I have heard this story so many times. Army Ordinance ignores the manufacturer's requirements for ammunition and goes with something easy for them to supply, but does not work in the field. The end result, our own men die. Thanks for the research into this and practical demonstrations.
@@Losantiville The worse M16 crime that OD committed was first issuing them without the proper maintenance kit. (the gun oils where not supplied I think) this is primarily what caused the myth of the m16 being unreliable, when the rifle was just objectively better suited to jungle warfare than the m14
Some people are here to watch obscure historic arms be fired. I'm here to listen to the questionable procurement and supply decisions of the US Army during the Civil War.
If you had just ended at "Questionable procurement and supply decisions of the US Army." You still would have been correct. You'd think after 150 years the army would do better with its procurement... 😂
This story of the issue of the improperly fitting ammo reminds me of the issue my grandfather had when he cast his own lead slugs and used black powder to shoot in his brand new Model 94 Winchester in 32 Winchester Special. It garnered a reputation for terrible accuracy("Couldn't hit the Side of a Barn"!) It took my father(his only son) to work out the problem when he took it upon himself to bring the gun to the Engineering Dept. at the University of Maine in the fall of 1939. The Bore diameter was .321 in. And the cast lead bullets that my Grandfather mould turned out were actually intended for earlier .32 cal guns which were .318"! The solution(until a suitable .321 mould became available) was to "Bump" the .318 lead slugs in a bullet sizing die on the bench to 'squat' them up in diameter and then exceptional accuracy was found. Another example of using the wrong ammo was the Vietnam era debacle of our soldiers dying because of excessive fouling of their M-16s. Eugene Stoner developed the ammunition to utilize the New "Ball" Powder, but when the U.S. military looked at the cost of this powder versus the huge leftover stocks of WW II -era "flake" powder, the decision was made to develop a load using the ancient propellant, not realizing the effect the humid jungle atmosphere would have in the fouling from this "cost-cutting" decision... Typical 'military intelligence"!!
And not only did they use the more "dirty" flake powder, they didn't issue a proper cleaning kit because Colt had somehow given them the impression the gun didn't need to be cleaned.
@@vicroc4 That 'no cleaning needed' idea was due to the chrome lined chamber, which the Army didn't want to pay for, so the M-16s they ordered didn't have it. So it was a combination of three factors: the wrong propellant in the ammo, the lack of chrome lining, and not supplying cleaning kits, that caused the poor reputation of the M-16 early on. Basically, McNamara being a cheap bastard, because that's how it worked in the auto industry where he came from.
@AndrewMartin-yd2kz Okay, but even with clean-burning powder and a chromed barrel, fouling will gum things up eventually. It just can go longer between cleanings, not "never needs cleaning" as seems to be what was sold to the Army. Pretty sure the Air Force had cleaning kits for their Model 601s, and those did have chromed innards. So someone sold the Army a bill of goods.
I bought one from a fellow skirmisher some 40 years ago. It had a Bill Large barre in .69 installed on the original breech. I have the .71 barrel that it was taken off. It shot the old Idea .69 minne pretty good @ 50 and 100. with 50 gn ff. Been thinking of pulling it out of the safe and shooting it again. I need to pull the breech to see if it was changed during the change. A true story, when my daughter started skirmishing @ 15 she loved the Garibaldi and shot it for some 3 seasons. The look she got from the guys when loading that 69 minne was priceless :-)
One thing it really brings home is the necessity of a proper aim and trigger squeeze. When I was a soldier *70-77 we trained with the M-16A1. Our DI's tried to stress the proper method of firing but a lot of soldiers figured hell I have 20 rounds, I can just spray and pray. Being a farm boy who cut his teeth on a Remington Target-master Jr. .22 rifle I had a quite an advantage over the city boys who had never seen a rifle before Basic. I always qualified Expert and it was with ease because I knew how to shoot and realistically the 5.56 has the same handling quality as the .22lr as far as recoil is concerned.
"Büchse" is not antiquated at all, it's still commonly used in hunting terms, to divide in rifle (Büchse) and shotgun (Flinte) and to describe combined guns like a Büchsflinte (side by side shotgun/rifle caliber).
In the 15th C, German gun makers made "Hackenbuch", "hook guns", basically a heavy cal weapon where recoil is absorbed by a hook against a wall or fence, a "pintle mount anywhere" weapon. The French mis pronounced this as Harquebus and the English re-mispronounced this as Arquebus, the standard weapon of the English Civil War in the 17th C, despite the 'hook' having vanished over a century before.
I had a Garibaldi rifle back in the early 1980's when I shot with the 1st Mich. Inf. in the NSSA. I would use it when we shot the stake or hanging pressboard event. It had a custom made .71 cal. wadcutter mine' ball mold made by Mike Newhouse and I'm sure I did not use more than 40-50 grs of 2F for a load. The rifle was accurate but had a heck of a recoil, the most I ever shot it at one time was eight shots and I remember having a heck of a headache from the recoil. We had no idea it had a Delveigne breech. It would take a huge chunk of wood out of the target. I wish I still had that rifle now.
This is fascinating. I thought there is NO WAY that you could mess up a muzzle loading rifle, but alas ordinance has found a way to disappoint me in ways I never thought to imagine. Again.
This may be silly, but one of the things I like about this channel is that they actually show the smoke cloud much of the time. A lot of channels will just show you the gun, then focus on the definitely very badass pudgy 60-year-old dude while he shoots. I love seeing that full cloud burst out from the front. Also, I appreciate the comprehensive logistical stuff.
Really appreciate this content, especially the history and details behind the topics in question. I love long format videos with lots of detailed research. I'm totally immersed. Keep the rifled musket content rolling!
Holy crap! I wouldn't want to be in a fire fight with that, your shoulder would feel like jelly after 30-50 rounds. How's your after 20 rounds? Thank you for your knowledge of these weapons. Can't wait to come back to Gettysburg to meet you in person. Have a healthy and Blessed New year Bill
Wow! This is geniunely warming my head, I have Adhd and i find this information helpful, your voice calms my wandering mind down, this really helps me focus, hopefully it can help me develop more patiance, gained a subscriber for your beautiful accent, keep it up! ❤
Sadly I zoomes out by the exect middle of the 30 minute video, but its okay, i improved, you may not be a very endearing person, but you are very helpful for me, thanks man, you are fixing my focus❤🎉
I totally get it, I also have ADHD. I am distracted by everything but I can also hyperfocus on things I’m interested in, that’s how I get these videos made.
I have a beautiful Austrian 1849 that was used by the Union in Missouri, with unit marks and everything. I would love to shoot mine, what mold did you use for the pointed conical?
I may have to try that lubricated yarn tied in the grooves of some of my other bullets such at REAL’s. Seems like an interesting and possibly self cleaning solution.
@@papercartridges6705I recently saw Spencer bee box video and I was wondering will the breech loaders and repeaters the Civil War can they Take a guncotton cartridge and what they have in terms of range recoil and will they even survive it
Because of the guns poor reputation I never really researched it, thanks for a more in-depth video on "Garibaldi" rifle I now know a lot more than I did.
Yes, go see the video of the original version of the rifle and experience his glorious hunglish dialog. He actually has some great videos, and he sells some great tools for making combustible pistol cartridges. I've just started making some for my .44 cap and ball revolvers, and I'm going to try them out next week.
An excellent presentation! In general, it appears as if it was the arms procurer, (gov't) that made this an unusable firearm ... Using a 69 caliber instead of the original 71? It is no wonder that the Union troops called this the worst firearm!
Not entirely sure if it's true, but I heard about a similar more recent thing earlish in the War in Afghanistan; they sent Army Ranges with the new FN SCAR to try out, & at the same time gave them new Polymer Magazines to try out too Story I heard goes that they kept jamming & they reported the SCAR unreliable When it works fine with regular metal magazines
On my second deployment I carried 1970s era metal mags. No reason except I liked them, but I did think maybe they were more reliable. On my third deployment they made me use the new P-mags. I have tried to find a reason not to like them, but so far, they’ve been 100% reliable. Not that I really would ever need to shoot anything as a logistics officer… so my opinion is probably irrelevant!
Now I'm wondering if an undersized + properly paper- patched bullet would (eventually..) work in the 71 cal rifle??.. 🤔 (Would it be a PITA to load it??).
...the only thing going through my brain through the entire post through all of the subjects mentioned, implied, overridden, and overlooked. Was "level it." There's so many factors and for those that get called weird because they tried to actually assess the mindset of the time. (And that's with the knowledge that we have fallen back in the progress we have made as a species...) and I don't know what I'm talking about and so I'm gonna shut up now. ...Thank you for the post, absolutely appreciated.
As an ex-ACW re-enactor I have read about this rifle. Thanks for sharing this video. Almost makes me want to get back into ACW re-enacting, however WW2 Re-enacting has been my passion for over 30 years. Too many hobbies not enough money.
A good addition to our knowledge base, thank you. Judging by the load and bullet weights it must have have a recoil similar to a Russian Luttich with a Kulikov winged conical I would imagine.
I bought an excellent Uberti replica of a three banded Enfield, that was in a true .580 cal. I had a mold for a .577 mimiball. All they did was keyhole and were wildly inaccurate. I bought a new mold from Dixie Gun Works in .60 cal. It will now shoot a fist size group at 100 yards. So as in meany things, size does matter!
Regarding the recoil, I suspect the negative attitude may have been simply "not what I'm used to". Some years ago we had a US exchange unit on exercise with us in NZ. As part of familiarisation we had a day firing each other's weapons. That evening there were complaints that our SLRs had the kick of a 12 gauge ( they didn't) and how could we put up with it all day ( they were using M16s). We never thought of our rifles as having a heavy recoil and many preferred them to the smaller calibre rifles that followed, especially for penetration and stopping power. Just what you are used to, I guess. Good Vid. By the way, well explained.
a 75 grain charge behind a 750gr bullet is a big honking charge. Considering it's contemporary was shooting a 250gr lighter bullet over ~15gr less powder, and that recoil is.......considerable. That also appear to be a relatively short and lightweight rifle.
It also goes the other way around. I thought I experienced a miss fire the first time I tried a Dutch c7. I was so used to the recoil of my G3 that it felt like nothing. 😁
It’s my friend Darrell from the Ministry for History channel. It’s a running joke… I “won” that picture at an event raffle several years ago so now I include it in most of my videos just to annoy him.
That seated grouping is a great example of why casualties were so high in the civil war. The armies were still using napoleonic tactics at the start of the war developed during the smoothbores reign and you needed to mass your shots due to the inaccuracies of no rifling. Now during the civil war you had rifled muzzle loaders capable of this accuracy at 100 + meters, which meant that you would most likely hit that man you were aiming at in the opposing formation. Now imagine a company of 200 or so men firing at once all most all hitting their targets, absolutely devastating formula of when technology out paces tactics. By the end of the war you start to see trench warfare develop. Every war starts with the tactics of previous wars and ends with the tactics of the next.
Trench warfare really was nothing new. If you look at the 80 years war in the late 16th early 17th century, they are full of sieges and extensive trench systems. The american civil war was deadly, but it wasnt't exceptional in this sense. The war of 1870 between France and Prussia/other german states had a much higher casualty rate if you look at how short it was. Even back in 1812, at Borodino, with smoothbores, you are talking about 30 000 casualties on the French side, and 50 000 on the russian side. Thats in a two day battle. That was a casualty ratio of nearly 1 out of 3. The civil war has individual companies that have a much higher casualty rate, but you'd be hard pressed to find a case where an entire army suffers casualties like that in such a short period.
It might be worth looking into the weapons that caused the most casualties and how. It's surprising how many infantrymen subconsciously refuse to aim at another man. The vast majority of kills in war are not done via a rifle but rather impersonal means like artillery.
Most civil war engagements were at or below 100 yards. The average soldier never fired his rifle before his first battle, let alone received training on it.
Very interesting. Question: How hard would it have been for the Union to just say to ammunition contractors, "this is the bullet it's designed to use, make moulds, cast the bullets, use them in the cartridges"? After all, all it takes is a few bullet moulds made up and a supply of, dare I say it.....URCHINS to roll the cartridges.
I think at that point the issue was simply that everyone involved on this side of the Atlantic who had the power to make decisions was pig ignorant of the weapon's fundamental design and requirements. They weren't really being directly sold from the Austrian military but passing through multiple hands to reach the U.S., so even if anyone had told the original agents involved that these weapons could not be used with minie bullets no one important might have actually gotten a single word of it by the time the process of acquiring them was complete. Much easier to just write the complaints off as terrible German manufacturing and make a minie ball that fits the gun rather than seriously investigate why the weapon is underperforming, especially since the kammerbuchse was completely out of the context of contemporary American gun culture which by and large focused squarely on French and British developments for continental inspirations.
Not just bullets, tubes for original locks are easy to make. Soldiers can make them in the field themselves, its just rolled foil with compound inside that has both ends crimped.
@@chrismath149 No I won't, because that is precisely my point. The U.S. agents purchasing them and the troops receiving them did not care enough to make the distinction. Even when they did, Austria was often lumped together with "Germany". As evinced when Papercartridges runs through the confusion of terms for the kammerbuchse rifles in U.S. inventories. When even the origins of the rifle become a detail that was not recorded with care, the fact that the weapon was designed in a specific way for a specific manual of arms was almost certain to be lost.
@@100thdragoon Okay, makes sense. But it always annoys me a bit when people use modern terms in regards to the past (like talking about Germany when talking about the middle ages instead of German lands or the HRE (which is also not entirely correct)).
Again, very good presentation. Was it considered by you to be worth trying a more determined use of the ramrod (very aggressive, three times, etc) on the infamous Burton loading? I'm just wondering if it might have made a difference instead of the more 'normal' Springfield/Enfield drill given the 'chamber' concept of the obsolete design.
I love this sort of practical historical approach- really putting things into context! One thing that I don't get - if I were to wander in front of the bench at the range during fire, the range master would shut the entire place down. What's going on there?
I went slowly through the video to see if there were any bullet impacts in the dirt anywhere from the Minies…. I didn’t see anything. It’s like they were shot into orbit.
Not flinching on the misfire earned my subscription. As someone who doesn’t shoot, it didn’t really cross my mind that even with historic rifles that’s a feat one must perform every single time they pull the trigger. Regardless of powder, or weight of the bullet. I think this gun encapsulates few points I have learned about the American civil war on your channel. Firstly the lack of supplies, especially ammunition, as the army grew in orders of magnitude in a blink of an eye, from the perspective of military procurement and training. And secondly, for the same reasons, the non-existent training in marksmanship of most soldiers. Which really turns the effectiveness of small arms into a much more complicated question. I wonder if the supplied ammunition could have been made effectively with field modifications and proper know-how. Hypothetically one could at the very least disassemble it, tie a greased yarn around the bullet, and put it back in. I would also have loved to see you try properly flattening the undersized ammunition. But I doubt that’s a viable strategy without a small maul to “operate” the ramming rod.
Fun fact, German military used the „Dreyse“ Zündnadelgewehr since 1848 that’s the reason the bigger army, the Austrians lost at Königsgrätz. One German saying remains from those days: „so schnell schießen die Preußen nicht.“ the prussians don’t shoot that fast, meaning it can’t be that bad, and assuming it’s worse 😂
I have one of these converted rifles that somehow made it from the U.S. to Nova Scotia Canada many years ago. My conversion was not nearly as well done as the one the author is using in the video. I tried all sorts of Minie bullets with horrible accuracy. I finally managed to get decent accuracy out of it using a double patched .69 round ball at my 60 yard range. It would easily group 4 inches at that range. I never tried shooting it out any farther than that. I would love to get my hands on some proper ammunition for it though.
I did a vid on running 7.62x54R through an 8x56 mannlicher a year ago due to hearing about people doing that and complaining about accuracy and yeah that went just as poorly. I started my target at 11 yards and it was already keyholing badly and I had to stop my test at 25 due to how bad it was off target.
Lived ten years in Rutherford county, TN where the Battle of Stones River was fought. Picked a lot of that ordinance off the ground. Sharps .50s were the most common ball to be found picked up a lot of lead but never anything of value.
Question from a novice: When you are banging that heavy ramrod down the barrel, could it not ignite the gunpowder? I noticed that you held the ramrod between your thumb and indexfinger as not to get it shot through your hand.
Good sir, a question: how do you clean around the pillar inside the breach? Is there a special donut-shaped scourer or some such that goes on the end of that boxcar-axle ramrod-of-doom? Love your content, thank you, Gus
Hot water. I don't jest. The best cleaner is to dump hot water down the barrel......then dump cleaner, then oil to protect. Keep in mind that they didn't intend these rifles to last forever. They expected to lose a bunch in battle and had armorers collecting and refurbishing constantly.
Thank you for the reply. Yes, hot water and additions down the tube, like any black powder muzzle loader. I was mostly interested to know how mechanical action was applied to the area around the pillar, coz it's not like a normal blunt-ended chamber that allows a full-bore swab on the end of yhe rammer to do swabby things against all the dirty surfaces. There's a pillar in the way. If you know how a pillar breach gun gets that swab around the pillar, I'd love to know. Cheers, Gus
In the autumn of 1863, in response to a call from Confederate authorities, the State of North Carolina organized the 66th NC Infantry regiment -- the last regiment raised by the State for "mustering into Confederate service". It was manned by local NC troops, ex-POW camp guards, guerilla forces, railroad guards. These troops had been enlisted for "state service" and they were not thrilled with the idea of being sent out of state. Records show that training and equipping of this regiment was slow. Their first large-scale battle was with Martin's (later Kirkland's) Brigade of Hoke's Division at 2nd Cold Harbor. The regiment was placed near Lee's right (southern flank) with another NC Brigade and some SC and GA troops. The official history of the regiment says that Brigade headquarters officers were highly impressed by the performance of the regiment. The history says that the Brigade was "firing loads of a round .69 caliber ball with two or three pieces of buckshot", The quick loading of this ammunition was said to give the North Carolinians the capability of "volleys that spouted sheets of fire, flame, and lead" and was said to have inflicted heavy casualties on the attacking Union troops. The history says that the Adjutant of Martin's Brigade met with the surgeon of one of the New York regiments of the "second NY Irish Brigade" during a truce to recover wounded between the lines and the surgeon described the effects of the buck-and-ball as "a hellish weapon that had left almost all survivors of his regiment with buckshot wounds". Your video reminded me that other records state that the regiment had been equipped with "Austrian pin-fire muskets" because quality Minie'-ball firing rifles were not available at the time. The regiment is recorded as *hating* the Austrian arms with complaints of failures of the firing mechanism, difficulty in loading, and troubling inaccuracy. They were later re-issued with small-bore, Minie' firing rifles by the time of the Battle of the Crater. I had always taken all this to mean that they were issued with ordinary-but-old-fashioned .69 caliber smoothbores (Springfield/Harpers Ferry/Fayetteville made??) and these were replaced by Austrian arms but now I wonder if they were using the Austrian rifles at Cold Harbor -- but lack of rifle ammunition to properly match the Austrian rifles wasn't available and they were firing "buck and ball" - normally a smoothbore load - at Cold Harbor because that was all that they had. Was there another Austrian large-bore called a "pin firing weapon" or is this an imprecise descriptive of the tube-type ignition system and the Austrian rifles used were actually "Kammerbuchse" type? Many thanks for the informative and entertaining video.
I would go for the Henry rifle! At least the Kammerbuschse is a safe rifle so no one gets hurt. Was it a 750 gramme weight bullet or a 750 grain bullet weight.
I have an old shotgun that might have started out as one of these rifles. It is twelve bore. The stock has a cheap piece. And has been shortened. I can find no makers marks just numbers on the lock. Don’t know where I am going with this just trying to figure out what I have
Those lead ice cream cones that it shoots look like they would be very unstable in flight. All that hard ramming couldn't be too good for the rifling near the muzzle either. I think I would have rather been issued a Matchlock
I have heard this story so many times. Army Ordinance ignores the manufacturer's requirements for ammunition and goes with something easy for them to supply, but does not work in the field. The end result, our own men die. Thanks for the research into this and practical demonstrations.
M16 in Vietnam, ordinance Dept changed powder in cartridges. Lots of problems.
@@Losantiville The top example I was thinking of.
@@Losantiville The worse M16 crime that OD committed was first issuing them without the proper maintenance kit. (the gun oils where not supplied I think) this is primarily what caused the myth of the m16 being unreliable, when the rifle was just objectively better suited to jungle warfare than the m14
WW2 American torpedoes come to mind when you say that
@@williamallan5791 The warheads were literally never tested
Some people are here to watch obscure historic arms be fired. I'm here to listen to the questionable procurement and supply decisions of the US Army during the Civil War.
I'm here for the whole package, and love the small drips of dry humor...
If you had just ended at "Questionable procurement and supply decisions of the US Army." You still would have been correct. You'd think after 150 years the army would do better with its procurement... 😂
Same bro
I just love the political drama. Like who was bribed into spending government money so the Austrians could get rid of this thing
@@blue5562I wonder how much of us procurement is straight up bribery and fraud.
Son here is your Prussian rifle from Austria called Gariabaldi in '71, here's your '69 ammo but don't worry it is self cleaning
Count on US Army Ordnance to ignore the ammunition and try shooting .69 out of .71 barrels and then complain about accuracy...
This story of the issue of the improperly fitting ammo reminds me of the issue my grandfather had when he cast his own lead slugs and used black powder to shoot in his brand new Model 94 Winchester in 32 Winchester Special. It garnered a reputation for terrible accuracy("Couldn't hit the Side of a Barn"!) It took my father(his only son) to work out the problem when he took it upon himself to bring the gun to the Engineering Dept. at the University of Maine in the fall of 1939. The Bore diameter was .321 in. And the cast lead bullets that my Grandfather mould turned out were actually intended for earlier
.32 cal guns which were .318"! The solution(until a suitable .321 mould became available) was to "Bump" the
.318 lead slugs in a bullet sizing die on the bench to 'squat' them up in diameter and then exceptional accuracy was found.
Another example of using the wrong ammo was the Vietnam era debacle of our soldiers dying because of excessive fouling of their M-16s. Eugene Stoner developed the ammunition to utilize the New "Ball" Powder, but when the U.S. military looked at the cost of this powder versus the huge leftover stocks of WW II -era "flake" powder, the decision was made to develop a load using the ancient propellant, not realizing the effect the humid jungle atmosphere would have in the fouling from this "cost-cutting" decision... Typical 'military intelligence"!!
And not only did they use the more "dirty" flake powder, they didn't issue a proper cleaning kit because Colt had somehow given them the impression the gun didn't need to be cleaned.
That is a great story about your father and grandfather. Thanks for sharing it.
@@vicroc4 That 'no cleaning needed' idea was due to the chrome lined chamber, which the Army didn't want to pay for, so the M-16s they ordered didn't have it. So it was a combination of three factors: the wrong propellant in the ammo, the lack of chrome lining, and not supplying cleaning kits, that caused the poor reputation of the M-16 early on. Basically, McNamara being a cheap bastard, because that's how it worked in the auto industry where he came from.
@AndrewMartin-yd2kz Okay, but even with clean-burning powder and a chromed barrel, fouling will gum things up eventually. It just can go longer between cleanings, not "never needs cleaning" as seems to be what was sold to the Army.
Pretty sure the Air Force had cleaning kits for their Model 601s, and those did have chromed innards. So someone sold the Army a bill of goods.
Thought the military used ball type powder?
I bought one from a fellow skirmisher some 40 years ago. It had a Bill Large barre in .69 installed on the original breech. I have the .71 barrel that it was taken off. It shot the old Idea .69 minne pretty good @ 50 and 100. with 50 gn ff. Been thinking of pulling it out of the safe and shooting it again. I need to pull the breech to see if it was changed during the change. A true story, when my daughter started skirmishing @ 15 she loved the Garibaldi and shot it for some 3 seasons. The look she got from the guys when loading that 69 minne was priceless :-)
One thing it really brings home is the necessity of a proper aim and trigger squeeze. When I was a soldier *70-77 we trained with the M-16A1. Our DI's tried to stress the proper method of firing but a lot of soldiers figured hell I have 20 rounds, I can just spray and pray. Being a farm boy who cut his teeth on a Remington Target-master Jr. .22 rifle I had a quite an advantage over the city boys who had never seen a rifle before Basic. I always qualified Expert and it was with ease because I knew how to shoot and realistically the 5.56 has the same handling quality as the .22lr as far as recoil is concerned.
"Büchse" is not antiquated at all, it's still commonly used in hunting terms, to divide in rifle (Büchse) and shotgun (Flinte) and to describe combined guns like a Büchsflinte (side by side shotgun/rifle caliber).
In the 15th C, German gun makers made "Hackenbuch", "hook guns", basically a heavy cal weapon where recoil is absorbed by a hook against a wall or fence, a "pintle mount anywhere" weapon.
The French mis pronounced this as Harquebus and the English re-mispronounced this as Arquebus, the standard weapon of the English Civil War in the 17th C, despite the 'hook' having vanished over a century before.
And Büchsenmacher is still used as the official term for a certified gunsmith
Thats "Hakenbüchse"@@aestheticdemon3802
@@aestheticdemon3802 Hakenbüchse.
I had a Garibaldi rifle back in the early 1980's when I shot with the 1st Mich. Inf. in the NSSA. I would use it when we shot the stake or hanging pressboard event. It had a custom made .71 cal. wadcutter mine' ball mold made by Mike Newhouse and I'm sure I did not use more than 40-50 grs of 2F for a load. The rifle was accurate but had a heck of a recoil, the most I ever shot it at one time was eight shots and I remember having a heck of a headache from the recoil. We had no idea it had a Delveigne breech. It would take a huge chunk of wood out of the target. I wish I still had that rifle now.
They are available... I see about two to three times a year.
Property Manager at Fort Shenandoah has several for sale.
This is fascinating. I thought there is NO WAY that you could mess up a muzzle loading rifle, but alas ordinance has found a way to disappoint me in ways I never thought to imagine. Again.
This may be silly, but one of the things I like about this channel is that they actually show the smoke cloud much of the time. A lot of channels will just show you the gun, then focus on the definitely very badass pudgy 60-year-old dude while he shoots. I love seeing that full cloud burst out from the front.
Also, I appreciate the comprehensive logistical stuff.
That still is pretty smokeless. It can become pretty foggy in no time firing powder from that period.
Really appreciate this content, especially the history and details behind the topics in question. I love long format videos with lots of detailed research. I'm totally immersed. Keep the rifled musket content rolling!
Another excellent video! Very informative and accurate! Having just visited Gettysburg makes everything even more relevant! Please keep them coming!
Thanks for another excellent presentation.
>750 grain bullet
Holy crap, that's a whopper. My 72cal Kodiak only takes a 588 grain expanding base slug.
Holy crap! I wouldn't want to be in a fire fight with that, your shoulder would feel like jelly after 30-50 rounds. How's your after 20 rounds? Thank you for your knowledge of these weapons. Can't wait to come back to Gettysburg to meet you in person.
Have a healthy and Blessed New year
Bill
Wow! This is geniunely warming my head, I have Adhd and i find this information helpful, your voice calms my wandering mind down, this really helps me focus, hopefully it can help me develop more patiance, gained a subscriber for your beautiful accent, keep it up! ❤
Sadly I zoomes out by the exect middle of the 30 minute video, but its okay, i improved, you may not be a very endearing person, but you are very helpful for me, thanks man, you are fixing my focus❤🎉
I totally get it, I also have ADHD. I am distracted by everything but I can also hyperfocus on things I’m interested in, that’s how I get these videos made.
Wow, that actually impresses me, your videos are earnest and geninue, not like any other clickbaity youtube channel, quality over attention! 🎉🥂
Buys unchecked, shitty conversions of a rifle, supplies the wrong caliber, doesn't load it properly -> "ThE rIFlE Is SHit!"
Love these videos about the lesser known firearms. Helps when reading about theTrans-Mississippi. Thank you.
I have a beautiful Austrian 1849 that was used by the Union in Missouri, with unit marks and everything. I would love to shoot mine, what mold did you use for the pointed conical?
I may have to try that lubricated yarn tied in the grooves of some of my other bullets such at REAL’s. Seems like an interesting and possibly self cleaning solution.
This channel is my recent discovery and I love it! Shooting is great addition to amazing story about guns. Keep going like this.
Glad you found me. Plenty more historical gun nerd videos are coming!
@@papercartridges6705I recently saw Spencer bee box video and I was wondering will the breech loaders and repeaters the Civil War can they Take a guncotton cartridge and what they have in terms of range recoil and will they even survive it
Because of the guns poor reputation I never really researched it, thanks for a more in-depth video on "Garibaldi" rifle I now know a lot more than I did.
Yes, go see the video of the original version of the rifle and experience his glorious hunglish dialog. He actually has some great videos, and he sells some great tools for making combustible pistol cartridges. I've just started making some for my .44 cap and ball revolvers, and I'm going to try them out next week.
I'd like to see ballistic gel torso take a few of those pointed rounds, maybe compare to other weapon systems around in the Civil War.
You do good work.
Nice to listen to somebody who knows what he is talking about.
To say the difference is night and day is a vast understatement! And that was a surprisingly good group size from the bench.
For a bullet that funky shaped, it is absurdly accurate. Makes no sense.
Fascinating, & highly informative with all of the historical facts. Bravo! 🙋🙏
Another instructive and great video, The explanation and range demonstration is fantastic!Keep them coming Brett.
An excellent presentation!
In general, it appears as if it was the arms procurer, (gov't) that made this an unusable firearm ... Using a 69 caliber instead of the original 71? It is no wonder that the Union troops called this the worst firearm!
Not entirely sure if it's true, but I heard about a similar more recent thing earlish in the War in Afghanistan; they sent Army Ranges with the new FN SCAR to try out, & at the same time gave them new Polymer Magazines to try out too
Story I heard goes that they kept jamming & they reported the SCAR unreliable
When it works fine with regular metal magazines
On my second deployment I carried 1970s era metal mags. No reason except I liked them, but I did think maybe they were more reliable. On my third deployment they made me use the new P-mags. I have tried to find a reason not to like them, but so far, they’ve been 100% reliable.
Not that I really would ever need to shoot anything as a logistics officer… so my opinion is probably irrelevant!
A great video, thank you for sharing your research and experimentation!
I got one in a Calvary Carbine configuration. Mine has a .65 smooth bore, if I remember correctly. Its conversion to percussion is pretty good.
Now I'm wondering if an undersized + properly paper- patched bullet would (eventually..) work in the 71 cal rifle??.. 🤔
(Would it be a PITA to load it??).
...the only thing going through my brain through the entire post through all of the subjects mentioned, implied, overridden, and overlooked.
Was "level it."
There's so many factors and for those that get called weird because they tried to actually assess the mindset of the time. (And that's with the knowledge that we have fallen back in the progress we have made as a species...) and I don't know what I'm talking about and so I'm gonna shut up now.
...Thank you for the post, absolutely appreciated.
As an ex-ACW re-enactor I have read about this rifle. Thanks for sharing this video. Almost makes me want to get back into ACW re-enacting, however WW2 Re-enacting has been my passion for over 30 years. Too many hobbies not enough money.
You need to try shooting it with the enlarged Burton bullets next.
A good addition to our knowledge base, thank you. Judging by the load and bullet weights it must have have a recoil similar to a Russian Luttich with a Kulikov winged conical I would imagine.
Some bonus points for your new favorite word:
"Kugel" means literally "orb", meaning "Spitzkugel" is a "pointed orb".
Kugel means also bullet (kogel in Dutch)
@@ikke12345 Yes, but that is a secondary meaning because the first bullets were round which is also were the English term "rounds" comes from.
Kugel can also be translated as "Ball", thus the Wehrmacht AA tank "KugelBlitz" - "Ball Lightning".
I bought an excellent Uberti replica of a three banded Enfield, that was in a true .580 cal. I had a mold for a .577 mimiball. All they did was keyhole and were wildly inaccurate. I bought a new mold from Dixie Gun Works in .60 cal. It will now shoot a fist size group at 100 yards. So as in meany things, size does matter!
I have lymen mold that's. 575 the bullets come out the mold at .580. I have to size it to .579 for my armi sport 1861.
Regarding the recoil, I suspect the negative attitude may have been simply "not what I'm used to". Some years ago we had a US exchange unit on exercise with us in NZ. As part of familiarisation we had a day firing each other's weapons. That evening there were complaints that our SLRs had the kick of a 12 gauge ( they didn't) and how could we put up with it all day ( they were using M16s). We never thought of our rifles as having a heavy recoil and many preferred them to the smaller calibre rifles that followed, especially for penetration and stopping power.
Just what you are used to, I guess.
Good Vid. By the way, well explained.
a 75 grain charge behind a 750gr bullet is a big honking charge. Considering it's contemporary was shooting a 250gr lighter bullet over ~15gr less powder, and that recoil is.......considerable. That also appear to be a relatively short and lightweight rifle.
It also goes the other way around.
I thought I experienced a miss fire the first time I tried a Dutch c7. I was so used to the recoil of my G3 that it felt like nothing. 😁
Another amazing video! I just love these. They are big honkin holes and that grouping is impressive. Who is the portrait on the mantle of?
It’s my friend Darrell from the Ministry for History channel. It’s a running joke… I “won” that picture at an event raffle several years ago so now I include it in most of my videos just to annoy him.
With a lubed cloth patch, the mini ball might do better, though that would defeat the purpose of the cartrage.
this is such a cool video man, love learning about these obscure instances where for the men at the time it was an absolute priority to set straight
That's Friday afternoon sorted - Thanks, Brett :D
Good info, thank you for all the experiments
I wana see some hi speed shots on those inaccurate bullets to see exactly what is going on with them
I'm an ex ACW re-enactor and never heard of this "Federal" gun. Really interesting.
That seated grouping is a great example of why casualties were so high in the civil war. The armies were still using napoleonic tactics at the start of the war developed during the smoothbores reign and you needed to mass your shots due to the inaccuracies of no rifling. Now during the civil war you had rifled muzzle loaders capable of this accuracy at 100 + meters, which meant that you would most likely hit that man you were aiming at in the opposing formation. Now imagine a company of 200 or so men firing at once all most all hitting their targets, absolutely devastating formula of when technology out paces tactics. By the end of the war you start to see trench warfare develop. Every war starts with the tactics of previous wars and ends with the tactics of the next.
Trench warfare really was nothing new. If you look at the 80 years war in the late 16th early 17th century, they are full of sieges and extensive trench systems. The american civil war was deadly, but it wasnt't exceptional in this sense. The war of 1870 between France and Prussia/other german states had a much higher casualty rate if you look at how short it was.
Even back in 1812, at Borodino, with smoothbores, you are talking about 30 000 casualties on the French side, and 50 000 on the russian side. Thats in a two day battle. That was a casualty ratio of nearly 1 out of 3. The civil war has individual companies that have a much higher casualty rate, but you'd be hard pressed to find a case where an entire army suffers casualties like that in such a short period.
It might be worth looking into the weapons that caused the most casualties and how. It's surprising how many infantrymen subconsciously refuse to aim at another man. The vast majority of kills in war are not done via a rifle but rather impersonal means like artillery.
Most civil war engagements were at or below 100 yards. The average soldier never fired his rifle before his first battle, let alone received training on it.
Another excellent video. Thanks for all the work you put into them.
Terrific video: extremely interesting and very well explained; congratulations my friend!
This is like the old adage, right tool for the right job! Great video brother!
Very interesting. Question: How hard would it have been for the Union to just say to ammunition contractors, "this is the bullet it's designed to use, make moulds, cast the bullets, use them in the cartridges"? After all, all it takes is a few bullet moulds made up and a supply of, dare I say it.....URCHINS to roll the cartridges.
I think at that point the issue was simply that everyone involved on this side of the Atlantic who had the power to make decisions was pig ignorant of the weapon's fundamental design and requirements. They weren't really being directly sold from the Austrian military but passing through multiple hands to reach the U.S., so even if anyone had told the original agents involved that these weapons could not be used with minie bullets no one important might have actually gotten a single word of it by the time the process of acquiring them was complete. Much easier to just write the complaints off as terrible German manufacturing and make a minie ball that fits the gun rather than seriously investigate why the weapon is underperforming, especially since the kammerbuchse was completely out of the context of contemporary American gun culture which by and large focused squarely on French and British developments for continental inspirations.
Not just bullets, tubes for original locks are easy to make. Soldiers can make them in the field themselves, its just rolled foil with compound inside that has both ends crimped.
@@100thdragoon Would you please stop talking about German manufacturing when the rifle was produced in Austria?
@@chrismath149 No I won't, because that is precisely my point. The U.S. agents purchasing them and the troops receiving them did not care enough to make the distinction. Even when they did, Austria was often lumped together with "Germany". As evinced when Papercartridges runs through the confusion of terms for the kammerbuchse rifles in U.S. inventories.
When even the origins of the rifle become a detail that was not recorded with care, the fact that the weapon was designed in a specific way for a specific manual of arms was almost certain to be lost.
@@100thdragoon Okay, makes sense. But it always annoys me a bit when people use modern terms in regards to the past (like talking about Germany when talking about the middle ages instead of German lands or the HRE (which is also not entirely correct)).
Again, very good presentation. Was it considered by you to be worth trying a more determined use of the ramrod (very aggressive, three times, etc) on the infamous Burton loading? I'm just wondering if it might have made a difference instead of the more 'normal' Springfield/Enfield drill given the 'chamber' concept of the obsolete design.
I love this sort of practical historical approach- really putting things into context!
One thing that I don't get - if I were to wander in front of the bench at the range during fire, the range master would shut the entire place down. What's going on there?
7:32 That took me my surprise, and gave me quite a chuckle, ha ha.
Seeing the completely blank target after the Minie balls gave me a good laugh
I went slowly through the video to see if there were any bullet impacts in the dirt anywhere from the Minies…. I didn’t see anything. It’s like they were shot into orbit.
standard "didn't RTFM" problem. what does your dentist think about your paper cartridge habit?
7:30 this killed me😂😂
7:50 “And then…war were declared”
Too bad you didn't try the 750 gr/75 gr load to see if it did any better, but I appreciate your concern for your shoulder.
More concerned about a 170 year old wood stock shattering. I can get a new shoulder… but Kaiser Franz isn’t making new stocks.
On behalf of the state that made and failed to produce good ammunition for the Cosmopolitan carbine, I apologize to the people of the Austria.
Not flinching on the misfire earned my subscription. As someone who doesn’t shoot, it didn’t really cross my mind that even with historic rifles that’s a feat one must perform every single time they pull the trigger. Regardless of powder, or weight of the bullet.
I think this gun encapsulates few points I have learned about the American civil war on your channel. Firstly the lack of supplies, especially ammunition, as the army grew in orders of magnitude in a blink of an eye, from the perspective of military procurement and training.
And secondly, for the same reasons, the non-existent training in marksmanship of most soldiers. Which really turns the effectiveness of small arms into a much more complicated question.
I wonder if the supplied ammunition could have been made effectively with field modifications and proper know-how. Hypothetically one could at the very least disassemble it, tie a greased yarn around the bullet, and put it back in. I would also have loved to see you try properly flattening the undersized ammunition. But I doubt that’s a viable strategy without a small maul to “operate” the ramming rod.
I take this title as an insult for the mighty Austrian Empire. :D
No dual monarchies were harmed in the making of this video.
@@papercartridges6705 :D
Well I have to say I learned something today. This video was very well put together and it was very informative.
Glad you enjoyed it! Thanks!
Another fantastic video
Cheers
Like a swiss clock...I listen to you talk for any period of time...I start getting an itch to jump into a campaign on Grand Tactician.
Thank you,most enjoyable!
The early rifles in history where called, Archbuca. an arch with a hole.
I spy with my little eye something very similar to 11.15x60mmR Mauser in that box.
glad you properly describe the .69 bullets
Excellent Australd1 Gar1buchse video
Nicely done. Thanks for illustrating a mid-19th Century variant of "garbage in, garbage out"
Fun fact, German military used the „Dreyse“ Zündnadelgewehr since 1848 that’s the reason the bigger army, the Austrians lost at Königsgrätz. One German saying remains from those days: „so schnell schießen die Preußen nicht.“ the prussians don’t shoot that fast, meaning it can’t be that bad, and assuming it’s worse 😂
The Austrian Stoßtaktik, charging with the bayonet in dense column formations, probably also helped.
@@papercartridges6705 as well as the rate of fire and the precission..... I don´t want to talk about discipline and so on ;-9
I have one of these converted rifles that somehow made it from the U.S. to Nova Scotia Canada many years ago. My conversion was not nearly as well done as the one the author is using in the video. I tried all sorts of Minie bullets with horrible accuracy. I finally managed to get decent accuracy out of it using a double patched .69 round ball at my 60 yard range. It would easily group 4 inches at that range. I never tried shooting it out any farther than that. I would love to get my hands on some proper ammunition for it though.
Fascinating video, very distressing that they did not perform, a lot of good guys were not properly armed.
I did a vid on running 7.62x54R through an 8x56 mannlicher a year ago due to hearing about people doing that and complaining about accuracy and yeah that went just as poorly. I started my target at 11 yards and it was already keyholing badly and I had to stop my test at 25 due to how bad it was off target.
"Büchse" is still used for firearms, for any firearm with rifling while the counterpart wiithout any rifling are called "Flinten".
Buchse refers to a rund, cylindrical container, originally made from boxwood, and refers to a smoothbore gun, nowadays usually used for shotguns.
Completely wrong. A "Büchse" is a rifled gun, a "Flinte" is a smoothbore in German.
Can you make another review for the Danish tige rifle ?
Would paper patching the .69 bullets help with the accuracy?
Good lord those are some gigantic ass slugs lmao WOW...couldnt imagine being hit by that sucker
Lived ten years in Rutherford county, TN where the Battle of Stones River was fought. Picked a lot of that ordinance off the ground. Sharps .50s were the most common ball to be found picked up a lot of lead but never anything of value.
Question from a novice: When you are banging that heavy ramrod down the barrel, could it not ignite the gunpowder? I noticed that you held the ramrod between your thumb and indexfinger as not to get it shot through your hand.
Oh look what's happening in S Carolina.
LOUD.
WAR WERE DECLARED! 😋
Money gotta be made
Really interesting- and yet procurement b*lls-ups still go on! Great video again - thanks Brett
I wonder if cloth packing those Burton minie balls would have helped them
13:18 Sounds like when they put the wrong powder in the m16's logistical nightmare
Good sir, a question: how do you clean around the pillar inside the breach? Is there a special donut-shaped scourer or some such that goes on the end of that boxcar-axle ramrod-of-doom?
Love your content, thank you, Gus
Hot water.
I don't jest. The best cleaner is to dump hot water down the barrel......then dump cleaner, then oil to protect.
Keep in mind that they didn't intend these rifles to last forever. They expected to lose a bunch in battle and had armorers collecting and refurbishing constantly.
Thank you for the reply. Yes, hot water and additions down the tube, like any black powder muzzle loader. I was mostly interested to know how mechanical action was applied to the area around the pillar, coz it's not like a normal blunt-ended chamber that allows a full-bore swab on the end of yhe rammer to do swabby things against all the dirty surfaces. There's a pillar in the way.
If you know how a pillar breach gun gets that swab around the pillar, I'd love to know. Cheers, Gus
@gussie88bunny I get it now, apologies. I'd be interested to know if there Is a cupped brass brush..... or some other consideration as well
büchse = rifle
muskete = musket
now
flinte = shotgun
but
can be used for any longarm as a derogatory term
or
tongue in cheek
In the autumn of 1863, in response to a call from Confederate authorities, the State of North Carolina organized the 66th NC Infantry regiment -- the last regiment raised by the State for "mustering into Confederate service". It was manned by local NC troops, ex-POW camp guards, guerilla forces, railroad guards. These troops had been enlisted for "state service" and they were not thrilled with the idea of being sent out of state.
Records show that training and equipping of this regiment was slow. Their first large-scale battle was with Martin's (later Kirkland's) Brigade of Hoke's Division at 2nd Cold Harbor. The regiment was placed near Lee's right (southern flank) with another NC Brigade and some SC and GA troops.
The official history of the regiment says that Brigade headquarters officers were highly impressed by the performance of the regiment. The history says that the Brigade was "firing loads of a round .69 caliber ball with two or three pieces of buckshot", The quick loading of this ammunition was said to give the North Carolinians the capability of "volleys that spouted sheets of fire, flame, and lead" and was said to have inflicted heavy casualties on the attacking Union troops. The history says that the Adjutant of Martin's Brigade met with the surgeon of one of the New York regiments of the "second NY Irish Brigade" during a truce to recover wounded between the lines and the surgeon described the effects of the buck-and-ball as "a hellish weapon that had left almost all survivors of his regiment with buckshot wounds".
Your video reminded me that other records state that the regiment had been equipped with "Austrian pin-fire muskets" because quality Minie'-ball firing rifles were not available at the time. The regiment is recorded as *hating* the Austrian arms with complaints of failures of the firing mechanism, difficulty in loading, and troubling inaccuracy. They were later re-issued with small-bore, Minie' firing rifles by the time of the Battle of the Crater.
I had always taken all this to mean that they were issued with ordinary-but-old-fashioned .69 caliber smoothbores (Springfield/Harpers Ferry/Fayetteville made??) and these were replaced by Austrian arms but now I wonder if they were using the Austrian rifles at Cold Harbor -- but lack of rifle ammunition to properly match the Austrian rifles wasn't available and they were firing "buck and ball" - normally a smoothbore load - at Cold Harbor because that was all that they had.
Was there another Austrian large-bore called a "pin firing weapon" or is this an imprecise descriptive of the tube-type ignition system and the Austrian rifles used were actually "Kammerbuchse" type?
Many thanks for the informative and entertaining video.
I can’t imagine trying to do this reloading while thousands of men are charging at you. Even just putting the Cap on must’ve been a nightmare.
wait... at 24:51 did the bullet just slide down the barrel with no rod?
It is possible that in this rifle the skirt of the Burton Minie bullet is deformed on the edge of the chamber when You ram it
a hundred years later us Army experienced same problems with m15 rifles in Vietnam. History simply repeated itself.
I would go for the Henry rifle! At least the Kammerbuschse is a safe rifle so no one gets hurt. Was it a 750 gramme weight bullet or a 750 grain bullet weight.
750 grain.
If this guy is a gamer he definitely plays War of Rights
Never got into it… the loading animation is all wrong. I stick to my flight simulator… yeah I’m a total nerd.
I have an old shotgun that might have started out as one of these rifles. It is twelve bore. The stock has a cheap piece. And has been shortened. I can find no makers marks just numbers on the lock. Don’t know where I am going with this just trying to figure out what I have
Those lead ice cream cones that it shoots look like they would be very unstable in flight. All that hard ramming couldn't be too good for the rifling near the muzzle either.
I think I would have rather been issued a Matchlock
The rifle seems to do fine at 180 years old
Why wouldn’t they just issue buck and ball?
That probably would have been a better choice honestly.