Enfield repos and patched balls?

This is research for my next muzzleloader months away. How do the various Enfield P58 and P61 short rifles perform with patched balls? Also any pertinent Canadian history of same is welcome. Thanks

Well research has gone well. Could folks please comment as they see fit.
1- the PH has the original's progressive depth rifling, others don't, how shallow is the rifling
2- the lock has no fly so snatching the half notch is possible
3- the original and PH used an angled fire channel, some repos use a 90 degree path with a cleanout screw
4- the sights have no windage adjustment
5- the 58 and 61 have 5 groove 48" twist

I have an original Parker Hale 1858 2-band Enfield rifle. I have only fired round balls in it once, usually shooting the Lee "Garbage Can" minie' bullet. .575 round balls loaded with a .016 pillow-ticking patch were somewhat accurate at 50 yards. 5 shots in a 6 inch group was the best I coud do with minimal load work up. I was loading 50 grains of FFFg black powder and wiping the bore with a damp patch after each shot. I could feel the ball loading tighter in the first 6 inches of the bore and getting easier as it moved towards the breech.
I had some evidence of patch burn-through despite being tight to load at the muzzle. I attributed this to the bore being larger at the breech. Since the minie' bullets shot so much better with minimum work, I did not experiment further with patched round ball. Perhaps sometime in the future. The sights are not adjustable for windage, and my rifle shot very high with the original front sight. I noticed competitors with the same gun all have a taller front sight installed to bring the point of impact down to match the rear sight setting.
The absence of a fly on the tumbler does not seem to be a problem with the P-H lock as the trigger breaks cleanly and the sear does not drag against the half-cock notch. Using RWS musket caps, I have never had a misfire or hang-fire using real black powder.

Canuck Bob said:

1- the PH has the original's progressive depth rifling, others don't, how shallow is the rifling

Click to expand...

The rifling on both the original P.58 Naval Rifle and the P.61 Artillery Carbine was 0.013in deep at the breech and 0.005in at the muzzle.

Comment is often made about the Enfields shooting high. My guess is that people are taking a 'full-sight' ie. top of foresight blade is aligned with the shoulders of the back sight. 19thC musketry instruction was however for soldiers to use a 'half-sight' ie. top of foresight blade aligned mid-way between shoulders and the bottom of the back sight.

David

What kind of accuracy do you get from a rest with the Lee Garbage Can bullet, and at what ranges?

Canuck Bob said:

This is research for my next muzzleloader months away. How do the various Enfield P58 and P61 short rifles perform with patched balls? Also any pertinent Canadian history of same is welcome. Thanks

Click to expand...

You may find surprises with reproductions as the various companies haven't always stayed true to original form in many ways. For instance, besides exterior deviations my repro '53 has a 48" twist.

The Lee "Garbage Can" minie' bullet cast of pure lead (1/2% tin added) is a smooth slide fit in my P/H 1858 rifle. I am filling the base with lube and loading over 45 grains of Olde Eynsford FFFg. Shooting off sand bags without swabbing between shots I can get 2 to 3 inch groups at 50 yards despite the primitive sights. I am careful to weigh the slugs to eliminate any with air-pockets and size with a push-through die to .577. The combination of lube-in-base and Olde Eynsford FFFg burns clean enough that I have been able to shoot 50+ rounds without swabbing and no loss of accuracy. Lube is 50/50 bee's wax/lard. I am working on getting a taller/thicker front sight for longer range shooting.

curator said:

I am working on getting a taller/thicker front sight for longer range shooting.

Click to expand...

Won't a taller front sight lower your elevation?

David

Yes, a taller rear sight will lower the bullet group. This gun shoots about 40 inches high with the rear sight set at 400 yards. I would like it to shoot dead center with a 6 o'clock hold at 100 yards using a modern sight picture (top of the front sight even with top of the rear sight shoulders) and the correct NRA 100 yard rifle target.

Thanks David

Is the progressive depth rifling a desireable feature to seek out?

On the issue of sights the last year has been a nightmare of eye surgery for cataracts and complications. I'm working with the optometrist to enable barrel sight ability but it is unlikely. A peep sight may be required. Is their a HC precedent for such sights on an Enfield?

Also research lead me to a re-enactor thread on how the newest Pedersoli Enfields were equipped with a new style 90 degree ignition channel in the bolster that utilizes a cleanout screw. They stated the original ignition geometry was superior without details. Would you elaborate please?

Canuck Bob said:

Is the progressive depth rifling a desireable feature to seek out?

Click to expand...

It’s historically correct but may not be desirable based on your post subject, ie. shooting patched ball. The rifling was not designed for PRB. Some say they get satisfactory accuracy with round ball; I’ve never tried so can’t comment, but have wondered about the progressively shallower rifling use with patched ball and whether there’d be tendency to jump the rifling. May take some work to get right patch thickness?

Enfield is a military rifle, and when used in target shooting competition in the 19thC open sights were used. Military match rifles in UK were generally around .45 cal (the Parker-Hale ”˜Volunteer’ is a generic rifle of this type); when fitted with aperture sights they would typically have elevation on rear sight and windage on foresight.

Sorry can’t give any comment on merits of original or Pedersoli ignition geometry; I have no ignition problems with my original rifle.

David

a taller rear sight will lower the bullet group.

Click to expand...

Oops! A mispeak. Taller rear sight will RAISE the point of impact. I'm sure ye either meant 'shorter' for rear or meant 'taller' for the front.