Enfield or Springfield

[FedericoFCavada]

Not much to add... And I suspect that everyone knows this already, but still:

In reading primary sources, I find most people assumed the American-made arm was better. A case of chauvinism or preference for American-made products, perhaps.

Also, the British line stood much more "square" to the enemy than comparable U.S. drill. As a result, many Americans find use of the Enfield awkward or uncomfortable. So the stock furniture requires a different technique for holding it at the shoulder, and many people of course, were unfamiliar with this aspect of the Enfield, and of course, entirely unwilling to learn!

But Enfields were used in huge numbers, North and South. If someone is contemplating getting started in skirmishing, and so on, the Enfield can probably be had used or second-hand for much less than any other rifle musket, it has excellent accessories, and would be the better bargain for getting started on a budget. "Do as I say not as I do..."

 

[KHyatt]

In the modern era, the P53 reproductions are clearly favored for many very good reasons.

Mr Barry, I truly respect your opinion, so I have to ask...what are those reasons? I've done almost no reenacting but I now have an original Enfield, and two reproductions, a Parker Hale and an Armi Sport. I also have an original 1863 Springfield and Miroku reproductions of both the 1861 and 1863 Springfields. I have not fired either original gun (I just acquired the Springfield and I do plan to shoot it but probably not the Enfield) but I've been learning to shoot all four reproductions. Except for some weight differences I don't see an advantage of one over the other. But, I'm also not an active reenactor, so I ask out of curiosity.

 

[CowCavalry]

Mr Barry, I truly respect your opinion, so I have to ask...what are those reasons? I've done almost no reenacting but I now have an original Enfield, and two reproductions, a Parker Hale and an Armi Sport. I also have an original 1863 Springfield and Miroku reproductions of both the 1861 and 1863 Springfields. I have not fired either original gun (I just acquired the Springfield and I do plan to shoot it but probably not the Enfield) but I've been learning to shoot all four reproductions. Except for some weight differences I don't see an advantage of one over the other. But, I'm also not an active reenactor, so I ask out of curiosity.

Paper Cartridges for Muzzleloaders

Authentic paper cartridges for reenacting, living history, and live fire muzzleloader shooting.

www.papercartridges.com

Cartridge Kit, .577cal Enfield, 20rds | website

The British Pattern 1853 Enfield Rifle Musket was the most widely used weapon of foreign manufacture during the Civil War, and served the armies of both North and South faithfully during the conflict. The rifle was most effectively used along with specifically patterned cartridges containing a...

www.thejeffersonarsenal.com

You might find these sites interesting.

 

[Craig L Barry]

There is a chapter in The Civil War Musket that goes into a detailed discussion, if you can find a copy and are interested. To summarize, all the reproductions are "machine made." Hence, the primary advantage of the original machine made US 1861 over the mostly handmade Civil War-era Enfield does not exist with reproductions. And the bolster design of the P53 Enfield is more reliable with blank rounds. The blued barrel finish is less prone to rust. And so on.

 

[rli]

I looked high and low and can't find the book I was looking for. Over the years I have lent and given so many books it's probably gone. As best I can remember it was when Gen. Williams took over 20th Corps and he inherited units with Enfields.