Austrian Lorenz Rilfe

[johan_steele]

Vareb, while a decent article it is quite dated. More information has come out in the last several years. Much of it courtesy of Don Dixon and others connected to the NSSA.

[whitworth]

In Confederate and U.S. correspondence, I found no reference to a Austrian Lorenz Rifle, but simply -the Austrian Rifle.

Both sides, used the Austrian Rifle. One piece of information indicated that the Austrian rifles were purchased in Great Britain. They may have been used rifles, as the quality of the Austrian rifle was not highly regarded by many. So looking for a "purchase order in Austria" might not be adequate to seek the "originator" of the Austrian rifles to the Civil War.

WAR DEPARTMENT,
Washington City, D. C., July 19, 1862.
His Excellency 0. P. MORTON,
Governor of Indiana, Indianapolis, md.:
Five thousand Austrian rifle muskets have to-day been ordered to
you from New York to arm militia.
P.H. WATSON,
Assistant Secretary of War.

Source:
p234 Series 3 - Volume 2
The war of the rebellion: a compilation of the official records of the Union and Confederate armies.
Publication Date: 1899



Abstract of summary statement showing quantity and value of army
supplies purchased and shipped by Maj. 0. Huse on account Con-
federate States Government.

One hundred and thirty-one thousand one hundred and twenty-
nine stand of arms, as follows: Seventy thousand nine hundred and
eighty long Enfield rifles, 9,715 short Enfleld rifles, 354 carbine Enfleld
rifles, 27,000 Austrian rifles, 21,040 British muskets, 20 small-bore
Enfleld, 2,020 Brunswick rifles, at a cost, including cases, molds,
kegs, screw-drivers, &c., of £417,263. 9s. 11d.

[Indorsement.]
FEBRUARY 3, 1863.
Respectfully referred to the Secretary of War for information as to
purchases made by Major Huse.
J. GORGAS,
Colonel, Chief of Ordnance


Source:
p382 Series 4 - Volume 2
The war of the rebellion: a compilation of the official records of the Union and Confederate armies.

[johan_steele]

What Caleb Huse managed to accomplish was nothing short of increadible; he managed to arm and equip the CS despite huge obstacles in front of him. Frankly he did a better job w/ what he had than the US agents.

[ole]

The Austrian rifles, Lorenz or not, have gotten some bad press. I think we've seen that they had their problems in that the parts were not necessarily interchangeable (that does present a problem), but that the Lorenz was not, as generically condemned, a "defective" arm.

Question: I read about some crappy arms now and then, but I forget whether they were Austrian or Belgian .... or maybe something else. Obviously, the Enfield and the Springfield emerged as the pre-eminent long arms of both sides. When we get into the others, we get into territory best served by those who really get off on that sort of thing.

But the subject is important when considering the logistics. If every wagonload of ammo had to contain .54, .577, .58, .69, .71, et. alii, we're looking at a quartermaster's nightmare.

Boggles.

ole

[Mr King]

Is it true that the Austrian Lorenz rifles were called "pumpkin guns"?

[johan_steele]

No, that was a term usually reserved for the French & Belgian .71's.

[John Gross]

As to the Lorenz not having interchangeable parts, the same was true for the vast majority of Enfields imported. Only Enfields made at Enfield or by the London Arms Company (LAC) had interchanheable parts. However, most Enfields imported were made by dozens (hundreds?) of different contractors, and often times even bayonets were not interchangeable from one rifle to another.

John Gross

[gary]

The Enfield look alikes could either be excellent or garbage. Nip-ples could be too hard and could break off. I've read where some hammers had problems too. It's not the problem of the Enfield made by reputable British firms (and there may have been some British gun makers who didn't care either) that followed the pattern room, but rather the Continental manufacturers who shoved them out the door with little regard for quality control.

[trice]

Does anyone have a comment on the criticism of the Austrian rifles mentioned here?
=====
HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT SOUTHEAST MISSOURI,
Cairo, Ill., September 12, 1861.
Maj. Gen. JOHN C. FREMONT, Saint Louis, Mo.:
... The Austrian muskets, now in the hands of some of our men, are reported to be entirely unreliable. The difficulty seems to be more in the cap than in the arm itself.
U.S. GRANT,
Brigadier-General.
-----
HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT SOUTHEAST MISSOURI,
Cairo, September 15, 1861.
General JOHN C. FREMONT,
Commanding Department of the West, Saint Louis, Mo.:
... I would call your attention to the fact that there are many troops here without arms, and some armed with the Austrian musket, which, with the caps now furnished, is unreliable; also that clothing, camp and garrison equipage, and accouterments are deficient. ...
U.S. GRANT,
Brigadier-General.
-----
ORDNANCE OFFICE,
Washington, February 11, 1862.
General D.C. BUELL, Louisville, Ky.:
SIR: Your telegram to General McClellan of the 10th instant has been referred to this office. In answer I have to state that on Lieutenant Edson's requisition of November 24, 1861, 10,000 small-arms of the kind designated at Army Headquarters (Austrian rifle muskets) were ordered to be sent to you. These were represented to be good arms. On receipt of information from Lieutenant Edson that they were defective in the cone-seats and required new ones, which he could have fixed to them, he was authorized to have the alteration made. ...
JAS. W. RIPLEY,
Brigadier-General.
-----
HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF KANSAS,
Fort Leavenworth, Kans., April 2, 1862.
ASSISTANT ADJUTANT-GENERAL,
Headquarters Department of the Mississippi, Saint Louis, Mo.:
...
Some of the mounted regiments in this district are armed with the Austrian carbine, which has been found very inefficient and unreliable, the hammers of many of them breaking after a few discharges and the cartridges furnished for them being entirely too small. I am having an inspection of these arms, and will have them repaired as fast as possible, but if better arms can be furnished it ought to be done at once.
...
J. W. DENVER,
Brigadier-General, Commanding.
-----
NDIANAPOLIS, IND, August 17, 1862.
E. M. STANTON, Secretary Of War:
... The Austrian rifles must be repaired, as the tubes are all too large and otherwise defective--many of them. I shall have it done here, for if I send them to Pittsburgh, under General Ripley's order, I shall not get them back in a month. ...
O. P. MORTON,
Governor of Indiana.
-----
O.R.-- SERIES I--VOLUME XX/1 [S# 29]
DECEMBER 7, 1862.--Action at Hartsville, Tenn.
No. 11.--Report of Capt. Carlo Piepho, One hundred and eighth Ohio Infantry.
...
The arms which were used by my command were the Austrian rifle, an arm totally worthless, and condemned on different occasions, the locks of said guns having springs of so weak construction that many of the men had to snap the **** three or more times before the piece would discharge. The men also were provided with ammunition a good deal too large for the pieces; the caliber of the guns .58, and that of the ammunition .54. ...
CARLO PIEPHO,
Capt., Comdg. One hundred and eighth Regt. Ohio Vol.
-----
INDIANAPOLIS, IND., August 21, 1862.
Hon. E. M. STANTON:
Complaints are made of the arms furnished the State for the volunteers, and from personal inspection I think deservedly. They are of Austrian manufacture. The hammers are inferior and frequently broken, and the screw of the Enfield nipple, which is used, being different from that in the barrel, a few discharges render them useless. Out of the 3,000 but 500 could be issued, and they indifferent. The springs of fully one-half are too weak to explode the caps, and the others only explode cap after two or three trials. The Governor says the State has secured far below her proportion of Springfield arms, whilst her numbers in the field are very large. Several of the regiments recently sent have miserable arms. Accouterments are needed. All received have been issued, and none whatever are on hand to furnish troops rapidly assembling. He further states that the Ordnance Department has not yet furnished the two field batteries for which requisitions were made on the 14th of July. Artillery companies are consequently sent into the field without equipments.
L. THOMAS,
Adjutant-General.
=====

Tim

[johan_steele]

Trice the weapons being mentioned are the pill lock Garibaldi. The first batch sent out didn't have the proper caps. A major problem to put it politely. The Lorenz was not an interchangeable arm which caused an inherent quality control issue.

To add to the problem the Lorenz chambers a slightly larger round than the .54 commonly used in the US. So while a .54 will load and fire w/ no problem the caliber of a Lorenz is actually closer to .55 IIRC which would trouble the accuracy somewhat.

It's also important to understand that the British arms makers lacked the quality control of Springfield. Outside of the Enfield factory P53 were not required to be interchangeable and quality control was less than stringently enforced. The CS contracts were of the higher quality arms while most of the US contracts for the P53 were of a lower quality/standard.

It;s important to understand that when it came to quality control of small arms the US was the foreruner and the country which all would have to be judged against. At over 400 yards the P53 is a more accurate arm than any of its contemporaries it was also in many cases far less reliable. Common complaints were of the ramrod channel not being properly finished (causing painful slivers or sticking ramrods) of the barrel bands working themselves loose during heavy firing and of water easily getting behind the lockplate causing rust issues of a poorly cared for arm. The Lorenz had similar complaints, though I cannot say I've ever read of issues w/ the wood. Whereas the M1841, M1842, M1855, M1861 (the M1863 had the same complaints about the barrel bands as the P53) had none of these complaints.