This poll is designed to examine the market for historical military rifled muskets. It appears that some manufacturers are making guns with the primary purpose of shooting blanks. Is that the largest section of the market, at least here?
-
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
Historical military style rifled muskets poll
- Thread starter Cubreac
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
Okay, I submitted my choices. I’m curious, though. Which ones are just made for shooting blanks?
I know Dixie lists at least one Enfield and one Springfield (I think a ‘61) in smoothbore. We in the USA are not the only market for muzzleloading firearms, and it is my understanding that some of the European nations are very restrictive with regard to rifled weapons. These smoothbore “rifle muskets” are a way to provide customers in those countries the experience of handling and shooting guns of this type while staying legal.
Maybe some of the forum brothers from overseas can expound on this a little more.
Also, judging from the posts on this forum, rifle-mounted smoothbores are immensely popular right now here in the USA. Dixie probably hopes to tap that market.
So, the smoothbore versions of these “rifle muskets” are fully capable of live fire. Which guns are for the primary purpose of shooting blanks?
Best regards,
Notchy Bob
I know Dixie lists at least one Enfield and one Springfield (I think a ‘61) in smoothbore. We in the USA are not the only market for muzzleloading firearms, and it is my understanding that some of the European nations are very restrictive with regard to rifled weapons. These smoothbore “rifle muskets” are a way to provide customers in those countries the experience of handling and shooting guns of this type while staying legal.
Maybe some of the forum brothers from overseas can expound on this a little more.
Also, judging from the posts on this forum, rifle-mounted smoothbores are immensely popular right now here in the USA. Dixie probably hopes to tap that market.
So, the smoothbore versions of these “rifle muskets” are fully capable of live fire. Which guns are for the primary purpose of shooting blanks?
Best regards,
Notchy Bob
The main reason I have one is to use in NSSA competition, which I guess would fall under target shooting.
@Notchy Bob That was just something I came up to explain why, for example, Pedersoli's Enfield P53 doesn't incorporate the original ignition and rifling design. From what I can tell from "Cap and Ball's" description of Pedersoli's Lorenz musket rifle they made an accurate replica there.
I'm just curious. If you caught a whiff of judgement in my question it was unintended. I hope to learn something from experts like yourself.
Thanks to everyone who has participated so far.
I'm just curious. If you caught a whiff of judgement in my question it was unintended. I hope to learn something from experts like yourself.
Thanks to everyone who has participated so far.
kh54
45 Cal.
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2021
- Messages
- 615
- Reaction score
- 919
I selected one of the poll options but it isn’t all that close to my primary interest in historical military firearms (ACW for me): to gain some understanding of and allow me to have some affinity with my ancestors who bore those arms in combat.
Having been a reenactor back in the day, I still enjoy that part although I no longer participate. Now I shoot in N-SSA competition so that covers targets. Bang bang, muzzleloader or not, let's go shooting! History, great fun shooting stuff that would otherwise may as well be art on a museum display. Geek, guilty.
Not at all! These polls can be fun, and I hope you get more participation.
You are certainly correct in that many of the replicas deviate from the originals in needless ways. Rifling specs and configuration of the breech are two of them, but external dimensions are another. There is a whole cottage industry out there for the purpose of "defarbing" these weapons, with people slimming and refinishing stocks, removing unnecessary "graffiti" from the barrels, and adding period correct markings.
I understand that Pedersoli made a good effort in duplicating the rifling and internal specs of the M1854 Lorenz, and it is said to be a very accurate rifle, but they committed an egregious faux pas in using walnut for the stocks on these. The originals were beech. I'm not a reenactor, but I sometimes visit reenactor boards in an effort to learn more about history, and I can tell you there was much gnashing of teeth over this choice of stock wood for the Lorenz reproduction. One would think that beech might even be cheaper... why the dickens did they use walnut?
I like all muzzleloaders, but I'll admit to liking some more than others. The mid-19th century military rifles and muskets interest me a lot. They are sturdy, easy to maintain, reliable, and a lot of fun to shoot. And, to tell the truth, there are still a number of shootable originals out there.
Best of luck to you, my friend!
Notchy Bob
There are no limitations in EU on muzzleloading firearms aside of being of legal age as far as I know. There is no difference between a smoothbore or a rifled firearm. You can buy a Sharps or a Lorenz prety much online and let it deliver to Your door. What is regulated, is black powder in SOME countries, since it is an explosives. We dont have mass shootings in EU, but we do have terrorists.
I started out re-enacting the Civil War and have a Euroarms Enfield 3 bander. Upon further research, I found that the unit I portrayed (81st Penn) extensively used the 42 Springfield even though that had the opportunity to swap them out for 61 Springfields. So, I bought me an original 42, which I still have as well. As one thing kept leading to another, I've since picked up a Tower Brown Bess, and an 1803 harpers ferry. But the fever didn't stop there. Now I re-enact from the French and Indian War up through the post-Civil war Indian war period. I've even expanded to the UK and have a Martini Henry and a Snider. My wife thinks I have a sickness. LOL. Maybe I do, but I just keep telling her I was born 100-200 years too late. Although I must admit, after a weekend of hard tack and salt pork, A break to McDonalds or Arby's is a welcome break!
Last edited:
Have a bunch of flintlock reproductions for reenacting/collecting/target shooting
And a growing handful of early 19thC-ACW martial arms, some for shooting, some I haven't shot, might not shoot for collecting.
I enjoy giving every piece I get a thorough cleaning when I get them in, I don't remove any accumulated patina unless there is strait up rust present, but I like looking over the pieces. Makes me ponder the older dings and dents and where those may have occurred 150+ years ago.
And a growing handful of early 19thC-ACW martial arms, some for shooting, some I haven't shot, might not shoot for collecting.
I enjoy giving every piece I get a thorough cleaning when I get them in, I don't remove any accumulated patina unless there is strait up rust present, but I like looking over the pieces. Makes me ponder the older dings and dents and where those may have occurred 150+ years ago.
The Indian made WTBS era muskets. They are very close to the original in shape and design but are smoothbore and while could be used as a smoothie they mostly serve as blank shooters.
Also the Baker rifle is available…. In .62 smooth
Same here. Use an original 1842 Springfield musket with an 1847 lock plate for competition but have a Loyalist Arms replica for manual of arms practice.
The N-SSA is politely best described as anal retentive snob Karens that put snotty rich sorority girls to shame with their attitude towards replicas. On their forums, there are those that denounce Pedersoli replicas as too inaccurate to originals that they should be banned from the permitted list. They use micrometers to measure band size and wig out if over a millimeter off. Read where they scoff at any mention of an Indian made piece. Guess I’m ruined by SASS‘s 10 foot rule. Not that I’m a naysayer for the N-SSA market but want you to be aware of the obstacles you’ll face.
My recommendation is that you reach out to N-SSA’s Small Arms Committee to see their requirements if you want to go into that market.
I acquire firearms that represent and honor historical periods. I also do acquire them in order to shoot them for my own personal enjoyment, and no other practical reasons.
Though a very very small niche - pattern 1853 Enfield muskets (smoothbore) were made by Enfield and Tower (possibly other contractors as well) for issue to colonial militias and native troops post mutiny until about 1866 when the Snider/Enfield breech loading rifles came into use. The rational being that they did not want colonists or native troops to have equal arms to British troops after the experience of the Sepoy mutiny. They did not have standard rifle sights but used a tombstone post rear sight and a more or less standard front. Though I sincerely doubt smooth bore reproductions are intended to copy those.
I voted for the categories that came closest, but really I love to feel the history in my hands, even if it's just a replica. I enjoy all military arms but sadly the only real ones so far have been unmentionables. I plan on correcting that little problem sooner than later though.
From the results of the poll we might conclude that there is definitely a market for historical and accurate firearms in this category. As someone pointed out above, the world wide market is different from here in the US, but at least on this forum it looks like people want to get the most historically correct and target accurate rifled muskets they can. I guess we should be grateful that Pedersoli does as good a job as they do. Hopefully, a company like the Birmingham Parker-Hale will emerge, or small shops will recognize the potential market and respond.
Thanks to all those who participated.
Thanks to all those who participated.
You're welcome
Brett Gibbons is an inspiration. His books (papercartridges.com) sent me on a search for a historically accurate Enfield P53, a British made Parker-Hale to be exact. If anyone has one for sale, please let me know
. Alternatively, I'm interested in a Lorenz. According to Brett the Pedersoli Lorenz barrel has to be bored out, lined and recut to the original specifications to be accurate. The modern Enfield replicas don't have progressive rifling, but barrels with progressive rifling are being made today. There are other things wrong with the Pedersoli version that are less easily overcome.
In this video Brett explains why the Italian makers make what they make. I saw it when it first came out, but, being old, I forgot about it when I posted this poll.
He explains why the Italian reproductions are not as accurate as the original designs. He makes the statement that they are basically a replica but the interior of the barrel is best shot with a patched round ball, like a modern "Hawken."
I have an Enfield artillery carbine, what people call a "musketoon". The paper cartridge Pritchett bullet is a nonstarter, but it was designed for the P53 which had three groove progressive rifling. I've lubed up a bunch of minie balls with three different kinds of lube (tallow and bees wax, straight bees wax and "wonder lube") to see if they shoot accurately. We will see how these compare to a patched round ball at 100 yards. Brett and @dave951, and others I follow, have had good results with "trashcan" bullets in these rifles.
Brett mentions N-SSA rules in the video. I'm interested in what @dave951 and others who participate in those events have to say about it.
. Alternatively, I'm interested in a Lorenz. According to Brett the Pedersoli Lorenz barrel has to be bored out, lined and recut to the original specifications to be accurate. The modern Enfield replicas don't have progressive rifling, but barrels with progressive rifling are being made today. There are other things wrong with the Pedersoli version that are less easily overcome. In this video Brett explains why the Italian makers make what they make. I saw it when it first came out, but, being old, I forgot about it when I posted this poll.
He explains why the Italian reproductions are not as accurate as the original designs. He makes the statement that they are basically a replica but the interior of the barrel is best shot with a patched round ball, like a modern "Hawken."
I have an Enfield artillery carbine, what people call a "musketoon". The paper cartridge Pritchett bullet is a nonstarter, but it was designed for the P53 which had three groove progressive rifling. I've lubed up a bunch of minie balls with three different kinds of lube (tallow and bees wax, straight bees wax and "wonder lube") to see if they shoot accurately. We will see how these compare to a patched round ball at 100 yards. Brett and @dave951, and others I follow, have had good results with "trashcan" bullets in these rifles.
Brett mentions N-SSA rules in the video. I'm interested in what @dave951 and others who participate in those events have to say about it.
He's essentially correct about progressive depth rifling. Not many options out there. He's not quite right about "N-SSA Approved". Just because it is "N-SSA Approved" doesn't mean squat about the rifling. It's more about the external features and dimensions. As for "modern improved minies", yeah, quite a few folks use them, but go look in the backstop and you'll find the entire range of bullets ever made and tried. Case in point, my Parker Hale really, really likes the "Hogdon" design, but it will shoot the 575213 (a fairly traditional style) pretty well. My Mississippi really really likes the 575213 while the others are decent. I don't know of any N-SSA guy shooting the REAL. It has to be pressed into the muzzle and that is a direct violation of N-SSA safety rules and will get you tossed off the firing line post haste. He completely ignores the other designs that are very close or same as originals and yes, there are guys in the N-SSA who use them because they work. Do some folks use absurdly light bullets? Yup, but you won't find them on the top of the list where scores are posted. Light bullets are detrimental to accuracy for a number of reasons.
To his comments about powder charge. First off, we don't have any manufacturer today making a Civil War "spec" powder so saying 60g of period 2f is more energetic than modern charge of Swiss 45g 3f really can't be proven. If we look at modern powder, Swiss is well known to be more energetic than standard Goex or Scheutzen 2f so to get the same results with the latter, you'll have to be at about 50g. Couple that with 3f v 2f and you're up to about 55g. That's not far off the "service charge" of 60g. If you just have to shoot the service charge, get some 2f, a thicker skirt minie, good caps and have at it. Even with modern arms however, it's commonly known among those who care alot about accuracy, that the best accuracy is generally at about the 80% power levels. This is due to barrel harmonics and interior ballistics.
To his comments about bullet fit- manufacturing tolerances were all over the map back then. Couple that with wide variations in the bullet size for the same reasons and trying to use ammo sized to .001 under bore size isn't going to get it in a combat rifle back then. Couple that with you can't wipe your bore during a firefight, whereas we can between relays, then the bullet has to be loose enough to fit every time, regardless of state of fouling. But also keep this in mind, modern service rifles tuned for matches aren't exactly the same as what's on the rack in the armory either. You're talking match grade v combat grade. In every case here, match prepared will always outshoot combat grade.
So overall, it's an interesting video with some historic information. Originals with progressive depth rifling are much easier to get shooting accurately than the original. I don't think he's quite right on the N-SSA and needs to make the distinction between match and combat shooting.
Before I gave up hunting, I took deer with an original flint 1816, 1841 Mississippi, rifled 1842, and 1863. All the rifled arms shoot very well with the intended projectile, the minie. My 1841 is the .58 cal version and is a great off hand target rifle that loves the Hodgdon. I've won a number of matches with it.
Similar threads
- Poll
