Arrows vs bullets

[cal.45]

Why wasn’t arrows used instead of bullets for small black powder handguns with short barrels? At low velocities arrows use its energy much more efficient than roundballs does, and I imagine a front heavy arrow with a hollow base would be more accurate too? A expandable broad head could have a diameter of .40 or less when recessed inside a gun bore, and unfold like a hollow point to a diameter up to 3 inch of wide knife blades. Such an arrow will make much more damage than a .40 roundball at the same velocity.

So why was roundballs prefered over arrows?

 

[CuNosecap]

If I had been alive in 1750, and was familiar with casting lead balls for my musket, it would be way easier to cast more balls for a new pistol, than to engineer an “expandable broad head”.
And as an old guy in 2023, I think it’s still easier.

 

[Sam squanch]

Early handgonnes sometimes shot arrows. As pointed out, it’s way faster and easier to cast many lead balls than manufacture arrows and the heads. And easier to carry than a bundle of arrows that might stick you if you fall down!

 

[Johnny Tremain]

You have to be a much better shot with a bow

 

[nkbj]

cal.45,
To answer your question, it looks as though experience with percussion revolvers identified an engineering problem to be solved which was to obtain penetration through outdoor clothing, hence the heavier pointy projectiles that concentrated the available force into the smallest cross section as does an awl.

My #1 theory about history is that people did what worked, that they perceived a need and set about creating a solution based upon what they knew at the time, in that manner creating what would sell.
All those wonderful inventions that didn't make it to market (including the ones that were before their time) we just don't hear much about.

 

[Juice Jaws]

Guess they figure arrows wasn't working out so well for the Indians so why waste the time

 

[Loyalist Dave]

Why wasn’t arrows used instead of bullets for small black powder handguns with short barrels? At low velocities arrows use its energy much more efficient than roundballs does, and I imagine a front heavy arrow with a hollow base would be more accurate too? A expandable broad head could have a diameter of .40 or less when recessed inside a gun bore, and unfold like a hollow point to a diameter up to 3 inch of wide knife blades. Such an arrow will make much more damage than a .40 roundball at the same velocity.

So why was roundballs prefered over arrows?

So they did try that, but with much less engineering...

The problem with the idea, is that small pistols were pocket items. They were sort of used as a form of communication first pulled, "HA! I did bring a handgun to the fight!" Followed by the second part of the communication which ends with the culprit taking a ball to the guts. So it would've eliminated some concealability, as you'd need a holster to cover the arrow in the muzzle and carry the pistol.

Why not the deploying folding death arrow? Well for the same reason the LeMatt didn't catch on and Colt dominated. Cost and Time. A brace of LeMatt revolvers gave the shooter two shotgun blasts, and 18 rounds of .44 ball, AND..., the LeMatt was designed to be held by its barrel when empty and the butt used like a mace. HOWEVER, for the Cost of those two LeMatt revolvers, a man could buy Seven Colt .44's and a good, sharp, and silent Bowie knife.

LD

 

[Tom A Hawk]

I suggest that you design an arrow that will fit within the chamber of a revolver, with room for a powder charge, and in so doing you will answer your own question. Its simply not practical. Anything small enough to fit would have very low mass/weight affecting penetration.

And besides....ignition would singe the feathers off.

Here is an expandable broadhead lying on a dragoon cylinder.