My mom was born and raised near where Ferguson died. Was not aware of this part of the story ...but it tracks. The fellow was given a choice ,and made it.
From what I understand there are techniques for reloading a muzzleloader while prone but it is very awkward and slower than normal. Breech loaders provide a significant advantage in this regard.
Calling Kentucky rifle "one of the earliest sharpshooter rifles" looks like a stretch. Massive usage of rifle-armed light infantry that fought in loose formations and practiced aimed shooting, indeed, dates to the last decades of the 18th century (musket-armed line infantry only had to aim "roughly in that direction" back then, and in many armies the muskets had actually lost any sights whatsoever), but rifles were first used in field action considerably earlier, roughly around the begiining of the 18th century. Basically they had to be used as a marksman weapon of sorts from the start, as accuracy was their only real advantage (combined with atrociously slow reloading). More typically those were a bit shorter rifles of larger calibers that were more convenient to reload (known as Stutzen in German). In particular, as early as in 1712 Peter the Great ordered the oboists of his army to be armed with such rifles (overall Peter the Great attempted to introduce many extremely innovative elements, though the ultimate result was limited because of the inferior Russian economy of the time; anyway, at least he managed to create a huge modern European army).
6 shots in a minute was like a machine gun. A bit hyperbolic. Something like a belton flintlock or chambers flintlock would be like machine guns. This is just very fast.
Chinese developed some kind of breechloading matchlock gun as early as they invented the gun, just a few decades after, needless to say it must have had issues considering it was not mass adopted, either that or high cost, the Indians and Chinese were masters of iron and steel in their day so its no doubt in my mind they would have built the system well but I guess the cost factor was more important when you need to field so many of them, thats the same case for Ferguson, its an interesting rifle but when it comes to price its too much.
The Ferguson wasn't _that_ much faster than the muzzleloaders of the day. It's main draw was that it gave the user a tactical advantage by being a breechloader and being able to load it from any position.
There was another HUGE advantage: the Ferguson was a RIFLED musket. The 99% of muzzle loaders were smooth-bore muskets at that time, pretty inaccurate after 60 yards and pretty much useless after 100 yards. An 18th century muzzle-loader rifled musket, e.g. the .50 Kentucky Rifle, was pretty accurate within 120 yards more or less ... but extremely tough to load from the muzzle because of the rifling. The Ferguson eliminated this problem with a breechloading system.
“They only knew how to fight proper” An exaggeration at best. Revisionist history at worst. Light infantry tactics were a common part of British military teaching.
You cannot really blame them, the only thing they learn in school is how to prepare hamburgers are McDonalds. Why do you expect them to know any form of history whatsoever? The americans still think they singlehandedly won both wars, LOL!
That’s a superb piece of craftsmanship and labour intensive technology. Why the huge calibre? Surely a smaller calibre would travel further, faster with greater accuracy - using less powder, with the troops able to carry more ammo. Many thanks. 🦘🇦🇺👍
Always great content, anyway we can support?
Sharing would help. Thanks!
I never knew these existed. What a great Guns. Ferguson rifle is "something" special!
Oh awesome! Good morning everyone!
Have never seen anything like that Collumbell rifle, that’s amazing.
My mom was born and raised near where Ferguson died.
Was not aware of this part of the story ...but it tracks.
The fellow was given a choice ,and made it.
I live near King Mountain, it is a popular hiking spot.
I really like that you include an estimated selling price range. Really interesting.
From what I understand there are techniques for reloading a muzzleloader while prone but it is very awkward and slower than normal. Breech loaders provide a significant advantage in this regard.
Great video Austin. Love going back and seeing these muzzleloaders!
One of my direct ancestors helped leave Ferguson on top of kings mountain.
Watched it twice this is a really great video!!!
Great video very informative!!!!!
Where's the detail on the Ferguson? How does it actually load? Shoulda stuck with Ian.
Calling Kentucky rifle "one of the earliest sharpshooter rifles" looks like a stretch. Massive usage of rifle-armed light infantry that fought in loose formations and practiced aimed shooting, indeed, dates to the last decades of the 18th century (musket-armed line infantry only had to aim "roughly in that direction" back then, and in many armies the muskets had actually lost any sights whatsoever), but rifles were first used in field action considerably earlier, roughly around the begiining of the 18th century. Basically they had to be used as a marksman weapon of sorts from the start, as accuracy was their only real advantage (combined with atrociously slow reloading). More typically those were a bit shorter rifles of larger calibers that were more convenient to reload (known as Stutzen in German). In particular, as early as in 1712 Peter the Great ordered the oboists of his army to be armed with such rifles (overall Peter the Great attempted to introduce many extremely innovative elements, though the ultimate result was limited because of the inferior Russian economy of the time; anyway, at least he managed to create a huge modern European army).
6 shots in a minute was like a machine gun.
A bit hyperbolic. Something like a belton flintlock or chambers flintlock would be like machine guns. This is just very fast.
Chinese developed some kind of breechloading matchlock gun as early as they invented the gun, just a few decades after, needless to say it must have had issues considering it was not mass adopted, either that or high cost, the Indians and Chinese were masters of iron and steel in their day so its no doubt in my mind they would have built the system well but I guess the cost factor was more important when you need to field so many of them, thats the same case for Ferguson, its an interesting rifle but when it comes to price its too much.
The Ferguson wasn't _that_ much faster than the muzzleloaders of the day. It's main draw was that it gave the user a tactical advantage by being a breechloader and being able to load it from any position.
There was another HUGE advantage: the Ferguson was a RIFLED musket. The 99% of muzzle loaders were smooth-bore muskets at that time, pretty inaccurate after 60 yards and pretty much useless after 100 yards. An 18th century muzzle-loader rifled musket, e.g. the .50 Kentucky Rifle, was pretty accurate within 120 yards more or less ... but extremely tough to load from the muzzle because of the rifling. The Ferguson eliminated this problem with a breechloading system.
@@federicovesentini3719 It also meant you didn't have to use patches, which is also a big time saver compared to muzzleloading rifles.
“They only knew how to fight proper”
An exaggeration at best. Revisionist history at worst. Light infantry tactics were a common part of British military teaching.
You cannot really blame them, the only thing they learn in school is how to prepare hamburgers are McDonalds. Why do you expect them to know any form of history whatsoever? The americans still think they singlehandedly won both wars, LOL!
What would be considered a long range for these pesky backwoodsmen shooting British gentlemen?
That’s a superb piece of craftsmanship and labour intensive technology.
Why the huge calibre? Surely a smaller calibre would travel further, faster with greater accuracy - using less powder, with the troops able to carry more ammo.
Many thanks.
🦘🇦🇺👍