Model 1863 Springfield Rifle Musket...a bit of history

[daboyleroy]

Model 1863 Springfield Rifle Musket...a bit of history


https://www.americanrifleman.org/ar...-old-gun-model-1863-springfield-rifle-musket/


The Model 1863 Springfield Rifle Musket has its beginnings in the Crimean War when the Pattern 1853 Enfield Rifle Musket was the world's premier infantry weapon. Concurrently, the U.S. government was creating its rifle musket the Model 1855 and then later the Model 1861. Shortly after, the Model 1863 was developed as a more expedient version of the Model 1861 and was being made during the Civil War. It was the last percussion muzzle-loading firearm made by the Springfield Armory. However, it continued its service because it could be converted to a metallic cartridge by installing a trap-door type of conversion. And even though production of the Model 1863 ended in 1865, it is still made today in the form of Italian replicas. For more on the Model 1863 Springfield rifle musket, watch this "I Have This Old Gun" segment from a recent episode of American Rifleman TV.

 

[32-20]

They sure messed up the pictures.

 

[AlexanderA]

The Model 1863 has two distinct versions: the Type I and the Type II (also known as the Model 1864). The main difference is that the Type I has clamping bands, like those of the Enfield and the 1861 Special Model (made by Colt and two other manufacturers). The Type II has solid bands retained by band springs.

The most authentic reproduction is not Italian, but was made by Miroku in Japan. It's no longer made, but fetches a premium when found. The Miroku, though, is a strange hybrid: it has clamping bands and band springs. I had a heck of a time fitting solid lower and upper bands to mine, so that it would at least be a consistent Type II. (The middle band is split, because of the sling swivel.) Original bands are close, but require alteration.

Model 1863's are not particularly popular among reenactors, because their use is pretty much limited to scenarios from the last year of the war. A Model 1861, an Enfield, or even better, a Model 1855, could have been used throughout the war, and therefore is a better choice for a reenactor.

Model1855 reproductions are being made, but they don't have working Maynard mechanisms in the locks -- just a dummy tape door. Custom gunsmiths, such as John Zimmerman, can make a working Maynard lock, but their work is expensive.

 

[RWMC]

They sure messed up the pictures.

You are absolutely right. Doesn't give you very much confidence when they start showing rifles that they're not even talking about!

 

[Slamfire]

Model 1863's are not particularly popular among reenactors, because their use is pretty much limited to scenarios from the last year of the war. A Model 1861, an Enfield, or even better, a Model 1855, could have been used throughout the war, and therefore is a better choice for a reenactor.

I am not a reenactor, but if I were, I would prefer a M1841 smoothbore musket. Up close, the smoothbore musket fired buck and ball, which was pretty devastating in the battlefield accounts of the period. The weapon was used throughout the war, and in the wooded areas of most battlefields, it was an effective weapon. It was probably a more effective weapon than the rifled musket, as, most Civil War soldiers were terrible marksman, so whatever "long range" accuracy the rifle musket had, it was wasted. And, regardless of theoretical accuracy, I don't think the actual service weapons were sighted in to point of aim. I read one account of a Union Soldier who observed General Forest conferring with an Officer. This Soldier said he took a "fine bead", just like he did squirrel hunting, and fired a couple of shots from his rifled musket, but, missed. His bullets got close enough because he saw General Forest give a reaction of alarm. In his account, he claimed the service weapons were so ill bored and ill sighted that accurate shooting could not be done.

I do not know if the Chickamagu Battlefield museum has only Chickamuagu associated weapons or not, but, there are lots of M1841 variants in the collection.

 

[AlexanderA]

I am not a reenactor, but if I were, I would prefer a M1841 smoothbore musket.

It's actually the M1842 musket. The first long infantry musket to be percussion, and the last to be smoothbore.

When I was doing Civil War reenacting, in the mid-1980's, there were no mass-produced reproductions of the M1842 being made. I didn't want to use an original, so I put together a hybrid using an original lock, trigger guard, buttplate, etc., and a newly made barrel and stock. It really turned out very well, but I didn't get to use it much because the unit I had joined was portraying U.S. Regulars, who were armed with M1855's and/or M1861's.

A few years ago, Armi Sport (Chiappa) came out with an M1842 that is very, very close to the original. (Which is surprising, because the Armi Sport M1861 is far from authentic, being surpassed by the Miroku, Euroarms, and Pedersoli offerings.) Later, they added the "rifled and sighted" version, which I added to my collection. As far as authenticity goes, it's indistinguishable from my hybrid gun. They're both in my musket rack, sporting original bayonets.

I do not know if the Chickamagu Battlefield museum has only Chickamuagu associated weapons or not, but, there are lots of M1841 variants in the collection.

The Chickamauga and Chattanooga National Military Park visitor center houses the Claude Fuller collection, which is a comprehensive collection of U.S.military weapons. Fuller apparently stopped his collecting with the M1917 Enfield rifle. https://www.nps.gov/chch/learn/historyculture/fuller-gun-collection.htm

 

[Slamfire]

When I was doing Civil War reenacting, in the mid-1980's, there were no mass-produced reproductions of the M1842 being made. I didn't want to use an original, so I put together a hybrid using an original lock, trigger guard, buttplate, etc., and a newly made barrel and stock. It really turned out very well, but I didn't get to use it much because the unit I had joined was portraying U.S. Regulars, who were armed with M1855's and/or M1861's.

How accurate are your repro M1842's? Can you consistently hit a man sized target at 100 yards?, 150 yards? I did see a program where the testers shot at a "battle line" of human sized cardboard cutouts, with buck and ball. I forget this distance but it was probably 25 yards, and the targets had lots of holes. They also shot a big brick of ballistic gelatin with a smoothbore musket. The brick flopped like a fish as the ball went through and actually bent and flopped enough to flip itself off the test table. I was impressed, the power of those old weapons is quite awesome.

Based on what I have read, early Federal troops were armed with muskets, and "German" rifles, basically anything that could be bought in Europe and issued. Confederates were lucky to get a weapon, there were units that trained without firearms, only receiving rifles/muskets till much later. According to Porter, the Army of Northern Virginia acquired enough Federal battlefield pickups that by Chancellorsville, they were able to retire their smoothbore muskets and flintlocks. In the south, I am certain that Confederate units were using smoothbore and flintlocks very late in the war. The Southern unit from my Hometown left to go fight in Bull Run, with 1841Mississippi rifles. Their Colonel was killed on the first day, received a Hero's burial in the hometown cemetery, I examined his huge monument this weekend.

 

[dh1633pm]

This begs the question, which reproduction 1863 Springfield would be a good choice as a balance between historical accuracy and functionality?

 

[Mike OTDP]

dh1633pm, your best bet would be Pedersoli...unless you want to get a custom rifle-musket. You can often buy something pretty good from the N-SSA BB.

Slamfire: The Prussians did some tests against a target representing a regimental front. In short, above 100 meters a smoothbore musket with a military load (i.e. undersized ball) was pretty ineffective. The smart thing to do was the British tactic of reserving fire until the enemy was at 50 yards or less, preferably less. Deliver one volley at killing range, and instantly follow up with the bayonet. It's a trick they picked up from the Scots in 1745, and made the British infantry the finest in Europe.

As to the Great Unpleasantness, the troops on both sides were largely armed with smoothbore arms for the first two years of the war. I've heard of Confederate units requesting musket flints...in 1864. In 1861, they were happy to have something that shot. Being an ordnance officer in that war was no picnic.

 

[4v50 Gary]

Give me the 1855 Springfield with its patchbox, Maynard tape primer feed system and fancier sights. Little wonder why those features were deleted (took longer and cost more to make) in 1861 onwards.

 

[Steel Horse Rider]

It is only my personal experience with shooting a Pedersoli Brown Bess that I made from a kit vs about 6 different rifled muzzle loaders including an original 1863 Springfield, but you would have to be a very practiced marksman to hit much beyond 50 yards with accuracy with a smoothbore. My rifled muzzle stuffers are pretty accurate with me behind the stock out to about 150 yards.

 

[AlexanderA]

Give me the 1855 Springfield with its patchbox, Maynard tape primer feed system and fancier sights. Little wonder why those features were deleted (took longer and cost more to make) in 1861 onwards.

All these features were not present at the same time, in M1855 production. In fact their presence or absence can be used to closely date an individual specimen. The "long range" rear sight was dropped at Springfield Armory in 1858 (and at Harpers Ferry in early 1859). The patchbox wasn't adopted until 1859, at about the same that the brass forend cap was changed to iron.

When I was doing Civil War reenacting and needed an M1855 musket for my impression, I took a Miroku M1861 and retrofitted it with a repro Harpers Ferry M1855 lock and a brass forend cap. (I even went so far as having the repro lock made into a completely functional Maynard mechanism by gunsmith John Zimmerman.) That made it correct for a mid-1859 production -- except for the small detail of the date "1861" stamped on the barrel tang.

The Maynard tape mechanism was a good idea in theory but proved unreliable in practice. The troops armed with M1855's ended up using regular caps.

BTW, the "patchbox" was not used for patches, but for implements such as a worm, ball screw, etc. It was later realized that these things could just as easily be carried in a pocket on the cartridge box.