Making and shooting military paper cartridges

[Firelock]

I recently tried my hand at making paper cartridges.  As will be obvious, I’m not a military reenactor, so this was a learning experience for me.

But once I got a good batch of cartridges made, I filmed an extended firing sequence using a reproduction of a .69 caliber, 1766 Charleville musket.

This is probably too basic for most of you, but it is always fun to see flintlocks being shot. So, maybe the vid is worth a look on that basis.

[Daryl]

Paper ctgs. are fun - some of us have been using them for years for hunting with large bore rifles.  We've found they work in rifles to as small as .58cal.  Smaller than that, and hunting loads seem to develope too much pressure to keep from sealing the gasses behind and 'taking' the rifling.  Paper ctgs. used in hunting riflez are much tighter than those for military muskets.  With mine, a short starter is used and accuracy is the same as patched ball to 100 meters - between 1 and 2 MOA.

[Scota4570]

Great historical information.  If fighting for ones life with a musket that would be a great way to handle the piece.

Safety is lacking by modern standards.  Serious safety issues I see right off include:
-Loading a primed musket. 
-not swabbing between shots
- it also concerns me that smoldering paper debris could set off the next charge while loading. 
-putting the hand over the muzzle. 

Please be aware of the risks before "trying this at home"




 

[Daryl]

I have never had the paper catch fire or smolder.  They usually are in one piece, and when unfolded, show rifling marks.

[heelerau]

I make the Pat 1858 Enfield paper cartridge, using a .568 diameter Pritchet bullet.  2 1/2 drams of FFg Goex. Best I can get out of my PH Navy rifle is an 8 ring group at 50 yes off the bench. Compared to a 10 ring group using the Trevor Bugg minnie bullet.  I recon they will be good for pig hunting, and they are a lot faster to load. I use Bienfang 360 linen rag paper. Your paper cartridge for the smoothie is a lot easier to make !! Most impressed.

cheers

heelerau

[Bob Roller]

That undersize bullet will not work with that charge.I recall reading an article in an American
magazine years ago stating the load was 85 grains of C&H.That load you are using is more like that of the
American Springfield. I had the first new barrel Bill Large made for the Enfield and used a hollow base
bullet of about 460 grains and 75 grains of DuPont or C&H 3fg. The bullet was a slip fit across the lands
and a one ragged hole group from a rest at 100 yards was common.
The Brits loaded their paper cartridges heavy and I remember seeing original Enfield loads marked caliber 55.
THAT is probably to make the barrel easy to load when badly fouled but accuracy was only something to dream
about.
Bob Roller

PS
I think that was in Guns Magazine in an article called "The Gun That Lost an Empire".The lubes used caused
a lot of religious $#*! being raised in India where the story was set.

[Daryl]

Until about 1820, the US military used paper ctgs. in their .69 (to .70) calibre muskets, loaded with .64 calibre balls and 165gr. of musket powder. This charge also included the prime, of course.

About 1820 or so, the powder's quality was improved and the charge was reduced to 135gr.- around that time as well, the ball's diameter was increased to .65" and swaged, to reduced, somewhat, the windage, which was still .020" or more per side.  This charge also included the prime.  The model 1842 .69 cal. musket was the first cap lock, but it also used the 135gr. charged paper ctg.

Paper ctgs. were issued with both single ball, as well as buck and ball ctgs.  Buck and ball ctgs. were used pretty much 3:1 in ratio to the single ball loads.
There was also a buck-shot paper ctg. which held 9, 000 (.36") balls. I do not know the powder charge used in the buck shot ctg.   The 000 that Hornady sells in 5 pound boxes, are .350" in diameter, not the true 000 diameter of .36".

[Hungry Horse]

 Even taking into account the priming charge, the charge you suggest is a heck of a load for a musket that is likely to be shot at not more than 150 yards.

                    Hungry Horse

[hammer]

Daryl, the 19th century East India Company records provide details of the 'buckshot' cartridges used by EIC and Kings troops.   Each layer filled the cartridge, with the next nestling into the hollows of the one below (.75 inch bore). The layers totalled the same weight as the round ball and the powder charge was also the same.   Seems likely other nations loaded theirs the same way?
Peter.

[Daryl]

Peter and HHorse - I am referring to the issued U.S. military ctgs. issued for their .69 cal muskets. I am not suggesting anyone use these loads, this is merely a history lesson.

You are right in that 000 will not lay properly in a .690" 'calibre' of the issue US musket, but that is what they used - and to good effect as they noted, 'prowling wolves' around the fort at night rent out shrieks of pain when struck by the buckshot loads, yet no bodies were evident in the morning's search. These 'wolves' they spoke of were, of course, Indians checking out the fort's night-time defenses.

Many troops complained about the recoil of issue buck and ball (3- TRIPLE OUGHT + ONE .64" BALL) and ball loads - of course.  They also had difficulty with some of the breechloading guns as the issue ctg. held more powder than would fit into their chambers - primarily the Hall carbines in ".64 calibre which would shoot the issue ball of .64" - so at that time, 1830'S, the issue musket ctg. ball's diameter had not been increased to .65" - yet - yet was increased in time to be used in the .69 cal percussion musket of 1842 & in all those which preceded 1842 that were still in use.

As a further note, these 1842's along with other issue muskets of decent remaining barrel thickness were returned to Harper's Ferry and Springfield for rifling during the 1850's, after the invention of the thin skirted hollow based Minnie Ball. At that time, the issue load for the .69 cal rifled muskets was 70gr. for the 730gr. Conical Ball. The .58's, of course, rifles only, (not rifled muskets as there were never any .58 calibre muskets) used 60gr. with the 505gr. while the .58 pistols used a mere 50gr. with the 460gr. reduced weight Minnie ball.  Lyman used to sell the lighter pistol bullet mould as the #575213OS- iirc. I believe the OS to them meant "original style".  They certainly were not over size as they cast .575" as they should. They also made a #585213 mould to cast a larger "Minnie ball" for the Snider, ctg. rifles.

[heelerau]

Bob,
        when I patch the bullet it comes up to a nice slip fit, I will try increasing the charge, but I am following instructions from a book by Hans Busk who was one of those brilliant chaps involved in making the British army into a profional force instead of a gentlemen's hunt club. as it was prior to the reforms of the 1880s. I think the problem may lay with my bullet which is a little short for the 1 in 48 twist, it was made by mistake for the 1in 78 twist of the Pat 53 rifle.
 I have a bullet in .554, and that, believe it or not gives similar group, with the same charge! I am still working on these cartridges and hope to get better results.

Cheers

Gordon

[Bob Roller]

Gordon,
A bullet that is lubed and a slip fit across the lands will make a BIG difference.
Trying to duplicate the failed ideas of the past will get nowhere fast.
I used the American Minie as offered by Lyman in the 1950's and would fill the base with
lube so as to plaster the bore with every shot.As I said,one ragged hole at 100 was easily
done.
I did alter one of these moulds to the shape of the Pritchett and it upped the weight and also
the recoil.My rifle was the 39"three band Enfield and I did tune the lock a bit to get a better trigger
pull.This was in the later 1950's and early 60's when I did NOT need glasses.

Bob Roller