Smith Carbine: Original Load Data?

[Model12Win]

I find that difficult to believe. My 3 band is accurate to minute of five gallon bucket at 300 yards.

If you're so inclined (which you may not be, I don't care either way) you could read up on it.

Seems the boys during the war often preferred the 2-banders. They were issued typically to the sharpshooters. Even the reproductions are widely reported to group better vs the longer 3-band rifles.

[mehavey]

Uuuuhhh.... No.

I own/shoot two full-up Springfields (1 original/1 Pedersoli); one 2-band Zouve;
and one Enfield Cavalry Musketoon.

The Springfields are perfectly balanced, incredibly light handling, and superbly
accurate much further than I can see (must less hold).

The other two -- somehow -- just feel like clubs in comparison.

[Hawg]

I don't see how it can be more accurate but if it is it can't be by very much.

[Model12Win]

Well I'm looking for something shorter. I'm not going to be out on the line shooting toilet paper wads at other overweight white-haired old dudes.

I'm going to be target shooting and hunting, so don't need such a large weapon. But I also don't want to be limited to an unoriginal (reduced) powder load with the Smith carbine.

I don't expect you guys to understand, but thanks for the help!

[Hawg]

I don't expect you guys to understand

I know exactly where you're coming from. You want originality and nothing less will do. I think it's kind of ironic tho that you want originality in your single shot pistols and long guns but you were endorsing brass frame revolvers awhile back that never existed. I haven't shot a paper target with my three band since 79 or 80. I like shooting inanimate objects with .58 minies to watch them fly or blow apart and I like seeing the damage they do. I have taken it hunting a few times but never saw anything to shoot with it. It is kind of unwieldy in a tree stand or shooting house and in thick brush forget about it.

[Model12Win]

I know exactly where you're coming from. You want originality and nothing less will do. I think it's kind of ironic tho that you want originality in your single shot pistols and long guns but you were endorsing brass frame revolvers awhile back that never existed. I haven't shot a paper target with my three band since 79 or 80. I like shooting inanimate objects with .58 minies to watch them fly or blow apart and I like seeing the damage they do. I have taken it hunting a few times but never saw anything to shoot with it. It is kind of unwieldy in a tree stand or shooting house and in thick brush forget about it.
Hawg is offline Report Post

I was endorsing the brass framed revolvers in regards to beginners, most of who don't know and/or don't care about historical accuracy. Pietta sells a ton of them because they are cheap, and in my experience (I've owned a couple) they make good shooters, and the investment in money is small for the novice.

I know a little bit more about these old guns than most beginning shooters, and I appreciate the attention to detail in authentic reproductions and original (you could even say reproduction) ammunition and loads as well.

[drobs]

Is there some reason a paper cartridge couldn't be used in the Smith Carbine?

How about boring out the rubber, plastic, or brass cartridge cases? I have a cheap Harbor Freight bench top drill press - seems like it would be really easy to bore out the rubber, plastic, or brass case. Have to wonder how much gain in volume I'd get?

Model12 - is that extra 50 to 100fps gained by 10 more grains of powder really going make a difference anywhere? Will a deer know the difference between 900fps and 1000fps?

[Mike Irwin]

"Is there some reason a paper cartridge couldn't be used in the Smith Carbine?"

Well, since many of the original Civil War cartridges were heavy paper tubes (NOT nitrated paper designed to burn away during firing)....

No. Absolutely not. Would cause vapurizingh nookulhur 'splosions. Bad ju ju. Many dead, many wounded.


"How about boring out the rubber, plastic, or brass cartridge cases? I have a cheap Harbor Freight bench top drill press - seems like it would be really easy to bore out the rubber, plastic, or brass case. Have to wonder how much gain in volume I'd get?"

Yeah, we've been talking about exactly that through most of this thread.

Have you read the entire thread?

[drobs]

Mike, thanks for your helpful response...
Great job!

[Model12Win]

It'd be interesting so if this could be done with the plastic cases, and would also be interesting to see what the case life would be compared to non-bored plastic cases.

Alas, for me personally buying a drill press and all that wouldn't pan out just for one experiment. Maybe someone, somewhere at some point in time might come across this thread in the coming ages and be inspired to do this?

Perhaps.

[Mike Irwin]

My apologies, Drobs. I shouldn't have posted that. It was snarky beyond reason.


Regarding boring out the plastic cases, I suspect that it would result in a faster failure rate, possibly significantly faster, as there would be less mass to contain greater pressure.

[Mike Irwin]

The old style "cartridge" paper, the kind that was used to make cartridges for the Springfield rifled musket and, I suspect, the Smith, Galager, and others, is still available.

These days it's sold as drawing paper. In Britain and former British colonies it's still called cartridge paper.

Here in the US it's apparently just heavy drawing paper. You'd probably want something in the 75 to 125 grams per square meter weight.

If you had some time in your hands I think you could probably put together some credible hand rolled cartridges for a smith.

You could even make bases out of heavy duty cardboard and glued into place.

Time consuming, but maybe not more so than rolling a musket cartridge.

[drobs]

All good Mike.
Looking at google images for Smith Carbine cartridges, I stumbled on this site: http://www.shelltube.us/SmithTube.html



Not sure the volume of the casing. I emailed them to see their thoughts on a 50gr charge and their casing.

In my brief research, I've seen black plastic &/or and brass but never seen these before.

By the way - you all are making me really want to buy one of these rifles. I've been looking for something cool in traditional BP rifle. Think this could be the trick.

[Model12Win]

Not sure the volume of the casing. I emailed them to see their thoughts on a 50gr charge and their casing.

I emailed them as well a short time ago, and they did not respond. It has been over a month, so I can only fear that they are all DEAD...

JK, most likely just an unmonitored email account.

Mike: I do not believe the modern product "drawing paper" is quite like what was used for making musket cartridges during the ACW. For one thing, that paper was cotton/linen based, not wood fiber based like today's paper. If anything it was more akin to the paper used to print money these days. It was stronger and more durable. It also had a buff or tan appearance, not white like modern drawing paper. Indeed, even modern "cartridge paper" (which I've never found available in this country) probably isn't like the original genuine article.

These days, most just use the brown kraft paper you can get at Wal-Mart etc. or the same type paper they sell at Home Depot to protect the floor from paint.

Smith carbine paper cartridges were much thicker, more like paperboard. Think of a paper shotgun shell, and also were foil-lined. This was to contain the actual pressure of firing, something the rifled musket cartridge paper wasn't used for.

[mehavey]

Volume:
See http://www.shelltube.us/smith_comp_liner.html
37gr/39gr 2F/3F

Ain't no free lunch troops.

[Mike Irwin]

Model 12...

Not entirely true.

The first mass produced wood pulp paper mills opened in the United States in the 1840s, and by the time of the Civil War they were supplying increasing amounts of paper in the United States, including for use in cartridges.

Traditional cartridge paper was, as you say, linen/cotton based, but with the enormous demand for cartridges during the war that quickly went by the wayside because it was far more time consuming and expensive to produce.

The British were using machine formed pulp paper tubes for Enfield cartridges prior to the Civil War, partially as a means of automating as much of the cartridge production process as possible.

Here's a nifty little paper on the subject that I found some months ago: http://www.newyorkcivilwar.com/qm/cartridgetubes.pdf

No, modern "cartridge paper" isn't like the old cartridge paper, but old cartridge paper wasn't like the older cartridge paper, either.

I have no doubt that with some experimentation one could make credible Smith cartridges using modern pulp paper.

One of these days, depending on how bored I get, I may just give it a try.



"Smith carbine paper cartridges were much thicker, more like paperboard. Think of a paper shotgun shell, and also were foil-lined. This was to contain the actual pressure of firing, something the rifled musket cartridge paper wasn't used for."

I don't have an original Smith paper cartridge, and I'm not going to spring for one, either, just so I can dissect it, but it's my understanding that the thickness was built up through multiple rolled layers of heavy cartridge-style paper.

I've never heard of any of them being machine formed from pulp as the Enfield cartridges described in the link above.

I also don't believe that all of them were foil lined. There were multiple manufacturers of Smith cartridges. Some makers apparently shellacked the insides of the tubes to waterproof them.

The largest maker, Poultney and Trimble, did produce foil lined cartridges, not only for the Smith, but also the Galager and other carbines that used a built up cartridge.

[Model12Win]

Very cool Mike, thanks for the info. I have always heard during the ACW they used what we would now refer to as "rag" paper. It seems like wood pulp paper was indeed used as well. I'll have to read that paper.

[Mike Irwin]

The demands of war-time production have a unique way of making acceptable things that were once rejected out of hand.