[Justin Pasternak]

When were "Buck and Ball" loadings or cartridges first used in muskets and how effective were they against the enemy?

[Lin Robinson]

[Richard Hare]

Justin,
I seem to remember that Roger's Rangers used this combination in the F& I war, but something is nagging that it was used in Europe before this, but can't think of the reference.
It makes perfect sence to use such a load for sentry duty.(in the dark)

Re. effectiveness, it would depend on range.
Like Lin said, the bucksjot spreads wide.
Having said that, in a situation like Bunker Hill, it didn't matter if the buck struck a different target to the ball, it still made a casualty who would be less likely to press forward.

At close range, this combination woud be rather deadly, as a close miss could still be a hit....if you see what I mean!

Richard.

[Lin Robinson]

[Ted Parolari]

I'm not really sure when they starting using buck and ball, but is was the common round used by most local guard/militia units on both sides at the beginning of the American Civil War. When the Damn Yankees... oops sorry bout that! When the Union Army switched these guard/militia units to the rifled musket, many units almost mutinied when they found out that they would not be able to use the buck and ball cartridges in the new rifles. They were hugely popular because the soldiers felt they had much more of chance of hitting what they were aiming at. They were really only accurate out to a hundred yards or so. After that it was a crap shoot.

I suspect that after retraining they were much more comfortable using the minnie balls, since the range was drastically increased. However it also meant that many of these men had to learn to be better marksmen. By the end of the war most Union Army units were using minnie balls. The Confederates used buck and ball through out the war.

[Hunter B.]

From what I know it was used from the mid-18th century up to 1865, at least in the case of one of my great (couple of times removed) grandfather's. We still have his shotgun and captured yankee bayonet.

[Helge B.]

There is an interesting wikipedia article about buck and ball shots. It mentions a test described in a book from Claud E. Fuller:

"Claud E. Fuller, in his book The Rifled Musket (New York: Bonanza Books, 1958) shows tests of a rifled musket firing Minie balls, and a smoothbore musket firing round ball and buck and ball rounds at various ranges. At ranges of 200 yards (180 m) and under, the buck and ball from the smoothbore musket, while less accurate than the rifled musket, actually produces a greater number of hits due to the greater number of projectiles; 37 of 50 Minie balls, vs. 18 of 50 balls and 31 of 150 buckshot, for a total of 49 hits in 50 shots. Beyond this range, the buckshot will have lost sufficient energy to become ineffective due to its lower ballistic coefficient."

Does anyone know the size of the target used in this test? I find it amazing that at a range of 180m the buck and ball shots gets more hits than the minie ball. I would have expected the break even point after which the latter would be more effective to be at about 100m.

[B. Fulton]

If you were doing "area fire" (aiming at an entire section, company, or battalion) as was the general case with smoothbores, of course the B-B load will get more hits. You're not aiming at one particular target, you're aiming at "those guys over there". One ball and multiple pellets drastically increase the likelihood of at least wounding someone in the enemy unit with every shot.

Minie bullets are far more accurate (and like a musket ball, very destructive). You can pick and hit one target much further away, but it takes more bullets/men to cause as many general casualties (as opposed to kills) as with the B&B load.

[Justin Pasternak]

I'd like to thank everyone that helped me out with this topic. Thanks Again!