Well it's well known that the Colonials at Breeds Hill (Bunker Hill) held their fire until the British, who were attacking up hill, were close. This was in part because the Colonials were short of ammunition, and probably because the Colonials knew that when firing down hill you naturally shoot high. Thinking you could hit a target at 200 yards on level gound is not the same as actually doing it on uneven ground in a battle.
Yes the loads used in hunting would give a Colonial an advantage over the British military ammunition used in their musket, as the British were interested in quick reloading, which necessitated a much smaller ball to overcome fouling, and this then necessitated volley firing. The British soldier was trained, regularly, to "fire-at-marks" folks. But as the ammo was naturally a bit inaccurate, the marks were at 50 paces or less. Light Infantry were trained in marksmanship at about twice that range.
The disadvantage of the Colonials using hunting ammunition, is they would, after a few rounds, need to swab a bore, while the British could use their whole ammuntion box of 18 - 24 rounds without cleaning. So if you can hit and run against the Brits such as happened when the Brits returned to Boston from Lexington and Concord..., you can cause a lot of damage.
Now a lot of faith is placed in the experience of the American colonial and his firearm, but folks, even by the 1860's where there were rifled pieces and precision sights, expert hunters such as Forsyth were making 90% of thier shots at under 100 yards. YES there were some folks renoun in history for much farther shots..., as they were the exception, not the norm. :grin:
In a pitched battle though, the Continental Army used ammo just as the British did, and often were broken by British bayonet charges. So the Continentals started choosing to fight where they had a fence or two to break up the British bayonet charge, and give them time to back up, usually to the next fence. (very smart fellows)
Good luck even with accurate ammunition in hitting a line of enemy soldiers at 200 yards with a musket. You have to be trained to correctly estimate the range, the ground has to be very level, and then you have to correctly elevate the musket. (That has to be done for all 100 men in each company) At that range very slight deviations will make you shoot under or over your target. PLUS the British fought at open order, meaning there was at a minimum one arm length between the files of the men, so you have more room for a miss at more than 100 yards.
Given laboratory conditions you could get a company of men to hit at several hundred yards, but the practical application under battlefield conditions was far different. So although some armies opened fire at 100 yards, effective hits didn't really begin with muskets until one reach about 60 yards. At that range you have time for one volley if the enemy is advancing, for if they then charge they will be on you before you can fire the second volley. So you might was well wait until they are at around 30 yards, hammer them with close to 100% hits with your one volley, and if they haven't been decimated, you then charge at them.
They weren't stupid folks. If they could've had reasonably gotten hits beyond 100 yards and so hamper or disperse an enemy unit at that range why did that not happen until the rifled musket came along? :hmm: Under battlefield conditions the had to get close.
LD
