Impressions Two Band P.60

[redbob]

I'm not in the mocking business. Thank you though.

As you will find, at times it is wise to develop a thicker hide on this forum and to add to what our German friend said; There is no such thing as a stupid question, just one that is not asked.

 

[LtRusell]

Technically the only British "Navy Rifle" is the P1858 Rifle, not to be confused with the "Bar-on-Band Rifle". The P1858 is brass mounted, with a rear sling swivel that is suspended from the front of the trigger guard bow. The rifle has a 33 inch barrel with a 5 groove bore with a 1:48 inch twist, as opposed to the 3 groove rifling and 1:72 inch twist of older models. The rear sight is ranged for 1,100 yards, although some late production rifles have sights ranged for 1,250 yards. The barrel of the P1858, and later models, is thicker than earlier rifles and weighs 4lbs 1oz, a full pound heavier than earlier rifles.

The P1860 and P1861 Rifles are very similar with 33 inch barrels with 5 groove rifling with a 1:48 inch twist. The rifles are iron mounted with the rear swivel suspended via a small stud behind the trigger guard. The rear sight of the P1860 is normally ranged for 1,100 yards, while the P1861 is ranged for 1,250.

There are some variations in features of these rifles, eg brass mounted P1860 rifles, due to the number of small workshops producing these for the British Volunteer Rifle Clubs and later, the Confederate military.

If I'm not mistaken the CS Navy purchased 1,000 P1858 Rifles, complete with cutlass bayonets. The CS Army also purchased P1858 Naval Rifles, but is believed to have ordered all of their P1858s (about 700 or so) with the more traditional saber style "semi-Yataghan blade" bayonet.

As with any impression your specific research will dictate if a P1858 will be appropriate, but given the low numbers of actual Navy imported arms I would not be surprised if the unit(s) you intend to portray never received them.

The "hate" directed at short rifles stems from one of two things: (a) Prohibition of all "2-band rifles" to prevent the ubiquitous "Zouave Rifles" aka Remington 1862 Contract Rifles from taking the field, and (b) reenacting units using sloppy drill that makes the use of short rifles unsafe, in their opinions, to be used in the rear rank.

Proper drill and use of correct foot placement renders the argument for part b void and null. And proper event standards will do the same for issue a.

Thanks very much that. Truly.

 

[LtRusell]

As you will find, at times it is wise to develop a thicker hide on this forum and to add to what our German friend said; There is no such thing as a stupid question, just one that is not asked.

I agree with both statements. I am new to the site. As you said a thick hide. I don't think that "mocked" is polite. Thick hide or no.

 

[redbob]

I agree with both statements. I am new to the site. As you said a thick hide. I don't think that "mocked" is polite. Thick hide or no.

"Mocked" may not have the same connotation in Germany as it does here and he may not have known the impact that it would have. To go way back to the original question, it was well worth being asked and it deserved an answer.

 

[unionblue]

I agree with both statements. I am new to the site. As you said a thick hide. I don't think that "mocked" is polite. Thick hide or no.

LtRusell,

My advice, develop that thick hide immediately.

Good luck on your attempts to form your unit. As I now live in Ocala, FL, I might want to come out to any event you and your unit participate end. Please let me know when you do such.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

 

[LtRusell]

That's true. I must admit that I didn't think of that. It's probably the reason. I'm not upset or anything though. I have learned a few things just from this thread. That's why I'm here.

 

[LtRusell]

LtRusell,

My advice, develop that thick hide immediately.

Good luck on your attempts to form your unit. As I now live in Ocala, FL, I might want to come out to any event you and your unit participate end. Please let me know when you do such.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

I have family that way in the state. As I said I'm doing the research on the subject as I put together my kit. When I'm ready I will certainly let you know. Thanks.

 

[johan_steele]

I would suggest seeing if you can research what the unit you wish to portray was actually issued. As I understand it CS Navy carried the left overs. So quite literally almost anything would have been possible from Flintlocks & percussion conversions to carbines, pistols, cutlass or boarding axes. The reality is that the P56/58/60 series arms is that they generally ended up with the Cav or Sharpshooter Battalions. And carbines would have been snapped up by the Cav.

In the reenactment world the sabre bayonet and correct leathers for it are rather spendy. The correct sabre bayonet for the P58 naval rifle is actually a cutlass bayonet and is even more spendy.

So for a cost effective reason I would suggest either an M1842 or a Pedersoli P53 as with either of those you can at least fall in w/ an Infantry unit.

Below you will see the appropriate bayonets for the Enfield rifles.

Oh and officers exist to give enlisted men a reason to go home. ;-)

 

[LtRusell]

Thanks. Good looking out on the officer tip.

 

[zburkett]

I was taught that the only stupid question was one you needed the answer to and didn't ask.

 

[LtRusell]

I was taught that the only stupid question was one you needed the answer to and didn't ask.

Whoever taught you that was wise indeed.

 

[zburkett]

I've got a question for the long time reenactors. Why the distain for just about any rifle other than the Springfield or Enfield? From reading firsthand accounts I know that early in the war just about anything that could shoot was carried. Shotguns, Pennsylvania rifles, Mississippi Rifles, Smooth bore muskets and I'm sure out west they pressed Plains Rifles into service.. Late in the war there are accounts of a lot of partisan bands attacking Yankee foragers, and again they used anything that would shoot that they could get their hands on. I understand why you don't want someone who is a part of a New York Regiment carrying the Kentucky Rifle he made from a kit but if it is the Southern farm wife or the old man left home a Kentucky might not be that far off.

 

[LtRusell]

I've got a question for the long time reenactors. Why the distain for just about any rifle other than the Springfield or Enfield? From reading firsthand accounts I know that early in the war just about anything that could shoot was carried. Shotguns, Pennsylvania rifles, Mississippi Rifles, Smooth bore muskets and I'm sure out west they pressed Plains Rifles into service.. Late in the war there are accounts of a lot of partisan bands attacking Yankee foragers, and again they used anything that would shoot that they could get their hands on. I understand why you don't want someone who is a part of a New York Regiment carrying the Kentucky Rifle he made from a kit but if it is the Southern farm wife or the old man left home a Kentucky might not be that far off.

From what I have gathered the early part of the war was as you said, a mishmash of rifles, smooth bored, even flintlocks. Standards on both sides were simplified. I think it was based on tech matters, rifling, ETC, and making the most use of the Minnie' ball.
As for irregulars, I can't say much. I know there were many arms used in the conflict, for varying reasons. Every unit was different. I have heard of Forrest's cavalry using shotguns but I don't have any confirmation on that.

 

[captaindrew]

I've got a question for the long time reenactors. Why the distain for just about any rifle other than the Springfield or Enfield? From reading firsthand accounts I know that early in the war just about anything that could shoot was carried. Shotguns, Pennsylvania rifles, Mississippi Rifles, Smooth bore muskets and I'm sure out west they pressed Plains Rifles into service.. Late in the war there are accounts of a lot of partisan bands attacking Yankee foragers, and again they used anything that would shoot that they could get their hands on. I understand why you don't want someone who is a part of a New York Regiment carrying the Kentucky Rifle he made from a kit but if it is the Southern farm wife or the old man left home a Kentucky might not be that far off.

There is no distain so to speak. The main reason is a 3 band is safer in infantry formations and reproduction Springfields, Enfields, CS Richmonds are readily available at a reasonable cost. You do see some smoothbores and Mississippi rifles. Hunting guns such as Kentucky rifles were brought from home but not practicle for heavy military use. They were discarded when proper weapons became available so unless it's a very early war event they wouldn't be correct. Shot guns were used by Confederate cavalry but not much in the infantry past very early in the war. You do see mounted cavalry reenactors using them some.

 

[LtRusell]

I don't know if I'm coordinated enough to load a black powder shotgun on horse back. Makes me feel bad I can't walk and chew gum.

 

[captaindrew]

I don't know if I'm coordinated enough to load a black powder shotgun on horse back. Makes me feel bad I can't walk and chew gum.

I hear you, me too, any kind of muzzleloader on a horse but I guess you do it enough it's old hat. To add to the previous post and it's been discussed here many times there was a big push on both sides to get as many people on the same ammo as they could for supply issues. It is a logistical nightmare to have many different sized ammo in the ranks. Your odd sized hunting rifle or shotgun would be useless if you couldn't get any ammo for it, so another reason they disappeared quickly.