Question about Morgan's Shingle

[1773]

Most of us have probably heard the story abut Morgan's Shingle where the test was to hit a roofing shingle at 250 yards. Well my question concerning this is at what range would most of these frontiersmen have had their rifles zeroed at? I got curious and loaded some data from my rifle into a ballistics calculator, in my rifle 90 grains of FFFg powder under a patched round ball gives an average velocity of right at 1850 feet per second. With those parameters and a 100 yard zero it would drop 61.3 inches at 250 yards and with a 200 yard zero it would drop 25 inches at 250 yards.

So with something the size of a shingle you would have nothing to reliably reference your hold over too. Now if it was against a tree that would solve the horizontal reference but not the vertical reference. So obviously if you are zeroed at 250 you are extremely high at closer ranges. Is there any historical record as to how the shoot was actually done was there something there to place vertical and horizontal reference for the shooter to align their sights. Or is this one of those things that has grown in history and the actual distance was much less than 250 yards?

 

[SDSmlf]

Most of us have probably heard the story abut Morgan's Shingle where the test was to hit a roofing shingle at 250 yards. Well my question concerning this is at what range would most of these frontiersmen have had their rifles zeroed at? I got curious and loaded some data from my rifle into a ballistics calculator, in my rifle 90 grains of FFFg powder under a patched round ball gives an average velocity of right at 1850 feet per second. With those parameters and a 100 yard zero it would drop 61.3 inches at 250 yards and with a 200 yard zero it would drop 25 inches at 250 yards.

So with something the size of a shingle you would have nothing to reliably reference your hold over too. Now if it was against a tree that would solve the horizontal reference but not the vertical reference. So obviously if you are zeroed at 250 you are extremely high at closer ranges. Is there any historical record as to how the shoot was actually done was there something there to place vertical and horizontal reference for the shooter to align their sights. Or is this one of those things that has grown in history and the actual distance was much less than 250 yards?

Posted a link to this video by
@duelist1954, aka Mike Beliveau, on another thread a few days ago, where he explains his method of setting up a gun to take down ‘Red Coats’ out to 200 yards or so. Note the targets he uses and his aim points. You may find it interesting.

 

[olskool]

beware of the man with one gun and knows how to use it,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

[springfield art]

Most of us have probably heard the story abut Morgan's Shingle where the test was to hit a roofing shingle at 250 yards. Well my question concerning this is at what range would most of these frontiersmen have had their rifles zeroed at? I got curious and loaded some data from my rifle into a ballistics calculator, in my rifle 90 grains of FFFg powder under a patched round ball gives an average velocity of right at 1850 feet per second. With those parameters and a 100 yard zero it would drop 61.3 inches at 250 yards and with a 200 yard zero it would drop 25 inches at 250 yards.

So with something the size of a shingle you would have nothing to reliably reference your hold over too. Now if it was against a tree that would solve the horizontal reference but not the vertical reference. So obviously if you are zeroed at 250 you are extremely high at closer ranges. Is there any historical record as to how the shoot was actually done was there something there to place vertical and horizontal reference for the shooter to align their sights. Or is this one of those things that has grown in history and the actual distance was much less than 250 yards?

Maybe it was one of those "entire roof area" shingles! (Joke) You're really thinking, though, very interesting!

 

[1773]

Posted a link to this video by
@duelist1954, aka Mike Beliveau, on another thread a few days ago, where he explains his method of setting up a gun to take down ‘Red Coats’ out to 200 yards or so. Note the targets he uses and his aim points. You may find it interesting.

Thanks for the video that was interesting but he obviously had reference points to use to calculate his holdover and had enhanced visibility targets. I have enjoyed shooting traditional style muzzleloaders for about 40 years but have really gotten a lot more interested in the historical part of it in the last few years. Here lately this whole "Morgan's Shingle" idea has caught my attention.

I have tried it at 200 yards the longest distance I can shoot at right now, without something to reference to you can't even tell where the shingle is in relation to your rifle. I mean with my not to be mentioned rifle I either hold at the top of the shingle at 250 and hit 8 inches down on it or dial in 3 MOA of elevation and hold dead center. As we all know it is infinitely more complicated with a flintlock rifle.

I have learned some things from this because ironically I had never really looked at the ballistics of a muzzleloader other than just by shooting it a different ranges. One of the things that I have learned is that though I could hit a deer at greater than 100 yards with my rifle, I will not shoot at one that far due to the low retained energy of the projectile at that range 478 FPE at 100. Fortunately that is not an issue in that I don't hunt with a muzzleloader to shoot at long ranges but rather to see if I can powder burn them with the shot.

This long range stuff is just a result of me getting more interested in the historical aspects of my hobby.

 

[1773]

beware of the man with one gun and knows how to use it,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

That is true but no matter how well you know your rifle at 250 yards if you don't have something to reference your sights to you aren't going to hit much. That is the part I am trying to figure out is what did they reference their sights to. I realize it is probably lost to history but it is just something I have been intrigued with lately.

 

[Dusty_Traveler]

If you depend on something every day, you will know that thing inside and out. Eyes closed, hands behind the back.

I think they were so familiar with their rifle, it became an extension of the body. I'm fairly sure they would have known the right amount of Virginia elevation to go with the Kentucky windage.

2¢

 

[The Crisco Kid]

I think it may have been in Michener's book Centennial that he mentioned some hero being able to hit a turkey in the head at 300 yards with his longrifle. Maybe Morgan's Shingle is in the same category. If you shoot at the barn long enough sooner or later you will hit the door.

 

[olskool]

If you depend on something every day, you will know that thing inside and out. Eyes closed, hands behind the back.

I think they were so familiar with their rifle, it became an extension of the body. I'm fairly sure they would have known the right amount of Virginia elevation to go with the Kentucky windage.

2¢

true, if you eat and breath something every day all your life you will just know, to a certain extent. first you have to be good at knowing what a certain distance is, then knowing what your particular rifle will do at that distance. i shoot a recurve bow, i do not use any sights other than my brain and eyes. i can hit a target close up or 75yds away ect. with only the aid of my knowing where to hold based on my brain and eyes, i do the same for the most part when shooting long range with open sights. a baseball outfielder or quarter back dose the same thing when throwing a ball. it is eye brain, coordination,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

[BillinOregon]

Well, what size was this shingle? Was it painted with, say, whitewash for contrast? If a typical wood shingle or shake, much longer than wide, it could easily have been two feet long or much longer, and if hung vertically gives considerable room for elevation errors, very little for windage errors. The next question, that I don't recall ever being discussed, is whether riflemen of the period ever used witness marks on rear or front sights (think Elmer Keith with the gold bars on his front sixgun sight for long-range work). I don't recall ever seeing any mention of the latter, but it certainly would be no trick to know where your rifle shoots if you use the plane of the muzzle octagon as your reference point, instead of the bead, for a known elevation at distance.
I'll watch Mike's video.

 

[dave_person]

Hi,
Or Morgan's shingle is a myth. Perhaps it was 250 paces not yards.

dave

 

[BillinOregon]

Well, I see Mike refers to this as "sight-base aiming" Ought to work.

 

[BillinOregon]

In this Youtube, our friend Mr. Capandball shoots at 200 meters and mentions the usefulness of a rear leaf sight. Simple solution I had not thought about.

 

[Tumbledown]

Hi,
Or Morgan's shingle is a myth. Perhaps it was 250 paces not yards.

dave

It's not a myth. There are several similar demonstrations mentioned in this article, all mentioning yards. Washington himself at Bunket Hill had riflemen shooting at a 7" pole from 200 yards so word would get to the British as propaganda.

Besides, 250 paces is still 200 yards. In my experience, the biggest trick at these ranges is accounting for bullet drop.

 

[Tumbledown]

Watching  that both videos, I think a full buckhorn sight might be useful.

 

[The Miner '49er]

Captain Morgan and Captain Cresap both were charged with forming companies of rifle sharpshooters. For a man to be selected he had one chance to walk up and take an offhand cold bore shot at that shingle. I have never read about how anyone aimed, or how much hold over or Ky windage they used. It is my belief that most men of that age were so familiar with their rifle or musket that very good shooting was commonplace. They intuitively shot on the mark without thinking about it, much like we drive our cars without thinking about how we do it. Having said that, we all know that being a good shooter doesn't mean the average guy would nail that shingle. Far from it, those who did were truly exceptional shooters, and I would compare them to today's Distinguished Riflemen.

 

[LongWalker]

Besides, 250 paces is still 200 yards. In my experience, the biggest trick at these ranges is accounting for bullet drop.

Back in 2013-2015, I did some playing with long range shooting (out to 400 yards) using a well-worn original Dickert, for a total of about 2,500 shots. I've continued some experiments along those lines in the years since. In my limited experience, the effects of wind were the biggest problem, followed by range estimation. (BTW, using the load that gave the smallest groups at 50 yards, the Dickert was sighted to hit center at about 80 yards.)

This afternoon I took an 8" wide by 20" long piece of scrap wood (roughly the size of the last shake shingles I saw split), wedged one end in the backstop, then backed up 250 yards. The rifle I had with me is currently sighted for 75 yards. At 250 yards, I held the top of the blade above the top of the hindsight "a bit". Winds were in my face from my right, steady at about 15mph. Of ten shots I had 7 solid hits, two shots nicked the left edge of the board, and 1 was off to the left (so the wind wasn't as steady as I thought!).

 

[1773]

That's some very respectable shooting to be able to hit a target that size 9 out of 10 shots at 250 yards.

 

[LongWalker]

I got that rifle earlier this year as a kit, with the intention of primarily using it for introducing newbies to shooting flintlocks. If you're going to do something like that (teaching) you need to be able to adequately and effectively demonstrate the use and accuracy of the rifle. I practice with it a fair amount.

 

[1773]

Your practice certainly shows, most shooters could not hit that size target 9 out of 10 shots off hand at 250 yards with a modern rifle with a good scope, much less with an open sighted flintlock. I am sure your students benefit from your instruction.