Range Report 15APR2023: The 1859 Sharps Infantry Rifle

I have long wanted a Sharps Infantry Rifle, but since they are so scarce all I could find was a second-hand Pedersoli reproduction.  Sharps are notorious (and rightly so) for poor ignition and severe fouling, so the previous owner had had it converted from the factory condition to be more reliable.  Unfortunately, when I got it I was unable to fire a single round from it—it simply would not set off the charge, which, naturally, was intensely frustrating.  At the advice of several people, especially Mike Beliveau of the Duelist 1954 YT channel, I sent the rifle to Larry Flees (<larryflees111@gmail.com>) to have him rebuild the rifle according to his conversion system.  Today was my first trial of the rifle since getting it back.

The cartridges I used are close copies of the flat-based linen cartridges used during the War, except instead of the 2-band bullets used by Federal suppliers I use the 504-grain Richmond Lab bullets I cast using an Eras Gone bullet mold.  The cartridges have a linen shell with a tissue paper base and contain 65 grains of Schuetzen 2F powder, just as was used in period.  The cartridges were packaged in historically accurate 10-round boxes which very closely match one style of the originals.  To learn how I load the cartridges, read the essay linked here:
https://historicalshooting.blogspot.com/2022/10/loading-ammunition-for-1859-sharps-rifle.html

Location:  Lytle Creek
Conditions: 58 degrees; dry; sunny; winds highly variable gusting up to 20 mph from 12:00 to 3:00.
Shooting Position:  Seated unsupported.
Sight Picture:  Full sight, 6:00 hold.
Range:  50 yards. 

I was only able to fire three tables of fire today, which was intensely frustrating, but the good news is that the Flees conversion does actually work, and the rifle did shoot.   Unfortunately, seven rounds into the third table of fire I discovered that I could not get the breech to fall, and so I was unable to continue firing.  After getting home I was able to use a hammer and a plastic rod to tap the block down for cleaning; more on this in the Conclusion below.

The first table of fire was five rounds made with paper tubes instead of linen.  My intention was to use the paper tubes for casual plinking since they are easier to make than the linen cartridges.  Unfortunately, their accuracy was appallingly bad, as will be seen on the first target below.  I believe that the paper does not combust (it is not nitrated) as the linen does and so clings to the bullet as it flies downrange, acting as a drag on the bullet.  I didn’t bother to determine a string test score for this first table of fire as there was obviously no point; needless to say, this experiment was a failure and won’t be repeated.  The bullet holes covered in blue tape on the first target represent Table One using the paper cartridges.

Historical shooters who are not yet using the String Test as a way to track their results should be since it is both historically correct and far more meaningful and useful than just looking at group size.  To learn more about the String Test and how to use it read the essay linked here:
https://historicalshooting.blogspot.com/2020/12/the-string-test-measure-for-historical.html

Table Two

Table Two
5 rounds, 17.25 inches.
String Test:  3.45 in./rd.

Table Three

Table Three
7 rounds, 22 inches.
String Test:  3.14 in./rd.

Conclusion
Overall I am pleased—a rifle that shoots is far better than one that does not.  Moreover, the string test results are pretty good for a first time out with this piece, although naturally I hope to do better with practice.

Of course, having the block lock up was intensely frustrating.  I initially blamed this on fouling on the breech since the Sharps is widely known to have this problem, but it seemed odd given that I had only fired 17 rounds, and as bad as the Sharps is, that’s pretty extreme.  When I got home I carefully tapped the breech block out and discovered a lump of linen had been jammed between the breech and the block, effectively locking the whole thing in place.  This was confusing at first since these cartridges are nearly exact copies of those used in period, but I recalled that as I fired more rounds the cartridges started to protrude slightly from the chamber, no doubt because of the fouling which built up there.  This led me to realize that the breech was cutting off a small piece of linen that protruded from the chamber and that this was getting caught in the action.

It is essential to measure the length of the cartridges correctly when making them to ensure they fit the chamber perfectly, which I had done, but I didn’t take fouling into account.  The difference isn’t large, perhaps 1/32 or 1/16 in., but it’s enough to catch on the edge of the block when it closes.  That means that I have to go back and trim the former I use to make the shells slightly to make the overall cartridges slightly shorter so that they remain fully inside the chamber even when it is fouled.

Every step is a learning process, and I learned a lot today.  Still, I am thrilled at being able to shoot this piece at all, and I think that with a little work on the cartridges and a lot more practice I can improve my results significantly.

The Historical Shooting Kit of a Civil War Cavalryman

Civil War cavalry arms.

Introduction
The equipment needed or desired by a historical shooter is largely a matter of personal taste and interest; the kit chosen can be as simple as just a weapon and ammunition or can be as elaborate as a full military uniform and equipment as for a living history presentation, or anywhere in between.  In this post I will review the gear I have assembled for my personal kit as an example of what the reader may wish to consider.  Obviously, this is a work in progress and will need a lot of work to bring to the standard I hope to achieve.

I don’t participate in Civil War reenactment, so the kit presented here is very generic, but with a few exceptions does a fairly decent job of presenting a realistic kit for a Federal cavalryman late in the War.  The main flaws in this kit are that I don’t have the correct trousers (see below), that my canteen is a modern sutlers-row example, and that my saber is garbage.

The Smith Carbine

The Smith carbine is a .50-caliber breech-loading rifled carbine patented by Gilbert Smith on June 23, 1857 that was used by various cavalry units during the Civil War.  They were manufactured by the Massachusetts Arms Company of Chicopee Falls, Massachusetts and the the American Machine Works in Springfield, Massachusetts. The name of the distributor for the weapon, Poultney & Trimble of Baltimore, Maryland, is often stamped on the carbines’ receivers.  They were 39½ inches in overall length with a 21⅝-inch barrel.  Approximately 30,000 Smith carbines were manufactured in total.  My Smith is a reproduction by Pietta that has been extensively reworked by David Stavlo at Lodgewood Manufacturing.

Pietta Smith Carbine.

An even more unusual aspect of the Smith was its ammunition.  The earliest Smith cartridges consisted of a .50-caliber bullet loaded into a hardened rubber case.  The case was pierced in the back to allow the flash from the detonating musket cap to reach the powder within, setting off the round.  The rubber case would obturate to fill the chamber completely, making the cartridge excellent at preventing the escape of combustion gasses which so plagued other breech-loading rifles of the period.  The rubber for these unusual cartridges became scarce later in the period, so a different approach was used:  Metal foil was wrapped around a mandrel to form the case, and paper was then wrapped around that.

Smith cartridges and cartridge packets.

Poultney & Trimble-style foil cartridges.  Note the different style of packaging.

To see how I load ammunition for my Smith, see here:
https://historicalshooting.blogspot.com/2020/12/ammunition-for-smith-carbine.html

The Remington New Model Army

The New Model Army was a .44-caliber closed-top revolver designed c. 1863 by Eliphalet Remington & Sons of Ilion, NY. They made three designs, a pocket model in .31 caliber, a Navy model in .36 caliber, and this one, with all being essentially the same design except for the caliber and some very minor differences in frame size and in hammer and cylinder design.  The New Model Army is often mistakenly called the “1858 Remington,” however, that appellation arose from collectors who misunderstood the 1858 patent date stamped on the barrel. 1858 was the date of the patent on some aspects of the loading lever system and does not apply to the revolver in general, so the name is quite incorrect and should no longer be used. In reality, the New Model Army was designed in c. 1861-1863.  My Remington is a reproduction by Pietta that has been extensively reworked by Gary Barnes of Gary Barnes Conversions.

Remington New Model Army, reproduction cap tin, and a cartridge pack.

Kerr combustible cartridges.

To see how I load and package ammunition for my Remington, see here:
https://historicalshooting.blogspot.com/2020/10/making-civil-war-style-paper-cartridges.htm

My full kit.

The Forage Cap

The most common style of forage cap or “Bummer” cap was the M1858, which was dark blue wool with a floppy peak that falls forward when you wear it. The Kepi cap, with its short, rigidly formed body was far less common with enlisted men as it was a private-purchase item and was not even mentioned in the Uniform Regulations of 1861. The brim of the forage cap should be worn either flat or folded slightly upward, not rolled down-ward as most people do with baseball-style caps today.

Uniform Jacket

Many troopers wore the Mounted Services Shell Jacket, a blue, waist-length jacket with twelve buttons down the front. Others, however, wore the four-button Fatigue Jacket or “sack coat,” especially as the War progressed. These were lighter and more comfortable to wear and were probably more common than shell jackets for most of the war.

Shirt
Shirts varied considerably; at the beginning of the War troopers were issued the 1851 gray wool flannel shirt, but later the issued shirts were of white cotton or muslin. In addition, many troopers wore civilian shirts of various fabrics and colors.

Trousers
The issued trousers were of sky-blue wool in the Mounted Pattern, which had an extra layer of material in the seat and on the insides of the legs. Regulations called for the trousers to be worn outside of the boots (for those who had them), however, pictorial evidence indicates many troopers tended to tuck them into their boots in the field. The trousers were held up with cotton suspenders (which occasionally had elastic in them although it was not common); note that the suspenders were attached to buttons on the trousers, not to clips. Unfortunately, I have not managed to acquire a good pair of trousers, as the photograph above shows.

Footwear
Cavalry troopers wore both the M1851 Jefferson Brogans, which were lace-up ankle boots, and artillery boots. Artillery boots were rarely issued to Federal troops, but when they were, they were usually made of black leather with a square toe and a twelve-inch top. The very tall knee-flap boots many people love today were private purchase items and were uncommon for enlisted men.

The full belt kit.

Saber Belt
These were of black leather with two straps for the saber and a shoulder strap, although photographs show that most troopers left off the shoulder strap. Enlisted men wore the M1851 belt plate which was brass with a separate silver wreath.

Cap Pouch
The M1850 was the most common pattern issued, although several styles were in use. These were of black leather with a woolen lining to help with cap retention. These were most often worn on the front of the belt just to the right of the buckle plate, although they can occasionally be seen on the left side of the buckle.

Pistol Cartridge Pouch
These were called pouches rather than boxes because they did not have interior containers. These are small but should hold two to three wrapped packages of pistol ammunition. They have a small leather flap inside which makes for a good place to put a combination tool (see below). Not all enlisted troopers wore them, but when they did they were usually worn just to the right of the cap pouch.

The Pistol Holster
These were of black leather with an unmarked flap. They had a small strip attached to the flap to secure it closed on a brass post. Holsters were worn butt forward on the rear of the right hip.

Smith cartridge box, outside view.

The interior of the box showing the cartridges and implement pouch.

The Carbine Cartridge Box
These were of black leather with two loops on the back for wearing on the belt, however, they also had buckles on the bottom and a strap on the back to enable them to be worn on a sling, as with the rifle cartridge boxes. They were almost never worn on a sling, but were usually worn on the belt on the right side of the back after the pistol holster. The 1860 pattern boxes had wooden blocks inside drilled to hold 20 rounds of carbine ammunition and had a small implement pouch.

All of the cartridge boxes sold by mainstream sutlers are designed for Sharp’s Carbines, so the Smith cartridges don’t fit in them. Originally, I used a Sharp’s box from which I had removed the wooden block so that the cartridges could be carried loose in the box, but that was unsatisfactory. I ordered a custom Smith cartridge box from David Jarnagin of C & D Jarnagin Company, which can be seen here.  Interestingly, although some original boxes had spaces for twenty cartridges this box has only eighteen. I discussed this with Mr. Jarnagin, who told me that the originals were never standardized and that mine was copied from an original in the collection of the Tennessee State Museum.

Carbine Sling
This is a wide leather strap with a wide brass buckle having two tongues and a brass strap end. It holds a steel keeper to which is attached a large steel spring-loaded hook used to hang the carbine. The hook attaches to the ring on the sliding bar on the carbine. It might seem as though these should be worn with the buckle on the front, however, most photographs of the period show them being worn with the buckle on the trooper’s back when in the field and in front only for formal events. The carbine sling should be worn so that the end of the leather falls to the point of your right hip. Although the carbine can hang loose by the side, when moving on foot they were usually flipped up over the right shoulder if attached, but note that when dismounting the trooper was taught to unsnap his carbine from its sling—they were not fired while attached to the sling when on foot.

Canteen
These were usually the M1858 smooth-sided or M1862 bullseye pattern. They were tin with a wool cover and a white cloth sling. They were issued with sky-blue wool covers at first, but later several different colors of wool were used. Modern reproductions are often made of stainless steel, and as long as the cover is used that is unnoticeable. Corks should be made of cork with a metal ring on top and secured with a piece of cord, not a chain. Some pictures from the period indicate these were carried on the saddle rather than being worn, however, in Congdon’s Cavalry Compendium we are told that the canteen was never to be attached to the saddle so here we see a case in which regulations may not always have been followed strictly.

Haversack
The Federal issue haversacks of the Civil War measured around 12 in. x 12 in. with a bottom gusset of 3-1/2 inches (although dimensions could vary) and were made of light cotton drilling or canvas which was often (but not always) “tarred” or painted with a combination of lamp black and linseed oil which gave them a shiny black water-resistant finish. During the war these were intended to carry food and eating implements only, however, the historical shooter will find them to be better for carrying all of his shooting implementia discreetly (I carry a field cleaning kit, oiler, range book, pen, stadiometer, etc., in mine). These were rarely carried on the trooper but were usually attached to the horse’s tack, so I am not wearing one here.

Cleaning Kits
The term “cleaning kit” is somewhat nebulous so we need to be specific about what we mean. We can break cleaning kits into three groupings: First, there’s a range or “shop kit,” by which I mean one with modern components not intended to recreate historical ones. Second, we can talk about a “garrison kit,” which means a period kit (or reproduction of one) intended to be stored in garrison. Third, and the focus here, is a “field kit,” meaning one which a trooper might take with him in the field.  A field kit should have, at a minimum, a wiper, a bore brush (you can’t really use a jag on a thong) for each caliber of weapon, cleaning patches, a combination tool having a nipple wrench and a turnscrew (or turnscrews) for each weapon, and an oil bottle or “oiler.”

All of the revolver combination tools I have seen have a nipple wrench with a single turnscrew set at right angles to it (except the Colt Walker which had a slightly different design).  This is a modern reproduction.

Reproduction revolver combination tool with a nipple wrench and turnscrew.

Carbine combination tools had a slightly different configuration, being a flat bar with a nipple wrench set into one end and then the end of the bar being a turnscrew, with an additional smaller turnscrew on a rotating pivot. Pictured below is a reproduction Smith combination tool made for me by Josh Davis of Davis Reproductions.  It is a superb and fully functional tool that I use in all day-to-day shooting.

Reproduction Smith combination tool.

Bore brushes of the period tended to be of twisted wire with boar’s bristles inserted into the winds of the wire. The one in the picture below is approximately five inches in overall length, with the brush proper being about four inches. The thong is around thirty inches in length and about 0.15 inch thick, and the ferrule is approximately three-quarters of an inch in length.  I can find no bore brushes made from boar bristles, however, nylon is a good replacement, so I have .54– and .45-caliber nylon bore brushes (I find that .50-caliber bore brushes don’t do a good job in the Smith). These are, unfortunately, shorter than the original, but I can live with the anachronism until I find some longer ones.

Reproduction bore wiper.

A review of various sources has not turned up any regulations for standard oilers. Instead, it seems a variety of civilian oilers have been recovered indicating that these may have been privately purchased or locally sourced. I have a reproduction of an oiler for the 1853-pattern Enfield rifle (many of which having been used in the War) that I fill with Ballistol.

I keep the brushes, cleaning patches, and oiler in a small drawstring bag which I keep in my haversack. The combination tools go in the accessory compartments of my cartridge box and pouch.

Historical Shooting with Civil War Cavalry Arms
For anyone interested in a far more detailed look at the kit and equipment of a Civil War Cavalryman along with extremely detailed information about the carbines and revolvers of the period and extensive information about loading and shooting them as practiced in period, I would suggest considering buying a copy of my book.

Historical Shooting with Civil War Cavalry Arms, by Hugh T. Knight, Jr.

The book is available for purchase here:
https://historicalshooting.blogspot.com/2022/08/historical-shooting-with-civil-war.html

New Video Channel for Historical Shooting of the Nineteenth Century

I have discovered, somewhat to my consternation, that people prefer to see videos about how to do things rather than reading articles on the subject.  This both surprises and confuses me because videos never contain as much information about their subject as an article can, and thus seem extremely limited in value; videos usually seem to emphasize flash (and bang, when it comes to shooting) over information.  Still, videos can help people actually see the mechanics of certain operations more easily in a video, so I have created a channel on Rumble to host my videos.  The title, unsurprisingly, is Historical Shooting of the Nineteenth Century, and my ID on that site is HistoricShooter19C.

I do not intend to post many videos on this channel, my primary content is here, and that will continue, nor will I be uploading videos very regularly.  The Rumble channel gives me a place to load videos that I can link to articles on this blog, but the main information will always be in the articles.  

The link to the Rumble channel is:  https://rumble.com/c/c-2448702

Range Report 04FEB2023: The Smith Carbine and an Uberti Colt 1860 Army

My new Uberti Colt 1860 Army reproduction.

This was a strange day.  I got a late start, and in rushing to get to the range I forgot my phone, so there are no pictures today.  I know people want to see photos, but we’ll have to settle for just the information today.

I recently acquired a new Uberti Colt 1860 Army reproduction.  I have always preferred Piettas because I have seen evidence that although Ubertis are prettier they are less historically accurate in their dimensions and often have bad springs and other problems; in short, they are about form over function, and to me, function is *far* more important.  Unfortunately, the last Pietta I got was absolutely horrible in terms of fit and finish, so I decided to try an Uberti.  This revolver is pretty nice looking, and although not perfect has significantly better fit and finish than my last Pietta.  When I took it to the range, however, I got some pretty bad results.  I fired .454 swaged round balls over a greased felt wad and 30 grains of Schuetzen 3F powder, and the resulting group sizes were horrible—so bad I didn’t even enter them in my range log.  They were probably in excess of 8 inches/round, which is monstrous; my last time out with round balls in my Pietta New Model Army I got averages around 3 inches/round or a little more.  In addition, although I had very few cap jams since I installed Slix-Shot nipples before even firing the pistol, the mainspring is very weak, and more than half of the caps had to be struck two or even three times in order to get them to go off despite the fact that I forcefully seated each cap with a plastic tool before shooting to make sure they weren’t sitting at all high.  Fortunately, this revolver is going off to be reworked in order to get it to accept paper cartridges (round balls are so boring!), and it will also receive a trigger and action job, a sight adjustment, have the chambers reamed and the forcing cone adjusted, and a few other things.  Hopefully this will bring it to the point where it shoots as well as my Pietta New Model Army, but I don’t have high hopes at this point.

110 rounds of Smith ammunition in historically correct cartridge packets.

My Smith Carbine was a very different story, but with some really interesting results.  This Pietta reproduction is a champion, especially since it was tuned up by David at Lodgewood Mfg.  I shot 50 rounds without a single weapon-related problem except that the screws holding the top strap and the hammer loosened over time.  I’m not at all sure why this is; Italian reproductions are notorious for having bad screws, and this may just be related to that, but I don’t really know.  Regardless, it’s just a matter of using the turnscrew on my handy Smith combo tool reproduction (thanks Josh Davis!) to tighten them down periodically.  Other than that, I simply ran a wet patch followed by one or two dry patches through the bore every ten rounds, and truthfully, I don’t even know how critical that is.  I need to do a test where I fire 50 rounds without cleaning the bore at all and carefully track the String Test results to see how accuracy does or does not degrade.

My goal for the Smith today was to compare different loads to see how they shot.  The original loads were 50 grains of 2F rifle powder, but the nylon tubes I currently use won’t hold that much, and most modern shooters get much better results with 3F powder.  I noticed, however, that after 5 or 6 refills the tubes seem to swell a bit, causing the bullets to sit lower in the case.  I considered adding a little cream of wheat filler to take up that space, but decided to increase the load to 40 grains to see how it would perform.  I also wanted to try loading with 2F powder to see how that worked since I am more concerned about replicating the military loads than I am in getting good scores.  In point of fact, these loads performed poorly, with 40 grains of 2F Schuetzen resulting in a 5.3 in./rd. String Test and the 35 grain load of 2F Schuetzen resulting in 5.2 in./rd.  Conversely, the remaining tables of fire I shot with 35 grains of Schuetzen 3F showed the kind of excellent results I am accustomed to, with scores between 3 to 4 in./rd. at 50 yards, which is close to what I have been getting recently.

When I had the carbine reworked, David added a large brass blade front sight so I could zero the weapon for 50-yard shooting.  I am very pleased to report that by using the procedure detailed in Mike Beliveau’s video on filing down the front sight on his Smith carbine (https://youtu.be/YxkcGEDNgo0), my piece is now shooting to point of aim at 50 yards so I don’t have to aim off, which can cause larger group sizes if I don’t estimate the sight placement well.

In addition, I continue to use the half-inch disks of nitrated paper inside the Smith tubes to keep the powder from shaking out through the flash holes, and this worked perfectly without a single misfire or hangfire.  It’s a bit of a pain in the neck to do since the tubes taper down at the bottom, making it hard to insert the disks because they tend to crumple up.   My new technique involves using a round-nosed hemostat to insert the paper disk.  I grip the disk in the jaws one half of the way across, then push it straight down and smooth out any bunching with the tip of the hemostat.  I sometimes just put a small piece of electrical tape over the outside of the flash hole when I’m being lazy, but that looks terrible and I find it a pain to have to remove them before every shot.

One bit of weirdness that arose is that I recently bought 1,000 CCI musket caps (the real ones, not the reenactor caps, which are not as good), and quite a few of them failed to fire, perhaps one in six or seven.  Looking at the ones that failed to go off, it seemed as though they had no percussive mixture in them.  The hammer did its job because the caps were split and splayed open as they should have been and it happened just as often with cartridges which did not have nitrated paper disks in the base (so it wasn’t that the paper blocked the fire).  I was very disappointed by this—with caps so hard to come by, this many failures demonstrates unacceptable quality control on the part of CCI.

The bottom line:  Uberti revolvers suck, the Smith carbine was the best cavalry arm of the Civil War, and my best load with the Smith continues to be 35 grains of 3F powder with an Eras Gone Smith Carbine bullet using a disk of nitrated paper in the base.

If you are not yet using the String Test as a way to track your shooting results, you should be since it is both historically correct and far more meaningful and useful than just looking at group size.  To learn more about the String test and how to use it, go to:  https://historicalshooting.blogspot.com/2020/12/the-string-test-measure-for-historical.html

To learn how I load cartridges for the Smith carbine, go to:  https://historicalshooting.blogspot.com/2020/12/ammunition-for-smith-carbine.html

The Confusing Point Blank: It’s Farther Than you can Toss a Biscuit

Few terms relating to rifle marksmanship are as misunderstood today as the point blank, and yet understanding it is absolutely essential for understanding marksmanship with black-powder rifles of the nineteenth century.  Most people today mistakenly use the term to mean a range which is so short that you can’t miss, or as one historical novelist liked to put it, “only a biscuit toss away.”  As we shall see, there was confusion about the term even in period, but the biscuit toss definition has never applied to the term point blank in any source.  In this essay we will examine what the term actually means, how it was used in period (both correctly and incorrectly), and why it is important to modern historical shooters.

Let’s begin with the correct definition:  The point blank is the second point at which the trajectory of a bullet crosses the line of sight of a firearm for any given sight setting, as shown in the figure above.  When shooting a rifle with a hausse (a rear sight which is adjustable for elevation) there will be a different point blank for each sight setting of the hausse.  Thus, with the hausse folded down and set at its lowest setting, which is the 100 yard setting on most rifles, if you aim at a target, the bullet will hit the mark at which you aim at 100 yards; if you use that same setting and the target is slightly closer than 100 yards the bullet will hit slightly above the mark because it hasn’t dropped down to the point blank yet, and if the target is slightly beyond 100 yards the bullet will hit slightly below the mark.  If you raise the sight setting to 200 yards, the bullet will hit the mark if the target is at 200 yards, and so on, for each sight setting.

NB:  This assumes that the shooter is shooting ammunition with the correct load for the period and weapon in question; when loading ammunition today your hausse settings will probably not match the ballistics of your homemade ammunition, so you have to experiment to see how your ammunition performs.

Moreover, we know that this definition was used by both American and British sources of the period.  In Heth’s 1862 A System of Target Practice for the use of Troops (p. 17) he wrote:  “[P]oint-blank (V) is the second intersection of the trajectory (T K), or curve, with the line of sight.” And provided this illustration:

Likewise, Wilcox in his 1859 An Elementary Treatise Upon the Theory of Rifle Firing (p. 48): “Beyond the point L the trajectory rises above the line of sight for some distance, then it falls and cuts it again at V. This second point of intersection is called the point blank; the distance CV of the point blank from the muzzle, is called the range of the point blank…”

In Congdon’s 1864 Cavalry Compendium (p. 35), he says “When fired from a gun, the ball crosses above the line of sight; after going a certain distance—according to the arm used—it crosses below the line of sight: this point is called the point-blank."

In Cleveland’s 1864 Hints to Riflemen (p. 28) he says: “The point at which the trajectory intersects the line of sight, is called the “point blank,” and may be varied by elevating or depressing the after sight...”

British rifle sources used the same definition.  While Busk doesn’t show an illustration, he describes exactly the same effect on pp. 55-56 of his 1860 Handbook for Hythe: “The object of the marksman is to make the point blank of his rifle as nearly as possible coincident with the object to be struck... In order to ensure striking an object within the point blank, we must aim under it, if the object to be struck is beyond the point blank, we must sight above it.”

In Thackery’s The Soldier’s Manual of Rifle Firing from 1854 (pp. 19-20), he says: “The

point where the trajectory the second time crosses the line of vision (figs. I., III.) is called the point-blank range, which should be the centre of the object to be struck.”

As this shows, the term point blank was used quite consistently by most sources from the period, however, there was some confusion about the term, too.  In Walker’s 1864 The Rifle, Its Theory and Practice (p. 86), he said that British artillerists had a different definition of point blank:  “This is the correct explanation of point-blank, and the one adopted in the French service and abroad generally; but unfortunately English artillerists have another acceptation of the term, viz., that it means the “first graze” [i.e., the range at which a round will hit at the foot a target soldier for any given sight setting—HTK] of a bullet fired from the shoulder, the axis of the piece or firearm having been kept horizontal," a definition which might make sense for an artillerist who is concerned with artillery rounds which were often intended to hit the ground and bound across it to take to multiple targets.  Notwithstanding the vagaries of artillerists, Walker holds the same definition for point blank, as applied to rifles, as seen in this essay, i.e., the second point at which the bullet crosses the line of sight, or point “E” in figure 20 below from p. 84 of his book.  “After culminating it makes a gradual descent till it again cuts the line of sight at the point E. This point of intersection of the trajectory with the line of sight is of important interest.  It constitutes what is termed “the point blank…” (p. 85).

Nor are we alone today in misunderstanding the term—people got it wrong in the nineteenth century, too.  In Freemantle’s 1901 The Book of the Rifle (pp. 312-313), he spends considerable time trying to dissuade people from using the term point blank, but this is largely because people misunderstood it.  He says that the ignorant call point blank the “distance which a bullet travels before it has dropped any appreciable amount.”  Obviously, he says, this is wrong since the bullet follows a parabolic trajectory, but if you think about what they are saying with this inaccurate definition it amounts to what our sources said above:  It is the range at which it appears not to drop any appreciable amount because it is the point at which the line of sight crosses the trajectory of the bullet for any given sight setting—in other words, the bullet seems to fly in a straight line to the point of aim, but only because the shooter can’t see the parabolic trajectory. 

The reason the concept of the point blank is so important is because of the extreme parabolic curve of the bullet trajectories of black-powder rifles.  With our modern rifles we (mistakenly) expect the kind of absolutely flat trajectories people thought they were getting in Freemantle’s complaint, but at longer ranges black-powder bullets can easily miss a target entirely unless the range is estimated correctly.  For example, with the .577 Snider-Enfield rifle with the hausse set for 600 yards, the greatest height of the trajectory of the bullet will be 23 feet above the ground.  At that sight setting, the bullet will hit an enemy infantryman who is 6 feet tall in the head (this is termed the “first catch”) if he is 585 yards away, in the waist (which is the point of aim) if he is at 600 yards (this is the point blank), and in the foot if he is at 615 yards (this is “first graze”) (1870 Musketry Instruction p. 35).  Thus, when a shooter aims for his opponent’s waist using the 600-yard setting of his hausse he will hit an infantryman somewhere on his body, from the top of his head to his foot, only if that enemy is between 585 and 615 yards away; this is called the “margin” in most British musketry manuals, or the “dangerous space” in other sources.  That means a shooter has to be able to estimate the range to his target to within 30 yards in order to make a hit at 600 yards.  From this, the reason the point blank is so important should be obvious:  Without understanding it, effective marksmanship at anything other than short ranges is impossible.  This is a central principle of black-powder shooting, and one which every historical shooter must understand.

Working Up a Load

Every weapon shoots a little differently, and, of course, every different bullet and/or powder load will affect accuracy as well. If a shooter only wants to shoot the typical government load for his weapon in an effort to recreate its operation as authentically as possible then working up a load is not necessary and he can simply work on improving his accuracy with that load, but if he wants to find the most precise load for his specific piece then this procedure will help determine what works best.

Working up a load refers to the process of testing various combinations of loads until one is found that reliably produces the best Figure of Merit (to learn about the FoM and how to calculate it see historicalshooting.blogspot.com/2021/01/calculating-figure-of-merit.html). Many shooters only consider group size, but as the essay linked above will show, the FoM is much more useful for this.  Once that is determined the shooter can work on adjusting his sights and/or aiming off in order to bring his Mean Point of Impact to the Intended Mean Point of Impact.

Sample chart.

To work up a load, prepare several batches of ammunition. The powder used (Swiss, Schuetzen, Goex, Pyrodex, etc.), the granulation of the powder (1F, 2F, 3F, etc.), any filler used to fill the case (wool, corn meal, etc.), whether grease cookies ae used or not, and the bullet type can all be varied, but only change one thing in every batch. Each batch should have at least five rounds in it; the commonly seen three-round batches are statistically insufficient, and ten rounds would be even more precise (see youtu.be/Ahp_bw5ZGjk).

Make a chart listing each load, as shown above. In this example, we consider two kinds of bullets (ring-tailed and Richmond Labs) with two different kinds of powder (Swiss and Schuetzen) and three different powder loads (55, 60, or 65 grains of each brand) for the 1859 Sharps Infantry Rifle.  Of course, this can be expanded with many different loads, but that will require a lot more test batches of at least five rounds each—this chart should only be seen as an example. Then, too, the test can be conducted at different ranges since a load that shoots well at 100 yards may not do so at 500 yards, so a completely different chart would have to be prepared. As this makes plain, the working-up process can be extremely involved and require a lot of ammunition; note that just working through the chart shown will require 60 rounds.

Next, take the chart and the ammunition (clearly marked) to the range. Since this is a test of precision rather than of accuracy (i.e., how the ammunition shoots from a given piece rather than how well the shooter shoots), all firing should be done using a rest to take the human factor out of the equation as much as possible. Make certain to use exactly the same Point of Aim and Sight Picture for each shot.  Calculate the Figure of Merit (see the link above) for each table of fire (in other words, each five-round test batch) and it will be obvious which load works best for that firearm at that range. Once the optimum load has been determined the sights can be adjusted and/or the principles of aiming off can be used in order to bring the Mean Point of Impact as close as possible to the Intended Mean Point of Impact with every round. After that, it’s a simple question of frequent, consistent practice to improve the results.

The Snider-Enfield Position Drill

Introduction
British musketry training of the nineteenth century took recruits through a very specific set of exercises to teach them how to shoot before they fired a single live cartridge.  First the recruit was taught to clean, maintain, and operate his weapon, then he was taught the theoretical principles of musketry, then he was trained in the three critical drills of musketry:  The Position Drill, The Aiming Drill, and the Judging Distance Drill.  The latter two drills we will reserve for a later post (or wait for my forthcoming book on Snider musketry), but here we will demonstrate the Position Drill.  All of this material is taken directly from the 1870 Musketry Instruction.

In this exercise the recruit, as well as the drilled soldier, is to be put through all the motions of firing, standing and kneeling, with the same accuracy as if actually firing ball, close attention being paid to each motion, the object being to habituate him to the correct position, to give him a perfect command of his rifle, and to establish the connection that should exist between the hand and the eye. The eye regulates every action of the hand, but constant practice is required to enable the latter readily to raise the rifle to an object on which the eye may be fixed, and the forefinger to act upon the trigger at the proper moment.

“The position drill was considered the single most important drill of all that were instructed at the School of Musketry at Hythe. General Hay, the commander of the School of Musketry at Hythe, would say ‘A man may be taught to shoot by drill alone, if he can but be brought to faith in the theory.’ Today we would call the Position Drill basic good shooting fundamentals. The key to the Position Drill, and indeed the key to good shooting in 1859 or today, is consistency. Good shooting comes from doing the same thing, every single time. Soldiers would practice the Position Drill over and over, until they had absolute mastery over their rifle.

“The objective of the Position Drill, being the most important of all the drills taught at Hythe, was to establish an instantaneous connection between the soldier’s eye and finger. The soldier was placed in, and habituated to, the best position for independent firing, as if actually firing live cartridges. Instructors paid extremely close attention to every motion of the Position Drill. General Hay himself would walk the line during the instruction of the Position Drill, ‘pointing out even the most apparently trivial defects.’ The Position drill is so sure an index of shooting that the officer instructors at Hythe could tell who would shoot well with live ammunition simply by observing how well they performed the Position Drill.”  (Gibbons, Brett A. Handbook for the School of Musketry. Privately Published, 2018, pp. 18-19.)

First Practice
This practice is intended to accustom the soldier to handle his rifle expertly, to strengthen his left arm so as to give him a perfect command of the rifle with the left hand, and to habituate him to raise it to the shoulder, in the direction of the object the eyes are fixed upon, without moving his body. It is therefore to be continued until these points are accomplished. No defect, however trivial, is to be overlooked, and the instructor is to explain the errors, and their bad effects, when the squad is standing at ease.

Order Arms.

The Instructor commands:
At ---- yards, Ready.
As per regulation in the Platoon Exercise.

• Adjust the rear sight with the fingers of the right hand.
• Bring the hammer to full cock with the right hand.
• Return to the Ready, eyes directed at a target.

At --- yards, Ready.

The instructor is to be most particular in this, and the following practices, to see that every man holds his rifle firmly with the left hand, at the place where it is to be held when at the “present,” viz., behind the lower band, and not nearer the nipple than the projection in front of the lockplate; that the fingers of the right hand are behind the trigger guard, that the body is erect, the left side being perpendicular, with the left breast over the left foot, that the shoulders are at the half face, and the feet at right angles, and that the eyes are fixed on the mark, or object in front, with the head in the same direction, and erect.

Present.
Without in the slightest degree moving the body, head, or eye raise the rifle smartly to the front of the right shoulder to the full extent of the left arm, the arms to move close to the body, the back sight to be upright, the top part of the heel plate to be in a line with the top part of the shoulder, the muzzle to point a few inches below the mark the eyes are fixed upon, the forefinger placed inside the trigger guard, and both elbows inclined downwards.

Present.

The squad is frequently to be brought back to the Ready by the command as you were in order to establish the men in the position above detailed, to point out errors, and to explain the subsequent motions of the practice: e.g., Present. As you were. Present. As you were, and so on, until the first motion is performed satisfactorily, when the second and third motions are to be similarly explained, and afterwards the following commands to be given: Present – Two – Three.

Two.
Bring the rifle smartly into the hollow of right shoulder, which must not be allowed to give way, pressing it thereto with the left hand, and at the same instant bring the left elbow under the rifle, and the right elbow nearly square with, and well to the front of the right shoulder, to form a bed for the butt, without moving the body, head, or eye, placing the forefinger round the trigger like a hook, but without pressing it.

Two.

Three.
Bring the rifle smartly to the ready position, without moving the body, head, or eye, placing the forefinger at the same time behind the trigger guard.

Three.

Ease springs.  Order Arms.  Stand at ease.
As per regulations.

Ease springs.  Order Arms.

Second Practice
This is much the same as the First Practice, except this time when the soldier comes to Present he is to raise the muzzle until he has a good sight picture and then dry fire his piece.

Position drill, by numbers, Second Practice, as a front rank standing.
At ---- yards, Ready.
As per regulations in the Platoon Exercise.

Ready.

Present.
Combine the actions of the first practice above into a single action and look at the target through the rear sight aperture.

Present.

Two.
Raise the muzzle steadily until the top of the foresight is brought in a line with the object through the notch of the backsight, pressing the trigger at the same time, without the least motion of the hand, eye, or arm, until the hammer falls [i.e., dry firing the piece], still keeping the eye fixed on the object. The breathing to be restrained in performing this motion.  Note that this is performed with an unloaded rifle with the snap cap in place to allow dry firing.

Two.

Three.
Bring the rifle to the ready position and “full cock” in order to prepare to conduct the drill again.

Three.

Ease springs. Order arms. Stand at ease.
As per regulations.

Order arms.

Third Practice
There is a Third Practice as well, but it differs from the second only in being done continuously at the soldier's own time.