Your collection of antique firearms and knowledge of each of them is truly impressive sir. It is beyond comprehension to be looking into the eyes of the opposing side as you all stand side to side waiting on the order to “FIRE”… that pause to the first volley would test the metal of any soul. Thank you for sharing another excellent story
Just an idea for a future video. Compare Japanese matchlock reloading times using their appropriate special techniques with western guns of the same time period.
And people wonder why some generals during the Civil War preferred their infantry to still carry smoothbores. The Buck and ball, with bayonet combo, was deadly effective on the battleground. Yes rifles had more range, but since most regiments I'd wager probably had a good mix of both rifle-muskets and muskets anyway, they probably weren't sacrificing very much. They always had a little bit of both
Another great video, and some very fine musketry. I was especially interested to see you resolve your misfire by wetting your fingers and wiping-down your flint and steel - I shall have to try that!
thank you so much for firstly the firearm content but made even better with the added historical information and finally the practical demonstration of these old weapons. As an engineer i fully understand the "hand skills" of these long gone craftsman -
Obviously you have a .54 caliber 1841 that has not been reamed out to the .58 caliber as most were later. Congratulations. I have looked forward to this study for a long time. I also hope you will cover the history and troop usage of the 1841. Thank you for this.
Yes, I was very happy to acquire it. The bore was rough, but I lead lapped it and now it is a good shooter. next part will focus on the production, then comes the accoutrements, training and tactics.
One way you might speed up rifle loading - put your cap pouch on your crossbelt at chest level, makes them easier to grab. That's how the British did it, Americans wore their cap pouches on their belt at waste level.
I still remember one time at a team practice with Dad and his Mississippi. As I mentioned before, his was assembled from all original parts. But he did glass bed the barrel, as that was permitted under the NSSA'a rules. And since we're just punching holes in paper and shooting breakables, our powder loads are all worked out and generally fall somewhere around a little over half of a service load. We also tend to use lighter bullets, more often than not semi-wadcutters. But on this day Dad was just on fire all day. We had moved the frames out to 100 yards. One of our teammates decided to be a smartass and hung a golf ball on the frame and dared my Dad to hit it. Sure as heck, he drilled it dead center at 100 yards. I'm pretty sure he was as surprised as the rest of us, because let's face it, at 100 yards that golf ball would have been completely swallowed by the front blade with room to spare. It was as much luck as it was skill, but it did earn the guy that bet him a whole bunch of humble pie and plenty ribbing from the rest of us. That golf ball is still hanging from the vent over his workbench to this day, 20+ years later. Lol.
Very interesting… I’ve made and shot paper cartridges for smoothbores and mini balls but never a cartridge that held a patched ball. Have to confess not sure I have even heard of such a thing in any case didn’t appear to have much if any advantage over the un patched ball. Not military but I have an antique English Capper and it really speeds up the loading
The united powder and patched roundball increased the rate of fire, therefore the rifle was more suitable for military use, could also be used in close combat formations to fire vollyes. I believe this cartridge construction is one of the best among all contemporary rifle cartridges.
Wonderful comparison video. Thank you for sharing it. It seems many seconds were wasted hunting for the next cartridge and cap. Were there not drilled blocks in the pouches to organize the cartridges and speed retrieval?
According to the 1850 Ordnance Manual the infantry and riflemen cartridge box was lined with tin blocks. Upper compartment held 10-10 loose cartridges, lower compartment held 1-1 bundles of 10 cartridges and 12 caps.
I find it interesting you 1855 production M1841 doesn’t have a long range rear sight and the bayonet mount. My 1852 production Harpers Ferry has a long range rear sight and Bayonet mount. Still 54 caliber.
If they were using cartridged ammunition on the M1841, what was the powder flask used for? Did they also carry patches and loose ball to load higher grain shots?
I would love to add a percussion double to my collection but every damascus barrel I find for sale always has a don't shoot warning with it 😢. Could you go over what to look for in a shoot able antique? It would be greatly appreciated.
Damascus barrels are well made, durable pieces, unfortunately if rust gets between the metal threads you'll never know when it will burtst. I prefere cast steel barrels or barrels forged on a mandrel the traditional way for modern time shooting and hunting. If you stick with damascus barrel, look for guns that were not restored, refinished and still they are in good shooting order. Rust is easy not hard to remove from the barrel, but if it is not a surface corrosion, the damascus barrel can be dangerous. A cast steel or iron forged barrel is safer from this perspective.
@@capandball no worries, thought I would throw it out. Do you own a copy of "the Rifled Musket" by Claude Fuller? He has a copy's of the 1860 Ordnance board accuracy tests on every single shoulder arm then in US service. It's also in the US National Archives however the book is on the must have list if you are into US muskets.
Why if the 3x .30" buckshot are contained within the paper packet furthest away from the powder & configuration do they not stay wrapped & hit in a closer or single group - the packet acting similar to a cut shell or, at least, a shot cup?
Just a question about loading, especially the musket. I am wondering about your thoughts on how much effectiveness was lost due to powder spillage. I cannot imagine that troops in a firing line would be as careful about powder spillage as you are here. Do you think that there would be a large difference in shot effectiveness due to troops spilling powder trying to prime the pan and then loading the rest into the muzzle? I enjoy your videos very much, Cheers from Texas.
The cartridge held 110 grain. Cca. 10 grains were used for priming. Even if you lost half of the remaining powder, 50 grain would still penetrate a body under 100 meters. So from tactical point of view I don't think it mattered too much.
Шикарна стрільба, шикарні рушниці. 👍👍👍 Дякую автору за гарне відео. Обожнюю 19 стліття. Я пошитий і зібраний на історичну реконструкцію по цьому століттю на дві війни. На Наполеоніку і Громадянську Війну США. Ще, дуже хочу на Франко-Пруську війну зібратися. Пошити уніформу на пруського піхотинця з гвинтівкою Дрейзе. Але, це вже після нинішньої війни. Тож, мені доведеться трохи зачекати. 😉😁🟨🟦
How often could you shoot that Mississippi before you had to swab the bore? Shooting my French Fusil de chase with a paper military cartridge I can shoot twenty rounds. Seventy grains 2f and a .575 ball. My 45 southern rifle I need to swab at least every fifth shot or it’s to hard to load My .54 smooth rifle, Lancaster style with a patched ball likewise becomes too tight shooting a 524 ball. I would wonder if the paper around the bare ball would not act as a patch. I noted some difficulty with you loading your third bare ball shot. I have GOEX powder and I understand it’s a little dirtier then Swiss
Very interesting. You could appreciably improve your times if you could do something with that paper to make it more cooperative! And how does it taste? LOL
You say that Buck & Ball was the most devastating load of the age - but how so? The large diameter ball certainly would be devastating but why the three .30" buckshot? OK. So you wouldn't want to be hit by any of it but a 'peripheral' hit with one of the buckshot would necessarily be either debilitating or immediately fatal.
Absolutely both are muzzle loaded weapons and not much difference in loading methods with the exception of using a percussion cap on the Mississippi 1841 rifle. The M1841 has superior accuracy and lighter weight for a well trained light infantryman using better light infantry tactics to skirmish to use cover and concealment to screen the flanks of the main body of their attacking main line infantry companies. No wonder why many Confederate soldiers love this short rifle especially the veterans of the Mexican War who were light infantrymen. Accuracy was highly prized when using the M1841 rifled musket.
Any video you produce is interesting! Unpatched but goes in with cartrige paper. Does that help or hurt accuracy? Must take a lot of guts to do that when the target shoots back? Three shots touching? Are you kidding me, i would take that from a modern, bolt action rifle and be proud! The sunken road at Antietam would agree with your analysis of buck and ball. Shot length wise down a row of defending soldiers was devastating especially as their line got ragged and uneven. Even if the shot only git one soldier,4 wounds from one shot will take you out of action. Am I the only person who wonders if I would have the guts and courage to participate in a battle of the civil war or any war?
@@capandball that's a manual i haven't seen and didn't know existed! the ones i've seen that contain buck and ball loads are the 1775 manual and the ones going up to 1848 and then it jumps to the 1860 manual before there's another reference to buck and ball loads, obviously that govt website has a gap then!
@@capandball like i said the website obviously has some holes in it! that or google took me to a foreign manual and i didn't catch it which has happened more than once in the past! it doesn't matter to me anyway though we can't use buck and ball for hunting here anyway and if i shoot black powder it's going to be a hunting load so it doubles as practice for the season!
Knowing how a martial advantage could be a closely held bit of Info, if Not a State Secret? "I developed" my own version with the Cap tucked into the Tail, or another version with the cap in a fold off the prjo. So I can dump the charge, pack my projo(I minie) grab the cap fron top of projo as I charge and shuff before I go to ramroding, then bringing her up to waist or sholder to cap safely. Ready to go. Yet another with measured faster easier lighting pan powder in a fold away from main charge and projo, for faster, safer use once main charge and projo are ramrodded and pan is ready. Maybe not Historically Correct or Verifiable? But If "I could" think of this my ancestors could and did, as they knew their Stuff, and Life depended on this. All of these make the ammo pouch as known a back up system for any fouls in the implementation of my stoner chages, or my cappers?
If what you mean is that this particular model of flintlock wasn't used in the ARW, then you're right, the ARW was over for nearly 50 years by the time this flintlock was built. However, American martial muskets before 1815 were all but copies of French designs, and the Harper's Ferry in question here was designed in the US, but heavily influenced by the French school of design.
that first group with the rifle was very impressive
That's a very fine rifle!
Being on old muzzleloader shooter for 5 decades, I rate this channel A number 1 in content and historical information. Thank you, Capandball!
I really enjoy that happy smile you get on your face after these demonstrations.
Your collection of antique firearms and knowledge of each of them is truly impressive sir. It is beyond comprehension to be looking into the eyes of the opposing side as you all stand side to side waiting on the order to “FIRE”… that pause to the first volley would test the metal of any soul.
Thank you for sharing another excellent story
Just an idea for a future video. Compare Japanese matchlock reloading times using their appropriate special techniques with western guns of the same time period.
Very interesting idea
That is a cool idea! I've handled a couple replicas. Very interesting guns
And people wonder why some generals during the Civil War preferred their infantry to still carry smoothbores. The Buck and ball, with bayonet combo, was deadly effective on the battleground. Yes rifles had more range, but since most regiments I'd wager probably had a good mix of both rifle-muskets and muskets anyway, they probably weren't sacrificing very much. They always had a little bit of both
A very fine rifle indeed, especially being original equipment and bore. I always appreciate your informative videos. Thanks!
Outstanding video, love these transitional firearms from the mid 19th century.
Another great video, and some very fine musketry. I was especially interested to see you resolve your misfire by wetting your fingers and wiping-down your flint and steel - I shall have to try that!
Written in the Austrian manuals. :)
Great video and very informative keep them coming cap and ball.
Another cracking video
Ty for your educating and entertaining videos.
Cap and Ball ❌
Cap'n Ball ✅
Ay ay, captain
In my silly personal opinion, I think it would be more appropriate now to call this channel Match, Flint, Cap, Ball and Bullet
:) Too long to remember. :)
@@capandball yes I agree lol
I dread to think what British muzzleloaders should be called then...
thank you so much for firstly the firearm content but made even better with the added historical information and finally the practical demonstration of these old weapons. As an engineer i fully understand the "hand skills" of these long gone craftsman -
As always … a superb video!
I’m really behind on my videos for this channel but it’s nice to see these two go against each other so to speak.
Love your channel! Lots of great info!
Great doco, thank you
Obviously you have a .54 caliber 1841 that has not been reamed out to the .58 caliber as most were later. Congratulations. I have looked forward to this study for a long time. I also hope you will cover the history and troop usage of the 1841. Thank you for this.
Yes, I was very happy to acquire it. The bore was rough, but I lead lapped it and now it is a good shooter. next part will focus on the production, then comes the accoutrements, training and tactics.
Sir, that's good information to know, thank you.
I think we'll see that 100m is illuminating and 200m will be shocking for the musket.
Thank you for video
Bravo, comme d'habitude très bonne performance
Thank you for another excellent video.
OHhmnn, that ball and buck-shot striking the outline of infantry solders.
It made my eyes water with worry...
I love this guy!!
Outstanding! Great video thanks 👍
One way you might speed up rifle loading - put your cap pouch on your crossbelt at chest level, makes them easier to grab. That's how the British did it, Americans wore their cap pouches on their belt at waste level.
Awesome!
Black powder never gets old!
I still remember one time at a team practice with Dad and his Mississippi. As I mentioned before, his was assembled from all original parts. But he did glass bed the barrel, as that was permitted under the NSSA'a rules. And since we're just punching holes in paper and shooting breakables, our powder loads are all worked out and generally fall somewhere around a little over half of a service load. We also tend to use lighter bullets, more often than not semi-wadcutters. But on this day Dad was just on fire all day. We had moved the frames out to 100 yards. One of our teammates decided to be a smartass and hung a golf ball on the frame and dared my Dad to hit it. Sure as heck, he drilled it dead center at 100 yards. I'm pretty sure he was as surprised as the rest of us, because let's face it, at 100 yards that golf ball would have been completely swallowed by the front blade with room to spare. It was as much luck as it was skill, but it did earn the guy that bet him a whole bunch of humble pie and plenty ribbing from the rest of us. That golf ball is still hanging from the vent over his workbench to this day, 20+ years later. Lol.
Great video, buck and ball is inaccurate as a single shooter but in volley fire from a line of troops must have been devastating.
Very nice
Very interesting… I’ve made and shot paper cartridges for smoothbores and mini balls but never a cartridge that held a patched ball. Have to confess not sure I have even heard of such a thing in any case didn’t appear to have much if any advantage over the un patched ball.
Not military but I have an antique English Capper and it really speeds up the loading
The united powder and patched roundball increased the rate of fire, therefore the rifle was more suitable for military use, could also be used in close combat formations to fire vollyes. I believe this cartridge construction is one of the best among all contemporary rifle cartridges.
What a difference a rifle makes.
Great video!
The Musket for the win.....Thanks my friend.....
Old F-4 II Shoe🇺🇸
Wonderful comparison video. Thank you for sharing it. It seems many seconds were wasted hunting for the next cartridge and cap. Were there not drilled blocks in the pouches to organize the cartridges and speed retrieval?
According to the 1850 Ordnance Manual the infantry and riflemen cartridge box was lined with tin blocks. Upper compartment held 10-10 loose cartridges, lower compartment held 1-1 bundles of 10 cartridges and 12 caps.
Hello capandball
I find it interesting you 1855 production M1841 doesn’t have a long range rear sight and the bayonet mount. My 1852 production Harpers Ferry has a long range rear sight and Bayonet mount. Still 54 caliber.
It is quite lucky that it was not modified. Probably because of the condition of the bore. But that's only a guess.
If they were using cartridged ammunition on the M1841, what was the powder flask used for? Did they also carry patches and loose ball to load higher grain shots?
I would love to add a percussion double to my collection but every damascus barrel I find for sale always has a don't shoot warning with it 😢. Could you go over what to look for in a shoot able antique? It would be greatly appreciated.
Damascus barrels are well made, durable pieces, unfortunately if rust gets between the metal threads you'll never know when it will burtst. I prefere cast steel barrels or barrels forged on a mandrel the traditional way for modern time shooting and hunting. If you stick with damascus barrel, look for guns that were not restored, refinished and still they are in good shooting order. Rust is easy not hard to remove from the barrel, but if it is not a surface corrosion, the damascus barrel can be dangerous. A cast steel or iron forged barrel is safer from this perspective.
Everything about the 1840’s is cool.
I have a Zoli 1841 in .58 and an original HF in .54. Id like to see an accuracy test between an 1841 and the 1817 Common Rifle.
Unfortunately i do not have a flintlock common rifle on hand.
@@capandball no worries, thought I would throw it out. Do you own a copy of "the Rifled Musket" by Claude Fuller? He has a copy's of the 1860 Ordnance board accuracy tests on every single shoulder arm then in US service. It's also in the US National Archives however the book is on the must have list if you are into US muskets.
Why if the 3x .30" buckshot are contained within the paper packet furthest away from the powder & configuration do they not stay wrapped & hit in a closer or single group - the packet acting similar to a cut shell or, at least, a shot cup?
I don't know. This is how it is mentioned in the Manual. Woth a try which is better for accuracy. I'll give that a try.
Just a question about loading, especially the musket. I am wondering about your thoughts on how much effectiveness was lost due to powder spillage. I cannot imagine that troops in a firing line would be as careful about powder spillage as you are here. Do you think that there would be a large difference in shot effectiveness due to troops spilling powder trying to prime the pan and then loading the rest into the muzzle? I enjoy your videos very much, Cheers from Texas.
The cartridge held 110 grain. Cca. 10 grains were used for priming. Even if you lost half of the remaining powder, 50 grain would still penetrate a body under 100 meters. So from tactical point of view I don't think it mattered too much.
dint they all so later have smooth-bore muskets wit cap lock instead with flint ???
From 1842 they were manufactured with percussion locks and they were converted also.
Шикарна стрільба, шикарні рушниці. 👍👍👍 Дякую автору за гарне відео. Обожнюю 19 стліття. Я пошитий і зібраний на історичну реконструкцію по цьому століттю на дві війни. На Наполеоніку і Громадянську Війну США. Ще, дуже хочу на Франко-Пруську війну зібратися. Пошити уніформу на пруського піхотинця з гвинтівкою Дрейзе. Але, це вже після нинішньої війни. Тож, мені доведеться трохи зачекати. 😉😁🟨🟦
Stay safe! I pray for better times to come.
@@capandball Після демобілізації мрію приїхати до Вас в гості.😁
Sir, what brand of musket caps did you utilize in this video with your cap lock long guns, please? Thank you. - Cmkh
Hi Kidhammer, I use normal RWS 1081 large musket caps.
How often could you shoot that Mississippi before you had to swab the bore?
Shooting my French Fusil de chase with a paper military cartridge I can shoot twenty rounds. Seventy grains 2f and a .575 ball.
My 45 southern rifle I need to swab at least every fifth shot or it’s to hard to load
My .54 smooth rifle, Lancaster style with a patched ball likewise becomes too tight shooting a 524 ball. I would wonder if the paper around the bare ball would not act as a patch.
I noted some difficulty with you loading your third bare ball shot.
I have GOEX powder and I understand it’s a little dirtier then Swiss
With patch roundball I can shoot whole day with the rifle. The bore needed some treatment, but now it is a perfect shooter.
Is the buck shot always loaded on top of the ball, does it matter?
According to the ordnance manual of 1850 this is the proper construction.
Was the US the only country that used buck and ball, or were there others?
The Imperial-Royal Army had buckshot cartridges called as guard cartridges but I never fond any information they were used on the battlefield.
Was the US army the only to use buck and ball? I am not aware of any European army that used it. It does look like a good idea for smoothbore muskets.
he Imperial-Royal Army had buckshot cartridges called guard cartridges but I never fond any information they were used on the battlefield.
Very interesting. You could appreciably improve your times if you could do something with that paper to make it more cooperative! And how does it taste? LOL
:) paper spiced with powder. the Capandball menu on an average workday.
You say that Buck & Ball was the most devastating load of the age - but how so? The large diameter ball certainly would be devastating but why the three .30" buckshot? OK. So you wouldn't want to be hit by any of it but a 'peripheral' hit with one of the buckshot would necessarily be either debilitating or immediately fatal.
As an after thought. If the buckshot was considered effective enough to be included then why not all .30" buckshot & do more collective damage?
@@grahampalmer9337 There is also a buckshot cartridge mentioned in the manual with 15 .30 cal buckshots in 5 tiers.
Absolutely both are muzzle loaded weapons and not much difference in loading methods with the exception of using a percussion cap on the Mississippi 1841 rifle. The M1841 has superior accuracy and lighter weight for a well trained light infantryman using better light infantry tactics to skirmish to use cover and concealment to screen the flanks of the main body of their attacking main line infantry companies. No wonder why many Confederate soldiers love this short rifle especially the veterans of the Mexican War who were light infantrymen. Accuracy was highly prized when using the M1841 rifled musket.
cringe
O cano é raiado?
Any video you produce is interesting! Unpatched but goes in with cartrige paper. Does that help or hurt accuracy? Must take a lot of guts to do that when the target shoots back? Three shots touching? Are you kidding me, i would take that from a modern, bolt action rifle and be proud! The sunken road at Antietam would agree with your analysis of buck and ball. Shot length wise down a row of defending soldiers was devastating especially as their line got ragged and uneven. Even if the shot only git one soldier,4 wounds from one shot will take you out of action. Am I the only person who wonders if I would have the guts and courage to participate in a battle of the civil war or any war?
Quick question, where do you go to buy your wheel locks at? I’ve been wanting to get one for a while now and can’t seem to find any.
My repros were made by Rafal Ziolko in Poland. A young, talented gunsmith.
@@capandball does he have a website? Also would he be able to ship to America? Those guns look beautiful
@@andrewryder70 I think he does not have one. Send me a message to our official email and I'll put you in contact,
you know most buck and ball loads i've seen have 6 pellets of double ought not 3!! some i';ve seen have 9 pellets of single ought buck!!
My cartridges are made according to the Ordnance Manual of 1850, Many of this type is displayed in Dean S. Thomas's book titled Round ball to Rimfire.
@@capandball that's a manual i haven't seen and didn't know existed! the ones i've seen that contain buck and ball loads are the 1775 manual and the ones going up to 1848 and then it jumps to the 1860 manual before there's another reference to buck and ball loads, obviously that govt website has a gap then!
@@keithmoore5306 The 1850 is the second edition. The first was published ion 1841, and also mentiones 3 buckshots.
@@capandball like i said the website obviously has some holes in it! that or google took me to a foreign manual and i didn't catch it which has happened more than once in the past! it doesn't matter to me anyway though we can't use buck and ball for hunting here anyway and if i shoot black powder it's going to be a hunting load so it doubles as practice for the season!
Do it at 75 yards from a bench rest.
I'll do that with the musket when it will be covered in a separate film.
I wonder how the US M1821 shoots at 100 meters
We'll see it!
Knowing how a martial advantage could be a closely held bit of Info, if Not a State Secret?
"I developed" my own version with the Cap tucked into the Tail, or another version with the cap in a fold off the prjo.
So I can dump the charge, pack my projo(I minie) grab the cap fron top of projo as I charge and shuff before I go to ramroding, then bringing her up to waist or sholder to cap safely. Ready to go.
Yet another with measured faster easier lighting pan powder in a fold away from main charge and projo, for faster, safer use once main charge and projo are ramrodded and pan is ready.
Maybe not Historically Correct or Verifiable? But If "I could" think of this my ancestors could and did, as they knew their Stuff, and Life depended on this.
All of these make the ammo pouch as known a back up system for any fouls in the implementation of my stoner chages, or my cappers?
what if you don't any teeth .
A good reason to avoid the army. :) The cartrudges could be break open as well.
Dear Lord please bless the person reading this amen.
Thanks!
Flintlock musket this is not used in American revolution
Of course it was. The musket was standard army issue.
Please start making sense
Charleville Musket
They mostly used the Brown Bess. Which was standard infantry arm for the British army. They were in all the colonial garrisons and armouries
If what you mean is that this particular model of flintlock wasn't used in the ARW, then you're right, the ARW was over for nearly 50 years by the time this flintlock was built. However, American martial muskets before 1815 were all but copies of French designs, and the Harper's Ferry in question here was designed in the US, but heavily influenced by the French school of design.