best reproduction musket ?

Lance

Cadet
Joined
Aug 1, 2012
What would be the best repro musket to get to be a reenactor? It would have to be authentic looking and be able to fire too. What brands or models, for the north too ?
 
I've heard that the Enfield is better for reenactors than the Springfield because the Springfield is more high-maintenance, i.e the metal has a greater tendency to rust. I don't know this for a fact, however.
 
I'd say, right now, either buy a new Petersoli or find an old British made Parker-Hale. The Armi-Sport 1842 Springfield smoothbore is very nice as well.
 
The ArmiSport 1842 Smooth bore Musket would be one that requires the least amount of work compared to others.

Kevin Dally
 
I prefer the ArmiSport M1842 Rifled Musket.You are going to pay a little more than an M1861, or an Enfield, but the money spent is well, well worth it.
 
The absolute best if you can find one. Is the Japanesse Miruko M1861 Springfield. Even the cone is done properly, so there is not the misfire problem of the Italian imports. you can even swap out original parts, it is so accurate to the original. Second best and readly available is the Armi Sport M1842 Sprinfield. Of all the presently made weapons, this one is closest to the a original in looks and action. As Kevin pointed out easiest to defarb out of the box.

Fact is all the re-pop enfields have serious issues with accuracy (authentic look and feel), and you can spend as much as you pay for one to get up up to accurate standards.
 
I actually like the rifled 42, that rear sight they put on them are works of art! I don't know why, but you shoulder a 42 in any form, you feel like you got a real manly weapon!
Size does kinda matter, and besides, musket shooters have more balls...that is Round ball, Buck-n-Ball, Buckshot, and that monster .680" 730 grain Minnie Ball !:wavespin:

Kevin Dally
 
Pvt Wells has pretty much hit the nail on the head. But I would add the EuroArms, now Pedersoli, M1841. As is in .54 cal it will work rather well for a CS impression or an early/mid war US. In .58 it can be, relatively, easily modified to any one of a dozen different models. And when it comes to live fire... I used to shoot one in competition.

The Miroku is becoming as scarce as hens teeth... but they are worth every penny.

The Parker Hale is an excellent arm... but it is a copy of the last model 53 manufactured, one that never saw service in the ACW. The ArmiSport M1842 has also been mentioned and is a grossly under represented arm for early mid war US troops.

All of that said a good custom made up from a mix of original & repro parts can be had for the price of a defarbed arm. $1000-1500.
 
Just an added shameless plug for the Rifled 42...

You can make some neat arsenal packs like this Washington AP I duplicated.
Washington Arsenal Pack.jpg

Kevin Dally
 
I'd say, right now, either buy a new Petersoli or find an old British made Parker-Hale. The Armi-Sport 1842 Springfield smoothbore is very nice as well.
I know this is an old topic. I thought it might be interesting to see what changes the past few years might have made to the replies.
I also can reply to the comment about the Parker-Hale. it is true the P-H is one of the closest reproductions made with several parts being made from original pattern pieces. BUT...
It is true to the 4th model P1853 which was produce towards the end of or after our War between the states.
To serve as a correct CW weapon, it would (did) require a number of modifications.
The P-H had the 4th model's "Baddeley" barrel bands. Those were replaced with originals. The lock screw guards on the reverse side of the stack are of wrong profile, replaced with originals. The PH lock plate markings are wrong but I chose to keep it for the sake of it's being a P-H and the hammer is not quite right but, stayed with the lock plate. The stock was sanded to a more accurate profile but I fear it is still a little too hefty and refinished in a simple oil finish. The bluing was also redone. The stamps on the breach were replaced with originals as was the stock cartouche. The cone guard chain is correct but, I think it was to begin with. I do not remember. Toilet chains are not right. By the way. The P-H has the originals progressive depth rifling.

Every repro bayonet I tried would not fit. I have an original which was loose. I lined the socket with JB Weld and Ground it to fit. Before you cringe, original bayonet's were a lot cheaper when I got, did this. It is marked to possibly have been in the War but there's no proof to say it was either.

As I recall, I was a bit ahead of the curb in "defarbing" a rifle. For the most part, you got the best you could and that was acceptable as made. There weren't all these people set up to sell you one or do yours. Mine was done by our reenacting unit's Lt. who had previously been with a National Park service living history unit and was a dedicated historian.

I think it about wraps it up.

Here are a few pictures of mine, done in the 1980s.
 

Attachments

  • PH 1st Gen P1853 Enfield rifle musket 006.JPG
    PH 1st Gen P1853 Enfield rifle musket 006.JPG
    83.2 KB · Views: 790
  • PH 1st Gen P1853 Enfield rifle musket 009.JPG
    PH 1st Gen P1853 Enfield rifle musket 009.JPG
    64.9 KB · Views: 793
  • a PH-1853 Enfield 001.JPG
    a PH-1853 Enfield 001.JPG
    120.7 KB · Views: 1,194
  • a P&H 1853 019.JPG
    a P&H 1853 019.JPG
    94.7 KB · Views: 549
  • a P&H 1853 026.JPG
    a P&H 1853 026.JPG
    87.5 KB · Views: 489
  • a P&H 1853 025.JPG
    a P&H 1853 025.JPG
    68.5 KB · Views: 509
  • a P&H 1853 016.JPG
    a P&H 1853 016.JPG
    158.8 KB · Views: 390
Back
Top