Most Accurate .577?

[R. McAuley 3014V]

In terms of originals at any rate, I believe generally speaking I'd vote for the 1858 pattern Enfield. Heavy barrel, plus the Parker Hale rifling and bullet design were really well mated.

That said, none of these were target guns and while 1000 plus yard hits would be lethal, it was a case of volley fire, for which any were adequate. And, inside of say 300 yards, all could hit a man sized target. So in practice, I don't know as it was even an issue.

Jonk, have you ever shot (any rifle) at 1,000 yards? I can guarantee you that most any of these pattern British Enfields are quite capable of hitting a man at 1,000 yards. A standard NRA 1,000 yard high-power target has a X-ring that is ten inches in diameter, the whole black is 30-inches in diameter. Back in 1988, CWO Billy Atkins, coach of the All Army Reserve Service Rifle Team zeroed me in at 1,000 yards (into the X-ring) in just three shots, and I have hit the X-ring on many occasions. Below is another group who routinely compete at 200, 300, 600 and 1,000 with muzzle-loading rifles. Below is a view from the 1,000 yard line looking toward the butts at last week's LRML match held at Oak Ridge, TN, on 26-27 March 2015 where I watched a young man competing with one of Hoyt's new Kerr rifle barrels mated to a Pedersoli P/53. Before this match, the competitor had only shot 23 rounds through the barrel while establishing a 200-yard zero. I witnessed him in the 10 and X-rings several times from 200 to 600, and watched as he hit paper at 1,000 yards. Even as a novice, he would have had no problem hitting a man size target at that range.

[jonk]

I have never personally shot past 600. I have pulled targets in the pits at Camp Perry at 1000 yards, so I know what can be done.

Notice I said 'for originals.' Shooting undersized balls with stock sights, while the construction of the gun was, I fully agree, capable of a 1000 yard shot onto a man sized target, the issue ammunition, stock sights, and soldier's ability most likley was not. There is a reason that snipers were issued special guns for shots of that range.

Hand me an 03, M1, M1A, or AR (even though I'm no fan of them personally) and yes, especially with a coach, and a proven load, I have no doubt that I'd hit the target at 1000. With the front stuffers, give me a gun that is tuned and with properly fitting ammo and a service load, I could probably do the same.

[R. C. Hubbard Jr]

Your not really comparing apples to apples here. The guns of the Volunteer corps were not all regular issue guns. Many were special built and rifled with A. Henry, kerr, Whitworth and other types of rifling, then built of the Enfield pattern.
I have a volunteer 1861 musketoon which has Henry rifling and a very neat single set trigger. Often they had improved rear sights on them as well.

Bob

[hobbler]

Had to look this up.
http://www.mlagb.com/wp-content/uplo..._KerrRifle.pdf

Was pondering perhaps doing something like this with the P53.
Happy to read about it being done in the 1800's.
Thank you for the info gents.

[hobbler]

By the way, was the progressive depth rifling also more accurate because it assisted in the initial cutting of the paper patches on the Pritchett bullets to get a more reliable shedding of the patch?
Something I've noted is that shedding the patch consistently can be very important and sometimes difficult to achieve. The shallow rifling of the .69 Armisport can be a real doosie to work with in that regard.

[hobbler]

The reference I've found so far indicates about a .004"-.005" change in groove depth from breech to muzzle so it would appear that yes, the progressive depth rifling would definitely be doing the work of cutting those thicker paper patches.

[R. McAuley 3014V]

Your not really comparing apples to apples here. The guns of the Volunteer corps were not all regular issue guns. Many were special built and rifled with A. Henry, kerr, Whitworth and other types of rifling, then built of the Enfield pattern.
I have a volunteer 1861 musketoon which has Henry rifling and a very neat single set trigger. Often they had improved rear sights on them as well.

Bob

Beside the "Any Rifle", only the Queen's and Albert Prize matches (like the Elcho Shield introduced 1862 between Scotland and England) were permitted to use small bore (.451 caliber) rifles like those made by Alex Henry, Kerr, Whitworth and other others. In the Queen's Prize, the Gun-maker's trials held earlier in the year (or even the year before) up until 1867 when they were discontinued, decided which maker's rifles would be used for the next year's Queen's Prize. Yes, "A Rigby rifle took the Queen's Prize at Wimbledon in 1865" but only because Whitworth's representative failed to appear at the trials, and Henry's rifles were disqualified for having oversized bores (just one two/1000ths out of gauge)! Rigby, being the only remaining entrant, won by default! Interestingly, the 1865 Queen's Prize was won by scores significantly lower than the winning scores of any year previous shot by a Whitworth rifle. In the 1866 gun-maker's trial, it was Rigby's turn to be disqualified, and the Birmingham Small Arms Company (under licensed to make the Whitworth) won the trials. In all the other volunteer matches, the regulation arm was mandatory, such as for the "Carbine prize", the "Five groove rifle prize", and one can only presume the "Enfield" prize, both the association cup and Wimbledon cup matches were exclusively limited to the use of the .577 Service Enfield.

[hobbler]

Does anyone know what .577 ammo was being used in the matches?
Surely not the standard service issue cartridges.

[R. C. Hubbard Jr]

This is may be the best online place to find this info. http://www.researchvault.co.uk/ There is also a forum that discusses shooting and the Kerr rifle project from when it started. I have considered replacing my Whitworth barrel with a Hoyt gain twist Kerr barrel.

Bob

[robertdeans72]

Does anyone know what .577 ammo was being used in the matches?
Surely not the standard service issue cartridges.

Hi there,

Surely they were!... There were devices that serious shooters used to double check the powder volume before pouring it into the muzzle. It fit over the muzzle and the cartridge was poured into it. The volume was checked to ensure that the boys at the Royal Laboratory had loaded the cartridge correctly. It was a stipulation in NRA competitions that service cartridges only were used..

The Cartridge had three cuts in the outer wrapper's inner layer and one through both, for a total of four. If you are interested in the Army (not NRA) Annual Musketry Qualification of the 1860s British Army, may I direct you here for a modern version (and somewhat abbreviated one due to lack of a 900yd range) but exemplary none-the-less...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAhZ...B2ZMJ&index=17

Cheers,
Rob