 

[Capt. Jas.]

I wonder how common the cartridge was with these and with NA's? I suspect wadding top and bottom no matter what the projectile/s

I would say about as common as the buck and ball load was in general for non-military type applications. When so used I would probably agree of wadding top and bottom but not with precisely measured cards and cushion wads.

 

[CoyoteJoe]

It is interesting to try the "old time ways" but they are not necessairly the "best ways". I can't see the point of such a load for hunting.

 

[George]

It is interesting to try the "old time ways" but they are not necessairly the "best ways". I can't see the point of such a load for hunting.

My interest is historical, only. I'd never shoot at anything with such a load, I might hurt it.

Spence

 

[tg]

I found a use for it, but never put it to use, I often hunted a river bottom choked with huge blackberry patches and briars and if a Deer took more than three leaps one would have to use a machette to follow the load I worked up put a .600 ball and 6 .30 balls within a 8-10' circle at 10yds most Deer in the area described are seen for a three count or so from 5-8 yds maybe 10,or could be hunted from a hideyhole along side a trail, it seemed a good way to increase the "stopping" power of the load and certainly could do no harm at that distance, but indeed it is very location/situation specific I never went back into that thick place after I worked up the load as ownership changed and acess was lost.A tied off back off shot would increase the range a bit and the knockdown power as the shot stays very close, again not a normaly usable load.I have not tried B&B with my .58 as I think the larger bores are more suited to it.

 

[Capt. Jas.]

Spence, I would be interested in these published 18th c. reports that show the prevalent use of buck and ball for hunting to use for my documentation collection.