Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 34

Thread: Questions

  1. #1
    Southron Sr. is offline
    Team:
    24th Georgia Volunteer Infantry
    Member
    3002
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Gorgia
    Posts
    1,319
    Region:
    Carolina - North Carolina and South Carolina

    Questions

    According to then contemporary U.S. Army manuals, what were the following for the U.S. M1855 (33 inch barrel) Harpers Ferry RIFLE:

    1. Muzzle velocity?

    2. Muzzle energy?

    3. Maximum effective range?

    THANKS!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    NWT area
    Posts
    937
    Region:
    Northwest Territory - Michigan, Ohio and Indiana

    Answers.....

    Answer to no. 3 ....... 500 yds accurately, 1000 yds of killing power

    For No 1 & 2 .. At that time in our history the technology your asking about did not exist. So there is nothing written in those terms from that time period as far as I know.

    Good question that someone today can do by replicating the load at the time.
    N-SSA Member since 1974

  3. #3
    bobanderson is offline
    Team:
    1st Michigan Infantry
    Member
    12291
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Howell, MI
    Posts
    831
    Region:
    Northwest Territory - Michigan, Ohio and Indiana
    Quote Originally Posted by Bruce Cobb 1723V View Post
    Good question that someone today can do by replicating the load at the time.
    I've been told that today's black powder is different than what was produced 150 years ago. Urban legend?

    Without data from the period, how would you replicate the old loads?
    Bob Anderson
    Ordnance Sergeant
    Company C, 1st Michigan Volunteer Infantry
    Small Arms Committee

    "I won't be wronged. I won't be insulted. I won't be laid a hand on.
    I don't do these things to other people, and I require the same from them."
    - John Wayne in "The Shootist", 1976

  4. #4
    Don Dixon is offline
    Team:
    Wheat's Louisiana Tigers
    Member
    2881V
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Posts
    353
    Region:
    Chesapeake - Maryland, Virginia, Pennsylvania and Ohio
    The following chart is based upon contemporary data, part of which comes from disinterested tests conducted by the Dutch Army Shooting School in 1859-60 when the Dutch Army was evaluating what it regarded as the best military shoulder arms in the world for possible adoption by the Dutch Army. Notably, the Springfield rifle musket was not among them. The Dutch, not surprisingly, selected the Swiss Feldstutzer for adoption, but then decided to hold off and ultimately go with breechloading technology:

    Firearm Weight of the Bullet in Grains and Grams Muzzle Velocity in Feet and Meters Per Second
    Model 1842 Smoothbore Musket 412 [26.7] (Round ball) 1,500 [457.2]
    Pattern 1853 Enfield Rifle Musket (British Army Cartridge in Royal Dutch Army tests) 527 [34.1] (Pritchett bullet, without Culot) 1,181 [360]
    Model 1842 Rifled Musket 730 [47.3] (Elongated ball) 879 [268]
    Muster 1854 Austrian Infantry Rifle
    (k.k. Army Cartridge in Royal Dutch Army tests)
    452 [29.3] (System Lorenz bullet) 1,148 [350]
    Pattern 1853 Enfield Rifle Musket (Federal Army Cartridge) 510 [33.1] (Elongated ball) 963 [293.5]
    Model 1855 Springfield Rifle Musket 510 [33.1] (Elongated ball) 963 [293.5]
    Model 1855 Springfield Rifle 510 [33.1] (Elongated ball) 914 [278.6]
    Model 1873 ?Trapdoor? Springfield Carbine 405 [26.2] 1,150[350.5]

    Reflective of the technology available at the time there is considerable variation in data. Various sources, state that the velocity of Muster 1854 System Lorenz Austrian ammunition in Muster 1854 rifle muskets was about 100 feet per second higher than the Dutch data. Not included are data on the Federal Army?s 50 gr load for Mississippi and System Lorenz rifle muskets, or data on the Confederacy?s cr*p ammunition. Some of the data I have seen from Confederate tests at Augusta is in the nature of pure fiction. With bullet weight and velocity, you can use a good ballistics program to calculate muzzle energy. Since 74-foot pounds [100 Joules] of energy is regarded as adequate to kill a man, you can also calculate the killing power at various ranges.

    Regarding the maximum effective range of the M1855 rifle musket, Captain Henry Heth?s pre-Civil War U.S. Army marksmanship training manual, stated that as soldiers progressed to live firing, they were to fire at distances from 150 to 1,000 yards at the following sized targets, which were divided by horizontal and vertical black lines crossing at the center:

    Distance in Yards Height of Target in Feet Width of Target in Inches
    150 and 225 6 22
    225 and 300 6 44
    325, 350, and 400 6 66
    450 and 500 6 88
    550 and 600 6 110
    700 6 132
    800 6 176
    900 6 220
    1,000 6 264

    The six-foot height of the target required that the soldier understand the importance of range estimation and be able to accurately estimate range. The widths of the targets were based upon the expectation that a trained soldier should be able to hit an individual enemy soldier at ranges to 300 yards, the area occupied by an artillery piece and crew at 600 yards, and the area occupied by an artillery section of two guns at 1,000 yards.

    Since Federal and Confederate marksmanship training was virtually nonexistent, a real world maximum effective range was under 200 yards.

    Regards,
    Don Dixon
    Last edited by Don Dixon; 09-04-2020 at 09:22 AM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    NWT area
    Posts
    937
    Region:
    Northwest Territory - Michigan, Ohio and Indiana

    If you really MUST know.....

    Quote Originally Posted by bobanderson View Post
    I've been told that today's black powder is different than what was produced 150 years ago. Urban legend?

    Without data from the period, how would you replicate the old loads?
    I see original period loads still for sale, just pricey. The powder, I have heard, does not appear to have been degraded over time. Anyone with the must know, must have, historical data can still figure it out. Check out The Horse Soldier Shop in Gettysburg, Pa
    N-SSA Member since 1974

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Huntsville
    Posts
    3,733
    Region:
    Deep South - Georgia, Louisiana, Tennessee, Mississippi and Texas
    Great post, Don.

    I've been told that today's black powder is different than what was produced 150 years ago. Urban legend?
    Black powder has been made with the same basic proportions of Potassium Nitrate, Charcoal, and Sulfur for hundreds of years. There is/was some variation in the quality of the raw materials. And there can be variation in grain size depending on how well you screen your particles by size. Even today there is variation in performance between manufacturers of black powder. And most modern black powders are glazed with graphite.

    Still, in the end, it's just finely powdered Potassium Nitrate, Charcoal, and Sulfur dampened with water and pressed under tons of pressure to corn the powder and force the ingredients into close physical contact.

    Steve
    Steve Sheldon
    Commander
    4th Louisiana Delta Rifles
    NRA Certified Muzzleloading Instructor

  7. #7
    Carolina Reb is offline
    Team:
    2nd South Carolina, Co I, Palmetto Guard
    Member
    5794V
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    364
    Region:
    Carolina - North Carolina and South Carolina
    Most of what you are looking for is in the 1856 Small Arms report on the development of the Models of 1855. You will have to calculate energy from the bullet weight and velocity.

    Harpers Ferry rifle reamed up to 58 cal.: Charge, 60 grains "Musket Powder", Bullet weight 510 grains (10 grains lighter than the Lyman New Style, 10 grains heavier than the Lyman Old Style) Initial Velocity: 914 fps.
    Mean deviations: 500 yards, 15" vertical, 12.7" horizontal; 1000 yards, 58" vertical, 25.2" horizontal.

    M-1855 Rifle Musket, same ammo: Initial Velocity: 963 fps.
    Mean deviations: 500 yards, 17.4" vertical, 14.4" horizontal; 1000 yards, 55.9" vertical, 25.5" horizontal.
    Interestingly, the target size at 1000 yards was 20x24 feet. Of 25 shots fired, one missed.

    As for the powder being different today, a lot of factors go into that. Different types of charcoal have different residual resins and tars, which affect both energy and the character of fouling. Finished powder has varying moisture content, which also has an affect. Purity of the ingredients has a strong affect on powder performance. One of the reasons George Rains' Augusta Powder Works was so successful was that he had a very efficient process for purifying niter. Federal powder quality got worse through the war and charges had to be upped from 60 to 65 grains. Confederate powder started off pretty crappy and got better when Rains took over. Ordnance records on both sides are full of complaints about poor quality powder. Another problem is that niter absorbs moisture from humid air. A lot of good powder became weak because of poor shipment and storage. Most mills varied their ingredients, mixing ratios, moisture content and mill processing in an attempt to reduce fouling and keep the residual soft, with the result that some powders were a lot slower and bulkier than others, particularly among the commercial powders.

  8. #8
    Kevin Tinny is offline
    Team:
    Tammany Regiment, 42nd New York
    Member
    13667
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    North Florida
    Posts
    573
    Region:
    New England - New York, Connecticut, New Jersey and Massachusetts
    Hello:

    Yes to all and:

    Tom Hunger and others told me they have dissected original paper, Smith and Spencer ctg's with uncompressed powder, which was common in copper cased ctg's, and the loose grain size was slightly smaller than our current 2F, closer to our 3F.

    In the early 1980's, Dupont, Moosic engineers Don Samonie and Vern Osdal and GOEX owner Frank Fahringer told me their test standards were set to U.S. Gov't spec's because the gov't took 75% of production, pyro 15% and sporting 10%. Both DuPont and GOEX used the same sized screens to fit gov't spec's, but pyro and sporting were not as uniform in grain size or graghite. The interesting figure was that they were allowed lot-to-lot, up to 7% velocity variation, mostly from moisture differences. A 7% velocity variation will play the devil with velocity consistency at longer distances. A few years back SWISS changed an ingredient and had a lot of comments about zero changes. In the 70's to '90's, with commomly available GOEX, we just used the same SIFTED VOLUME of charge and clicked off sighter shots for new lot zero. The change could be worth an inch, even two at 200. Skip range estimation differences for soldiers.

    French artillery mixed black powder ingredients in the field to create desired strength.
    Have no idea how corning fit into this practice, but the French were capable. H'mmm.

    A sifted GOEX 2Fg muzzle velocity variation extreme spread of 30fps will be worth 2" - 3" at 200! Hard to imagine a trooper in the heat of battle loading with uniform seating pressure and keeping hits within 15" at 300 on a good day. Yes, vertical, man height is helpful. And those Confed sharpshooters at Petersburg were shooting through loopholes, but they practiced the setup off-target and knew the drops. Japs did the same thing on Pacific islands. Carlos, also.

    Amazing how accurate muskets can be, even with all the variables.
    Carlos was a good friend of Jim Land, who told me that the 50 BMG snipers in Nam used AVIATION ammo because that was the most consistent. Getting old. Haha.

    Respectfully,
    Kevin Tinny
    Last edited by Kevin Tinny; 09-04-2020 at 11:46 AM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    NWT area
    Posts
    937
    Region:
    Northwest Territory - Michigan, Ohio and Indiana

    The Answer..

    Every one should note the word " contemporary " that is used in the charts language. This means " belonging to or occurring in the present." The fine chart shown is a MODERN conversion based on some old data that is inaccurate at best. You need modern equipment to answer the original question. An accurate way of timing wasn't even available to do such a test until the 1930's. You need old original ammunition. No original data exists for a comparison, its all subjective. I would propose that someone like The Carolina Reb should go and make up a " Go Fund Me " page to elicit money for him to go and buy some original rounds and do a test to determine the real characteristics. Its the only way to really answer both the of the remaining questions. I sure would contribute to it as well as others who want an answer too.
    N-SSA Member since 1974

  10. #10
    RaiderANV's Avatar
    RaiderANV is offline
    Team:
    Palmetto Sharpshooters
    Member
    5795V
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginny & McKinney, Texas
    Posts
    2,472
    Region:
    Carolina - North Carolina and South Carolina
    I would strongly suggest even then you will not have your answer. Powder varied so much from batch to batch and improved year to year. It's known the Confederates had better powder with their process. So any testing.....especially with original ammo would be trivial at best.
    Never squat with yer spurs on!!!

    Pat "PJ" Kelly #5795V
    Virginny & Texas
    540-878-8024

    MAYNARDS RULE!! & starr's DROOL!
    Hence the rust. MAYNARDAE LAUS DEO!

Similar Threads

  1. Two 44-40 Questions
    By WBR10654 in forum Small Arms
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-24-2015, 08:32 AM
  2. Questions and more questions... I know, I know....
    By tackdriver in forum Shooting Techs, Tips, & Tricks
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 09-03-2012, 05:17 PM
  3. Ballard questions
    By jmiller in forum Small Arms
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-08-2012, 08:37 AM
  4. 1855 QUESTIONS
    By remington1858 in forum Shooting Techs, Tips, & Tricks
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-29-2010, 11:20 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •