doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion Double Rifles, Paradox Guns & Gauge Rifles @ doublegunshop.com A puzzling Scottish Percussion 12-bore Double

Nice rifle! I read of notchless rear sights with only a platinum line, but never actually saw one. I suppose that could indicate such sights were a short lived fad that were simply found to be less practical and precise than a more conventional rear open sight. Few people approaching middle age would be able to simultaneously focus on the platinum line, the front sight, and the target with any speed or precision.

Mike Rowe's comment above saying the bullets with such an arrangement would strike at the top of the bead seemed a bit problematic, because with my own black powder rifles, the average sight bead can cover a fairly large portion of the target at longer ranges. I had one .50 cal. flintlock that was difficult to get the precision I wanted because the rear notch was narrow, and the bead fairly filled the notch. That made it hard to know I was centered on the heart of a deer at 100 yards, especially in low light conditions, so I modified the rear sight notch. And if my bullet were to hit at the top of the bead at that range, that could mean a shot intended for the heart would result in a very high lung shot, or worse. Or it would mean consciously holding low to make a heart shot, which isn't a great idea either.

I looked at your photos and was surprised to see there wasn't as much difference in height between the 100 yard and the 500 yard blade as I expected, especially for a percussion 12 bore rifle. It seems like there is a lot more difference in height on small bore higher velocity military rifles with ladder type rear sights when you elevate to longer ranges. So it seemed like the sight graduations on your rifle were optimistic at best. I shot my .50 and .54 cal. flintlocks at longer ranges to check the trajectory with hunting loads, and they really start dropping like a rock when you get much past 125-150 yards. I'd be very surprised if your gun shoots to the sights once you find a regulation load, and actually fire it at the longer ranges.

When I was in my 20's, I bought a .69 cal. percussion replica rifle and mold from a friend. I asked him what load he used, and he said 160 grains of FFg with a round ball that weighed around 450 grains, as I recall. That would be a 5.85 dram charge, which in hindsight was probably much too heavy for the gun. The recoil set me back a step or so, but it was a literal blast to shoot. It turned out to have poor accuracy, even when I varied the charge a bit, so I sold it. The trajectory at longer ranges was worse than my smaller caliber flintlocks, and I never tried it past 200 yards. I'd guess a 12 bore round ball trajectory would be even worse.

I saw that Francis Lovel had some nice muzzle loaders on his rack,,was it from him or Giles Marriot?

Flat topped long range sights have an advantage in that you can lay off for wind without losing the same elevation.

Not that shooting at 500 yards in a cross wind when using a 12 bore rifle is likely to be productive if you are shooting at anything smaller than a closely formed battalion.

I agree with Parabola that notches in a flat top leaf would be distracting when shooting long range targets in the wind. I can see a reason for the flat top notchless rear sight.

My thanks to Eightbore, Parabola and Keith for your comments.
I agree that it appears the 500 yard leaf would provide insufficient elevation, but - having learned that notch-less sights were a "thing" - I'm inclined to trust their maker.
Nonetheless, I shall look for an opportunity to set up the rifle in a rest and see just how much vertical difference there would be in the presumed POI at, say, 100 yards, when using the 100- and 500-yard leaves, respectively; then play around with some numbers in a ballistic calculator. I think the G1 BC of a 575-grain 0.72" round ball works out at around 0.11. How much better it would be for a conical bullet is another matter to look into.
Additionally, I have just received a copy of Graeme Wright's Shooting the British Double Rifle, from which I'm sure I'll learn much of use and interest.

Keith
I have not found a problem when hunting, with the bullets striking at the top of the bead. It doesn't matter how large the bead may be, it's not covering the strike spot.
In use, I align the sights (well, as best I can!), and raise them up the animal until the top of the bead reaches the spot I need to hit. Then press the trigger.
It's worked so far.

BTW If y'all have read "The Art of Still Hunting" by T.S. van Dyke, published, I believe, in the 1880's, he recommends a flat bar rear sight made of black rubber. The old first hand accounts like this are always a great source of inspiration. Too many good methods have been lost to time.

A great reference. Here's the quotation:

"The back sight I use is a straight bar of hard black rubber about thirty-five hundredths of an inch wide, perfectly level on top. Iron or bone soaked with ink will do as well; but iron should be kept corroded with tincture of iodine and then blackened withink. With such a sight and ivory on the ball in front you can swing your rifle around the horizon in the sun and see no change of light-center and not a glimmer from the bar. And you can shoot ten degrees closer to the sun’s eye with them than with any other set of open sights. The very best of all is a piece of hard soleleather, made still harder by boiling and hammering and drying in an oven. Soaked with ink, not a ray of light will this cast. It can be screwed in through a hole." (pp.357-58)

Theodore S. Van Dyke, The Still Hunter (New York: Fords, Howard & Hulbert, 1882)