• 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

Is it possible to achieve a 100m(109yd) accuracy of 24 MOA with the 1842 Springfield musket without patched ball?

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

WolfSharp

32 Cal
Joined
Feb 26, 2023
Messages
6
Reaction score
2
Location
Taiwan
I came across an article on the internet claiming that the 1842 Springfield Musket had a 24 MOA accuracy, and the author of the article suggested, "It was probably a patched ball." However, the article lacked any credible sources or evidence. It appears that the author may have drawn this conclusion based on their bias toward the accuracy of flintlock muskets. What are your thoughts on this matter? Do you also believe that it must be a patched ball, or do you think achieving this accuracy is possible with a regular paper cartridge?
 
I came across an article on the internet claiming that the 1842 Springfield Musket had a 24 MOA accuracy, and the author of the article suggested, "It was probably a patched ball." However, the article lacked any credible sources or evidence. It appears that the author may have drawn this conclusion based on their bias toward the accuracy of flintlock muskets. What are your thoughts on this matter? Do you also believe that it must be a patched ball, or do you think achieving this accuracy is possible with a regular paper cartridge?
Yes, anything is possible if one has enough time, ammo, and allot of luck.
 
I don't know much about the originals, but I bet the reproductions can. I shoot PRB out of one of my unmentionable muzzleloaders at 100 yd and can pretty consistently hit a plate sized target, and I'm not the world's best shot by any means.
 
In early seventeenth century there were European smooth bore match’s held at about 250 yards and rifle match’s taking place over three hundred
There is a you tube of a guy shooting a hundred and eighty yard gong with a bess. First shot high, second low third ping.
North south skirmishes get smoothbore targets you could be proud of with a rifle,
I’ve had some real good days on the range, at least stand with Annie Oakley. I’ve had days where I was badly disappointed.
In a three shot group with a smoothie I can get two real good hits and a flyer
Some times my flyer is several inches off, some times close
I found patch vs wad doesn’t make that much real difference
IMG_1602.jpeg
.
This is fifty, but someone who is really dedicated I could believe a hundred yard similar is possible
Patch on the left, tow wads and bare ball on the right, .62 65 grains 3f, 42” barrel, .595 ball
 
I came across an article on the internet claiming that the 1842 Springfield Musket had a 24 MOA accuracy, and the author of the article suggested, "It was probably a patched ball." However, the article lacked any credible sources or evidence. It appears that the author may have drawn this conclusion based on their bias toward the accuracy of flintlock muskets. What are your thoughts on this matter? Do you also believe that it must be a patched ball, or do you think achieving this accuracy is possible with a regular paper cartridge?
M1842 was a percussion lock. Maybe he was referring to an earlier variant of the M1816 (up to around 1840) which were flintlocks?

Anyway, I've got an original M1842. Been shooting it very accurately at 50 yrds using a .678 RB, roughed up, dipped in lube, with 62gr Swiss 2FG. Haven't tried it at 100 yrds yet, but I'm guessing 24 MOA is possible with maybe a heavier powder charge. I'll report back when I try it.
 
I came across an article on the internet claiming that the 1842 Springfield Musket had a 24 MOA accuracy, and the author of the article suggested, "It was probably a patched ball." However, the article lacked any credible sources or evidence. It appears that the author may have drawn this conclusion based on their bias toward the accuracy of flintlock muskets. What are your thoughts on this matter? Do you also believe that it must be a patched ball, or do you think achieving this accuracy is possible with a regular paper cartridge?
My 100m gun. .69 caliber. .690 roundball,greased mattress ticking patch, 70grains 2F. Working up the proper load..ie..patch, powder, ball combination, is key. Practice, steady hold, and breathing...all key.
 

Attachments

  • received_130412766710809.jpeg
    received_130412766710809.jpeg
    172.1 KB · Views: 0
I came across an article on the internet claiming that the 1842 Springfield Musket had a 24 MOA accuracy,
A 24 degree minute of angle at 100 meters is posible with a hand thrown rock!
Accuracy and kinetic energy at delivery can be improved with a sling,,
 
Cannot speak from experience but 24 MOA at 100 meters is approximately 24 inches or roughly shoulder width on a man sized target. I believe it is entirely possible. Would like to see the results if someone here can test the theory.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top