Possibles bag sizes.

[DennyDucet]

I found the maker of a possibles bag that I have chosen to go with, and spoke with him yesterday. He is a pleasant gentlemen for sure.

I was hoping to get some input from you guys on here as to the accuracy and utility of various sizes for a bag. The maker explained that historically bags were smaller than many today, and modern Muzzle Loaders seem to request bigger bags often. I wanted to stay somewhat accurate but also wish to have the utility of being able to carry what I need. The only bag I have ever used, is a beautiful moose hide possibles bag 6" x 7" with no "gusset" sewn in (just leather sewn to another large piece of leather, little inside space). The bag is my dads - he purchased it I believe at the Red Lodge Rendezvous many moons ago. He uses it to support his .54 Hawken, while I will need a bag to support a .50 Flintlock.

The sizes I am debating between are:

Trail Bag: 8" x 7" with 1.5" Gusset

Trapper Bag: 9" x 8" x 2" gusset

There is also the option of a Hunters Star or Heart or Plain flap:


his bags are at blackpowderbags d*t c*m

Both bags are not the larger bag options available and seem fairly traditional in their sizing with the trapper on the bigger end.

 

his bags are at blackpowderbags d*t c*m

Why do this? Why not provide a clickable link?

Unless you think it's against the rules to post a link in which case you broke them anyway. :rotf:
http://www.accu-riser.com/categories/Muzzleloading-Possibles-Bags-%2d-Hunting-bags/

 

[SgtErv]

Mine is 8" x 9" with a 1 1/2 in gusset. It's larger than what I really need but I got it after using a much smaller bag. I prefer having more than enough room to not enough when shooting a flintlock.

This larger one allows me to carry enough to spend several hours at the range, well supplied. When going with a larger one, of course, inner pockets are very helpful.

There are very, very few bags that survived. The couple that I've seen were smaller than I use. So I don't think my larger one is entirely period correct for the 1770s, but additional items like a short starter weren't needed with their coned barrels either.

 

[FishDFly]

his bags are at blackpowderbags d*t c*m

Why do this? Why not provide a clickable link?

Unless you think it's against the rules to post a link in which case you broke them anyway. :rotf:
http://www.accu-riser.com/categories/Muzzleloading-Possibles-Bags-%2d-Hunting-bags/[/quote]

The owner is a nice fellow, goes to Friendship and sells his products and advertises in the NMLRA magazine, good enough for me.

I do own some of his work.............

 

[Artificer]

Denny,

The size of historic shot pouches comes from the originals that still remain. There are very few 18th century pouches left and they are smaller size. I think these few were "day pouches" where the owner only carried a few items like balls, patches, a few flints and maybe a turnscrew (screwdriver) on a hunt in the day and came back to his cabin or home at night. So a smaller pouch was fine because he carried so few items. 19th century bags tend to be larger and in a few cases, the original accessories were found in them that included more items than the day pouches.

I made my 18th century shot pouch larger than the originals because I carry more things in it and some they did not carry in the period. I also have fairly large hands and some of the smaller pouches were hard for me to reach in and get something out. Short Starters were virtually unknown back then, but I used a rather large size short starter for my Brown Bess. I also carried a larger adjustable powder measure than they normally carried, because I used the same pouch both for my Bess and my Flint Rifle and just switched items for each gun as necessary. Short starters came into use in the 19th century, so the pouches got a little bigger for that reason alone.

The style of the pouch can be either 18th or 19th century, depending on whether you want to make it correct for a certain time period or place.

So what I am getting at is the size of the pouch either then or now was/is determined by what "stuff" they or you are going to carry in it and maybe the size of your hand. You are fortunate to have access to a bag to see if the stuff you want to carry will go in it and work well for you and see if it is big enough or too big for you and what you want to carry. Otherwise, you have to lay your stuff out to try to determine what size bag will suit you.

Gus

 

[DennyDucet]

I tried leaving the link and each time I tried to post it, it defaulted to some computer language/code I did not understand and lead no where, so I just did that instead.

 

[Claude Mathis]

I tried leaving the link and each time I tried to post it, it defaulted to some computer language/code I did not understand and lead no where, ....

Hmm
www.blackpowderbags.com

 

[hanshi]

I've made two of my bags but the third one made by a forum friend. The two I made have the horns (day horns) attached to the strap. One bag measures at 5-3/4" X 6-1/2" and the other is 8" X 6-1/4". The gifted bag is 7-3/4" X 7-1/4". I find all plenty roomy.

 

[Onojutta]

his bags are at blackpowderbags d*t c*m

Why do this? Why not provide a clickable link?

Unless you think it's against the rules to post a link in which case you broke them anyway. :rotf:
http://www.accu-riser.com/categories/Muzzleloading-Possibles-Bags-%2d-Hunting-bags/[/quote]

I just bought one of his bags recently and it is great. Very well made, and beautiful leather. I went with the T-301 beaver tail bag which I believe is one of the larger sizes at 9 x 8. I got it to replace a generic possibles bag that I got at Dixon's many years ago, mainly because the generic bag was always a little small. Not PC, but I often put other things in my possibles bag while out hunting like gloves, keys, wallet, hunting license, etc. so a little more room is always better. I haven't noticed any difference in wearing the bag. It definitely does not feel any bigger or too big for that matter. I figure its better to have a little more size than you need, than it is to wish you had just a little more.

Oh one more thing, I went with the adjustable leather strap that was a small up charge. So far I haven't used it while hunting, but my thinking is that the adjustability will be helpful in accommodating different layers of clothing between fall and late winter hunts, as well as tailoring the fit with a powder horn worn above it.

 

[Black Hand]

Personally, I would opt for a smaller rather than larger bag. It eliminates the temptation to stuff the bag full of items that belong elsewhere or are unnecessary.

My gun bag contains the items needed to feed & clean my gun with the addition of a brass compass, flint & steel and several feet of brass snare wire. Anything else goes in my pack.

 

[tenngun]

Denny,

The size of historic shot pouches comes from the originals that still remain. There are very few 18th century pouches left and they are smaller size. I think these few were "day pouches" where the owner only carried a few items like balls, patches, a few flints and maybe a turnscrew (screwdriver) on a hunt in the day and came back to his cabin or home at night. So a smaller pouch was fine because he carried so few items. 19th century bags tend to be larger and in a few cases, the original accessories were found in them that included more items than the day pouches.

I made my 18th century shot pouch larger than the originals because I carry more things in it and some they did not carry in the period. I also have fairly large hands and some of the smaller pouches were hard for me to reach in and get something out. Short Starters were virtually unknown back then, but I used a rather large size short starter for my Brown Bess. I also carried a larger adjustable powder measure than they normally carried, because I used the same pouch both for my Bess and my Flint Rifle and just switched items for each gun as necessary. Short starters came into use in the 19th century, so the pouches got a little bigger for that reason alone.

The style of the pouch can be either 18th or 19th century, depending on whether you want to make it correct for a certain time period or place.

So what I am getting at is the size of the pouch either then or now was/is determined by what "stuff" they or you are going to carry in it and maybe the size of your hand. You are fortunate to have access to a bag to see if the stuff you want to carry will go in it and work well for you and see if it is big enough or too big for you and what you want to carry. Otherwise, you have to lay your stuff out to try to determine what size bag will suit you.

Gus

And to Black Hand too.
When I got in to this it was get the biggest bag you can carry, load it down with enough gear to outfit L&C and walk with a list to one side.
We just don't see that in paintings of the time. Then time after time we read about some one getting stuck alone in the wilderness. Over and over we read about a full powder horn but only four or five balls.
Go small, you will find it a lot more comfortable.

 

[Artificer]

May I ask, what paintings are you referring to?

The only painting of which I am aware that SEEMS to show a small pouch is in the following link. However, some folks say there is only a small ball bag and others say there is no bag or pouch at all. I don't know, my eyes are not good enough to see it.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki..._Samuel_Blodget_in_Rifle_Dress_-_WGA23099.jpg

This drawing it looks like a Cartridge Pouch instead of a Shot Pouch: https://siftingthepast.files.wordp...ntryman-from-pensylvania_chodowiecki_1784.jpg

The Shot Pouch in this illustration looks not too tall, but rather wide and MUCH larger than the horn:
http://preserve.lib.unb.ca/wayback/20141205160841/http://atlanticportal.hil.unb.ca/acva/blackloyalists/en/context/gallery/images/zoom/deverger.jpg

The following figure is all out of proportion all over, so I'm not sure what we can make of it.

"Figure 1. A watercolor image of a Virginia Rifleman during the Philadelphia Campaign wearing a fringedhunting shirt (Richard St. George Collection, Harlen Crown Library.)"
http://www.academia.edu/3336557/_k...eculiar_to_America_The_American_Hunting_Shirt


Gus

 

[fleener]

W-101 WOODLAND POSSIBLES BAG

This is the bag I just bought from him. Been looking at them for years. Have made my own, but this is a heck of a bag.

It is his largest bag. I wanted a bag I could take on my travels with me. My criteria is I need to get the camera in the bag, perhaps a bottle of local beer or bottle of wine that I find and some other odds and ends.

I will use it more for traveling than I will for shooting I think.

Fleener

 

[tenngun]

Just bags I've seen in paintings in general Brigham Miller bodmer ect, pouches all seem small compared to the horse pack I started with

 

[Artificer]

I went through 20 pages of Bodmer's paintings on line and found only two that illustrated guns and pouches.

In this one the pouch is very small: http://www.museumsyndicate.com/item.php?item=46500

However, in this one, it is pretty large: http://www.albion-prints.com/ekmps...int.-north-american-indian-31-[2]-96746-p.jpg

Gus

 

[Artificer]

Oh, and as far as when I mentioned that shot pouches got bigger in the 19th century, I was referring to originals in The Kentucky rifle hunting pouch: Its contents and accoutrements as used by the frontiersman, hunter, and Indian by Madison Grant.
Gus

 

[Dave Marsh]

It all depends on what you are going to do with it. I graduated from large to small as I use mine for deer hunting and I like to travel light. I only carry in the bag what I need to load or maintain my gun. I hunt out of our cabin. The two of us have 450 acres to roam. I don't need to carry survival items like flint striker or wire for a snare.

I load my rifle before I leave to hunt. I have a small priming horn over my shoulder. In my pouch I carry my brush, pick, 3 speed loaders along with a wallet with a turn screw and extra flint. That is about it. I have no need or desire to be HC/PC. Hunting supplies are in my knapsack like lunch, drink, warmer clothing and roll of camo for a ground blind if I choose to set one up.

For bird and small game hunting I have a haversack that I use. Whole different set up.

You need to evaluate how you are going to use it and how much stuff you will never use you want to lug around. :hmm:

Dave

 

[Tom Compton]

Larger allows additional items if needed and these old XXL arthritic paws to retrieve items w less trouble.

Bought a Leatherman Tr600 from an older gentleman. Included patch knife and scrimshawed horn. Bag is of buffalo hide, leather strap w sheath and loop, weaping heart and so many pockets several have nothing in them.

Leases here run 400-1000 acres so no trekking and really no need for much or even a bag but I like having one w all I need for a day for the .54 and another for the .40. Horns are attached just grab one strap and a rifle.
TC

 

[Rifleman1776]

Do I hear someone saying "do yer own thang"? :wink:

 

[Rifleman1776]

Not PC, but I often put other things in my possibles bag while out hunting like gloves, keys, wallet, hunting license, etc.

I thought we were talking about shooting bags here. I often carry two bags. One my shooting bag with rifle loading/cleaning/etc. necessities only. On my left shoulder I might have a plain cloth haversack with modern day necessities like wallet, cell phone, etc. It is larger but I never overload. Very handy. And, I believe, looks good.