Rifled Napoleons

[107th PV]

Can anyone furnish any information on rifled Napoleons? There is a blog "To The Sound Of The Guns" that gives some information on the subject, but I cannot find anything more than what it holds.
It seems that these guns were experimental, and that not much was gained. I can only surmise that there was not much knowledge besides that which would have been learned from the use of the James rifles.
There most likely was only 6 and, as the blog shows, they are now used as battery location marker guns on the Gettysburg battlefield.
This is an interesting example of trying to gain any technological advantage possible.

 

[Frederick14Va]

Were they intended to fire the James Rifle type shell ? What time era were they rifled?

 

[hrobalabama]

To rifle a "Napoleon" would be to limit its effectiveness .
They were an effective piece. I witnessed an artillery team hit a 4X8' plywood at 600 yards at first shot.
The could fire grape, canister, solid and explosive shell with great accuracy and fast loading.

 

[ole]

I'd guess that rifling in a bronze tube would not last very long.

 

[107th PV]

Were they intended to fire the James Rifle type shell ? What time era were they rifled?

The Napoleons retained the 4.62 in bore, the James a 3.8. It is not certain that they fired the same type projectiles. These were made in 1862 by Ames.

 

[107th PV]

Here is the website: https://markerhunter.wordpress.com/2009/02/05/rifled-napoleons/
This site is where I have gained the most significant information.

 

[107th PV]

I'd guess that rifling in a bronze tube would not last very long.

That is the main reason the James gun fell into disfavor. Their service life was very short.

 

[107th PV]

To rifle a "Napoleon" would be to limit its effectiveness .
They were an effective piece. I witnessed an artillery team hit a 4X8' plywood at 600 yards at first shot.
The could fire grape, canister, solid and explosive shell with great accuracy and fast loading.

It was a very effective gun against infantry formations. The rifled pieces were much more effective for counterbattery fire. The Napoleons' greater bore could hurl a larger dose of grape & canister. The rifles had more accuracy & range but due to their smaller bores fired smaller diameter projectiles & conseqeuntly smaller loads of grape & canister. I believe that ordnance was trying to determine if it could improve on a solid design. I am doubtful that there was any significant improvement in speed and ease of loading. The Napoleons were also a heavy gun.
I certainly would not wish to be on the receiving end of either!

 

[Frederick14Va]

I was once on a reenactment gun crew that had an original 14lb James Rifle... formerly a M1841 6lb bronze tube dated 1846... reportedly altered and rifled about 1860-61 time frame so the owner had researched the piece... He spent considerable time and efforts to track the guns history...... It had been used with a field artillery unit in the Mexican War... In Federal service still in 1861... apparently had been captured by confederates at some point... later recaptured... Interestingly the bore of the gun was in pretty good shape... only minor wear noted in the rifling... but did have a few small gouges here and there in the rifling....

At the 125th First Manassas event he found another 14lb James present owned by a guy up in NY.... Its gun number was two digits off from his.... Same foundry, both cast on the same day... both guns had been issued to the same battery in the Mexican War.... both had been rifled accordingly.... Needless to say it was interesting spending the entire event watching these two guys trying to buy the others gun... both of course badly wanted to have the matching set... it didn't happen either way...

 

[John Winn]

I didn't know there were any rifled Napoleons. Learned something here today. Thanks !

 

[thomas aagaard]

The Austrians used rifled bronze guns for all their artillery. (in 1864-66 at least)

So the idea is not that stupid

 

[AUG]

It was a very effective gun against infantry formations. The rifled pieces were much more effective for counterbattery fire. The Napoleons' greater bore could hurl a larger dose of grape & canister. The rifles had more accuracy & range but due to their smaller bores fired smaller diameter projectiles & conseqeuntly smaller loads of grape & canister. I believe that ordnance was trying to determine if it could improve on a solid design. I am doubtful that there was any significant improvement in speed and ease of loading. The Napoleons were also a heavy gun.
I certainly would not wish to be on the receiving end of either!

The canister round for a 3-inch Ordnance Rifle contained 154 shot according to these shot tables (scroll down to "Summary of the Ammunition for Field and Mountain Service" and look at "Number of Shot").

The 12-pounder Model 1857 Napoleon canister contained 27 shot, each about 1.5 inches in diameter. I would guess that the 3-inch Ordnance canister shot were probably smaller sized.

I've heard many people claim that canister is less effective in a rifled gun, although it doesn't seem like it would have been, seeing how the canister round doesn't completely come apart until it leaves the muzzle.

 

[drezac]

The canister round for a 3-inch Ordnance Rifle contained 154 shot according to these shot tables (scroll down to "Summary of the Ammunition for Field and Mountain Service" and look at "Number of Shot").


The 12-pounder Model 1857 Napoleon canister contained 27 shot, each about 1.5 inches in diameter. I would guess that the 3-inch Ordnance canister shot were probably smaller sized.

I've heard many people claim that canister is less effective in a rifled gun, although it doesn't seem like it would have been, seeing how the canister round doesn't completely come apart until it leaves the muzzle.

Just a note: field artillery did not fire grape shot - grape shot was a heavy artillery round. field artillery only used canister.

the canister round was not as effective in the rifled guns for 2 reasons:
1. the smaller bore. even though it contained more shot, it was much smaller than the 12-pdr shot, and lost it's effectiveness at a closer range. Just like the difference in a shotgun between buck shot and #6 shot.

2. while the canister from a smooth-bore would stay intact for a while after leaving the bore (like a shotgun wad) keeping the shot in a tight pattern, with a rifle it started to come apart in the bore due to the rifling, and would peel off the shot almost as soon as it left the bore, causing the shot to disperse in a wider pattern. There is a video on u tube of firing canister from a 12-pdr napoleon. you hear the gun go off, and shortly afterwards you can hear the metal com off of the shot making a whirring sound -

 

[drezac]

also, you could think of the james guns as a type of recycling - many of them were older guns that were considered obsolete that were returned to the armouries and rifled. also some of these were from existing contracts that were near completion, so they had the foundries rifle them before delivery. when the federal government switched to the 12-pdr napoleons, they did still accept delivery of the 6-pdr field guns that were already on order, but did request some of these to be rifled.
while the would have a shorter life, they could be effective. 1st OVLA battery A originally had james rifles during they 3-month service. A confederate boat was seen on a river at night, the battery could see light from it's boilers through the trees and b rush. The Capt. order the gunners to fire at the light - and in a few rounds they hit the boiler and sunk the boat.

 

[drezac]

The Napoleons retained the 4.62 in bore, the James a 3.8. It is not certain that they fired the same type projectiles. These were made in 1862 by Ames.

the James nomenclature refers to the James system type of the projectile, not necessarily the bore of the gun. Any size gun could be rifled for the James system (although most James rifles were converted M-1841 6-pdr field guns with he 3.8 bore). the james projectile was a undersized round with a band of softer lead around the mi-section. the lead would engage the rifling in the softer bronze bore to prevent excessive wear during firing. there were still problems, as they would tend to foul easier due to the lead that would build up in the bore.