• This community needs YOUR help today. We rely 100% on Supporting Memberships to fund our efforts. With the ever increasing fees of everything, we need help. We need more Supporting Members, today. Please invest back into this community. I will ship a few decals too in addition to all the account perks you get.



    Sign up here: https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/account/upgrades
  • Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

Max kill distance for PRB

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
difficult to read with that background but a good article anyway. check out www.snipercountry.com and go to the history section. Good paragraph or two about Maj. Ferguson during the Revolutionary War. Anybody know if that ferguson rifle fired RB or conical?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So, question for you all. Does anyone know what the longest range confirmed kill is for a PRB either in a military or hunting scenario?

Really two different questions. For game, IMO, the max range that a typical shooter can reliabley place a proper sized ball on the vitals is about it. Saying that, I've observed a whole lot of long range shooting with round balls and can tell you that even the best of shots can't reliabley place a ball in the vitals of a deer under field conditions much beyond 100 yards. One twenty to one thirty pretty much the limit. For me, it's 100 yards under ideal conditions (no wind, good light, a rest, perfect shot set up).

I observed a 180 yard kill on a mule deer with a .54 round ball a few years back. The deer was hit perfectly through the lungs and dropped on the spot. Ball stopped under the skin on the far side. I'm not to judge the ethics of that shot but can only say I could not do it reliably.

Military situations? Shooting is usually controlled by a unit commander at some level. Was then, is now unless it's "fire at will" (would not want to be will!) or for any other reason the shooters choice (sniper, etc.). When the soldier is free to fire at will, then there is no range limit. There are no ethics involved in the relationship of the shooter and the enemy soldier target. If you miss you miss. If you hit the enemy in the foot, that's just fine.
 
Fergusons rifles used a ball I do not recall the bore size but.54 comes to mind it maynot be correct and when Morgan I believe it was ordered Timothy Murphy to shoot an officer who was rallying the British troops I think it took him several shots to hit him and that was maybe 300 yds? not sure of the distance, someone else may have the source or a better recollection of it, as stated most people cannot hit consistantly at the outside effective range of the ball with open or probably even aperture sights.
 
Given the medical applications of the time even slight wounds could often be fatal. Sometimes we read to much into things.
 
Dont Know. I want to see how CLOSE I can kill a deer. If I can powder burn him then I figure thats close enough :thumbsup:
 
wattlebuster said:
Dont Know. I want to see how CLOSE I can kill a deer. If I can powder burn him then I figure thats close enough :thumbsup:

Use a Bowie knife for a real challenge.
 
According to some accounts, Murphy's shot was as much as 438 yards, took several shots to hit Gen Frasier (hit the horse first)and even then it took a day for Frasier to die. So is one of the most famous shots fired in the American revolution, a lethal shot?

I once went to a muzzleloader sillouhuette match. PRB only. My 45 cal could hit the 200 yard targets reliably, but couldn't push them over. My 58 Zouave wasn't near as accurate, but when I hit, which was about 60%, they tumbled in a lively fashion.
 
S.kenton said:
In the book "The Frontiersman" by Allen Eckert ..it's mentioned somewhere ( I can't find the passage now)That it was recorded in one of the soldiers diaries,that a sharpshooter shot a horse out from underneath one of the opposing forces officers. When it was " stepped out" it was said to be more than 400 yrds...my memory of the passage is a little foggy....I'm sure that woulda been PRB for that time period, (late 1700's)..and is quite possibly exaggerated..
That shot came up in a discussion on the forum on maximum effective range - http://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/fusionbb/showtopic.php?tid/224556/

There's another interesting compendium at http://www.snipercountry.com/Articles/LoneMarksmanRevisited.asp

Regards,
Joel
 
Last edited by a moderator:
" I want to see how CLOSE I can kill a deer."

Now THAT is sounding like a mindset that is into the true spirit and essence of the historical side of the ML game, treating the gun as a step back in technology that requires a bit different way of thinking than we use today with todays ever increasing range and efficiency possibilities, I like it!
 
tg said:
" I want to see how CLOSE I can kill a deer."

Now THAT is sounding like a mindset that is into the true spirit and essence of the historical side of the ML game, treating the gun as a step back in technology that requires a bit different way of thinking than we use today with todays ever increasing range and efficiency possibilities, I like it!

Doesn't a PRB make all of us think that way to a degree? I still don't trust it to shoot very far.
 
I found the original account here (search for "Tarleton").

There were many Englishmen who had seen service in America and learnt what a formidable weapon in the hands of a skilled shot a rifle could be. Colonel Hanger, who was one of them, relates an instance bearing on the point. Writing in 1814, having served during the war as a captain in the Hessian Jager Corps, he says that he never in his life saw better rifles, or rifles better used, than those made in America, and adds that they were chiefly made in Lancaster, and two or three neighbouring towns in that vicinity, in Pennsylvania. Their barrels, he says, weighed about 6 lbs. 2 or 3 oz., and carried a ball not larger that 36 to the pound. This is equivalent to a diameter of a little more than half an inch, a smaller calibre than was used in the military arms of this country until the adoption of the Martini-Henry rifle. Yet Colonel Hanger says that he never saw in America a rifle of larger calibre than has just been mentioned, although he had seen many hundreds. He gives the following account of an incident in the war, showing that the use of the rifle at a distance of 400 yards was unusual in those days, and taken to be a very important developement in war : ”” * Colonel, now General Tarleton, and myself, were standing a few yards out of a wood, observing the situation of a part of the enemy which we intended to attack. There was a rivulet in the enemy's front, and a mill on it, to which we stood directly with our horse.s' heads fronting, observing their motions. It was an absolutely plain field between us and the mill ; not so much as a single bush on it. Our orderly-bugler stood behind us about three yards, but with his horse's side to our horses' tails. A rifleman passed over the mill-dam, evidently observing two officers, and laid himself down on his belly ; for in such positions, they always lie, to take a good shot at a long distance. He took a deliberate and cool shot at my friend, at me, and the bugle-horn man. Now observe how well this fellow shot. It was in the month of August, and not a breath of wind was stirring. Colonel Tarleton's horse and mine, I am certain, were not anything like two feet apart ; for we were in close consultation, how we should attack with our troops, which laid 300 yards in the wood, and could not be perceived by the enemy. A rifle-ball passed between him and me ; looking directly to the mill I evidently observed the flash of the powder. I directly said to my friend, * I think we had better move, or we shall have two or three of these gentlemen, shortly, amusing themselves at our expence.' The words were hardly out of my mouth when the bugle-horn man behind us, and directly central, jumped off his horse and said, ' Sir, my horse is shot.' The horse staggered, fell down, and died. He was shot directly behind the fore-leg, near to the heart ”” at least, where the great blood vessels lie, which lead to the heart. Now, speaking of this rifleman's shooting, nothing could be better; but, from the climate, he had much in his favour. First, at that time of the year, there was not one breath of wind ; secondly, the atmosphere is so much clearer than ours, that he can take a more perfect aim.' ' I have passed,' he adds, * several times over this ground, and ever observed it with the greatest attention ; and I can positively assert that the distance he fired from, at us, was full four hundred yards.'

Regards,
Joel
 
Good reference FWIW the bore size for a ball of 36 to the lb would likley have been somewhere around .530 for a rifle the ball being around .51 I have always wondered just how accurate his assement of the "average" and "largest" ball sizes were given the areas he was not able to sample we have existing guns with larger bores all of which are not likley to have been worn out or re bored, most counts of existing guns during the rev war period give an average within his numbers though as I to the NA's recall one gentleman counted all the guns in RCA 1&2 and tallied and averaged them but he is no loner here to varify the results, I do not think it would be unuauall to find a gun with a bore of .58-59 to shoot a .56 ball or a .46 bore gun to shoot a .44 ball the differences for windage are guesstimates much smaller than the windage for earlier smoothbores printed in some documents, but I do not think the excessive windage would have been used with the rifles which were made for PrB with grooves to catch the fouling and maintaining a reasonably stable bore size for a number of shots compared to a smoothbore.Whedn he says never as to the existance of larger bores i am skeptivcal even with all Pennsylvania guns in the mix it is likley therre were guns from the 1750's still in service that were part of the "hundreds of rifles that he accurately measured and observed"the quotes are mine along with a bit of skeptical thinking. Iwould like to see several other period writings that showno balls larger than51-.52 in any of the American guns from 1750-1780. through most of the 18th century the larger the ball the better, more efficient and superior it was by military standards some feel this may have been the reason for making NA trade guns smaller than the military guns of those trading with this in mine it would be a good propaganda effort if the Rebels all seemed to have guns significantly smaller than those used by his majesties troops, just a thought that occured to me I have nothing in the way of evidence that this fellow juggled the numbers to make things look better for Englands choice/superiority of military gear, except the bores of many surviving guns, again reboreing and wear were certainly a factor but one can only go so far when reboring a gun, I am just not convinced it created all the larger bore rifles that have survived, just a personal "not convinced as things do not add up" type of thing for me.Please do not respond directly to me Dan as I will not see it and we have jointly killed this horse a dozen times over, and we will never agree on anything that I can think of right off, thank you.
 
Thomas Plunket killed a French general at anywhere between 200-600 yards with a Baker Rifle (granted that is a belted ball). He followed up that shot with another one, showing it wasn't pure luck.
 
S.kenton said:
I'm not afraid to shoot my 45 or 50 out a bit past 100 yrds. with a certain confidence that I can kill a deer...done it before. Practice makes accuracy. A good rest helps too... :grin:

Yes, but in the world of hunting. 100 yds isn't that far.
 
with my 50 cal CVA hawken .490 prb, 90grns FFFg, open sights, off of a bench rest, i can verbally confirm several 400 yard hits on a 18"x24" paper target. i may not have hit it in the vitals but i managed to wing it pretty good, but it didn't go too far before dropping in its tracks. :rotf:
 

Latest posts

Back
Top