Brown Bess question?

[Steven Goselin]

Actually not just a Brown Bess question, but ya need a title. A friend has a Brown Bess replica sold by Middlesex Village Trading Company. It is a pretty good shooter and sparks well. Overall not a bad looking rifle. Bit of a heavy trigger. Given the price it prompted me to do a search and see about opinions on this forum and a few others and it lead me to a question. I really do not want to debate the quality of Indian muzzleloaders or whether to buy one. Please let's not go down that road. I have a fundamental question about the Brown Bess and other flintlock military muskets of the time. I have never handled an original. How well made were they. I am not talking about durability or even functionality. I have a lot of experience with later 19th century military cartridge firearms. The Snider, Martini Henry, Trapdoor Springfield, Rolling Block, Mauser, Beaumont and many more. They are all durable and quite functional, but most have woefully heavy triggers, often rudimentary sights and are basically capable of hitting a man sized outline at 100 - 200 yards. Add to that the recruit usually had no control of what weapon he got and it's quality or condition. During the same time period there were sporting rifles that could take large game such as Buffalo out to 800+yards and sporting and target rifles that could shoot MOA and had beautiful smooth trigger pulls. Since I have little or no experience with military muskets of the 17th and 18th centuries I pose the question. The major criticism I have found of the Indian replicas is first and foremost heavy trigger pulls followed by poor wood, poor fit and finish and of course historical inaccuracies which is not really part of this discussion. What was a typical Brown Bess or Charlesville musket like? How was the trigger pull? The wood? The fit and finish? These were military firearms after all and not sporting arms. Your thoughts are welcome. Thank you.

[Bigsmoke]

I am not much of an authority on original firearms, but I have heard from many more knowledgeable sources that individual accuracy was not a priority, rather the ability  to lay out volley after volley of lead into an opposing group that is trying to do the same thing to you.  Hence, a fine trigger pull is not what they were requiring.  Actually, the one thing that was required was to have two upper teeth and two lower teeth that were in the front of the mouth, in order to rip the end of the paper cartridge open to load the musket quickly and on command.
Bringing it up to modern times, years ago, I did have a Pedersoli Bess and the trigger pull on that was pleasant and did it ever spark.
That's all I got.
John

[Steven Goselin]

Yeah, I have heard the same thing. I am really curious about the trigger pull. When I researched the Indian muzzleloaders the single biggest complaint was the heavy trigger pull, yet some also complain about historical inaccuracies from an exterior standpoint? So might a heavy trigger pull in fact be accurate (no pun intended).

[Stormrider51]

Goose,   Yours is a difficult, and maybe impossible, question to answer.  I've had the opportunity to handle three different original
Brown Bess muskets and all of them had acceptable triggers.  Not match grade by any means but not terrible either.  Unfortunately, this tells us very little about what they were like when they were issued at the armory.  After all, they are 200+ years old and who knows how many gunsmiths/armorers have had their hands on them in the intervening years?  Another thing to keep in mind is that they were manufactured pre-industrial revolution and each and every part was hand forged and filed to fit.  The concept of parts interchangability was still in the future.  (As a side note, the guns made in India are hand forged and filed today.  I will abide by your request that we avoid starting a Made in India debate.  That subject has been beaten to death on various forums.)  We do know that the manufacture of various parts was farmed out to multiple makers with the quality of some being known to be better than others.  I think it's safe to say that an overly light trigger was not considered a good thing.  Nor was one so heavy that you could sprain your trigger finger trying to fire it.
John

[Steven Goselin]

I know that I am asking a likely impossible question to answer. I will take whatever info I can get from this knowledgeable bunch.

[RobD]

firstly, i would be very very suspect of any firearm originating from india.  though i've never even held one, the sordid stories about them abound.  i've heard that the barrels aren't proofed and are made of tubing, not real drawn steel.   that would make some sense as they do not leave india with touch holes (illegal in india).  others, in legions, say they are the pits whence quality compared to jukars and spanish guns (which i think are at least close to the pits).  i'm just regurgitating what i've heard, fwiw.

middlesex, the chief india usa broker, refutes all of the above.  well, maybe.  they do have a stake in the outcome ....

http://www.middlesexvillagetrading.com/muzzleloader_technical_info/educational_articles/musket_history_articles/Indian_muskets_and_safety.shtml

as to a hefty single trigger pull, that's usually an issue of geometry - the pivot point of the trigger.  if not in just the right place, it will never have the leverage required for smooth pull in the 5 to few pounds range that it should have.  peter alexander's book has a pic that clearly portrays single trigger layouts from really bad to really good.  i'll see if i can scare up that image ... i did ....

[Uncle Russ]

Great illustration!

Uncle Russ...

[Loyalist Dave]

...,  the sordid stories about them abound.  i've heard that the barrels aren't proofed and are made of tubing, not real drawn steel.   that would make some sense as they do not leave india with touch holes (illegal in india).  others, in legions, say they are the pits whence quality

Funny how I know of several India origin muskets who have actually been to the English and German proof houses, which have much higher standards than the Italian proof house used by Pedersoli, and they all passed without fail.   

The major complaint is the lack of proper walnut used in the stocks.  The metal parts are pretty close to originals, though there are those who fail to recognize that even the originals had lots of variations as they were all hand finished, that one does not see in a new Italian SLP Bess or the now out of production Japanese SLP Bess.  Yes the wood to metal fit is often so-so. 

I own four different smooth bores made in India three of which are of the Bess family, and the triggers and main springs are fine, no problems.  I have seen Pedersoli Charleville Muskets with main springs so heavy that it was very difficult to cock the muskets, and the reenactors using them had to brace the butt plates on their thigh to get enough leverage.     As to their weight, they are probably a bit heavier than their original counterparts, but the modern Italian and Japanese muskets may be too light, due to the much higher quality steel used in their barrels compared to the welded, wrought iron barrels used in military muskets.  Miroku barrels are extremely thin. 

LD