Buffords arms

[gjkershul]

Just finished reading Hallahan's "Misfire" about how US Ordnance has not put the best small arms in the hands of Amreicas fighting men.
He states Bufford's men at Gettsburg had Spencers. I have read in other sources they had Sharps. Any information?
He also says the 5th Michigan was armed with the Spencer he they tangled with Stuart on the third Day?

As an interesting side point he says it was easier for the Cavalry to get Spencers in that they would not be replacing the 1855 Musket and its sucessors that Ripley was fixated on as the only war winners.

[John Gross]

Buford's four regiments had Sharps, Burnside, and Gallager carbines. Custer's 5th Michigan had Spencer RIFLES, as well as the 6th Michigan partly armed with the Spencer rifles.

John Gross

[Don Dixon]

My great-grandfather was a corporal with the 8th Illinois Cavalry, one of Buford's regiments. He and the 8th carried Sharps carbines at Gettysburg, a fact which is very well documented. It is alleged that the first shot of the battle was fired with one of the 8th's Sharps carbines. This tells you something about the accuracy of Hallahan's research. You will also note that the book isn't footnoted much. I read the book when it when it first came out, and was not much impressed.

Hallahan is correct that Ordnance has made some very bad choices with regard to arming U.S. troops. But, his examples are often not on point. He repeatedly referred to armament decisions as having been driven by military competitive shooters, whom he referred to as "gravel-belly." Curious. In 28 years of military service rifle shooting, a High Master card, the Distingushed Rifleman Badge, the President's Hundred Tab, two turns on a winning National Trophy (Dogs of War) Team, a summer with the Army Marksmanship Unit, and eight years with the All-Army Reserve Rifle Team, I never heard the term.

Regards,
Don Dixon
2881V