Thank you Alden,
In this era only a few years before (without looking it up I think in the mid to late 1690’s), Virginia had imported a good sized number of arms that were British "Military Surplus" with the intention they were to be sold at reduced cost, so the poorest members of the Militia could afford a gun for Militia Duty. (The problem for us who would LOVE to know what “Military Surplus Arms” Virginia received is it never mentions which arms they were, though I expect they were Muskets and most likely flintlocks, because it does not mention anything about them being matchlocks.) Though the idea seemed like a valid one,
it turned out to be a Huge Bust. Virginia wound up only selling a very few of them. Even as cheap as they were sold, they were deemed as “too heavy” by most of those it was the intention to sell them to. IOW it seems, IF the poorer Virginians had any money to buy a gun for Militia Duty, then they went ahead and paid more for a lighter civilian gun that would be acceptable for Militia Use.
Further, at the personal expense Lt. Col. Thomas Gage of the 44th Foot (British Regulars), 540 P1730 Muskets were taken from stores and delivered to a New York Gunsmith, Abraham Vangelder who was paid the sum of 135/13/0 Pounds for “lightening” those muskets and was paid for doing the work on 10 Jan 1758. These were for Gage’s Unit of “Light Arm’d Foot.” ( FWIW, Bailey also noted,
“This is the only recorded instance of this type of work being carried out for the British Services in North America.”) More on this in the following link:
http://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/fusionbb/showpost.php?post/1467030/
I must also admit that the capture of the huge pile of French Arms (around 15,000) from Fort Louisbourg in 1758 and the resultant
eager and wide acceptance of those arms by both British Regular Light Infantry and Colonial Militia has a lot to do with my choices for both this era and the mid 1750's era Arms in your other era question. It is documented more than once that both the British Regular Light Infantry and the Colonial Militia preferred these Muskets because they were “lighter.”
The common thread amoung these examples, though spread over more than 60 years, is the Colonial Militia from different Colonies (as well as British Regular Light Infantry Units) seemed to have believed the “British Standard Issue Musket” was too heavy and preferred lighter Muskets.
This is where I have had to divorce myself from my own experience and personal preference for a more robust arm that will stand up better to rough usage in combat, both in the period and in modern military usage. Though I have never handled an Original P1730 or earlier British Musket, I have handled a couple of very accurate reproductions of this model and one I think was custom made by Kit Ravenshear. These were noticeably heavier than the Pedersoli Musket I commonly used for reenacting, though I do not believe TOO much heavier. (I come from the period in the military when we were issued a heavy rifle and told “to get used to it and get stronger and not complain about the weight.”) BUT, it is hard to argue with period documentation on their preferences in the period. GRIN.
IMO, the period “Carbine Bore” diameter/caliber was also large enough to be completely adequate for all military usage in the 18th century; while reducing weight of the Firelock and ammunition, as well as requiring less lead and powder for each round of ammunition. So this bore size appeals on many points, including the very important point of Logistics.
Gus
