• 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 US rifled musket

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
A friend of mine has one. It is, in both my and his opinions, a beautiful weapon and a very close copy of the original. However, he has never live fired it, so I cannot give you any input as far as accuracy. I would love one day to own one.

So many guns, so little money!
 
I don't own one but I've heard very good things about them as well as the smoothbore. I have an original rifled '42 and the Armi matches up very well. Skirmishers consider the smoothbore to be the best value out there for an NSSA approved musket. By the way, the last time I checked out Dixie's site, they had both models on sale. If you do get one, be advised, the recoil from the original 700+ grain minie will really ring your bell, especially from the bench. Get a Rapine mould for his semi wadcutter (500 gr.). You can also shoot patched roundball. Armi has also come out with the shorter 2 band Fremont Model. It would make a nice easier to handle big game rifle.
I've used my '42 for deer hunting and the 42" barrel is kind of long to swing around in a treestand.

Duane
 
I have this rifle, but its actually not a a pure 1842, its a copy of the M1847.

I cast my bullets with the Lyman .685 minie mold getting about 730grain conicals out of it, I have mixed feelings about that rifle.

1. The conicals need a LOT of powder to expand the skirt properly.

2. Recoil with the conicals is terrible. My most accurate load right now is 90 grains of swiss 3F behind the 730 grain concial, the conicals get out of the barrel with about 1400 fp/s with 3200 ft/lbs getting 55 ft/lbs @ 19fp/s free recoil energy, and with the straight metal butt plate the gun is not fun after thirty shots from the bench.

3. It aint a target rifle at any means, the best I can do is getting a fist sized group at 50 yds. I tried EVERYTHING to get more accuracy, I used loads ranging from 60 gain 2FG up to 100 grain 3FG and everything between, I used 4 different kinds of lubes but I havent found the magical ingredient to get smaller groups. Right now it serves as a pure fun gun.

4.The sights are very crude, the rear sight is ''ladder'' styled, but the front sight is attached to the barrel band and moves a bit, even if the spring is tight. Not to mention that the front sight is round-shaped and very hard to see.
The later .58 Springfields have their front sights attached to the barrel. The sights are really hard on the eye on the M1847.

5. The overall finish is as nice as it gets, the wood is beautiful, the barrel is strong (a bit thicker than the original M1847 barrel), the lock is awesome, the gun overall is very sturdy.

Long story short, the M1847 is a cumbersome, beautiful, powder eating, shoulder killing, lead spitting unaccurate beast from hell.

I love it, but I wouldn't buy it again. I would rather get me a .58 Springfield, they are easier on the shoulder, the seem to be hell of a lot more accurate, and are more economical on both powder and lead.
 
Have you tried a .680 ball patched with a .015 patch?
These sometimes shoot quite well in rifled .69 caliber guns and their 473 grain weight is a whole lot easier on the shooters shoulder too.

Dixie Gunworks lists them in their catalog a part number BA0702.
.680 ROUNDBALLS
 
I have about 100 .675 470 grain round ball, but didnt get the right sized patches from my muzzleloading store. Tried it but the ball and patch falls into the bore, of course accuracy that way is useless. Have to try it with thicker patches.

I've heard from a fellow shooter that 47grain of swiss 3FG should give decent one-ragged-hole at 50yds with the round ball. - By the way that load suggestion comes from another member not getting decent accuracy out of his rifled .69 with the conicals. :hmm:

But I would love to get the miniés more accurate, the rifle was designed just for that conical. Either the concial is a bit undersized (Maybe .688 gives better accuracy) or the hollow base isnt right at all.Maybe I should flatten out the base of the mold to get a ''flat'' base for the conical as a ''last try''...
Does anyone know a source for a picture of the original conical which was used in the civil war?
 
The M1847 was one of three weapons...actually the same weapon in three configurations. The artillery, cavalry and sapper's musketoons. They had 26 inch smoothbore barrels. I believe some were later rifled, however. Is this the gun you're shooting those big loads in?

The original prescribed load for the smoothbore M1847 Musketoon was 75 grs. of Musket Powder. If you're using a Minie you should probably use between 50 and 60 grs. If the skirt won't upset into the rifling, I would turn a new base plug a little bit bigger than what you have. This will make a thinner skirt. Just don't go too thin.
:thumbsup:

Note: Colonel Craig of the Ordnance Dept. mentioned in a letter that there was some complaints about the excessive recoil of the Cavalry Musketoon (M1847) and said that the only reason for it in his opinion was that musket cartridges were being used, or else they were double-charged. Now this was concerning smoothbore guns.

Like I said, I'd modify your base plugs and lower the powder charge some more and see what happens.
 
I've read a test of the Armi sport in a German gun magazine. In their testing the patched roundballs shot better as the minié's. they got 3,5" for the roundballs and 6" from the miniés at 100m. It you're interseted i can look up the loads.
I'm shooting a .69 cal Charleville 1777 AN IX flintlock. The 1842 is basicly the same rifle but with a percussion lock, rifled barrel and an rear sight. The nosecap with the front sight is the same as the Charleville. I'm shooting a .69 cal flintlock French cavalery pistol too. With full power loads it gives about the same recoil as a 44mag. Only man size accurate for about 8 meter but great fun. (-:
 
Moloch said:
I have about 100 .675 470 grain round ball, but didnt get the right sized patches from my muzzleloading store. Tried it but the ball and patch falls into the bore, of course accuracy that way is useless. Have to try it with thicker patches.

I've heard from a fellow shooter that 47grain of swiss 3FG should give decent one-ragged-hole at 50yds with the round ball. - By the way that load suggestion comes from another member not getting decent accuracy out of his rifled .69 with the conicals. :hmm:

But I would love to get the miniés more accurate, the rifle was designed just for that conical. Either the concial is a bit undersized (Maybe .688 gives better accuracy) or the hollow base isnt right at all.Maybe I should flatten out the base of the mold to get a ''flat'' base for the conical as a ''last try''...
Does anyone know a source for a picture of the original conical which was used in the civil war?

Try www.blueandgrey.zoomshare.com/1.html for pictures.

If your bore is a true .690, then a .685 minie is
way too small. .688-.689 would be a better fit. Are you sizing them to .685? If so, you might want to measure them out of the mould. Alot of molds cast .001-.003 oversize, which may give you the fit you need, IF your bore is .690.

Duane
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No sizing here, the bullets going out of the mold are .686 (with a hot mold), its the Lyman mold. I cannot imagine that the conicals are undersized, the concials go easy down a clean and fresh bore, but cant be pulled out with a ball puller (learned the hard way) - and they require hard pushing on the last 7'' down the chamber after the third shot - I dont wipe between the shots - its a military rifle. I dont think that a bigger conical could go down the bore of a even fresh cleaned bore. And with a hollow base that big (a third of a .58 concial fits into the hollow base!) it should expand like mad with 3F powder as I use the softest lead available, 100% lead. I've got some 850 grain concials from a fellow member who shoots a original .69 rifled, they measured .690 to .691 and were as big as the complete barrel. - Impossible to load and shoot without sizing.

Like suggested here I tried loads around 50-60 grain, ANY load with 2FG is utterly useless, some bullets keyhole with even 70 grains of swiss 2FG which was the service load back then. 60 grain 3FG is the lower limit, at 55 grain 1/3 of the bullets thumble into the targets, right now 90 grain of 3FG gives me the best accuracy but is hard on the shoulder and the gun (with 80 grain 3FG the concials go supersonic)- which leads me to the conclusion that the base of the bullets does not expand for whatever reason. The lead is so soft that I could expand the base of the concials with a hammer.

Thats a 50yds target with 65 grain swiss 3FG
65 grain swiss 3FG 50yds
The same target at 50yds with 70 grain of swiss 2FG: 70grain swiss 2FG 50yds


Once I recovered a shot conical from the dirt (the concial somehow ended up at the surface) and while completely flattened out the base was still intact and had deep marks of the rifling. Kind of puzzling, dont you think?

Here is a pic of the conicals base: -They are bad quality because the mold was too cold, thats why I have not shot them. The concials I shoot have no wrinkles like on the picture.
.685 Lyman concials - from cold mold

A member of the german forum suggested me to flatten out the base plug of the mold to get the ''flat'' bottom instead of the big conical base. I think I'll give it a try, accuracy cant be any worse anyway...

I must admit that I always feel a bit dumb and ashamed whenever I go shooting the rifle, because I know that there is something wrong and I am unable to fix it.
Still not fun shooting the gun. :barf:
 
A couple of things.

As you noted, military muskets were not intended to be cleaned between shots. No time outs allowed in combat. BUT they were also not intended to provide target shooting accuracy, especially out of a musket that started out as a smoothbore. So, cleaning between shots while trying to come up with your best load is a neccessity. Consider the following: Your're not cleaning, the musket has a less than ideal front sight, the rear sight is prone to loosening from recoil and even with only?
65 gr of Swiss 3F you're getting thumped at the bench which causes a flinch. Given all that, the group you got with that load isn't that bad. I think one problem you may have, especially with higher charges is the fouling you mentioned ahead of the breech. Original muskets had progressive depth rifling starting at around .015 at the breech to help with that problem. I really don't know, but I'm guessing your Armi doesn't have that. My original'42 was relined by Bob Hoyt(the master!!)
and has progressive depth and it can still foul in the same area as yours. That's why the troops using later .58s were provided with a special "clean out minie" intended to be fired once in ten shots. I'd be interested to know when in the series of shots with the 70gr 2F load, the keyholes showed up. Having to pound a minie down over hard caked fouling could be a factor. The fouling could in part be caused by blow by from the first shots out of a clean barrel, which is not totally unavoidable with a minie. You can minimize it by giving the minie a few short raps with the rod when you seat it, to flare the skirt
into the rifling for a better seal. The variable here is that you don't know with certainty what your bore size is. The first musket I bought is a '63 Springfield. I tried .575s, .578s and even some 580's without too much success. I took it to Ray Raypine (the mould maker) and he miked the bore. It's .585. That's an original, but the guys in the N-SSA will tell you the repros vary to.
Check out their site, it's a treasure of info regarding your problem, and the guys on the forum
are very helpful. They were for me when I got started. I hope I don't come off as pontificating!

Regards,

Duane
 
Both myself and duane shoot and have shoot on the with in the n-ssa, one thing I have noted is what are you useing for lube? nothing or very little? and another problem is if you are lubing your bullets are you putting the lube in the base plug are? if so STOP THAT practice that is why your accuracy sucks, put it were it was designed to be in the grease grooves, and everything else will come into play, as for shooting patched round ball your ball size is ok, and if your worried about patching double your patch and lube it, plase aball on it, now you realling don't need to beat it down the bore that just loblongs the bullet, and before you shoot the thing bruch out your fouling, I mean put the butt of the rifle to the sky and use a 16 ga brush (propper bruch for 69 cal), and push down and twist do this for 4 times and you will see a big improvement, I beleive you have a lube issue, and or not enough lube or wrong kind of lube.kjg
 
Duane,

I always soothe myself saying that it is a ''converted'' smoothbore and I wont get target shooting accuracy out of it like the guys with their .45 pennsylvanias and whatnot, but than again comes the logical thinking. Its a rifle with a rear and front sight, it has rifling and good bullets and good powder. If the soldiers back than hit so bad with the rifles they would have re-issued their smooth bores as I shoot the rifle not better than a smoothbore without rifling and sights. Hitting a man at 100yds with that kind of accuracy would be a 70/30 situation and for any rifled long gun that was used on a battlefield thats totally inacceptable. If I would get that kind of accuracy at 100yds with standing position I would be a happy man, but I would have to get twice as accurate to shoot that good as the targets I posted here are 50yd targets from th bench. :surrender:

and even with only 65 gr of Swiss 3F you're getting thumped at the bench which causes a flinch

65 grain of 3FG isnt so bad at all, its not my first big-bore rifle so I dont think I flinch much at all, with 65 grain 3FG I get the kick of a .300 winchester Magnum out of a heavy rifle, and I can shoot my .300 hole-in hole all day long. Pain really starts at 90 grain 3FG when bullets go well over the sonic barrier, recoil is worse than I hanything I have ever shot - unfortunately its the best load for accuracy so far, it makes a fist-sized groups at 50.

. I'd be interested to know when in the series of shots with the 70gr 2F load, the keyholes showed up.
The target I linked here was shot with 70 grain swiss 3FG out of a perfectly clean rifle, if you look closely you'll see that all bullets keyholed, some just endet up pretty straight at the target but still made conical holes.

I beleive you have a lube issue, and or not enough lube or wrong kind of lube.kjg
KJG,

as lube I use 50% beeswax and 50% tallow for my conicals, maybe a bit more tallow to keep things soft, I always dip the whole bullets into the lube to get a thin coat of lube all over the surface of the bullet EXCEPT its base. I never thought that it is a good idea to stuff the base up with lube, I think blowing the skirt into the rifling with the base filled up with lube would delay expanding and accuracy would be pretty bad. I never tested it though. I tried different lubes, especially softer lubes like hand cremes mixed with beeswax and tallow with a lot of fat and water but it wasnt any better or worse so I stay with the beeswax/tallow mix. Fouling is lowest with the tallow/beeswax lube. 50/50 talow and beeswax was, as far as I know the original standart used when the rifles hit the battlefield.

I tried to keep as close to the history as possible, I use the same bullet design and weight, I handle the rifle like the soldier did back then, I even used the same load of powder to be as close as possible to the original battlefield performance of this rifle. But no luck at all

The fouling could in part be caused by blow by from the first shots out of a clean barrel, which is not totally unavoidable with a minie. You can minimize it by giving the minie a few short raps with the rod when you seat it, to flare the skirt
I always seat them with a few raps, I read a lot of that technique here and copied it. Although it does not seem to make much difference at all - but you cant do too much good.

The variable here is that you don't know with certainty what your bore size is.

Yes, I have to admit that I dont know what the bore size is, BUT it must be under .690 since the .691 conicals were quiet too big. I think the bore is .687 or .688 since the .685 minies fit very well even with a bit of fouling and the .69's are way too big. IMO conicals .003 undersized like I have should be ideal. But I'll let the bore measured by a gunsmith anyway. You never cant be too sure, especially with a muzzle loader. :hmm:
 
I have one. I love it! I have been shooting a Parker_Hale musketoon since 1974, the one from England. I took a buffalo with it in 2007. This winter of 2009 I am going to use my 1842 rifled musket for my buffalo. I use the Lyman mold and plumbers lead from a local plumber store here in Yuma AZ. I agree that the skirt seems to need a good boost to expand, or it could be the lead. Maybe it should be softer. I stepped off 240 paces. That is left foot, right foot (1...2)120 paces is 100 yards for me, I know this because I walked and counted across a foot ball field. I can hit (not ever time mind you) but my misses were not by miles ether, a gal. plastic milk jug. and at 100yrds that jug never gets away. I am shooting 85 grs of 3fffg. My son and I comint that this gun is much more accurete than a gun launching a hunk of lead that size has any right to be! I love it and will take a buffalo with no hesitation.

My musketoon weighs about 7 1/2 pounds and 1842 weighs about 9 1/2 or so. I do not feel it kicks to badly. NOW just do not put 2 69 cal round balls and 100 grs of powder! That just might rattle your cage :nono: :shake: :youcrazy:
P.
 
@ Poordevil,

you actually use the Lyman mold AND get accuracy out of it? :bow:
The lead I use is x-ray protection led from the hospital, the softest lead known to mankind, I can bend the skirt of the minie with two fingers! I could only dream about your accuracy you get with your rifle, I can hardly hold the black at 50yds, let alone a milk jug at 100! Fist sized groups with 95 grain of 3FG is the best I can do at 50. Maybe I really should focus more on the heavy side of powder charges-.
 
Moloch, have you removed the breechplug and looked at your rifling? There must be something wrong in there, or you're getting voids in your bullets. Using lead that soft should be a guarantee that the skirt is engaging the grooves, even with a light load.

Voids in the bullet will definitely cause keyholing faster than any other cause. And it doesn't take much of a void. They most commonly occur at the top of the cavity and sometimes there is a thin layer of lead there with the void out of sight. That's why it is so important to weigh each one.

You said earlier that this gun was an M1847. Is it a copy of the musketoon with the 26" barrel. If so, as I said in an earlier post, you would need to use a lighter load.

But whatever the gun, it sounds like the rifling is too shallow or non-existant and the bullets are stripping, or there are voids in the bullets causing them to yaw and keyhole. I can't think of anything else at the time. Good luck.
 
Its not the musketoon, its the full-length rifle with the 42'' barrel which started as a smoothbore and was adpated to percussion and got a rifling. I have a repro of it, the Armi Sports 1847. The rifling visable at the barrel looks deep and sharp, dont see a problem here. With a bore light the rifling looks nice and shiney down to the chamber.
Here is a pic of the muzzle, its a bit hard to see but you get a good idea how ''broad'' the rifling is: Rifling at muzzle of 1847 Springfield.

I always weigh the concials and keep the differences under 2 grain, bullets with wrinkles get sorted out.
 
Moloch, glad you cleared that up, I was afraid that you had this:
http://www.loyalistarms.freeservers.com/1847musketoon.html

That is a reproduction of the M1847 Musketoon, a smoothbore. What you have is indeed the Armisport reproduction of the M1842 musket, with the lock date of 1847. Yours is rifled and should shoot the Minie balls well. Have you slugged the bore to find its true diameter?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, your rifling looks good! And if your bullet weights are consistant, there's only one other thing that I can think of. I went back through your posts and looked at the part about your front sight. If the double fore-end band that its mounted to moves, it's gonna cause a lot of trouble. My Charleville has the same problem. A big blob sight on a band that wants to move.

One thing you can do is put shims between the muzzle of the barrel and the stock. That will tighten the upper band and prevent it from moving so much. Just leave it loose enough that you can remove it whenever you need to. You could also bed the muzzle with AccraGlas and do the same thing and not have to worry about replacing the shims every time you take the barrel off.

Another thing is to carefully file the sight so that it can be centered in the backsight instead of you having to try to line up a big blob in the notch. You still may need to file the notch anyway, but you'll know if you need to.

The bad thing about any 3 band rifle is that the rear sights on the originals as well as repos are too close to the breech for accurate sighting. Especially the case for aging eyes. Some shooters will take an extra sight leaf and drill a small aperture in it and use the sight as a peep sight.

The small amount that the front sight moves will make a big difference even at 50 yards, so I'd try to tighten it up and maybe trim it down to fit the rear sight notch. That's about all I can think of right now. Hope this helps. Let us know how it goes if you try it.
:thumbsup:
 
I would suggest you trying FG. That is what it
was origionally designed to shoot...You have tried
everything else..on a big bore 3f puts a lot of
pressure on the breech plug....Just like my Bess
with a 75 cal. ball should use FG..I get away with
FFG. But know i should use FG..My opinion and i am
sticking with it...
 

Latest posts

Back
Top