1842 Springfield

[fiddler]

I’ve got an original 1842 musketoon, stamped 1847 on the lock. It hasnt been shot in many years but it is still functional. My dad found it in a DE farmhouse back in the 40’s. He used to shoot marbles out of it.

 

[smoothshooter]

Considering a paper cartridge, The .25 - .28 buck shot is loaded after the powder with the ball seated on top of the buck shot.

If you load the buck on top of the ball, you will get no concentration in your grouping.

I would think that for combat against mostly linear targets, a larger spread would be the most desirable.
Would increase the chances of hitting more than one enemy per shot.

 

[smoothshooter]

The Irish brigade was armed with the smoothbores by request of their commanding officers. They preferred the smoothbore for it's in close advantage.

In the hands of the average soldier, the smooth bore musket was probably a better weapon.
Very few soldiers had the skills or eyesight to take advantage of the rifled musket’s extended accuracy potential.

 

[FlinterNick]

In the hands of the average soldier, the smooth bore musket was probably a better weapon.
Very few soldiers had the skills or eyesight to take advantage of the rifled musket’s extended accuracy potential.

The rifled muskets of the Civil War don’t take much experience to hit a man sized target at 100 yards, they’re very accurate and a .58 or .69 Minnie ball hitting home is just as nasty as buck and ball.

The kind of rifles that took skill with aiming and using were the older generation of 1841 and 1817/1814 common rifles.

 

[Trot]

In the hands of the average soldier, the smooth bore musket was probably a better weapon.
Very few soldiers had the skills or eyesight to take advantage of the rifled musket’s extended accuracy potential.

Very true, plus most units never really did any target practice to speak of.

 

[nkbj]

Can't imagine being shot at by a bunch of guys shouldering .69 caliber anti-aircraft guns!

 

[toot]

as stated, NOTHING COULD GET ANY WORSE THAN A GOOD GRISS OF BUCK EN BALL. just read about the IRISH BRIGADE!

 

[gemmer]

The rifled muskets of the Civil War don’t take much experience to hit a man sized target at 100 yards, they’re very accurate and a .58 or .69 Minnie ball hitting home is just as nasty as buck and ball.

The kind of rifles that took skill with aiming and using were the older generation of 1841 and 1817/1814 common rifles.

Most soldiers never got the opportunity to shoot at 100 yards in training. While the rifled musket inherently was an accurate arm well past 100 yards, it had rather primitive open sights that required practice to use them effectively even at 100 yards. And, more than a few muskets, with no adjustment for windage, shot wild. My original 1863 is one of them. It took quite a bit of tinkering to get it to shoot center. Truth be told, very few engagements happened where troops opened fire at 100 yards or more, due to antiquated tactics still based on the use of smoothbores. Gettysburg was a notable exception. So in reality, because the rifled musket was not used to it's advantages, there was little difference in effectiveness between them and a buck and ball loaded smoothbore. One smoothbore disadvantage not usually discussed is that in a prolonged engagement, it was the smoothbore that became heavily fouled and hard to reload due to no lube to keep the fouling soft.

 

[Notchy Bob]

One other issue with rifle muskets is that they tend to shoot high, due to a rather low front sight. I think they were made this way to allow fitting a socket bayonet on the muzzle. A higher front sight is one of the relatively few gun modifications allowed under N-SSA competition rules.

Also, they are muzzleloaders, which we generally accept as being individualistic and possibly temperamental. I would be understandable for some to shoot less satisfactorily with the standard service loads.

Notchy Bob

 

[gemmer]

My original '63 also shot high at 100 which is normal. Ny problem was how to correct it without permanently altering the front sight which is not a good idea on an original. I eventually soft soldered a taller sight directly behind the original which can easily be remove and the solder cleaned up. I used epoxy to do the same thing on my rifled '42.

 

[Capnball]

For those who don't know, the original Springfield 1842 was a smoothbore, .69 caliber, percussion musket. It was the last .69 caliber musket and the first musket using the percussion system distributed to the Army. It was also the first musket to be made at both Springfield and Harpers Ferry Armories with fully interchangeable parts. There was a total of over 275,000 made.
There was no rear sight on these muskets and the front sight was built into the front barrel band.
During the years 1856-1859, 14182 of these were rifled by Springfield and Harpers Ferry. Of these, about 10,000 were fitted with rear sights.
Special, .69 caliber Minie' Balls were made for these but because of logistics, support of the rifled muskets in the field, was not good.

Here's a picture of my Springfield smoothbore made 1845.View attachment 49899
View attachment 49901

Beautiful gun. I have a relic of the gun converted to percussion hanging in my office. If it looked that nice, I'd be shooting it!

 

[BillinOregon]

Wayne Austerman first brought my attention to this historic musket with his article, "Old '42 and the Fortunes of War," in the 1986 issue of the late-lamented Dixie Gunworks Black Powder Annual. I have wanted one ever since - especially the shortened and rifled "Fremont" model. Great thread and thanks to all who have contributed.

 

[fireman1]

Wayne Austerman first brought my attention to this historic musket with his article, "Old '42 and the Fortunes of War," in the 1986 issue of the late-lamented Dixie Gunworks Black Powder Annual. I have wanted one ever since - especially the shortened and rifled "Fremont" model. Great thread and thanks to all who have contributed.

Bill,

Go buy one.

I don't know how old you are but I'm guessing we are sorta in the same range. I'm 60 and I just bought my first flintlock. Been wanting one probably since i was a kid growing up in Boston. Watched those crazy dudes reenacting the Noble Train of Artillery dragging canons from Ticonderoga down the Post Rd to Boston. They slept out overnight on our town green in the middle of winter. Later I got really into the Napoleonic wars.

I picked up a very nice Pedersoli Bess this fall. After Christmas I will learn to shoot it. With any luck I will find a reenacting unit and give that whirl also.

My only regret? I waited this long to do it.

 

[RjSixgun]

Fremont was a rifled barrel that used .69 cal minie balls like the 1842 rifled-musket. closed thing to in smoothbore would be an 1842 Macon Armory cut down. Or you could make an 1847 musketoon only problem is the 1842 lock is slightly bigger than the 1847

 

[tenngun]

Without a lot of practice a soldier could hit well at two hundred yards. With practice three with practice and luck five and company of men could sure make five hundred darned uncomfortable
There were certainly those battles where a deadly no man’s land was created. I have never been to any of the big battlefields of the east. Shiloh being the biggest one I visited. At Wilson creek, pea ridge, prairie grove, Carthage and at Shiloh it looked like most of the fighting took place in smoothbore range. Looking at maps of Wilderness, Chancellorsville, the seven days it too looked like much was well within smoothbore range.
Even after ml went the way of the dodo for military maps seem to show fighting still within smoothbore range for conflicts such as the Franco-Prussian war, or the Sudan war.
not having been to those battle fields and only reading histories of them it looks like until smokeless, and machine guns troops often fought in smooth bore range. Even then in engagements like Belleau woods was fought at smoothbore ranges.
I can understand opting for smoothbores for your men. Especially in a large army where your flanks could be covered by rifleman

 

[fireman1]

Tenngun....after WW1 the German being German analyzed the major engagements of WW1. They determined that the majority of the fighting took place under 400 yards. The actually began work on an intermediate unmentionable in the early 1930's. Not much has changed to this day. RDS's are effective because most engagements are at smoothbore range.

 

[nkbj]

Hard to beat a Fremont. Might actually be a better long arm if smooth bored rather than rifled but rifled is mighty nice.

 

[RjSixgun]

Another good alternative to the Fremont would be the CS Richmond Carbine or musketoon these can also be made with 1861s and still be correct as the south made many carbines both new and rebuilt battlefield pickups.
you'd still have a rifled barrel, but you'd have more choices of 58 caliber minie ball molds.

 

[BillinOregon]

Fireman, I have you beat by seven hard-earned years, but appreciate your point. Wish the Italian guns had not appreciated so much in price.
If anyone wants to read that Austerman article, send me a PM and if there is enough interest I will scan it.

 

[fireman1]

Yeah, they have really climbed in price. It is a shame. Good luck in your quest.