Percussion Sharps?

[Phil Coffins]

I have a Shiloh 1863 Sharps rifle and would like to request that a Pedersoli owner to look at the slide (breech block) under the nipple. Mine has a hole that is about as small as the exit hole of the nipple. Here’s mine to show what I’m wanting to learn.
872E284F-CD15-450A-B956-E480D13083AD by Oliver Sudden, on Flickr

 

[KevinC]

Sir,
Although my '63 is an IAB and not a Pedersoli, it is a good bit different than your Shiloh. The nipple seats on the cross hole/cleanout channel, with a small lateral channel below.
I hope this helps.

 

[KevinC]

I have a question for you Phil that I hope you can answer.
I've read in these posts that you used to work at the Farmingdale shop.

With the 1863 model percussion Sharps, were the chambers cut differently for each caliber? Or were all of them made with the same sized chamber regardless of caliber?
It would make sense that the chambers would be cut accordingly per caliber.
Like, a 50 caliber Percussion '63 would have a chamber that would accommodate a 70 or 90 grain charge.

I have reached out to the folks in Montana regarding this, and regardless of how I ask the question I have not recieved a direct answer.

I'm hoping that you might know.

 

[KevinC]

Interesting:
I have 2 IAB rifles. One is a carbine pictured above, and a sporting rifle that has features identical to those in your Shiloh photo.
I wonder when and why they changed?

 

[Phil Coffins]

Thank you KevinC, that’s just what I was wanting to see.
My work focused on the 1874 models and the few 1863s that I did custom work on were 54 calibre. The 54 calibre percussion sporting rifles did have a deeper chamber than the military models.

 

[KevinC]

Thank you Phil.
That was also part of what I wanted to know. Must have been interesting to work there.

Back in 1978 I bought a Shiloh '59 Carbine. It was a beautiful thing. But I could not get it to function properly. There were very few people that I could go to for help with it at that time.
Every shot, the breech froze solid.
No matter what I tried I got the same result.
Eventually I got frustrated and sold it to a CW reenactor.

Now some years later, I have time to solve the mystery (I always regretted selling that carbine).
The older IAB guns are very close to the Pittmans Notes drawings of the 1863 Sharps. And they are a good bit more affordable than an original or an American made rifle for me to play with.
After a good bit of scrutinizing historical documents, and harassing museum curators, and manufacturing engineers, I have more or less solved the majority of the issues I experienced back then.

Back in the 1860's the Sharps was capable of sustained fire and was a combat worthy weapon.
They did not have "O" rings or other of our modern "improvements" that so many now feel are necessary to fire these rifles reliably.
The powder that was produced back then was different than our modern black powder.

Ref:
Lucas R. Clawson
Hagley Historian
Hagley Museum and Library
Wilmington, Delaware, USA
[email protected]
(302) 658-2400, x319
www.hagley.org

*Mr. Clawson was a breath of fresh air with his knowledge. The Hagley Museum is located on the grounds of the original DuPont powder plant in Delaware. And he welcomes any questions on the subject of black powder.

With further research, the lubricants were different as well.
Petroleum based stuff is a fouling nightmare when combined with black powder residue.
In the 1860's Petroleum based lubricants were not the standard, animal based lubricants were.
Now that I know these things, Jojoba oil and beeswax lubricants and better burning powders than Goex have led to better results for me on the range.

I'd love to get an American built sporter '63 in 45 or 50 caliber. I'm just trying to find out what specs are on the chambers before I "pull the trigger"

 

[Eterry]

A friend had a 54 cal Sharps. But he wasn't able to get it to group. During a time we both were struggling he offered it to me for $500 or a Chief's Special for $300. I was a rookie cop making lousy money so I bought the Chief for work.
One of my bigger regrets.

 

[dave951]

A friend had a 54 cal Sharps. But he wasn't able to get it to group. During a time we both were struggling he offered it to me for $500 or a Chief's Special for $300. I was a rookie cop making lousy money so I bought the Chief for work.
One of my bigger regrets.

I'll say this about percussion Sharps, like in the day, bore sizes vary widely. I have 2 IAB carbines and both measure .555. Stamped on the barrel is .54. If I shot a .54 bullet through it, at a full .010 smaller than bore, there's no way it would group. This is not uncommon and those who play with these guns need to understand that. There is a reason for the Sharps "Christmas Tree" bullet.

 

[Phil Coffins]

My experience with the Shiloh Sharps 1863 has been it’s an easy rifle to operate. I have lubed the bullets with lard, lard and bees wax mix, Crisco, and SPG each working well. My first experience was with a Shiloh 54 calibre in 1977 that a buddy bought. I don’t remember any problems but I was convinced I needed one. Having no adult supervision I shot mine mostly with loose powder and bullets or ball. Cartridges also when I made flash paper. That rifle was stolen in about 1981 and last year I got another infantry rifle that performs fine for at least 25 shots with no cleaning. I agree that if a man in a battle could keep them running then the design is sound and Orings or such aren’t required in a well built replica.
The question about the flash channel was based on all the talk about poor ignition that’s on the internet. When I pop a cap at the beginning of a shooting session the poorly rated CCI cap will move a pebble on the ground and as yet have never had a failure or a hang fire. Perhaps that’s because of the way Wolfgang made his breech block (slide) with the small hole that mates with the nipple. I know he used original Sharps parts to pattern his work as apposed to what I’ve seen on other replicas.
Good luck on your quest for a rifle.

 

[KevinC]

Interesting note on the Shiloh chambers the sporting rifle model having a larger chamber than the carbine. Makes sense though.
Both my IAB (sporting rifle and carbine) have the same chamber sizes. They both measure .545 in the bore.
Rapine (and others) made 3 different sizes of ringtail moulds, .010 increments different. I also have the Richmond Sharps mould that was made a few years back. It's a nice bullet to fix a paper cartridge to.
Both work well in my carbine and rifle, but I think the Ringtail does a bit better in the carbine.

I had read that Wolfgang followed the original Sharps design faithfully.
I also read that the Italians, when they were starting out (about the same time as Wolfgang Droege), they had purchased a couple of original guns to use as patterns.
US Customs cut the recievers in half before they allowed them to ship.
Not only destroying American antiques, but pieces of history.
I fail to understand that level of ignorance.
Oh well...

In the end, it was said that the early Shiloh and IAB guns parts are interchangeable with the originals.
I am also to understand that the current Shiloh (yes they are offering 1863's again for 2023) still are interchangeable with originals as well.
Gosh, but they do make a nice rifle!