Conference smurf::civil_war

    First of all, the Sharps arms used in the CW were not repeaters.  All
    CW Sharps weapons were sliding-block percussion breechloaders that used
    a combustible linen cartridge.  Sharps developed a model that used a
    metallic cartridge, but these weapons were not put into production
    until after the war, as "New Model 1866."
    
    Some Sharps models had a modified lock with a (not very successful)
    device for feeding special pellet primers called "Sharps' primes" from
    a tube inside the lock; the general theory was that the user did not
    then have to apply a cap.
    
    Most prewar Sharps carbines, including John Brown's and those shipped
    west as "Beecher's Bibles," were of caliber .54.  The Sharps arms sold
    to the Union forces during the war were almost all cal. .52.
    
    It is possible that you've confused the Sharps with the Spencer cal.
    .56 rimfire repeater, which was referred to by disgruntled Confederates
    as the "horizontal shot-tower."  In the Army's first 500-round trial of
    the Spencer, in 1861, firing was as rapid as 7 rounds in 10 seconds. 
    Early Spencers were in cals. 36 and .44.
    
    A colonel of the 41st Massachusetts said in a letter in 1863 that he
    and some friends had shot at musket range, using a target 5 feet tall
    by 18 inches wide, and that he had not missed once, putting one ball
    through the center of the target and handily beating all the others. 
    He said the Spencer was admirable.  Another officer said in a letter to
    Spencer that the weapon was better than all other breechloaders he'd
    seen.
    
    The company that supplied ammo for the Spencer had a test rifle.  After
    they had fired over 16,000 rounds through it, pausing maybe three times
    to clean it, they said it was as good as new.
    
    -d

    Pat,
    
    Sharps did not make a repeater. Sharps made a a single shot breechloading
    rifle and carbine. The repeaters that were used during the war were the
    Spencer and the Henry. I do believe that the Sharps was either a .50 or a
    .52 caliber. 
    
    The Spencer was a lever action, loading through a tube in the butt
    stock. The Henry (later the Winchester '66) caliber 44-40 was what we
    consider now as the repeater.
    
    I hope that this helps
    
    Regards,
    Rusty

    The Henry was not a .44-40, though the modern replicas are.  The Henry
    fired a cartridge called a ".44 flat Henry."  It was a rimfire ctg.,
    and quite anemic.  It was virtually worthless at much over 100 yards.
    The rifle, itself, was quite accurate and reliable.  
    
    The scene in "Dances with Wolves" where Costner drops a charging
    buffalo at a couple hundred yards with a Henry is fanciful, at least. 
    AT that range, I believe the buff's hump hair would have stopped that
    trundlin' little round.
    
    The .44-40, on the other hand, can be reloaded into a very fine
    cartridge.  The stuff you buy in the stores is pretty wimpy because the
    ammo makers know that a certain number of people will shoot it in
    great-granpa's black powder Colt.  Properly reloaded, though, it is a
    great round.
    
    Wess

Yeah, the Henry was anemic all right, at least by long-arm standards. 
Some stats:

Weapon			Bullet Weight	Muzzle Vel.	Muzzle Energy
----------------------	--------------	--------------	-------------
Henry .44 rimfire	200 grains	1300 fps	 750 ft-lb
Remington .44 revolver	135 grains	 900 fps	 242 ft-lb
Remington .58 Zouave	505 grains	1150 fps	1488 ft-lb

These numbers are give or take a little; I haven't actually played with
this ballistics stuff since '77, and these weights and velocities are
from memory of back then, when I was shooting my two replica Remingtons
quite frequently.  I never owned a Henry, but I sure wanted one!

Advertising of the time would have you believe that the Henry was
anything but a wimp.  An advertisement by John. W. Brown, the agent in
Columbus, Ohio said, and I quote:  "Penetration at 100 yards is 8
inches; at 400 yards, 5 inches; and it carries with force sufficient to
kill at 1,000 yards."  I have to wonder, penetration of what?  Jell-O?

-dick

    Penetration was generally measuared on soft white pine.  I'd sure like
    to see that bullet get through that much pine at those ranges.  I'd
    also like to know what that bullet would kill at 100 yards.  Maybe he
    was talking about the "best case" scenario viz Jeff Cooper's
    observation that, "You don't have to hit a man very hard in the eye to
    kill him."
    
    Wess

I know this topic hasn't seen much action in a while, but I was curious
as to what type of "repeating carbine" Buford's troops might have had
at Gettysburg?  


frank

    RE .6:
    
    	I _thought_ Buford's folks just had carbines, not repeaters.  If
    so, they were probably Sharp's.  My memory may be faulty, though - I'll
    see if I can check.
    
    	Bear in mind that Buford had two brigades, or about eight regiments
    - and every regiment might have had different weapons (and there could
    have been differences within regiments, though that was more common in
    the CSA).  I don't know that they _did_, but it is possible.
    
    MikeR
    

>    	I _thought_ Buford's folks just had carbines, not repeaters.  If
>    so, they were probably Sharp's.  My memory may be faulty, though - I'll
>    see if I can check.
>    
>    	Bear in mind that Buford had two brigades, or about eight regiments
>    - and every regiment might have had different weapons (and there could
>    have been differences within regiments, though that was more common in
>    the CSA).  I don't know that they _did_, but it is possible.
>    
>    MikeR
    

Thanks Mike.

I'm not 100% sure where I read it, but I'm thinking _The_Killer_Angels_.
If the late Michael Shaara did his research, here's basically what was
said:

		Buford's troops had about 2500 new repeating
		carbines, that allowed them to fire at a rate of
		about 20 shots per minute, as opposed to the rate of
		about 4 shots per minute with a muzzle loading musket.


Part of that could be from Foote's Civil War narrative too....

I'm kind of a gun buff myself, but don't know a lot about those early
firearms......


frank

    RE .8:
    
    	If the statement is accurate, then the weapons were most likely
    Spencer carbines.  I should have a couple of sources at home that will
    give some clue.
    
    MikeR
    

>    
>    	If the statement is accurate, then the weapons were most likely
>    Spencer carbines.  I should have a couple of sources at home that will
>    give some clue.
    
I will look at my books tonight, and try to bring in exact quotes.  That
might help a bit....


frank    

Mike,

I didn't bring in exact quotes, but I realized that I hadn't checked all
my sources.


In _The_Killer_Angels_, Michael Shaara writes something like

		
		He had thrown away the sabres and the silly dragoon
		pistols, and equiped them all with the new repeating
		carbines.  Dug in behind a fence, they could hold anyone
		for a while.


I hadn't checked ahead in Foote's work, but in there it clearly states
that Buford's men were equiped with

		the new, seven shot, Spencer carbines....



So I guess they were Spencers after all.


thanks for the help,
frank

    RE .11:
    
    	Does Foote give a source for his information?  I ask because the
    sources I checked would seem to indicate they were _not_ Spencers.
    
    	There are two threads here.  I have two different sources on the
    history of the Spencer which agree that the Navy bought some (about
    700) in 1862, but that the Army did not officially buy any until after
    August, 1863, when Spencer got an interview with Lincoln, who was
    impressed with the weapon and quickly "retired" the officer in charge
    of procuring small arms, an ardent champion of the muzzle-loader.  In
    early 1863, General Wilder had equipped a brigade of mounted infantry
    in the West with Spencers (without Federal money), with devastating
    results to the Confederates.  By 1864, the Spencer carbine was the
    standard arm of Federal cavalry; however, this used up so much
    productive capacity that few Spencer rifles (longer barrel, same
    mechanism) were procured for the infantry.
    
    	So, it would seem unlikely that two brigades of cavalry in the AoP
    were equipped with Spencers in the face of bureaucratic opposition.  A
    second thread comes from my Gettysburg simulation game, Terrible Swift
    Sword, which distinguishes the type of weapon used (mainly) by each
    regiment/battery.  While not definitive, these games are carefully
    researched, and the game shows all eight of Buford's regiments at
    Gettysburg armed with carbines, not Spencers.  (Gamble's brigade: 8th
    Illinois, 12th Illinois, 3rd Indiana, 8th New York; Devin's brigade:
    6th New York, 9th New York, 17th Pennsylvania, 3rd West Virginia)  The
    game _does_ have two cavalry regiments in Custer's brigade armed with
    Spencers - 5th and 6th Michigan.  I seem to recall reading years ago
    that the Governor had gotten the state to pay for equipping these units
    with Spencers, but I don't recall where.
    
    	Neither Catton's history of the AoP or "Battles and Leaders" makes
    any mention of special weapons in Buford's units.  Again, that's not
    conclusive, but is suggestive when combined with other evidence.
    
    	As an aside, the likely weapon for Buford's men was the model 1859
    Sharp's carbine, a breach-loader with either a paper or linen
    cartridge.  The Sharp's would have given Buford's men a rate-of-fire
    edge over infantry muskets, with the added advantage that it could be
    reloaded while lying down (next to impossible with a muzzle-loader). 
    About 80,000 Sharps were bought during the war, and it is an early
    enough design to be around in mid-'63.  The Sharp's seems to be the
    only carbine other than Burnside's or Spencer's which was bought in
    quantity; Buford might have had Burnside's carbine, but it was similar
    to the Sharp (i.e. single-shot, not magazine-fed like the Spencer).
    
    	I have seen a few things that make me suspicious of Shaara's
    accuracy on detail, in spots, so I would not regard him as
    authoritative, and I know Foote claimed to be writing a "narrative
    history", so unless he gives a source I would not assume he was
    reporting a checked fact.  If somebody has access to a regimental
    history of one of Buford's units, that might help settle the issue.
    
    MikeR
    

>    
>    	I have seen a few things that make me suspicious of Shaara's
>    accuracy on detail, in spots, so I would not regard him as
>    authoritative, and I know Foote claimed to be writing a "narrative
>    history", so unless he gives a source I would not assume he was
>    reporting a checked fact.  If somebody has access to a regimental
>    history of one of Buford's units, that might help settle the issue.
>    


Well, Shaara mentioned "repeating carbine", which would seem to fit in
with your reference to carbine.

Foote does provide a bibliographical section, where he mentions most,
probably not all, of his sources, but he did eschew individual footnotes
in favor of readability.  At least that's what he says in his afterword.

I'd probably be inclined to go with your educated guess of the Sharps.

On the other hand, playing devil's advocate here, and being involved in
a State militia myself, I could envision Buford, a bit of a maverick, 
pushing, pulling, cajoling, and in general going outside of regs to get
"repeaters" for his men -- however 2500 is a lot of cajoling and going
outside of regs....8^)


I'll keep poking around!


thanks again,
frank    

    RE .12, .13:
    
    	A further bit on info - I happened to have a book written by the
    fellow who became colonel of the 6th Michigan Cavalry.  He confirms
    that both the 5th and 6th MI were initially issued Spencer _rifles_
    when they got to Washington in very early 1863.  He hints that "wire-
    pulling" may have been involved, and says that his unit was "one of the
    first" Union cavalry outfits to get Spencers.  He also says that after
    a year they exchanged the rifle model for the Spencer carbine.
    
    	So, it would seem best to find a regimental history of some part of
    Buford's division, since the _number_ of weapons mentioned (2500) is
    about the total strength of Gamble's and Devin's brigades combined -
    which means all regiments were supposedly armed with repeaters.
    
    MikeR