• This community needs YOUR help today. We rely 100% on Supporting Memberships to fund our efforts. With the ever increasing fees of everything, we need help. We need more Supporting Members, today. Please invest back into this community. I will ship a few decals too in addition to all the account perks you get.



    Sign up here: https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/account/upgrades
  • Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

1842 Springfield Musket

L & R
muzzle loading side side shotguns
shop deals on amazon
Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
nightwolf1974

nightwolf1974

45 Cal.
MLF Supporter
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
917
Reaction score
523
Location
NH
So, I'm working on my 2021 list of BP firearms to buy. For a few years now I've been wanting a 1842 Springfield repro, BUT always can't make up my mind on smooth or rifled bore.

I plan to deer hunt with 1842 and use it for general shooting. I plan on shooting a .69 cal PRB, and not minnie ball. Thoughts?
 
How far away will the game be? With a little work the smoothbore will do the job out to 50 yards which is more than enough in the woods. With a little luck and hard work you might be able to stretch that range some though the lack of a rear sight doesn't help. The rifled version has sights and eliminates the shortcomings of the smoothbore (if you consider them shortcomings).
 
I won't quote every response from those above. They all show a great deal of insight.

The original 1842's were .69 caliber smoothbore. I believe the 1842 had the distinction of being both the first percussion musket (the M1841 was a rifle) and the last smoothbore issued by the US Government. There was no rear sight, and the front sight was a brass bump on the forward-most barrel band. Rifle muskets shooting conical projectiles came later, and existing supplies of 1842s were later rifled to shoot a variant of the Minie bullet. They had adjustable rear sights added at the same time. The rifled version of the 1842 proved to be impractical. It just didn't work as well as hoped, and the recoil was unreasonable for the average soldier.

The question, as I understood it, was whether the smoothbore (with no rear sight) or the rifled version (with a military-style rear sight and rudimentary front sight) would be a better choice for hunting. May I suggest neither? We are talking about over ten pounds and close to five feet of gun here, in 14 gauge, with lousy sights on the one hand, and sights limited to a bump on a barrel band on the other. These are things to consider.

I have an Armi-Sport M1842, a smoothbore de-farbed by gunsmith Todd Watts. I love it. Some guns come and go, but this is one of my very few "keepers." It is a lot of fun to shoot... On the range. In its original configuration, it was designed as a military gun, and not a sporting arm. I don't doubt that game was taken with these guns in times past, but it would not be my first choice for taking afield, in its military configuration (many surplus military guns were "sporterized" for sale to the civilian market). If the M1842 were my only choice, I would pick the smoothbore, and work up loads for both ball and shot, and try to work on my hunting skills in order to keep my shots within "bow hunting" range.

This is not to discourage you. As I said, the M1842 is a great and historically significant gun, and as one who owns one, I can tell you it is fun to shoot and easy to maintain. It just wouldn't be my first choice for all-day carry in the woods in pursuit of game, with the hope of a humane kill. Others may feel differently, and I respect their opinions.

Best regards,

Notchy Bob
 
nightwolf1974 said:
So, I'm working on my 2021 list of BP firearms to buy. For a few years now I've been wanting a 1842 Springfield repro, BUT always can't make up my mind on smooth or rifled bore.

I plan to deer hunt with 1842 and use it for general shooting. I plan on shooting a .69 cal PRB, and not minnie ball. Thoughts?
[/QUO
Click to expand...

If you intend to shoot minie balls out of the rifled version, you're going to spend a considerable amount of time finding the correct size. The Armi/Chiappa 1842s tend to have oversize bores. The bore needs to be measured in order to find a minie that is .001-.002 under bore size. You'll need to find someone with a set of pin gauges to measure your bore. Then, you'll have to spend some money on a mould(I suggest Moose Moulds' semi wadcutter), a sizing die and pure lead. If you don't already cast, you're in for more expense for the necessary equipment. On the other hand, if you plan on shooting patched balls, you'd be using essentially the same set up as for a smoothbore.
 
Notchy Bob said:
I won't quote every response from those above. They all show a great deal of insight.

The original 1842's were .69 caliber smoothbore. I believe the 1842 had the distinction of being both the first percussion musket (the M1841 was a rifle) and the last smoothbore issued by the US Government. There was no rear sight, and the front sight was a brass bump on the forward-most barrel band. Rifle muskets shooting conical projectiles came later, and existing supplies of 1842s were later rifled to shoot a variant of the Minie bullet. They had adjustable rear sights added at the same time. The rifled version of the 1842 proved to be impractical. It just didn't work as well as hoped, and the recoil was unreasonable for the average soldier.

The question, as I understood it, was whether the smoothbore (with no rear sight) or the rifled version (with a military-style rear sight and rudimentary front sight) would be a better choice for hunting. May I suggest neither? We are talking about over ten pounds and close to five feet of gun here, in 14 gauge, with lousy sights on the one hand, and sights limited to a bump on a barrel band on the other. These are things to consider.

I have an Armi-Sport M1842, a smoothbore de-farbed by gunsmith Todd Watts. I love it. Some guns come and go, but this is one of my very few "keepers." It is a lot of fun to shoot... On the range. In its original configuration, it was designed as a military gun, and not a sporting arm. I don't doubt that game was taken with these guns in times past, but it would not be my first choice for taking afield, in its military configuration (many surplus military guns were "sporterized" for sale to the civilian market). If the M1842 were my only choice, I would pick the smoothbore, and work up loads for both ball and shot, and try to work on my hunting skills in order to keep my shots within "bow hunting" range.

This is not to discourage you. As I said, the M1842 is a great and historically significant gun, and as one who owns one, I can tell you it is fun to shoot and easy to maintain. It just wouldn't be my first choice for all-day carry in the woods in pursuit of game, with the hope of a humane kill. Others may feel differently, and I respect their opinions.

Best regards,

Notchy Bob
Click to expand...
They are rather long for hunting from a tree stand, that's for sure, especially if you have a deer come up on you from the wrong side or behind you and you have to swing that thing around without spooking him. It happened to me, but he trotted away rather than full tilt and I was able to take the shot. I would get the rifled version. From a shooting standpoint, unless you want to shoot buckshot which I consider to be a crippler, the rifled one has no disadvantages compared to the smoothbore while having the advantage of much greater accuracy and range. I shoot an original and it will easily keep all shots in a 4'' square at 100 yards with sights that are rather crude. If you need a second shot, the rifled musket with a minie is much faster to reload than a patched ball.
 
gemmer said:
They are rather long for hunting from a tree stand, that's for sure, especially if you have a deer come up on you from the wrong side or behind you and you have to swing that thing around without spooking him. It happened to me, but he trotted away rather than full tilt and I was able to take the shot. I would get the rifled version. From a shooting standpoint, unless you want to shoot buckshot which I consider to be a crippler, the rifled one has no disadvantages compared to the smoothbore while having the advantage of much greater accuracy and range. I shoot an original and it will easily keep all shots in a 4'' square at 100 yards with sights that are rather crude. If you need a second shot, the rifled musket with a minie is much faster to reload than a patched ball.
Click to expand...
Good post, Gemmer!

However, I would like to clarify my comment regarding working up loads for both shot and ball. I was actually referring to bird shot, for using the M1842 smoothbore as a fowling piece, thereby increasing its versatility as an all-around hunting gun. However, the OP did specifically say he wanted to use it on deer, so I apparently muddled the issue. I agree with you on buckshot. I would not use it. I'm sorry I did not make that clear.

Notchy Bob
 
gemmer said:
They are rather long for hunting from a tree stand, that's for sure.......
Click to expand...
I've hunted with and taken deer before with Zouave reproductions before, and just put an old 1853 Enfield 3 Band reproduction on layaway last month. So, I'm not bothered by the weight or length of a military musket reproduction.

My biggest thing about thinking a smooth bore was to try buck & ball loads in the 1842 platform. AND to have a transitional piece reproduction between a flintlock musket and the 1853 Enfield.
 
Mine is the 33" barrel rifled version.
I love it.

Some things to consider.

If you find an Armisport .69 caliber you will be hard pressed to find a rifled one, the ones that have the rear sights on them. And if you find a 33" barrel short version (the 1847 "Fremont"), it will probably cost more than you'd care to spend on a reproduction.

If you want to get a rear sight on a smooth bore version of the 1842, a way to do it is to install a blank blade on the rear barrel band and sight that rascal in. Dixie gun works might be able to help you on that. They are who I got a rear barrel band from to put a sight on my Pedersoli 1816. I'm threatening to get a rifled barrel for it... golly I'm not sure why but it sounds like a lot of fun.

Armisport deserves the notorious reputation concerning bore diameters. Mine is 0.696". To get a minie to fit properly I have gotten a customized minie mold. The push through sizer is from S&S Firearms (NY). The stick with the JB Weld nose cup on the end is from me.:)


Trying to make the dang near seventy caliber minie rifling shoot a round ball accurately can make you say bad words in new and invective ways. Its three grooved extremely shallow rifling and the lands are WIDE. Like almost 3/8" wide. A patched ball thinks it's sitting in a poor quality smooth bore. A shotgun fiber wad behind the patched round ball helped some.

So I've settled on lubed lead and paper patched minies.
This is my paper patched.
 
An option:
"Macon" alterations result in a shorter barrel, 30', 34, 36" ish barrels. '42s are pretty accurate smoothbores. Like everything else in the gun world "know your piece." Once you develope a load and sight picture, you can easily hit something 25 to '50+ yards out. 100 is possible, but its still a smoothbore. Below are 3 "Macons" top is a 36inch barreled restoration, the middle is a '1795 that has been altered several times, below is a original parts 30"-er for a Harpers Ferry fan. The 30 inch barrels typically are not very good at 50+ yards, a Richmond musketoon ateration, (24 inch barrel) does better at 50 yards... typically, but you want the longer barrel in general. A bit of dabling and user consistancy will get you where you want to go... essentially its a martial percussion flower when put to hunting use as you are describing it.

Have fun, '42s are nice muskets.
Joe
 

Attachments

  • 20200510_161458.jpg
    20200510_161458.jpg
    90.5 KB · Views: 153

Similar threads

Arch_Dornan
Chiappa/Armi Sport or Veteran Arms 1842 Springfield?
Replies
7
Views
788
towgunner11h
T
W
Is it possible to achieve a 100m(109yd) accuracy of 24 MOA with the 1842 Springfield musket without patched ball?
Replies
9
Views
536
Salty Cracker
Salty Cracker
wiscoaster
NGD - 1861 Rifle Musket (but what exactly is it?)
Replies
19
Views
892
Muley Gil
M
JonewallStackson1861
  • Locked
WITHDRAWN Armi Sport Rifled 1842 Springfield musket
Replies
9
Views
2K
FlinterNick
F
Voltigeur_de_la_Garde
Russian Infantry Musket model 1845
Replies
2
Views
252
Voltigeur_de_la_Garde
Voltigeur_de_la_Garde

Latest posts

Back
Top