Day at the Range

Joined
Aug 17, 2018
Location
North Carolina
Hey all! I took my three repro rifles out to the range yesterday and had a blast! Shot about 20 rounds or more out of each one...a M1842 rifled musket, M1861 Springfield and a P53 Enfield. I do have a question in regards to the M1842 rifle. This was my first trip with her to the range...the group from the mini was all over the place, even at 50 yards. Whereas the group with a 65 roundball loaded traditionally (over 110gr of 2f) had about a 3"-4"group. Needless to say, I found the accuracy of the round ball much better! Has anyone had similar issues? I may have been anticipating the recoil from the minis a tad but not that bad to my mind!

Also, the engagement of the sear on the M1861 is really stiff...anyone know of a solution? Thanks!
20200309_104924.jpg
 
Hey all! I took my three repro rifles out to the range yesterday and had a blast! Shot about 20 rounds or more out of each one...a M1842 rifled musket, M1861 Springfield and a P53 Enfield. I do have a question in regards to the M1842 rifle. This was my first trip with her to the range...the group from the mini was all over the place, even at 50 yards. Whereas the group with a 65 roundball loaded traditionally (over 110gr of 2f) had about a 3"-4"group. Needless to say, I found the accuracy of the round ball much better! Has anyone had similar issues? I may have been anticipating the recoil from the minis a tad but not that bad to my mind!

Also, the engagement of the sear on the M1861 is really stiff...anyone know of a solution? Thanks!
View attachment 350605

There is a technique to get minies to shoot accurately. I shoot North South Skirmish Association competition and I can tell you that if your barrel is good and the minies set up correctly, a 2moa group is within the realm of possibility. That's a 1in group at 50yds. My guess is that your minies are grossly undersized for the actual barrel dimensions. There could be other issues, issue sights, lube, powder charge, caps, etc.

As for the sear, most stock repops have issues with the locks. We work ours over for a trigger pull of about 3-4lbs. That work involves polishing and some work on the tumbler. If you aren't familiar with how the geometry interacts on these, send it off to a gunsmith.
 
with a 65 roundball loaded traditionally (over 110gr of 2f) had about a 3"-4"group.
Wow! Sounds like you DID have a blast.

You stated you were firing 110gr? That load seems really hot. I know the guns could fire that amount but I thought the typical load during the War was much less. I can never remember how much powder they used. The point I'm making is the accuracy of a round/bullet can be improved by matching to the amount of powder with the type of bullet you are using. Also barrel twist is a factor but you can't change that. The old guys used a light powder load with a patched round ball in their Long Rifles.
Again, I don't know if a Minie Ball has better accuracy with a hotter load or with minimum load. You might try that.

Personally----I blame it on the wind or my failing eyes. Otherwise, I am an Expert Marksman. :geek:

Post some Action Shots of your shots.
 
Your rifled 42 probably doesn't like what size minie balls you're loading/and/or how soft the lead is. Is it an Armisport??? Are you making/casting your own bullets or buying them from some other source?? I was with the N-SSA for 3 years back in the late 80's. You sure can learn a lot from being part of them. 110 sounds like way too much. I always used the lightest powder load possible to get whatever I was shooting at downrange to hit the target. Anything more than what you need is wasted powder and more fouling. Always use real black powder too, not the fake stuff, that's for deer hunters.
 
The Armi-Sport rifled 42 issue is likely the bullet; either your lead is an issue or bullet size. Those are your most likely culprit. 110 FFG is hot but shouldn't destroy your accuracy that badly. Are your rounds keyholing? My suspicion is your rounds are undersized or too light. Those .69's prefer heavy bullets... too light and they'll barely stay on the paper.

my experience with the Italian reproductions are almost never accurate out of the box. The AS P53 I owned was about 6" high and to the right. A Euroarms I handled had a front site that didn't even vaguely line up. Most are sold for the re-enacting market where actually live firing is a rarity. NSSA & ACWSA shooters can fine tune them to become excellent shooters. My originals... not an issue. Which is why I prefer originals.

I own an original "Fremont" (when it became a Fremont God only knows) which is a dream to shoot. I use a 740 grain burton bullet pushed by 75 grains FFG. At 100 yards I average a 2-3" group. When I used the 110 grain loads recoil was severe but she has a shorter barrel than yours and I don't recall group size.
 
Hey all! I took my three repro rifles out to the range yesterday and had a blast! Shot about 20 rounds or more out of each one...a M1842 rifled musket, M1861 Springfield and a P53 Enfield. I do have a question in regards to the M1842 rifle. This was my first trip with her to the range...the group from the mini was all over the place, even at 50 yards. Whereas the group with a 65 roundball loaded traditionally (over 110gr of 2f) had about a 3"-4"group. Needless to say, I found the accuracy of the round ball much better! Has anyone had similar issues? I may have been anticipating the recoil from the minis a tad but not that bad to my mind!

Also, the engagement of the sear on the M1861 is really stiff...anyone know of a solution? Thanks!

Did you purchase your ammo, or cast them yourself? (I see 2-3 good looking AP's! :thumbsup:)
What powder grain weight were you using in the rifled 42 with your Minie? 70 grains was what they used for altered muskets. What Minie were you using in the 42?

Check the screw tension in your 61 lock, having them too tight can adversely affect your lock's performance. You need to know the diameter of your bore sizes, modern repo's do not have the same type of rifling as the originals. You need to have a Minie sized 1-2 thousandth's inch UNDER your bore size. Trying to get a .575" Minie to shoot accurately in a .581" size bore isn't going to work well at all in my experience! My Armi 61 bore is .581", I size my Minie for it down to .580". My Euroarms 3-band Enfield must be about .579" I can get a .578" Minie to load, but do better with a .577" size Minie.

A hard lesson I learned early on is using pure/soft lead when casting Minie's. I made the dumb mistake of casting some out of wheel-weights, never again!

Now, I have done this for other folk, I can send you Minies sized .575", .577", .578", and .580". You can see what will "Start" down your barrel, which ones won't! It would give you an idea of where you need to be size wise. As for the rifled 42, I won't be much help. The only experience I have had with one of these was a friend had one. He got one of those Lyman .685" 730 grain Minie Molds, and we shot those cast of pure lead. We could stay on target at 50-100 yards, but we were shooting a metal gongs, and never really put em on paper! 70 grains of powder behind that huge Minie was an attention getter!

(PS. Always use BLACK POWDER!)

Kevin Dally
 
Any Italian repro is gonna require fine tuning as far as the sights go. Same with the lock and its internal parts. That's if you wanna do the N-SSA stuff. Back in the late 80's most of my team members were shooting originals, both musket and breech loading carbines. I was the outcast as mine were Zoli's. But once you customized the sights on them and figured out a proper powder load and cast your own bullets with 100% pure lead they were great shooters and very accurate. I could run my 4 clay pigeons and then take out others with my JP Murray Zoli repro I still have. All's I had to do was file down the front sight so it would hit bull's eye at 50 yards. This was at carbine events, shooting along side original breechloaders like Smith's, Burnside's and Spencer's...There wasn't anything for .69 smoothbore/rifled 1842's back then but I hear there is now.
 
Modern black powder can be a bit more efficient than some of the 19th Century stuff, so a smaller powder charge may be in order?

I shoot a relined .69 rifled and sighted original Model 1842 made in 1851. I use an underweight 535gr. "wadcutter" Minié/Burton ball out of a custom Moose Mould at .685" for my .687" Hoyt relined bore. In my admittedly limited experience, FFFg or 3f works much better with Miniés. I still use FFg or 2f for smooth-bore round balls. With the wadcutter Minié I'm using about 50 to 55 grains of FFFg. On the round balls I sometimes go up a bit because of the coarser powder. Lots of round ball shooters I know use a fairly tight round ball like .672, then roughen the surface and apply multiple coats of alox bullet lubricant to get a pretty tight fit in the smoothbore.

The musket charge for a flintlock .69 was something like 120 to 110 grains of musket powder, real coarse. After the percussion cap was adopted the cartridge fell into the 110 to 100 grain range. I'm thinking a modern-day black powder load of something like 80 grains tops would be plenty. I used to think the .69 Minié used 80 grains, but I guess it was 70 grains. That'd be too much rifle for me! :timebomb::cannon:

Thanks a lot for your post and pictures of your collection! Reminds me I'd best get to casting... I've got a skirmish in late March!
 
A hard lesson I learned early on is using pure/soft lead when casting Minie's. I made the dumb mistake of casting some out of wheel-weights, never again!

I'm curious of this with the wheel weights, why should one never use them? I had no problem out of Uberti SAA's with casted reloaded .45's but this has grabbed my attention.
 
Hey all! I took my three repro rifles out to the range yesterday and had a blast! Shot about 20 rounds or more out of each one...a M1842 rifled musket, M1861 Springfield and a P53 Enfield. I do have a question in regards to the M1842 rifle. This was my first trip with her to the range...the group from the mini was all over the place, even at 50 yards. Whereas the group with a 65 roundball loaded traditionally (over 110gr of 2f) had about a 3"-4"group. Needless to say, I found the accuracy of the round ball much better! Has anyone had similar issues? I may have been anticipating the recoil from the minis a tad but not that bad to my mind!

Also, the engagement of the sear on the M1861 is really stiff...anyone know of a solution? Thanks!
View attachment 350605
I've had the same experience with a Colt .36 C&B Revolver. Round balls were far better than conical bullets.
 
I'm curious of this with the wheel weights, why should one never use them? I had no problem out of Uberti SAA's with casted reloaded .45's but this has grabbed my attention.
Wheel weights are not made of pure lead, so the skirt on the Minnie ball will not, or may not expand as it should. And you have no idea how hard it is and that hardness will vary from wheel weight to wheel weight.

The more in-depth answer is that you want to use pure lead so the Minnie will orbitrate (spelling?) as easy as possible. When a pure lead Minnie ball is used, the explosion of the gas not only expands the skirt of the Minnie to engage the rifling and seal the bore, but also the rear of the bullet begins to move forward, but due to inertia, the front of the bullet remains in place. This action causes the bullet to get squished a tiny bit shorter, and also fatter. This act of orbitration also adds to providing a better seal of gases and helps to engage the rifling along the whole length of the parallel sides of the bullet. If the bullet did not orbitrate, if only the skirt engaged the rifling, yaw would be induced to the nose of the bullet and it would wobble down the bore. With orbitration, where the bullet has expanded to fill the bore, the parallel sides of the bullet are supported by the bore of the barrel and bullet yaw is minimized, and this helps with accuracy. Remember that we are shooting an undersized bullet, one that the caliber of the bullet is smaller than the caliber of rifling of the bore by a few thousandths of an inch. The expanding gasses will begin to overcome the bullet's inertia, and begins pushing the bullet down the bore. Using a projectile that is not made of pure lead, one that is harder than pure lead, does not accomplish all of the above as efficiently as pure lead does.
I noticed the original poster said he made some of his bullets out of plumbers lead, and in my experience that's pretty pure lead. You should be able to easily scratch pure lead with your thumbnail.
I normally purchase my lead from a metal recycler and if I want to cast a harder bullet, I'll get some tin from them also. I shoot black powder cartridge, and due to higher velocities I have to use a harder lead or the bullet will lead the bore. But if I were to use wheel weights, I have no idea of how hard that mixture of metal is. If I want a bullet that is say 20:1 lead to tin, I buy 20 pounds of lead and 1 pound of tin, and now I have a known hardness. To shoot accurately, one must be consistent in every thing one does. Casting bullets, loading rounds, the act of shooting; accuracy demands consistency.

You may be able to get away with using a harder lead in a SAA as when you load the cylinder, your sizing the bullet down to effect a good seal in the cylinder. When fired, the bullet travels through the cylinder, then gets swaged down again via the forcing cone at the rear of the barrel, then travels through and exits the barrel. How much lead to you find on the forcing cone? If you used a pure lead bullet, you may find its easier to load the cylinder and may not have so much lead embedded in the forcing cone. And perhaps you'll gain some accuracy. But in your pistol, your using oversized bullets that get swaged down, first by you and the mechanical advantage of the loading lever, then by the expanding gasses pushing a slightly oversized bullet into the forcing cone and into a slightly smaller caliber barrel. So you don't need the bullet to orbitrate like a musket does. Your pistol bullet starts out larger and gets reduced as it goes through the shooting process. The musket bullets starts out small, and need the effects of orbitration to make the bullet bigger. I suppose you can get away with using a harder bullet, but it's probably a little harder on your pistol. And in using wheel weights, your bullet hardness varies, as does your bullet weight. Neither one of those things would happen if you used pure lead, (providing you can do a good job of casting your bullets).

When I shoot my black powder cartridge rifle, similar to your pistol, I'm shooting an over sized bullet (0.457) into a bore of 0.45 caliber, plus I'm pushing the bullet into the lands of the rifling about an eighth of an inch when I chamber it. What this does, unlike your pistol, is the powder is generating a lot more pressure before the bullet begins moving down the bore. And while I'm using a charge of 68 grains of 3f powder, similar to the charge used in a CW era round, the increase of pressure that I'm generating (around 1350 feet per second), will cause a pure lead bullet to leave streaks of lead in the barrel and give real poor accuracy. Thus I cast my bullets at a 20 to 1 lead to tin ratio to make the bullet harder. I forgot to add that I'm also compressing my powder charge in the case by an eighth of an inch. Compressing black powder also will increase its pressure/velocity. To help ignight compressed powder, I'm also using a magnum primer, to give a hotter and longer flame, which again increases pressure. I also lube the bullet to help with the leading, and to help keep the fowling soft, as hard fowling can also impair the accuracy. Of course, a muzzleloader lubes their bullets too, but that's primarily to keep the fowling soft, as their muzzle velocity probably doesn't get to 1200 feet per second, and at this velocity level, one should not expect their soft lead bullet to lead the bore.

OK, kids. Class is over for the day. I'll be in my office if there are any questions.
 
Last edited:
Hey all! Thanks for your replys! I should have clarified better lol...the 110 gr charge was for the round ball, I used 70 gr ffg behind the burton minis. I gor them from S&S and they were labeled as being from the 720 gr Lyman mould. I will certainly take a better look and see if there is any unnecessary windage next time I take her out! The minis were not keyholing so that is a plus....I was shooting standing, I think next time I will put her on the bench and see how she does!

As far as the M1861, I will definitely take your advice and see what she looks like under the hood! Thanks again everyone!
 
As posted before in regards to smoothbores, in NSSA competition, many "rough" the ball with farriers files or a type of "dimpling" machine. Some then dip in Alox (very bad to mix with BP fouling). Powder charges are all over the map, from 40g to 90g of either 3 or 2f. I found mine shot best with doing absolutely nothing to the ball, removing the sprue didn't change anything. Powder charge I use is 60g 3f Swiss. My ball casts at .684, barrel is measured at .690, so very little windage. Only lube is a dip on one side in musket lube. Ball is loaded lube side down, sprue down just for consistency. This load will shoot into less than 2in at 25yds from my 42 Macon.

And for emphasis- PURE lead only for minies. They will not grip the rifling with anything harder. Adding more powder for "more power" is counterproductive. Best to get an accurate load and stick with it. When the lube and powder are in balance, you can shoot until either your shoulder or ammo supply gives out. My record for number of shots without wiping or cleaning is over 60 shots straight with no loss of accuracy. In fact, in the last 10 shots, a kid was shooting that gun and cut the chains holding gongs at 50yds with that gun. Yeah, it was still shooting good.
 
Last edited:

Learn About Us
About CivilWarTalk
Contact the Webmaster
Meet the Staff
Link to CivilWarTalk
Join Our Community
Register
Browse Forums
View Today's Discussions
Search the Forum
Get Help
FAQ
Student Guide
Forum Rules & Etiquette
Copyright / DMCA

     Contact Us CivilwarTalk on Facebook CivilWarTalk on YouTube CivilWarTalk on Twitter RSS Feed

Bringing the American Civil War and More to Life.
© 1999 - , CIVILWARTALK, LLC - Site Version 10.0

SlaveryTalk.com - SecessionTalk.com - CivilWarTalk.com - ReconstructionTalk.com
Back
Top