If we ballpark one aimed shot every two minutes overall (which is considerably less than what a muzzleloading rifle can do and which would seem like a conservative estimate for hyped-up guys under stress looking to kill Comanches), in thirty minutes 200 Texans could have easily sent 3,000 rifle balls downrange.
Whatever the actual figure, I believe the Texans must have flung a lot of lead, as Felix Huston hisself wrote "a handsome fire".
Eighty Comanches actually getting hit seems like a reasonably conservative estimate. Birdwatcher
Birdie... British infantry were trained to be able to load and fire 3 shots per minute from their muskets in the Napoleonic era, and that was the infantry standard of the day up until the implementation of breechloaders. I expect that irregulars such as this Texan force would not have been quite so efficient, especially if they were using rifled arms.
If you look at battlefield casualties records as far back as they've been kept, wounded numbers were/are generally 2-3 times the number of KIA. As such, I would expect total Comanche casualties would have been 80-120 estimated. Aside from KIA, in the absence of modern surgical and medicinal treatment, wounded who would die from their wounds could run as high as 50% of the wounded, bringing total dead from the battle into the 80-100 range.
The psychological effect of having wounded men dying back in the camps, where the women and children could see the effects of the Texans' rifle balls, would have been devastating to the collective consciousness of the bands/tribes involved.
