In your answer to my question of August 16th about the Baker Rifle you asked me for the name of the article: The Article was "Britain's Brunswick Rifle," by Garry James in the September 2006 edition of Guns and Ammo magazine. I quote Re: The Baker Rifle " With its slow twist (one quarter turn in 30 inches) and rather shallow rifling, the short Germanic-looking Baker had been designed with as much concern for ease of loading as for accuracy. It was at least a better group-getter than the smoothbore Brown Bess out to 100 yards, but anything past that was pretty much touch and go. Also as designer Ezekiel Baker was a buddy of the Prince of Wales, he had something of an inside track on getting his arm tested and adopted. By the mid-1830's , however, stores of Bakers were running low, and the 40 year old flintlock was beginning to show its age. Officers of the rifle regiments to whom they were issued complained that a new gun was sorely needed. Rifles on the Continent were outstripping the Baker in long-range accuracy, and the emergence of the percussion system had rendered the flintlock obsolete.
Bob Long
Thanks for that . . . I suspect the writer of the piece was using some really rotten sources. It's true that the Baker only had a quarter turn (and in a very short barrel), but in those Woolwich tests it outperformed every other rifle - and all the other rifles had a three-quarters turn and longer barrels. The Prince of Wales had nothing to do with the tests, and no influence on the outcome which was based solely on performance. There probably was some dissatisfaction by 1840 (technology had moved on), but I've never discovered a complaint about the rifle from the men who used it to fight Napoleon - which is the job it was designed to do.