I bought a .45 Colt Spencer Carbine replica about 20 years ago. I bought a rudimentary box from probably Regimental Quartermasters about that time and it worked well for a late war Federal Cavalry impression. Funny how sometimes even during a reenactment battle you get a glimpse of how an advanced weapon really but a twitch on the enemy. Myself and 3 other troopers were holding the flank when a group of six confederate cavalry charged. The others had musketoons and fired a couple of shots and slowed the charge. I told them to fire one more volley and rejoin our lines most haste. They did that and I had the Spencer loaded with two tubes already out on the ready. As soon as they fired I let the horsemen move within a hundred yards and then I opened up. The charged halted and with a nod of the lead horse rider's head turned and retreaded to their original starting position which gave me time to rejoin my lines. I had a little Zen moment knowing that at some point in real life that had to have happened. Thanks for your great impression presentation.
I loved the ending with the M-14. Back when I was reenacting CW I showed up at morning Company inspection with my MP-40. My leutentant, while not particularly surprised, was not amused.
Plus the added joke that the M14 is similarly viewed as backwards for its day and a mistake brought by overly conservative procurement officers. Would have loved it in Korea, though, never mind the Civil War.
@@Clowndoe Problem with the M14 was that there actually were better alternatives out there. And I'm not talking about the AR-15/M16 that would replace it.
@@Clowndoe The US Ordnance Department has a history of bad thinking and bone-head moves. And they didn't like outsiders. Like the shenanigans they pulled with the adoption on the M-16.
The cavalry of the Empire of Brazil used this carbine with excellent effects against Solano Lopez' aggression in the last stages of the Paraguayan War (1864-1870). It was a tremendous upgrade over the basic muzzle-loading carbines and short muskets used by various mounted troops of Emperor Pedro II. In several occasions dismounted cavalarianos could repel otherwise brave paraguayan charges without much effort. I'm not sure how many Spencers were ordered by the Empire, but it was so much appreciated that it defeated the competition and served in distant stations at least until 1890.
@@TheGrenadier97 It's a war with even more extremes than the Civil War; a war where one side was mainly armed with the Brown Bess smoothbore muskets, facing Brazilians with the US supplied Spencer carbine!
But notice that the Spencer wasn't as common; it may have armed very few squadrons of cavalry, although two instances they were used dismounted were recorded. The Empire possessed a lead over Paraguay on Minié rifles, although, like in the US Civil War, the benefits were often negated because the Imperial Army was mostly composed of volunteers trained in "outdated" ways - like in the US.
Tbf to Ripley, a lot of crap was foisted upon Government that he opposed. And early cartridges weren't as good as modern ones. And frankly, "taxpayer advocates" are just as bad, or even worse.
@@edgarburlyman738the early Henry was more expensive, was a 44 rimfire with 28 grains and powder, so it had a pistol cartridge. It is impossible to field strip and the tube is easily damaged. Because it was a smaller bore it was subject to fowling. This is why they bought Spencers and not the Henry.
@@erikschultz7166 it's like a 250gr at 1200 it's not that weak. you need enough iq points to not use it as a hammer. the Spencer is slower than a fast breach loader.
Only relative I know of who served in the American Civil War, used Spencer Rifles, not Carbines. Served in the 98th Illinois Mounted Infantry. Though they started out as an Infantry Regiment. The rifles were purchased by our local community, and as a result of them already having Spencer rifles the 98th Infantry was later converted to Mounted Infantry shortly after deployment.
My ancestor had the same story - started out as 39th Indiana Infantry, bought Spencer rifles and horses and became the 39th Indiana Mounted Infantry, and later became the 8th Indiana Cavalry. I’m not sure if they kept the rifles or got the carbine version then.
@@SStupendous Cental Theater ifthat qualifies as western. Fought in Tennessee. Served in the famous Lightning Brigade under John Wilder. Basically a mounted infantry brigade. Imagine it like a proto motorized/mechanized infantry unit not as a cavalry unit. But before automobiles so obviously used horses to blitz around dismount and engage. With repeaters they were a very effective Brigade combined with that mobility. Battle of Chickamauga I think they pushed up to relieve and try stabilizing the right flank which collapsed. They ended up getting semi surrounded/surrounded and held out mauling the Confederates that tried to approach their position. Held out until the Confederates eventually pulled back enough for them to leave.
@@SStupendous ya I didn't even know I had a relative who served under Wilders until like two years ago. Lol He was on my grandmother's (mother) side of the family which I knew little about. He survived the war as well. Kind of cool finding out I had a relative who was there and came out of it alive.
Well done my friend, finally an honest review of the Blakeslee box. I don't know how many times I've seen it said the box held loaded magazines. But come on, a glorified pistol round! Easily a mid-range round, 45 grains of powder behind a 350 grain bullet. A 56-46 Spencer was credited with killing an 1800 lb Grizzly bear here in California in 1890. The Spencer was not just a newfangled jimcrack, it was the real deal. Spencer worshiper
My understanding is that modern brass has reduced capacity compared to the original brass, making it impossible to get the 45 grains of powder in. And modern powder isn't as heavily optimized for gas generation as powder was back then, so velocities are reduced even further. So it goes from being a light but serviceable rifle cartridge to a glorified pistol cartridge. (then again, the same complaint has been leveled at the modern .300 Blackout round, and that one's still proven to be fairly deadly at the ranges combat actually happens at)
@@vicroc4 True, modern centerfire brass cannot hold as much powder as the original 56-56. But we're talking 19th century ammo here. A .539 bullet weighting 350 gr traveling 1200 fps is not weak sauce. Plus, the sergeant's blanks make his carbine look clunky to operate. A Spencer with proper ammo is a joy to shoot. Spencer worshiper
I’ve had a .45 Colt repro of one of these for a bit now and I’ve always enjoyed it, even if it hangs up every now and again, still a lot of fun! I’ve always wanted one of these boxes and now I know where to get one! Great video, I love these skits. Always informative and entertaining!
A Lovely skit with a Lovely gun! Thanks Kindly Fellas! An amazing example of design and engineering for the day. I’m always very impressed by the quality of art and craftsmanship of the day. And indeed, muzzle loading forever I say! Many Blessings and KeepYour Powder Muzzled! DaveyJO in Pennsylvania
This is great! I always wondered why no one ever use a feeder mechanism in the stock before. I guess someone did and I didn't know about it. Great topic. TY
After having inherited a Spencer( Burnside RIfle Co. Providence RI ) some forty year ago, five years ago I discovered the firing pin was missing. I found a NOS firing pin on eBay. It fits perfectly. Now…Some reasonably current production Rimfire ammo would be nice. So I will assume you are shooting with a conversion block, which one. S&S?
@@papercartridges6705 I don't shoot black powder often but have been doing it since I got my first one as a kid , and have always had an interesting and like for the art of making them shoot accurately .
This carbine has always interested me, and as I'm interested in miniatures, Gilles Lavandera made a nice 1/4 scale working miniature with all the accessories a few years ago. Worth a look.
Hilarious and awesome as always! But we all know that the Smith was the apotheosis of cavalry carbines, so it's kind of moot. Besides, what's the keep the troops from dropping the cartridges inbutt first? Nope, it will never work.
Don’t forget that the ordnance department copied the 1898 Mauser action, and stripper clips, then added a “magazine cut off” to keep ammunition in reserve. Treating it like a single shot breach loader.
While the Spencer was most efficacious within 100 yards, it proved capable much farther out. Despite its rainbow trajectory, the Spencer’s one-ounce ball still caused plenty of grief even after wheezing to its destination. Capt. G.M. Barber, writing from the headquarters of the 1st Battalion Ohio Volunteer Sharpshooters relates his men’s use of the Spencer in 1863 in Chattanooga, Tenn., “…About six miles below Chattanooga the main road, over which supplies for the whole army must be drawn, lays along the banks of the Tennessee river, the south bank of which was held by the enemy, and their Sharpshooters played havoc with our teams and drivers… The river is 500 yards wide and I was ordered to protect the road… we found by actual trial that our guns had longer range and greater accuracy. We seldom missed at 700 yards. I had 125 men with me, and for two weeks kept 600 reb’s at bay, and, as I afterwards learned, killed and wounded over thirty, with a loss of one man wounded.”
The Spencer repeating carbine was also used by foreign volunteers (of many nations; Polish, Hungarian, Spanish, American and, above all, Italian) who, led by Giuseppe Garibaldi, fought the Prussians in Dijon in 1870
so Officers never realy change. Some generals wants to use the service rifle from their time as a young cadet. even when they are closing in on retirement and the weapon wasn´t new back then.
To get a clear picture of how ordnance men thought, watch the movie Zulu Dawn. The British are still using a single shot rifle in 1879. Their key concern was to not let soldiers waste ammunition. The key scene is when the British are being overrun and the ordnance man is stingily handing out a handful of cartridges to a line of desperate men. That mindset was very hard to overcome and continued to have some influence even into WWII.
If you want the real story on the ammunition supply at Isandlwana go watch Rob @ Britishmuzzleoaders series Britishmuzzleloaders in South Africa Part 3E 3F 3G with Col. Mike Snook. (of course the movie had many errors)
@@papercartridges6705 I am assuming this is tongue-in-cheek or a quote from some historical document, or you are still in-character. Regardless, I appreciate your ability to act out this scenes with as much accuracy as you can muster. Thanks.
Well, don't know if that scene really happened, surely there were difficult to supply ammos to the soldiers (they've been placed too far from the camp !), but in 1879 all the armies used single shot rifles, repeaters were few and too frail. Ironically the US Army was one of the latest to adopt a smokeless repeater, with the Krag being issued shortly before the war of 1898 against Spain, and the national guard was yet using the Springfield, as some volounteers unit.
Argentina used the Spencer rifle during the Paraguayan War in 1864-1870, causing tremendous massacres of the Paraguayans in the Battle of Tuyutí in 1866.
I love how you combine history and humor great and entertaining video. I have an idea for a future video. On a recent video you say that the springfields accuracy was compromised by the size of the Burton bullet. I would be interested to know what it could do with the correct size projectile. Thanks
Excellent work, once again. Hmm, Blakeslee tubes, one set of ammo in a (disposable) packet for fixed magazine rifle... Did someone say stripper clip? 😁
Good question, but I believe the answer is "NO." That part of the Henry design made them, and all of the Winchester rifles and carbines that followed, superior as far as the rate of fire goes. Of course, the original .44 Henry cartridges were not that powerful either, but I sure wouldn't want to have gotten shot by one!
Spencer I've learned had ideas for this modification in 1867-68, but that same year the Spencer company went bankrupt - from the number of Spencers produced from 1861-66. Died of success.
Looks like the Ord. Sgt. needed to come over to our side of the war. When our side got their hands on a Spencer, it was shipped to a manufacturer just south of Richmond and copied. Of course it was a little late to be useful. But our ordnance department didn't fight off the idea of a superior weapon. Thinking about it, that weapon may have helped stop the war. Too many sons, brothers and fathers died in that.
The Confederates considered adopting it? Interesting. The Spencer was highly prized by them, when they ran out of ammunition that was it until they could capture more though.
Fun Fact: It was Russia who saved The Union during the American Civil War as they sent their Navy to San Francisco and New York when England and France were just about to enter the war on the side of the Confederates since London created the Confederates. France was already in Mexico making a spear head movement to resupply the Confederates and to open up a Pacific Theatre and to create a port in California. England already amassed 11,000 troops and growing stationed at their Northern Confederacies border now called Canada ready to open a Northern Theatre to divert Union troops away from their Southern Confederacy then to attack The Unions naval blockade. The Union would have been completely destroyed and annexed by those two great powers leaving the Confederates to exist as a puppet state of London. London was already courting (threatening/bribing) other countries to get involved like Spain while Russia was in talks with Prussia to ally with incase London was to intervene. Seeing all of this Tsar Alexander II wrote a letter to Queen Victoria saying “If you enter in this war it will be a casus belli for all out war with the Russian Empire”. The stage was set for the 1st World War and Russia stopped it. There is also a memorial in San Francisco for the hundreds of Russian sailors who came off their Asiatic fleet ships that died while helping the city put out a fire that threatened to lay waste to it during the War.
Russia also helped Thailand (Kingdom of Siam) maintain its sovereignty from being completely Partitioned/Annexed from the British and French around the same time. The very word Thai (ไทย) means 'free man' in the Thai language which is partially to thank to the Russians as they might have ended up being a colony or part of another country/colony if not for their intervention.
About 7 rounds in about 15 seconds (more or less), try this with a Springfield muzzle loading....The absurdity was that the army replaced it in early '70s with the Springfield single shot. Only real problem with repeaters was that, before smokeless powder's invention, the smoke from the weapons, expecially without wind, would've been awful. Naturally,had the US waged war against someone better equipped, they surely would've needed a more modern weapon, as happened in Europe when the first breech loading rifles showed their superiority on muzzle loading ones (and the Dreyse was inferior as range to muzzle loading rifles, but could be fired from prone)
See how in 1864 - during the war - the Ordinance Board rejected the Peaobody rifle, future (Peabody)-Martini-Henry rifle of all things beause they knew they were set on adopting the trapdoor. Poor Peabody even modified the gun so it could use more parts from the existing Springfields, still rejected. And now his name is hardly remembered while the Martini Henry is infamous.
Very good. That sling has to go. In the wider context Ripley was probably right to avoid giving them to infantry. Cavalry would make more sense. At regimental level the ammunition resupply from regimental stores can probably be brought forward to keep up with the rate of effective fire with some more soldiers detailed to the resupply task but, once the regimental stores are exhausted the extended mass supply to top them up via rail then wagon then pack horse is not going to be up to the task. And was not other than in the rail dense Western European region. Now with a post war professional army with trained soldiers directed by professional officers the rate of fire can be judiciously judged and limited to effective fire so will be a force multiplier and their logistics should be easier to function with a larger military and civilian tail.
Trapdoor was better all around, especially ballistically. But it also came many years later, and firearms tech was developing insanely fast in the mid-1800s. Spencer went from cutting edge, to clunky obsolete, in half a decade.
@@vicroc4 yeah I was referring to guns the US military adopted as any standard. (Granted the .50-56 cartridge and spencer rifle were only adopted by cavalry)
@@papercartridges6705 yeah “In range” has great video where Ian abd Karl test the trapdoor and Spencer’s head to head. They basically found that feeding individual rounds was only slightly slower than working the Spencer’s action. I’ve never shot one, but the Spencer’s looks clunky to operate. It appears that the lever has a wall of sorts that has to ge overcome??? I think it’s I’d cuz the Spencer’s sort of a falling block repeater of sorts. The drawings look like a modified falling block to me anyways? There’s no way that’s gonna be smooth.
That would require a longer action, and the magazine would hold fewer rounds. I guess Spencer decided 7 rounds of moderate to weak power was better than 4 rounds of higher power.
The .56-56 Spencer was a rimfire round. Rimfire cartridges are limited to low chamber pressures because the case must be thin enough so that the firing pin can crush the rim and ignite the primer. So adding more powder and hence increasing the chamber pressure would cause sticky extraction issue, and was simply not an option. This was why the Spencer worked just fine with a copper cartridge case, while later the Trapdoor Springfield had issues with that.
Too bad there wasn't a Blakeslee box equivalent for the Henry. Although, isn't it curious how derivatives of the Henry are still in mainstream production today, while the Spencer is relegated to niche reproductions? Hmm...
@@vicroc4 Perhaps the basic action. Spencer over Henry all day. Keep in mind there's definitely key differences between the Winchester and the Spencer. All the Spencer needs is a self cocking mechanism to compete with the Winchester; it is already better than the Henry.
Could probably modify a Spencer to make a simple self cocking mechanism. Spencer went out of business before his ideas for exactly that came around in 1868.
Seems to be a recurring theme in American military history. Hate to think how many U.S. tank men were maimed or killed going up against German tanks that were better armed and protected than American Sherman’s.
I bought a .45 Colt Spencer Carbine replica about 20 years ago. I bought a rudimentary box from probably Regimental Quartermasters about that time and it worked well for a late war Federal Cavalry impression. Funny how sometimes even during a reenactment battle you get a glimpse of how an advanced weapon really but a twitch on the enemy. Myself and 3 other troopers were holding the flank when a group of six confederate cavalry charged. The others had musketoons and fired a couple of shots and slowed the charge. I told them to fire one more volley and rejoin our lines most haste. They did that and I had the Spencer loaded with two tubes already out on the ready. As soon as they fired I let the horsemen move within a hundred yards and then I opened up. The charged halted and with a nod of the lead horse rider's head turned and retreaded to their original starting position which gave me time to rejoin my lines. I had a little Zen moment knowing that at some point in real life that had to have happened. Thanks for your great impression presentation.
I loved the ending with the M-14. Back when I was reenacting CW I showed up at morning Company inspection with my MP-40. My leutentant, while not particularly surprised, was not amused.
Plus the added joke that the M14 is similarly viewed as backwards for its day and a mistake brought by overly conservative procurement officers. Would have loved it in Korea, though, never mind the Civil War.
@@Clowndoe Problem with the M14 was that there actually were better alternatives out there. And I'm not talking about the AR-15/M16 that would replace it.
@@Clowndoe The US Ordnance Department has a history of bad thinking and bone-head moves. And they didn't like outsiders. Like the shenanigans they pulled with the adoption on the M-16.
@@johnmcdonald587Mark 14 torpedoes come to mind.
@@wnchstrmanYes the Mk14 torpedo....could have brought Japan to her knees far sooner without that debacle
Speaking as a retired officer, I endorse the sergeant's parting remark.
As a retired Chief Warrant Officer...it put a smirk on my face.
At least he was safe with a book, just don't let him have a map...@@bobm7514
"Officers!" I say that at least 10 times a day.
The cavalry of the Empire of Brazil used this carbine with excellent effects against Solano Lopez' aggression in the last stages of the Paraguayan War (1864-1870). It was a tremendous upgrade over the basic muzzle-loading carbines and short muskets used by various mounted troops of Emperor Pedro II. In several occasions dismounted cavalarianos could repel otherwise brave paraguayan charges without much effort. I'm not sure how many Spencers were ordered by the Empire, but it was so much appreciated that it defeated the competition and served in distant stations at least until 1890.
It was also used in Japan by the Tokugawa Shogunate
Thank you for a very interesting exposition.
You're welcome!
@@TheGrenadier97 It's a war with even more extremes than the Civil War; a war where one side was mainly armed with the Brown Bess smoothbore muskets, facing Brazilians with the US supplied Spencer carbine!
But notice that the Spencer wasn't as common; it may have armed very few squadrons of cavalry, although two instances they were used dismounted were recorded. The Empire possessed a lead over Paraguay on Minié rifles, although, like in the US Civil War, the benefits were often negated because the Imperial Army was mostly composed of volunteers trained in "outdated" ways - like in the US.
Ripley was a hidebound old fossil. Ripley and men like him hamstrung progress in ordnance for more than 100 years.
Tbf to Ripley, a lot of crap was foisted upon Government that he opposed. And early cartridges weren't as good as modern ones.
And frankly, "taxpayer advocates" are just as bad, or even worse.
For a blackpowder gun to fire that many times without fouling up😊👍
I would've given smart guys Henry's, mouth breathers single shots and skipped the Spencer
@@edgarburlyman738the early Henry was more expensive, was a 44 rimfire with 28 grains and powder, so it had a pistol cartridge. It is impossible to field strip and the tube is easily damaged. Because it was a smaller bore it was subject to fowling. This is why they bought Spencers and not the Henry.
@@erikschultz7166 it's like a 250gr at 1200 it's not that weak. you need enough iq points to not use it as a hammer. the Spencer is slower than a fast breach loader.
"Turn money into smoke and noise." That's a great line!
Well played, gentlemen.
"Fascinating modern age we live in" Is that a reference to Master and Commander? I sure hope so.
It was the lesser of two weevils.
@@papercartridges6705 He who would pun would pick a pocket.
Blakeslee Boxes also work extremely well with 1860 Henry's.
Colonel John T. Wilder: “I’ll take your entire stock!”.
The legacy the Spencer left on the Western Theater can let Christopher Spencer rest happy
Only relative I know of who served in the American Civil War, used Spencer Rifles, not Carbines. Served in the 98th Illinois Mounted Infantry. Though they started out as an Infantry Regiment. The rifles were purchased by our local community, and as a result of them already having Spencer rifles the 98th Infantry was later converted to Mounted Infantry shortly after deployment.
My ancestor had the same story - started out as 39th Indiana Infantry, bought Spencer rifles and horses and became the 39th Indiana Mounted Infantry, and later became the 8th Indiana Cavalry. I’m not sure if they kept the rifles or got the carbine version then.
Was he in the Western Theater by any chance?
@@SStupendous Cental Theater ifthat qualifies as western. Fought in Tennessee. Served in the famous Lightning Brigade under John Wilder. Basically a mounted infantry brigade. Imagine it like a proto motorized/mechanized infantry unit not as a cavalry unit. But before automobiles so obviously used horses to blitz around dismount and engage. With repeaters they were a very effective Brigade combined with that mobility.
Battle of Chickamauga I think they pushed up to relieve and try stabilizing the right flank which collapsed. They ended up getting semi surrounded/surrounded and held out mauling the Confederates that tried to approach their position. Held out until the Confederates eventually pulled back enough for them to leave.
@@Alte.Kameraden Ah, I knew it! The Lightning Brigade, my favorite unit of the Civil War. God bless him.
@@SStupendous ya I didn't even know I had a relative who served under Wilders until like two years ago. Lol
He was on my grandmother's (mother) side of the family which I knew little about. He survived the war as well.
Kind of cool finding out I had a relative who was there and came out of it alive.
Great video as always, I love your ability to make your videos as entertaining as they are informative.
Well done my friend, finally an honest review of the Blakeslee box. I don't know how many times I've seen it said the box held loaded magazines. But come on, a glorified pistol round! Easily a mid-range round, 45 grains of powder behind a 350 grain bullet. A 56-46 Spencer was credited with killing an 1800 lb Grizzly bear here in California in 1890. The Spencer was not just a newfangled jimcrack, it was the real deal. Spencer worshiper
My understanding is that modern brass has reduced capacity compared to the original brass, making it impossible to get the 45 grains of powder in. And modern powder isn't as heavily optimized for gas generation as powder was back then, so velocities are reduced even further. So it goes from being a light but serviceable rifle cartridge to a glorified pistol cartridge.
(then again, the same complaint has been leveled at the modern .300 Blackout round, and that one's still proven to be fairly deadly at the ranges combat actually happens at)
@@vicroc4 True, modern centerfire brass cannot hold as much powder as the original 56-56. But we're talking 19th century ammo here. A .539 bullet weighting 350 gr traveling 1200 fps is not weak sauce. Plus, the sergeant's blanks make his carbine look clunky to operate. A Spencer with proper ammo is a joy to shoot. Spencer worshiper
I’ve had a .45 Colt repro of one of these for a bit now and I’ve always enjoyed it, even if it hangs up every now and again, still a lot of fun! I’ve always wanted one of these boxes and now I know where to get one! Great video, I love these skits. Always informative and entertaining!
A series of tubes!
Thoroughly enjoyable video. As a retired NCO who had an occasional good idea of my own, this brought back memories.
I love the banter in the opening and closing sketches.
Great grand dad Piet & his men in his Union cavalry troop thought highly of them. Firepower was a GOOD thing.
One of those channels I wish I could subscribe twice!!!
A Lovely skit with a Lovely gun! Thanks Kindly Fellas! An amazing example of design and engineering for the day. I’m always very impressed by the quality of art and craftsmanship of the day. And indeed, muzzle loading forever I say! Many Blessings and KeepYour Powder Muzzled! DaveyJO in Pennsylvania
Interesting Advert....... Being a Hoover's Gap neighbor, we are well versed with Spencer's, as well as, the shooting range for Whitworth rifles.....
11:47 well he isn't wrong, we ain't going to win a war with that gun.
I had the same thought!
"Whaaat ? but the M14 was the bestest rifle evarrrrrr." Totally not a failed attempt at a Garand with a box magazine
Thanks for the video! I knew Spencers we great, but I had no idea they were so amazing. Watching the video was very informative.
Excellent Spenslee carBox video
This is great! I always wondered why no one ever use a feeder mechanism in the stock before. I guess someone did and I didn't know about it. Great topic. TY
After having inherited a Spencer( Burnside RIfle Co. Providence RI ) some forty year ago, five years ago I discovered the firing pin was missing. I found a NOS firing pin on eBay. It fits perfectly. Now…Some reasonably current production Rimfire ammo would be nice.
So I will assume you are shooting with a conversion block, which one. S&S?
Karl of InRange and Ian from Forgotten Weapons get zapped by that guy when lecture us about the Spencer's loading and operating flaws😵
Excellent video. Retired officer, but civil war artilleryman.
New to your channel, just spent about 4 hours watching, thanks for your videos, vary informative.
Wow four hours! That’s heroic. Im pretty sure forcing someone to watch 4 hours of my content would violate the Geneva Convention.
@@papercartridges6705 I don't shoot black powder often but have been doing it since I got my first one as a kid , and have always had an interesting and like for the art of making them shoot accurately .
This carbine has always interested me, and as I'm interested in miniatures, Gilles Lavandera made a nice 1/4 scale working miniature with all the accessories a few years ago. Worth a look.
Interesting, thank you.
Once again a great show with tons of facts.
Hilarious and awesome as always! But we all know that the Smith was the apotheosis of cavalry carbines, so it's kind of moot. Besides, what's the keep the troops from dropping the cartridges inbutt first? Nope, it will never work.
Hilarious? There was nothing funny at all in this video.
@@papercartridges6705 LOL! I'm sure old Ripley wouldn't think so.
The M14 could've been the longest serving standard issue rifle instead of the shortest. 🤣
General Ripley's probably not going to believe it"believe it or not"
Awesome presentation.
Don’t forget that the ordnance department copied the 1898 Mauser action, and stripper clips, then added a “magazine cut off” to keep ammunition in reserve. Treating it like a single shot breach loader.
To be fair the magazine cutoff was pretty common during the period of history.
While the Spencer was most efficacious within 100 yards, it proved capable much farther out. Despite its rainbow trajectory, the Spencer’s one-ounce ball still caused plenty of grief even after wheezing to its destination. Capt. G.M. Barber, writing from the headquarters of the 1st Battalion Ohio Volunteer Sharpshooters relates his men’s use of the Spencer in 1863 in Chattanooga, Tenn., “…About six miles below Chattanooga the main road, over which supplies for the whole army must be drawn, lays along the banks of the Tennessee river, the south bank of which was held by the enemy, and their Sharpshooters played havoc with our teams and drivers… The river is 500 yards wide and I was ordered to protect the road… we found by actual trial that our guns had longer range and greater accuracy. We seldom missed at 700 yards. I had 125 men with me, and for two weeks kept 600 reb’s at bay, and, as I afterwards learned, killed and wounded over thirty, with a loss of one man wounded.”
The Spencer repeating carbine was also used by foreign volunteers (of many nations; Polish, Hungarian, Spanish, American and, above all, Italian) who, led by Giuseppe Garibaldi, fought the Prussians in Dijon in 1870
Indeed!
so Officers never realy change. Some generals wants to use the service rifle from their time as a young cadet. even when they are closing in on retirement and the weapon wasn´t new back then.
Except in NJ, where you can only have a 2-tube Blakeslee box.
Sounds like a common sense gun safety rule to me. Nobody needs a high capacity blakeslee box.
Just tell me. Why would any sensible person need a repeating rifle? Lol.
@@papercartridges6705
I love my spencer rifle,
?
@@williamscroggins9627 I have a spencer three band rifle I shoot.
Very entertaining. Thanks.
Works great with .22 lr, just use 3/8 inch copper tubing and a dowel in the bottom.
The 1860's Assault Rifle
To get a clear picture of how ordnance men thought, watch the movie Zulu Dawn. The British are still using a single shot rifle in 1879. Their key concern was to not let soldiers waste ammunition. The key scene is when the British are being overrun and the ordnance man is stingily handing out a handful of cartridges to a line of desperate men. That mindset was very hard to overcome and continued to have some influence even into WWII.
As an Army ordnance officer, I aspire to be that guy, stingily handing out M4 magazines, and demanding to see the paperwork first.
If you want the real story on the ammunition supply at Isandlwana go watch Rob @ Britishmuzzleoaders series Britishmuzzleloaders in South Africa Part 3E 3F 3G with Col. Mike Snook. (of course the movie had many errors)
@@papercartridges6705 I am assuming this is tongue-in-cheek or a quote from some historical document, or you are still in-character. Regardless, I appreciate your ability to act out this scenes with as much accuracy as you can muster. Thanks.
Hard to overcome? Influence in WW2? We still got that today 😭
Well, don't know if that scene really happened, surely there were difficult to supply ammos to the soldiers (they've been placed too far from the camp !), but in 1879 all the armies used single shot rifles, repeaters were few and too frail. Ironically the US Army was one of the latest to adopt a smokeless repeater, with the Krag being issued shortly before the war of 1898 against Spain, and the national guard was yet using the Springfield, as some volounteers unit.
Great video as always. Particularly liked the recreation skit.😂
Great job 🤙🏼
Argentina used the Spencer rifle during the Paraguayan War in 1864-1870, causing tremendous massacres of the Paraguayans in the Battle of Tuyutí in 1866.
I’ve seen reproductions of these chambered in .45 Colt and I want one so bad 😂
I love how you combine history and humor great and entertaining video. I have an idea for a future video. On a recent video you say that the springfields accuracy was compromised by the size of the Burton bullet. I would be interested to know what it could do with the correct size projectile. Thanks
it would also be interesting to have information on the little-known Evans rifles with spiral magazine; and Meigs at 50 shots
Unlikely for them to ever get their hands on a Meigs, Forgotten Weapons is the place for such things
@@SStupendous ^^ grazie mille
Too Kool for school!
Excellent work, once again. Hmm, Blakeslee tubes, one set of ammo in a (disposable) packet for fixed magazine rifle... Did someone say stripper clip? 😁
Were any of the Spencer's ever modified to operate with a single lever stroke? Like a Henry?
Good question, but I believe the answer is "NO." That part of the Henry design made them, and all of the Winchester rifles and carbines that followed, superior as far as the rate of fire goes. Of course, the original .44 Henry cartridges were not that powerful either, but I sure wouldn't want to have gotten shot by one!
Spencer I've learned had ideas for this modification in 1867-68, but that same year the Spencer company went bankrupt - from the number of Spencers produced from 1861-66. Died of success.
Looks like the Ord. Sgt. needed to come over to our side of the war. When our side got their hands on a Spencer, it was shipped to a manufacturer just south of Richmond and copied. Of course it was a little late to be useful. But our ordnance department didn't fight off the idea of a superior weapon. Thinking about it, that weapon may have helped stop the war. Too many sons, brothers and fathers died in that.
The Confederates considered adopting it? Interesting. The Spencer was highly prized by them, when they ran out of ammunition that was it until they could capture more though.
A little PT goes a long way there soldier
Fun Fact: It was Russia who saved The Union during the American Civil War as they sent their Navy to San Francisco and New York when England and France were just about to enter the war on the side of the Confederates since London created the Confederates. France was already in Mexico making a spear head movement to resupply the Confederates and to open up a Pacific Theatre and to create a port in California. England already amassed 11,000 troops and growing stationed at their Northern Confederacies border now called Canada ready to open a Northern Theatre to divert Union troops away from their Southern Confederacy then to attack The Unions naval blockade. The Union would have been completely destroyed and annexed by those two great powers leaving the Confederates to exist as a puppet state of London.
London was already courting (threatening/bribing) other countries to get involved like Spain while Russia was in talks with Prussia to ally with incase London was to intervene.
Seeing all of this Tsar Alexander II wrote a letter to Queen Victoria saying “If you enter in this war it will be a casus belli for all out war with the Russian Empire”. The stage was set for the 1st World War and Russia stopped it.
There is also a memorial in San Francisco for the
hundreds of Russian sailors who came off their Asiatic fleet ships that died while helping the city put out a fire that threatened to lay waste to it during the War.
Russia also helped Thailand (Kingdom of Siam) maintain its sovereignty from being completely Partitioned/Annexed from the British and French around the same time. The very word Thai (ไทย) means 'free man' in the Thai language which is partially to thank to the Russians as they might have ended up being a colony or part of another country/colony if not for their intervention.
About 7 rounds in about 15 seconds (more or less), try this with a Springfield muzzle loading....The absurdity was that the army replaced it in early '70s with the Springfield single shot. Only real problem with repeaters was that, before smokeless powder's invention, the smoke from the weapons, expecially without wind, would've been awful. Naturally,had the US waged war against someone better equipped, they surely would've needed a more modern weapon, as happened in Europe when the first breech loading rifles showed their superiority on muzzle loading ones (and the Dreyse was inferior as range to muzzle loading rifles, but could be fired from prone)
See how in 1864 - during the war - the Ordinance Board rejected the Peaobody rifle, future (Peabody)-Martini-Henry rifle of all things beause they knew they were set on adopting the trapdoor. Poor Peabody even modified the gun so it could use more parts from the existing Springfields, still rejected. And now his name is hardly remembered while the Martini Henry is infamous.
Was this filmed at the National Mall, near the Washington Monument?
LOL, the good old days when one could request the President to step out into the National Mall so that you may demonstrate your rifle to him.
hahaha great stuff!! i love it!!! :D
Take it to Lincoln. He’s a woodsman!🧐
Very good. That sling has to go. In the wider context Ripley was probably right to avoid giving them to infantry. Cavalry would make more sense. At regimental level the ammunition resupply from regimental stores can probably be brought forward to keep up with the rate of effective fire with some more soldiers detailed to the resupply task but, once the regimental stores are exhausted the extended mass supply to top them up via rail then wagon then pack horse is not going to be up to the task. And was not other than in the rail dense Western European region. Now with a post war professional army with trained soldiers directed by professional officers the rate of fire can be judiciously judged and limited to effective fire so will be a force multiplier and their logistics should be easier to function with a larger military and civilian tail.
The thing is the spencer was clunky enough the trapdoor 1873 was a much better option.
Trapdoor was better all around, especially ballistically. But it also came many years later, and firearms tech was developing insanely fast in the mid-1800s. Spencer went from cutting edge, to clunky obsolete, in half a decade.
The Spencer was outclassed in its own time by the Henry rifle - derivatives of which are still in production to this day.
@@vicroc4 yeah I was referring to guns the US military adopted as any standard. (Granted the .50-56 cartridge and spencer rifle were only adopted by cavalry)
@@papercartridges6705 yeah “In range” has great video where Ian abd Karl test the trapdoor and Spencer’s head to head.
They basically found that feeding individual rounds was only slightly slower than working the Spencer’s action.
I’ve never shot one, but the Spencer’s looks clunky to operate. It appears that the lever has a wall of sorts that has to ge overcome???
I think it’s I’d cuz the Spencer’s sort of a falling block repeater of sorts. The drawings look like a modified falling block to me anyways? There’s no way that’s gonna be smooth.
EXCELLENT
Really looking to get a Blakeslee Box for my Spencer in 45 Colt. But it looks like the Civil War Ordinance Dept Facebook page doesn’t exist anymore.
The page is still up. It’s spelled “Ordnance” not “ordinance.” Very common misspelling. I even see it daily in the US Army.
🤩🤩🤩
So, hear is a serious question. Why did they not lengthen the case of the Spenser and put more powder into it thus giving it the longer range?
That would require a longer action, and the magazine would hold fewer rounds. I guess Spencer decided 7 rounds of moderate to weak power was better than 4 rounds of higher power.
The .56-56 Spencer was a rimfire round. Rimfire cartridges are limited to low chamber pressures because the case must be thin enough so that the firing pin can crush the rim and ignite the primer. So adding more powder and hence increasing the chamber pressure would cause sticky extraction issue, and was simply not an option.
This was why the Spencer worked just fine with a copper cartridge case, while later the Trapdoor Springfield had issues with that.
I didn't know that Jason Kelce knows about old guns?
_aaacting!!!_
😉
LOL, John Lovitz.
Please let us know when we should come pick up our Oscars.
Why the custome???
Childis
funny I love it
Are there modern replicas of this?! I want, i want! Please!
There are, the most sought after reproductions from the Civil War!
Yes but, who wants an underpowered rifle that fires promiscuously?!!🤣👍🏼👏👏👏
LOL...Like those Officers are acting like they are paying for the rifles/carbines out of their own pockets! I'm sure some did.
Many did, despite the 106,600 ordered by the government it's believed private purchase was even greater!
That governor of Ohio can shove it!
Leave my M1809 alone. (Yelling in 1861 Ohio.)
Too bad there wasn't a Blakeslee box equivalent for the Henry. Although, isn't it curious how derivatives of the Henry are still in mainstream production today, while the Spencer is relegated to niche reproductions? Hmm...
Winchester won the commercial war. The Spencer Company went bankrupt from the amount produced from 1861-66. Died of success.
@@SStupendous Oh, I know. My implication was supposed to be that the Henry was also the superior design.
@@vicroc4 Perhaps the basic action. Spencer over Henry all day. Keep in mind there's definitely key differences between the Winchester and the Spencer. All the Spencer needs is a self cocking mechanism to compete with the Winchester; it is already better than the Henry.
You and Ridley are misinformed - the Spencer rifle had a much further range than 100 yards.
If only the leber action cocked the hammer
Could probably modify a Spencer to make a simple self cocking mechanism. Spencer went out of business before his ideas for exactly that came around in 1868.
😂😂😂😂
don´t give anything like this to the irish, just let them bayonet charge.......
Shame the South didn't have a million of those in 61.
No kidding
@@buckfizzard291 A lot of kidding over here
Seems to be a recurring theme in American military history. Hate to think how many U.S. tank men were maimed or killed going up against German tanks that were better armed and protected than American Sherman’s.