Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Muzzleloaders The top 10 Smoothbore Muskets

I was talking with some students yesterday and they asked which gun won the west. Setting aside the semantics of the word "won", I replied, the smoothbore musket. They asked me which ones...I replied as follows. Comments most welcome. I need the advice.

1. Matchlock
2. Snaphaunce.
3. Dutch trade musket.
4. Cookson fowler.
5. Escopeta.
6. Tulle Fusil.
7. Brown Bess.
8. 1766 Charleville musket.
9. 1810 era trade musket.
10. 1816 percussion conversion.

If you are looking for a general term to encompass the real guns that started the ball rolling, the term trade musket just about covers the entire catagory.

Actually the term "trade musket" can cover many styles in the historical community.

For the sake of identity, they have been divided into an assortment of catagories. These catagories were established years ago and may not be the best way to identify them, but it's what's generally accepted.

For example youe have both French and English trade guns. French guns may be catagorize by their architecture. As Type C or Type D fusils and then your Fusil Ordinaires and Fusil de Chasse. I was able to inspect about a dozen of the remains of the fusils taken off La Salles ship "La Belle" in 1996. There wee absolutely state of the arts Flintlock fusils for 1685! Like the M4 carbine of their day!!!! Tulle is the arsenal in Franch were certain guns were made. They were also produced at other arcenals as well. Like Maugberge and Charleville.

English guns abound as the French guns left the scene after 1763 as the Treaty of Paris ending the Seven Years war. Thus France lost about 99% of her colonies in North America.

The climax would have been what has become known as the Northwest Trade Gun which appeared on the scene circa 1780 being manufactured in England by such firms as Barnett. Later being copied by many early American gunmakewrs like Henry, Leman, and Deringer.

There are several good books on the subject of trade muskets. Check with the company of "Track of the Wolf" (google and you'll find them!). They have a very complete library on the subject of all eras of trade muskets as well as other historical arms!

Kaywoodie

If you're talking the "West" East of the Mississippi, I'd agree. West of the Miss, I'd say the "shotgun" won the continent, but it "weren't no muskeet."

Dan

well said woodie trade guns would be the right description IMO ..
they were neather muskets in the true since . nore fowlers in the true since . but of a ground somewhat between .
IMO they were also the most numerous .

But I would question if they can be said to have won the west . West being past the Allegany�s

Cap

The "Trade Guns" were pretty much what you'd have had if you'd have taken a military musket and made a "sporter" out of it.

Dan

Very true. And this was done a lot!

Commercial Trade guns were made in such quantities that they were actually easier to obtain that many military guns of the day. Many were given away as annuities to the assorted tribes. Many were alos given away to seal the deal on any alliances. They also had the advantage of being lighter and usually of smaller bore than the military guns. There are records of the old NW guns in percussion versions still being sold and used in the north country waaaay into the 1930's!

Here's a hog i took with a Fusil de Chasse loaded with 60 grns of FFFG and a .595 RB. Wadded with wasp nest. Approx. 20 yd shot thru the boiler room. Maybe ran 20-30 ft.



KW

well yes and no .
normally trade guns were not of the large a caliber as a military musket
that�s not to say all were small 50 + cal . No sire . That would not be factual .
Also a trade gun is different then a fowler

See we have to be careful not to confuse guns of trade , with trade guns or for that mater calling a smooth bore a shotgun
.
The first being basically used guns of all types that were entered into the trade business , After they has had lost their usefulness to someone . Be it military or private .

Then you have the trade gun . This was specifically developed for the north American Native trade .
The trade gun business was so lucrative that countries took note of how well and sought after another countries designs were .
IE the French rifles were very sought after . As such the early English designs began to in many way emulate what the French were doing .

Later as with the NW , Mackinaw , Carolina guns , depending on what you want to call them , the quality became very poor . So much so that many times they would not fire but a few times and then become junk . they were being made a cheep as possable . As such specific makers became sought after .
But what the trade gun does carry is a light and slim design that easily carried and of a reasonable caliber

The other thing that confirms these differences was the willingness of native warriors to many times leave military muskets on the field of battle .

We would think that having a gun , was better then not . But simply put . That doesn�t seem to be the case or mindset take the Bess . the caliber is so large that alot of lead is exspended . its also very heavy in the fraim . while being a very sutable and well built weapon , its just wasnt suited for their applications .
now this isnt to say many were not collected . they were but for the most part as items of trade that were gotten rid of as soon as possable .
its worthy to not here that later came the trade rifle . which was a rifle also built specificly for the Trade market

Then you have the fowler .
While also a smoothbore they also differ
. Fowlers of the period normaly have thinner lighter walls and larger bores . The barrels were also for the most part longer .
Case in point . The Dutch English , dutch club butts and Hudson valley fowler�s carred very long barrels .
Currently im in the process of building a Hudson Valley fowler . The barrel is 52 inches . Even at that length it is short for the recorded examples as many carried barrels in the 67 inch range
The one im building , is als a 24 gage . Again small for a fowler as most were 12 gage or much larger . While the trade guns come in at 50- 69 cal with some being in the 72 range

Again though these were predominantly built for shooting shot . even today if we look at original ,,,, say SXS. those which ere more purposly built for shooting balls , carry much more robust barrels and heavier ribs .

If we look back the confusion lays in the word musket . What does it mean .
back in the 1970�s most any flintlock was called a musket , by the less knowledgeable. Did not mater if it was a rifle , smooth bore or a military weapon .
the discription simply isnt usful and serves nothing but to confuse the diffrent types of weapons and their specific purposes

To confuse things even more there is what�s called board of ordinance guns . These are a mix of just about everything you can think of . Parts from all kinds of examples were used . So its not uncommon to find French hardware with british barrels ,.

Nice woodie .
Another note here .
Lets take your Tulle and use it as an example
Tulle is as you stated a place
Many call that gun a Tulle de Chasse or more properly Fusil de tulle .
But de chasse is hunting gun � light hunter � and tulle is a place .
Tulle made many guns a lot of these were actually commissioned military pieces .
The French crown dictated that each French ship must carry a full compliment of guns . Upon docing in the new world those guns went to the armories.
As such you have the fusil de boucanier , les fusil ordinaire� common musket � Le Fusil Grenadier all standing right along the De chasse, fusil fin de chase et de service and les fusil fin .
All different guns . Yet all often mistaken for a Fusil de chase . Which according to Hanson , probably never numbered more the 500 a year . So some where around 6000 being sent to the colonies . Most if not all those being found in Canada
Their gage / caliber also being listed as rather small coming in at 28 balls to the lb . where as the le fusil Ordinaire . Just alittle longer then the military orders , comes in at 18 balls to the lb

I mention all this not to confuse people but to show that the description of Tulle , covers as many different types of weapons as does the word Trade gun

here is a a few that i have bult for folks through the years

Fusil de Tulle


D fusil


an early english trade gun . the for runner of what would later become the NW or Mackinaw

Nice type "D", Captchee! I just sold my Type "C" last week. This type is as close as one could currently get to the guns that I examined off of "La Belle", circa 1680.

It was the top gun in the pic with the trade items



Fusil fin (Type "C") and Fusil de chasse



KW

Most escopetas were smoothbore were they not? Does anyone make escopetas? Thanks. Keep the info coming...also how do you shoot one of these accurately? I haven't had any luck getting better than a 12" group at 50 yards.

Yes all escopetas were smoothies. But the colonial Spanish kept very strict regulations on just who could own them in New Spain. There were always a shortage of guns in Spanish America. For example, During the Natchez war the Spanish commander of the presidio at Los Adaes (In NW Louisiana) sent his troops to the French Garrison at Natchitoches (Ft. St. Jean Baptiste), to assist the French under Louis Jurchereu de St. Denis in fighting the Natchez Indians. They had no servicable escopetas at all! Only lances. They were issued French muskets from the King's stores.

At one time there were several folks putting Catalonian Escopetas together. But as a rule most built their own. Might check with Loyalist Arms up in Canada. They may have one available now. And the Rifle Shoppe in Okla. offered parts at one time. BUT be advised the Rifle Shoppe may take a while to get your parts to you. Loyalist would be your best bet. Just google "LOyalist Arms" and they should come up. They are one of the companies that supply the movie industry with lots of firelocks.

Bonne chance!

Kaywoodie

again woodie has it .
i would also add that Loyalist is as i recall one of the ones that also sell the Indian imports that get converted here .
so that might be something to keep in mind .

as to accuracy. You have to work a load for a smoothbore just like you do a rifle .
However there can be a lot more to that . IE different wads and card combo. Patches as well as powder charges .
Myself I don�t use a patch as part of my load .
What I do is use a soft felt wad . The ball is dropped on top of that . Its then held in place with a light , over the shot card .
That over 80 grains of 3F . In the type D fusil above . Produce a sub 1 inch group at 25 and under 6 inch group at 75 yards .
The other issue folks have is getting use to only have a front blade sight .
Having one sight is a myth . There are as many examples with rear sight�s or rear references as there are those with only a front sight .
Now that being said . Most smoothbore shoots require only a front sight .
So what you have to do is learn to be consistent in your anchor . Just like an archer does with the anchor point in the corner of the mouth .
So w I normally do for first time shooters as part of their beginning set up , is to have them shoulder the gun so as they are looking right down the top flat . this has to be done without settling into the stock . The gun should come up to the shoulder quick . With their eye on the top flat .
I then take a piece of masking tape and place it right where their cheek is .
This is their natural anchor point .
If you place you face in the same spot each time . You eye will align the sight proper , every time .
if you face is constantly being placed in diffrnet location . you eye is eather higher or lower , every time you fire . thus you aim is also diffrent and you patern will suffer from it

The other thing one can do is pick something for a rear reference and center the sight to that . some of the things folks use would be the top flat of the barrel . The width of the tang , Tang bolt �� the list can go on and on.
but even then if you get a proper anchor established you will soon find that refrance is not important .
from there its a mater of sighting the gun in . this is as simple as filing the front sight and bending the barrel small amounts to achieve windage

But once you get the proper load and learn to get a consistent hold you should be putting ball to ball at 25 and well under 6 inches at 75 yards

I put a brass rear sight on my Fusil de Chasse reminiscent of the brass rear sight found on a French gun at one of the many Tunica sites in southern Mississippi, not far from the Louisiana border. It can be found in the Harvard Press reports from the Tunica sites "Tunica Archaeology".

Another cool thing that turned up at the same sight is a "left-handed" fusil. I know another LH lock found a bit further north west of this site over near where the Coushatta lived; not far from where the Red River flows into the Mississippi. I have held this lock.

Kaywoodie

if you take a look at Links writings and documentation Kaywoodie , you will find a number of brass and gold and some iron rear sights on french smoothbores .

the museum in cody also has a number of NW guns with rear sights as well as file rear refrances

here are a couple scans from links writings

A curiousity question Cap. Do you happen to know when frizzen bridles were first used and by whom?? It seems to me that before the bridles were used, a frizzen could easliy be knocked out of alignment making it nearly useless.

it really depends on the lock maker .
many better locks of even the late 18th century were un bridled . Defenatly most earlier in the 18th .
but changed over to bridled by the end of the 18th century .
now that being said . alot of the trade gun locks , stayed un bridled .
really its not so much that a frizzen will break off but more that they will bend the screw . thus bind the movement of the frizzen.
through the years i have owned many rifles with locks that did not carry a bridle . while the setup is alittle more temperamental . I found very little problem with it .
I do think the bridle was an improvement and basically solved the issue of broken or miss alignment ...


remember alot of things were changing at the end of the 18th . gun makers were all pushing hard to ring out every last benefit of the flintlock system .
thus you see things like roller frizzens , flashole liners, , water proof pans .better geometry , improved breech designs . Basically anything that would give them even a small edge on the market

Thanks Cap. Do you happen to know when the bridle first appeared?? Tough question, but it seems like it had to have showed fairly early on even if it didn't become used much until later on.

that i would not know for sure

Cap,

Yes I know. The last NW gun I had was copied from a Deringer example in Hanson's book. I did put the rear sight on it as well. I always like the filed notches. The gun I was replicating here would have been the most common seen on the SE frontier, circa 1730-45. BTW, are you ALRA by chance?????? Have you seen the painted Native guns???? There was a Choctaw chief by the name of "Tananpo Luska", which roughly translates to "Black Gun". I know of one pink early Wilson I think that was among the Pecana Creeks.

Kaywoodie