Lewis and Clark's rifle

[Russ T Frizzen]

The 1792 Contract rifle did not look anything like the 1803 Harper's Ferry rifle. The '92 was a full stock of generic long rifle or Pennsylvania style. The 1803 was a new
design half stock with under-rib completely different from
what had gone before it. There is no way one could ever be mistaken for the other. The 1803 looks like no other rifle-
its design is very distinctive. If you have to fake an 1803
for $160, you have a hard row to hoe. On the other hand, if you decide to try to replicate a 1792 rifle, it gets easier. You should be able to find a cheap long rifle online (probably Spanish or Japanese made) that will fit the bill. Try[url] auctionarms.com[/url] or[url] gunbroker.com[/url]

 

[strand]

You guys are correct that the rifles were 1792 contract rifles, one more tidbit I can add is that Lewis also had rifles made for trade rifles to the natives, these rifles were smoothbore as opposed to the rifling of the contract rifles, this was to insure that the natives did not have an advantage over the Corps should a conflict break out.

 

[Bushwhacker]

There is a fur trade museum in Cody, Wyoming that has the air rifle that they took with them. I have pics of it if anyone is interested.........Bushwhacker

 

[Rat]

Just out of curiosity, why is it impossible that they had proto-type or pre-production 1803's??

::

Rat

 

[Donny]

the Lewis and Clark interpretive centers up and down the Missouri display a 1792 contract musket as the gun they carried. :winking: Not the 1803.

 

[Leithan]

axactly my thinking on it Rat, the misconseption that they had 1803s had to come from somewhere, its preaty much excepted that Lewis and clark did not have 1803s because that rifle didnt make it to the scene until after they left, but it did, not long after they left, and I dont think it was something they came with over night, it had to of been in development for some time, In my imho that was why the 1792s that lewis received were called experimentil, because they were converted into the precurser of the 1803,if they were gearing up to produce a new rifle why not convert them to being close to the new rifle? They had to have prototypes in there shopp, I can see it now ( Lewis ) whats that, ( Gunsmith ) its a cutting edge brand new rifle we are develping, heres your old school, cut down contract riffles. Mabee thats over simplifing things and I'm sure it is, but in my head Lewis walked out of there with 15 shiney new 1803 prototypes. Again please ignore my grammer.

 

[Stumpkiller]

They had to have prototypes in there shopp, I can see it now ( Lewis ) whats that, ( Gunsmith ) its a cutting edge brand new rifle we are develping, heres your old school, cut down contract riffles. Mabee thats over simplifing things and I'm sure it is, but in my head Lewis walked out of there with 15 shiney new 1803 prototypes.

Boy, I dunno?? I don't have the answer for Lewis & Clark, but to take the counterpoint on your visit to Harper's Ferry:

Lewis: "Goin on a trip. Mebbe 2,000 miles and years long."
Gunsmith:"Cool. We're futzin with some 'sperimental rifles here, wanna try some?
Lewis: "And if it breaks, you gonna come fix it? No deal, you dig me out one of them old rifles like we're used to. Besides, Jefferson is on my back already about the costs. Taxpayers and newspaper editors are callen him knutz for given Napolean all that money for a bunch of noplace. I gotta buy used guns. You could slap some new locks and barrels on 'em, though."

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

One source of many misconceptions about the rifles carried on the expedition and the expedition in general is a
gentleman named Elliot Coues. Mr. Coues paraphrased (to the point of completely changing the meaning of) many passages in the journals of the expedition. He actually damaged the notes with his nonsense. He makes the statement that the rifles were made at Harper's Ferry when the journal does not say this. When enough people repeat a falsehood and no one rebuts it, it tends to become the perceived truth. That seems to be the case with Mr. Coues.
There exists a letter written May 25, 1803 by Secretary of War Henry Dearborn,requesting a prototype rifle be made and the suggested features are those of the 1803. Lewis and Clark left in the summer, so it seems most unlikely that Harper's Ferry had a number of rifles made up by then. Add the fact that few men about to go off on this type of adventure in those days would want to do so with an unproven , new-fangled prototype rifle and I just don't think L&C had 1803s with them. In December 1803 Dearborn wrote a letter that clearly refers to the 1803 rifle, suggesting a few minor changes, most likely to the protype(s).L&C were way out west by then.
There are historians who say that production of the 1803 didn't get going until spring of 1804. These guns were built to a pattern, so there would have been some tooling up
to be done. There are some other references that indicate that the rifles carried were altered and fitted with new locks. Not something that gets done to new guns as a rule. It has been a while since I read up on this and I would have to dig around to find the sources, though I suspect that a google search would turn up scads of information that
is quite up to date.

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

Amen, Stumpy.

 

[Ohio Joe]

There exists a letter written May 25, 1803 by Secretary of War Henry Dearborn,requesting a prototype rifle be made and the suggested features are those of the 1803. Lewis and Clark left in the summer, so it seems most unlikely that Harper's Ferry had a number of rifles made up by then. Add the fact that few men about to go off on this type of adventure in those days would want to do so with an unproven , new-fangled prototype rifle and I just don't think L&C had 1803s with them. In December 1803 Dearborn wrote a letter that clearly refers to the 1803 rifle, suggesting a few minor changes, most likely to the protype(s).L&C were way out west by then.

L & C and Company were not way out west by December 1803. They were camped at "Camp Wood", east of St. Louis... They did not leave there until Sunday May 13, 1804...

There would have been plenty of time for the half stock 1803 Harper Ferry Rifles to reach L & C and their men, and plenty of time for the men to become familiar with them in my opinion. Lewis went to Harpers Ferry in March 1803. River traffic, and overland traffic would not have haulted all together through the winter of 1803 - '04... The Corp could have recieved supplies up to the time of their departure.

Dearborns letter about the 1803's could have been from direct correspondence with Lewis before they ever left Camp Wood. Testing of the new 1803 may well have been taking place then through the winter they were there?

Unless Ambrose is all wrong in his dates, which I don't think he is, I would say the rifles (1803's) were there. :imo:

 

[strand]

Maybe the misconception of the corps carrying 1803's came about simply because the corps left in 1803 carrying 15 "new" guns.

just a thought...

 

[Rat]

I can't believe they went on that trip and didn't take a camera!! And with all those pics he drew of plants and animals...couldn't he have drawn one of his rifles???

SHEEESH!

Well those sure are good arguments for both sides of the coin. Seems like what kind of rifle they took is "debateable" at best. I sure wouldn't say it was one or the other.

If it had been the Lewis and Rat expedition, we'd be armed with .62 calibre Jaegers and Brown Bess carbines, and maybe one or two .36's to conserve lead and powder on small to deer sized game. I'd have a couple of pistols like Daryl's too.

Rat

 

As late as December 2, 1803 Dearborn again wrote to the superintendent at Harpers Ferry saying that "The iron ribbed Rifle in my opinion is an excellent pattern, with the following very trifling alterations....".
-----------------------------------------------------------

If the term "iron ribbed rifle" is used in Dearborn's letter,.... I wunner why we never see thet "term" used in the journals of the expedition, if they did indeed have "proto types" of the 1803's??

Instead we see the term "short rifles" mentioned in the journals several times. Which leads me to think of fullstock rifles with "barrels shorten'd".

The 1803's were the first rifles of ther kind with the "iron rib", I would expect some mention of the (new) "iron rib" likely, or, at least mentioned once consider'n the extent of the expedition.

Innerest'n topic indeedy!! :thumbsup: ::

YMHS
rollingb

 

[TANSTAAFL]

"I owned the condensed version of the 11 or 12 volumes of the Lewis and Clarke Chronicals."

Link below is to excerpts from all the journals kept by several "Corps of Discovery" members. Often redundant, but fascinating reading.

On fire locks carried. There is mention of one member who had a bad experience when in an excited griz moment, he forgot that to fire the piece, one first had to set the trigger. Seems he did some mightily repeated trigger pulling before throwing the rifle down and jumping into the river to escape the urinated bruin.

http://www.pbs.org/lewisandclark/archive/idx_jou.html

 

The book of "condensed" journals I have, is by:.... Bernard DeVoto.

YMHS
rollingb

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

Ya know if some folks want them to have carried the '03 then it's okay with me. But in 1803, St. Louis was a long haul from Harper's Ferry. And L&C had certainly left the Harper's Ferry area in the summer of '03 with their rifles.
And there is no mention of new rifles being shipped to them in St. Louis or any where else. I don't quite understand why it is so important that these rifles were used by the expedition. Other than being the first arsenal produced rifles, they don't seem to have had a particularly distinguised career. And if I recall correctly, the next U.S. rifle reverted to a full stock design, so it would seem that the 1803 didn't impress folks all that much during it's service life. Although some say the Hawkens may have been influenced by it when designing their well known rifles. Anyhow I will state with certainty that very few M-16 rifles were carried on the expedition and all of them jammed. Must have been the black powder loads.

 

Maybe the misconception of the corps carrying 1803's came about simply because the corps left in 1803 carrying 15 "new" guns.

just a thought...

And I think thet is a very "logical" thot!!

"New" guns with short barrels, but of 1892-5 "design"!!

YMHS
rollingb

 

[Ohio Joe]

Here is a website that may help with the question of the Short Rifle; www.lcarchive.org

This is the May 25, 1803 Dearborn letter sent to Joseph Perkin of Harper's Ferry.

Dearborn uses the term "Short Rifle", and describes it. Lewis is known for using the term "Short Rifle". I would submit the idea that when Lewis is writing in his journal, he is not going to write; "The iron ribbed rifle", "The iron ribbed short rifle"... I think he would write, "The short rifle", as it was termed by Dearborn in the letter.

This letter is worth reading if some have not had the chance to see it yet. eace:

 

[Leithan]

Good point stumpkiller, I was thinking the same thing but then again they did bring an iron folding frame boat and a air rifle, I was just thinking that a prototype rifle wouldent have been that big of a stretch, this thread was origanly ment to give me some ideas about puting togeather a replica for a freind, I didnt and still dont't really have a hard opinion as to the axact rifle that was brought on the expedition, I am starting to though, thank you all, for all the great info!

 

Ohio Joe,.... I couldn't find Dearborn's letter to Perkins


Rifles of the Expedition


At Harpers Ferry, Captain Meriwether Lewis obtained 15 rifles built under contract for the United States Army in 1792 and 1794. Gunsmiths from Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, produced these rifles. According to the records in Lancaster, these were .49 caliber weapons, with a 42-inch barrel that featured a patch-box with a push-button release. Over 300 of these rifles were stored at the Harpers Ferry arsenal when Lewis arrived in April 1803.

From the 18 May 1803 requisition receipt Lewis received from the arsenal, the 25 May 1803 letter from Secretary of War Henry Dearborn to the Superintendent of the Harpers Ferry Arsenal Joseph Perkin, and the 8 July 1803 letter from Lewis to Jefferson, it appears that Lewis had the arsenal shorten the barrels of 15 of the 1792 / 1794 rifles to between 33 and 36 inches and re-bored. He also had the gunsmiths add swivels to these weapons, and fit them with new locks. Additionally, Lewis purchased replacement locks and spare lock parts for each rifle.

Significantly, the requisition paperwork from Harpers Ferry does not mention the specific type of weapon Lewis obtained. This is certainly not consistent with Army regulations, unless the arsenal had only one type of weapon in stock, in which case it was not necessary to specify the type procured. This leads to the conclusion that the arsenal had only one rifle in stock