Making and shooting paper musket cartridges.

[Clark Badgett]

In the process of gearing up for my new Charleville to show up, I revisited all my old ordnance files.

The original charge for the .69 cal, M1816 musket was 135 gr of powder under a .64 or .65" ball. When loading the cartridge, one tears the cartridge with the teeth, primes the pan and then loads the bore with the powder. After that rotate the cartridge and tear off the excess paper below the lower string tie under the ball and insert the ball with the paper patch and ram it home. For safeties sake prime after you load, unlike the era method.

The charge for the ball cartridge was lowered to 110 gr for the M1842 musket.

What the charge was prior to the M1816 I have not ever found any conclusive data.

So at this time, I have my patterns for the cartridge papers drafted up and will start cutting papers and rolling them this weekend. I plan on taking pictures and posting them here if I can figure that part out.

Tidbits gleaned from the ordnance manuals are;
1. Cast balls were tumbled
2. Sweged balls were listed as very common by the 1849 manual.
3. Same manual also still had a chapter on the proper type and packaging of gun flints.
4. Cartridges for the .54 cal rifle used .525 balls and thin muslin patching, specified as square and tied around the ball.
5. No mention of lube used on any cartridges, musket or rifle.

[Daryl]

The information I had, was the original 1700's charge was 165gr. musket powder with .64" cast ball and was reduced to 135gr. about 1820 (1815?) when the ball sized was increased to .65" and swaged instead of cast. I did not know it was further reduced for the 1842 cap lock musket.
Many complained the older ctgs. kicked badly.
I did not know the ctg. was reversed, but thought the powder was drained and the ball ctg. was then simply rammed down the bore - then the rod was "thrown" upon the ball 3 times to ensure it was seated on the powder.
There was trouble with the .69 Hall carbines as their "chamber" would not admit the entire ctg. of powder and of course, much of it spilled down inside the stock, which created other problems.

French ctg.



The British Ctg. were tied. I did not know the US ctg.s were also tied.



I made mine tapered for less loss when tearing off the end to expose the powder, then shoved the small ind into the bore. While the powder drained out, I extracted the rod, then shoved
the paper ctg. down onto the powder.  It would exit as confetti - likely due to the 165gr. powder charge I used with them in my .69 rifle. The paper never burned nor ignited.

[Nhgrants]

I had done paper cartridges in my Fowler with good results but the bore was .660and the balls were .648
So paper thickness was a big issue with loading.  I tied thin cotton string at the paper twist at the bottom of the ball and then again around  the top of the ball next to the powder.  I also lubed the cartridge where it was formed around the ball.

[Clark Badgett]

Daryl, I can see that the 165 grain load would seem excessive. With the problems that the US had with the quality of some of the early M1795/Charleville pattern muskets, that could be the reason why they eventually dropped the charge down a bit. The US cartridge for muskets was crimped and tied on the ball end, and then the ball was inserted and then it was tied at the base of the ball. After the powder charge was placed it was folded on the tail end in the French fashion. The rifle cartridge (in the case of the 1849 Ordnance manual was for the M1841 rifle) is what is confusing me. It specifically stated that the .525 ball was to be wrapped and tied in thin muslin, thin leather or bladder, and tied. then the excess was to be trimmed at the knot and then placed into a paper tube and tied below the ball. That sounds to me like it was double patched, but no mention of any sort of lube was made.

The part about turning the empty tube over and tearing off the excess paper is solely my method to prevent the excess paper from potentially causing a fire down range. I've never found any era drill manuals that specifically state whether to ram the whole tube or not.

[Daryl]

I see. The drop in charge was said to be due to improvement in powder quality (Firearms of the American West).
Interesting about the tying, but then, the buck and ball ctgs. were tied.

[Craig Wilcox]

What kind of paper is used on these cartridges?

[Clark Badgett]

What kind of paper is used on these cartridges?

The two best kinds I've found have been newsprint and the light brown packing paper. Paper lunch sacks work well too and are about the same as the packing paper. Typing paper and grocery bags are horrible, unless you have teeth that a grizzly would envy.

[Daryl]

I use simple copying paper. Works for me. 18 or 20 pound, both worked just fine.
Mind you, I haven't made up paper ctgs. for some years now. 

[Scota4570]

A local newspaper publisher will have the ends of rolls of unused newsprint.  You can probably get  lifetime supply for free, or nearly free, by asking. 

[Craig Wilcox]

All three responses are very good - many thanks, my friends,
I have a very good supply of copy paper and the light brown packing paper - I usually smooth it out and use it for drawing rifle plans,
And the Kenton Examiner offices are just down the street,  Judging by the size of the building, they print right here in town.  I shall visit and see about a "lifetime supply".

Formerly, while with the NSSA decades ago, we used paper or cardboard tubes, holding 100 gr of FFG and an inverted Minie' "ball" holding the powder in the tube,  The Minie' was well-lubed with a beeswax/tallow concoction.  Is the ball in these paper cartridges lubed in any way at all?  It seems that a lot of fouling would be "wiped out" by lubing the paper or the ball.

I have a lot to learn about paper cartridges, don't I?  Love learning new stuff!

[Daryl]

I never lubed them, paper or ball. M loads were snug enough, that I had to choke up on the rod to get them started. Once started down in one push.
They are snug enough and with the paper balled up between the powder and ball, they shot quite cleanly. I could load and shoot 10 of them before
needing to fire a "cleaning" load, which was 3 drams 2F and a wet-patched ball. This cleaned the bore enough to allow another 10 ctgs. to be shot.
Accuracy with the ctgs. was identical to the accuracy with 165gr. 2F and a patched ball & so was the POI.  165gr. 2F GOEX was my normal moose load
for patched ball (1st shot) and any subsequent shot using the paper ctgs.
I practiced with the paper ctgs. timing my shots, and I could fire, then reload and fire the second aimed shot in 8 seconds. Of course, that included capping
the nipple.  Of course, the 3rd shot would take longer as I'd have to find the dropped ram rod. LOL

[Clark Badgett]

Here are few I’ve made up. The long English style is for a P.53 with and original .56 Pritchett ball under it. On the right is a regulation Civil War cartridge made exactly to the ordnance manual, but we’re not here to talk about them. The one on the left is a buck shot cartridge for the .69 made per the 1849 manual along with an original .65 ball and one of my .645 balls

[Daryl]

Good stuff Clark. Thanks for the pictures and explanation.

[Clark Badgett]

Daryl, as soon as I can make the patterns, I'm going to do a short tutorial. Even if most around here are rifle shooters mostly, there are probably a few musket fans that may not have seen the process and could benefit and add yet another time eating facet of this hobby to their stable. 

[Daryl]

There have been 3 other forum members who have tried  paper ctgs. in rifle and/or smoothbores since we discussed this several years ago.
I also would like to try them in my 20 bore flinter.

[bob in the woods]

They are a mainstay with me. However, after starting out years ago with the traditional design, I must emphasize that the tapered cartridge is such an improvement in both ease of use and speed, I use the design exclusively in both rifle and smoothbore. 

[Daryl]

Chock that up to an idea that panned out.