• 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

Rifle vs. Smoothbore

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Folks haven't mentioned, how well do you see at 100 yards? Are you using an optic on that modern version of a rifle that shoots black powder? I know of a fellow who is an amazing shot with a fowler out to 80 yards, but he also has amazing eyesight.
While yes terrain is a big factor in some choosing a smoothbore over a rifle, eyesight is also part of the equation. Having a rifle that will reach 100+ yards with accuracy, from the bench, is not the same when one's years get advanced, and the eyes won't let the shooter exploit the rifle's capability, eh?

My eyes are terrible, but they're getting better. I put scopes on all my hunting rifles over 20 years ago. I ended up going with an inline ML, because I could throw a scope on it. Then about 10 years ago, my long sight started to improve. I can now see iron sights again.

Chemo screwed things up a little, but as things are settling out after 2 years, I'm doing pretty well. I picked up a Rossi M92 in the store just before deer season this year and I could sight the irons just fine. In fact, I'm probably going to pick one up one of these days to celebrate.
 
My eyes are terrible, but they're getting better. I put scopes on all my hunting rifles over 20 years ago. I ended up going with an inline ML, because I could throw a scope on it. Then about 10 years ago, my long sight started to improve. I can now see iron sights again.

Chemo screwed things up a little, but as things are settling out after 2 years, I'm doing pretty well. I picked up a Rossi M92 in the store just before deer season this year and I could sight the irons just fine. In fact, I'm probably going to pick one up one of these days to celebrate.
So the modern rifles have a much shorter sight plane than many muzzleloader, so you should be OK, and you might look into a peep sight. I was just wondering as it's a lot of coin sometimes to drop on a traditional rifle, only to find that you yourself are only good to half of the rifle's effective range.

LD
 
In 40-some years of muzzleloading, I have only acquired 3 Muzzleloading arms:

a 54 cal TC Hawken
a 75 cal Pedersoli Brown Bess
a 50 cal LHR inline

I'm thinking about my next one. I want it to be a flinter. If all goes well, I'll use it for deer hunting.

How much additional useable range should I expect getting a rifled barrel versus a smoothbore? My Hawken is rifled. With patched roundball, I can keep it on a pie plate at 50 yards. The Brown Bess does the same at 40 yards, but I'm still on the front side of the learning curve with it. With the Inline, I'm doing 4-inch groups at 100 yards.

Let's say I have a choice between 54 cal smooth and a 54 cal rifled. Take the Kibler Woodsrunner as an example; it's available in both. What's your guess on the difference in usuable range on deer sized game?
I agree with Rich....
A .50-54 flintlock rifle is a 100 yard gun.
A smoothbore is a 50 yard gun.
I’ll add this....
A .45 rifle is a 70 yard gun.

Smoothbore guns are less forgiving about hold.
Example.....
Where it hits offhand may be a lot different than the bench. Prone, propped or kneeling....different still.
You have to shoot them. They are not unlike a primitive bow.
 
HBC NW Fur Trade Gun
By 1781, HBC had sold over 46,000 of them ! { HBC was still making them utill 1867 + }
*20 ga (.62 cal.) Smoothbore Flintloock*
 

Attachments

  • northwest-trade-gun-2.png
    northwest-trade-gun-2.png
    851.9 KB · Views: 0
While I've taken deer with my .62 smoothbore and it's accuracy at 50 yards is excellent, in my book deer hunting is a rifle game. Rifles were what I used for all game, other than birds, and it just simply makes logical sense to me. One never knows when that 90 yard shot will present itself or a closer one that's only possible through a small hole in the brush.
 
Why not just use the brown Bess? It’s a flintlock and a smoothbore. I use mine for deer and small game using shot.
For me it would be impossible to hit a bird on the wing and it is not legal to turkey hunt with a rifle here and a running rabbit is hard to hit with a rifle that is just a few examples for me I am sure others have
I'm curious...why can I hunt any animal with a smoothbore, but can't do the same with a rifle?
I'm curious...why can I hunt any animal with a smoothbore, but can't do the same with a rifle?
Ever shoot a flying bird or scampering rabbit w/ a rifle?
Or try to figure out what you are going to eat off a squirrel you shot in the body w/ a .50 or greater cal. PRB?
If small, moving, and/or close game is the quarry, smoothbores generally win.
 
Last edited:
Well 100 yards is easily doable with either if you do your part. Obviously the rifle in theory would be more accurate but 50 yards I wouldn't bet against either gun with the same shooter. At 100 yards i'll bet on the rifle 100% of the time. But i thought the woodsrunner was only available in rifled. I just looked at website it says 45, 50, or 54 cal. If you look at colonial rifle it says smooth or rifled in options.
I imagine they can come up with whatever you want within reason.
Might add a little to the delivery time though.
 
Smoothbores with 'regulated' barrel can be accurate !
This Fusil has won several 50yd rifle matches.
Back when I was building custom Fusils I 'regulated' the barrel on my personal display gun where the centered decorative notch in the tang aligns perfectly with tip of the turtle front sight blade.
At 82 with bone loss & severed rotator cuff I can no longer shoot long guns so will be posting it for sale on the forum later this month.
Relic shooter
How long is the barrel?
 
Ever shoot a flying bird or scampering rabbit w/ a rifle?
Or try to figure out what you are going to eat off a squirrel you shot in the body w/ a .50 or greater cal. PRB?
If small, moving, and/or close game is the quarry, smoothbores generally win.
A .50 loaded down to about 750-800 FPS does not tear up small game much.
A head or forward rib cage shot still leaves most of the meat.
Back when I squirrel hunted, I quit aiming for the head and only took ribcage shots. Same for deer. I developed a fear of pulling the shot and blowing off a nose or jawbone and having an animal die a slow and painful death. If a forward chest shot goes just a little bit off, the margin for error is increased slightly because the bullet may still hit the spine, shoulder, etc.
 
As I was a good Boy Scout, I like to always Be Prepared.
A recent acquisition was a double barreled firearm, made in France c. 1850.
The left barrel is about 20 gauge, or 2o-bore if you are a Brit.
The right barrel is about .36 caliber, rifled.
Amazingly simple response for range.
Unfortunately, the right (rifled) lock will not remain in the full cock position. Sear needs stoning, and it is out for repair.
Beautiful little double, good companion to my c. 1850 British 15-bore double. Both exquisitely built and engraved. Pics whenever I get my cameras working.
I would really like to see some pictures of this gun, I have one very similar that I also need to send out for repair.
 
Smoothbore….16 gauge by Mike Brooks. Forty two inch barrel. Shot for birds; round balls for deer. Weighs six pounds four and points like a wand.
 

Attachments

  • 1A4297BA-D7F8-4F6C-9552-A4967DEF3002.jpeg
    1A4297BA-D7F8-4F6C-9552-A4967DEF3002.jpeg
    1.6 MB · Views: 0
Ever shoot a flying bird or scampering rabbit w/ a rifle?
Or try to figure out what you are going to eat off a squirrel you shot in the body w/ a .50 or greater cal. PRB?
If small, moving, and/or close game is the quarry, smoothbores generally win.
No, but I hit a flying chuckar partridge and a running rabbit with an arrow. My only claim to fame.
 
Shot lots of rabbits an squirrels with a rifle. Never could understand what ya needed a shotgun for them.
It's called instinctive shooting an you just practice....a lot...
 
I shot a couple of squirrels when I was young with a shotgun before I got serious about rifles, shooting squirrels with a shotgun seems unsporting, a little to easy.
 
Just an idea I’ve thought of for many years
70 grains is 1/100 of a pound
A load of shot somewhere around 1/20 to 1/10 of a pound
If you spent time in the back country a hundred shots would be about six pounds.
A rifle cuts that lead load a lot. A big bore, .54 gets thirty two shots to a pound
Even a pack horse or a canoe and a big camp pounds count.
In terms of economics and weight you can’t live very well on shotgunning. A deer will feed you for days not so much for a squirrel, prairie chicken or rabbit.
Yet
We see shot by the ton shipped to frontier post. Historicly shot was real popular even in the backwoods at the end of a long supply chain.
 
Just an idea I’ve thought of for many years
70 grains is 1/100 of a pound
A load of shot somewhere around 1/20 to 1/10 of a pound
If you spent time in the back country a hundred shots would be about six pounds.
A rifle cuts that lead load a lot. A big bore, .54 gets thirty two shots to a pound
Even a pack horse or a canoe and a big camp pounds count.
In terms of economics and weight you can’t live very well on shotgunning. A deer will feed you for days not so much for a squirrel, prairie chicken or rabbit.
Yet
We see shot by the ton shipped to frontier post. Historicly shot was real popular even inn the backwoods at the end of a long supply chain.
When we would do extended hunt or starve trips, we ate a lot better with smooth bores than rifles.
 
For me, whether smooth or rifled, I like to keep distances under 100 yards preferably 80. With a good tight patched round ball, at 75-80 yards I'm minute of deer with my smoothbore. I could stretch that out to maybe 100-125 yards with a rifle, keeping in mind that my eyes are more of a problem than the ability of the gun to hit where I think I'm aiming.
 
Just an idea I’ve thought of for many years
70 grains is 1/100 of a pound
A load of shot somewhere around 1/20 to 1/10 of a pound
If you spent time in the back country a hundred shots would be about six pounds.
A rifle cuts that lead load a lot. A big bore, .54 gets thirty two shots to a pound
Even a pack horse or a canoe and a big camp pounds count.
In terms of economics and weight you can’t live very well on shotgunning. A deer will feed you for days not so much for a squirrel, prairie chicken or rabbit.
Yet
We see shot by the ton shipped to frontier post. Historicly shot was real popular even in the backwoods at the end of a long supply chain.
Maybe the guys with poor, uncorrected eyesight that had trouble seeing rifle sights and animals in clear focus were big shot customers.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top