1842 Musket: Rifled vs Smoothbore

[austinmillinder]

Hi all!

Looking into getting a Springfield 1842 musket, and i'm stuck between smoothbore or rifled options. I know they were initially smoothbore and a percentage were converted to rifles.

My question is, what was more common during the Civil War? Were Federal troops outfitted more with the smoothbore or rifled versions? Same for Confederate.

They're both great options, I just want to make a purchase that will serve me greater in the long run. Curious to hear thoughts!

Thanks a lot,

-Austin Millinder

[Craig L Barry]

Re: 1842 Musket: Rifled vs Smoothbore

Fewer than 10% of the US 1842 production were later rifled, and fewer still (est 10,000) were rifled and sighted like the reproduction. The overwhelming majority were issued as smoothbores. There are images where Union soldiers can be seen with the rifled version and they obviously saw use in the US Civil War. However the rifled version made up a very small percent of the total numbers. The smoothbore version would be the better option.

[austinmillinder]

Re: 1842 Musket: Rifled vs Smoothbore

Thanks Craig!

[Pritchett Ball]

Re: 1842 Musket: Rifled vs Smoothbore

I'm with Mr. Barry, the 42 smoothbore would be great for so many scenarios, on both sides of the conflict.

The .69 smoothbore is a fun weapon to form authentic cartridges for live firing, if you choose to go that route. Authentic blank cartridges, and arsenal packs are to be had also. You can simulate Round Ball, Buck-n-Ball, and Buckshot cartridges and arsenal packs. This is a Buckshot cartridge and arsenal pack I made, copying an original. I have other labels to work with.

[StonewallSharpeson]

Re: 1842 Musket: Rifled vs Smoothbore

I agree with Craig. In my opinion, the Model 1842 should be most reenactor's starter gun. It was extremely common throughout the war, and even on both sides; especially so if it is considered as a stand-in for the grossly underrepresented percussion conversion muskets of the M1816 series.

There are a couple of points you should consider:

1. 1. Of the about 273,000 M1842s which were produced, only about 44,000 were ever rifled.
2. 2. The M1842 reproductions are generally considered stand-ins for percussion conversions of the Model 1816 series (1816, 1822, 1828, 1835, 1840) and for smoothbore arms imported from Europe.
   a. Of the former, something on the order of 780,000 were produced. While many of these were not considered serviceable by the time of the Civil War, many of them were issued in response to the rush for arms, particularly by the Confederacy which began the war with almost 0 arms manufacturing ability. Of these, over 300,000 were converted to percussion, mostly using the cone-in-barrel method. To my knowledge, the only reproduction of a flintlock conversion is Pedersoli's 1816 Colt conversion musket, which is not a cone-in-barrel conversion and wouldn't have been very common.
   b. In the rush for arms, tons of guns were imported from Europe. The Europeans were starting to get into breechloading rifles at this time, and were happy to offload their old inventories on us. Some of these were arms were approximate to ours from the 1830s and 1840s; high-caliber smoothbore and since-rifled percussion and percussion-conversion muskets. I don't have numbers, but I think it could probably be pretty safe to assume that the numbers of these types of arms totaled in the tens if not hundreds of thousands.
3. 3. The rifling in reproductions is not correct anyway. They are produced using standard-depth rifling, whereas originals used progressive depth rifling (deeper at the breech, shallower at the muzzle). This actually has been shown to dramatically affect performance of minie balls. So, unless you're going to have Hoyt or Whitacre correctly rifle your barrel, you're just as well off getting a smoothbore. Certainly don't pay extra for it! Some repro 42s these days have thicker barrels precisely so they can make both smoothbore and rifled version without have to make 2 barrels for them.
4. 4. Sort of as a side note, 42s are still good for Union impressions, especially early in the war. Production of the Model 1861 rifled musket didn't get underway until the winter of 1861 and as was typical for US arms production was sluggish at first. There is little question that, by the end of the War, it and the Model 1863s were the most numerous weapons in the field. But that took time.

Craig, I'd love to know your source to double-check these numbers! We can swap notes? My numbers are based on a CWT post of a guy summarizing from "American Military Shoulder Arms" vol.s 2 and 3 by George Moller. He also notes that good sources on Confederate arms would be "Confederate Rifles and Muskets", "The English Connection", and "Arming the Glorious Cause".

[Valhan21st]

Re: 1842 Musket: Rifled vs Smoothbore

I agree with the above responses. Unless you have a specific unit in mind, I'd avoid a rifled 42' and take the smoothbore. The 42' smoothbores are in use by both armies for the entire war; you still see large numbers of smoothbores in the AoP until the 2nd Quarter of 1864, by the 3rd quarter they really start to taper off, but never disappear completely.

Why, may I ask are you looking into a 42'? over a 61' or Enfield RM?

[Craig L Barry]

Re: 1842 Musket: Rifled vs Smoothbore

Good question. I got my figures on US 1842 production from my 2006 book "The Civil War Musket: A Handbook for Historical Accuracy." I had the 1842 production figures in the chapter on smoothbore muskets as 272,565 (p.218) which is awfully precise. So where did that come from? I did not cite the source and that was written quite a while ago...as I recall it was from SPAR (the Springfield Armory National Park website), but I could be wrong.

In Joe Bilby's Civil War Guns website, the article on the US 1842 gives a somewhat similar but rounder number:

"The Model 1842 U.S. Percussion Musket was produced in great numbers by both the Harpers Ferry and Springfield Armories from 1844 to 1855. The Model 1842 was notable in several respects, chiefly, that it was the last .69 caliber musket. Additionally, it was the first weapon made at both Harpers Ferry and Springfield with completely interchangeable parts. Harpers Ferry produced 103,000, while Springfield produced 172,000, for a total production surpassing a quarter of a million arms."

Tim Prince (College Hill Arsenal) gives a similar but slightly different figure in a listing he had for a rifled US 1842 as follows: "The US M1842 percussion musket went into production at the Springfield Arsenal in 1844; with 2,956 completed guns being delivered into stores that fiscal year (July 1, 1843-June 30, 1844). Production did not commence at Harper’s Ferry until 1845, with that armory delivered 2,225 arms into store during fiscal year 1845 (July 1, 1844 to June 30, 1845). The M1842 muskets remained in production until 1855, with Springfield Armory producing 165,970 and Harpers Ferry producing 106,629, making the total production for the M1842 musket 272,599."

As far as the numbers rifled and sighted, he states "Between 1855 and 1859 slightly less than 44,000 M1842 muskets were rifled at five US arsenals and armories, including the Springfield, and Harper’s Ferry armories, and the Saint Louis, Frankford and Benicia Arsenals. Of the 43,759 muskets rifled, 23,683 received long-range rear sights. The rifled and sighted alterations took place at both Harper’s Ferry and Springfield, as well as at Saint Louis and Frankford. Benicia Arsenal did not apply long-range rear sights to any of the guns that they altered. Between 1856 and 1859 Springfield rifled and sighted 9,929 M1842s, Harper’s Ferry rifled and sighted 11,060 M1842s. The Frankford Arsenal rifled and sighted 1,313 between 1857 and 1858 and the Saint Louis rifled and sighted 1,381 in 1857."

[James Brenner]

Re: 1842 Musket: Rifled vs Smoothbore

I cannot speak for other states, but by the end of October 1863, all Ohio infantry regiments in both the Army of the Cumberland and Army of the Tennessee were fully equipped with either Enfields or Springfields. The regiments that received rifled muskets were the 1st, 2nd, 9th, 13th, 14th, 15th, 17th, 33rd, 35th, 40th, 41st, 49th, 69th, 92nd, 93rd, and 94th Infantry. What is interesting is that some units only needed 30 rifled muskets (1st and 2nd OVI) and others, (17th OVI) needed 550. I'd have to look at the 1861 Ohio reports to see what type of weapons each unit was originally issued, but that information is here on the AC site. The source for the above is: Ohio: Annual Reports Made to the Governor of the State of Ohio, Quartermaster General Report, 1863, Part II, 595.

So, to echo what others have said, a '42 smoothbore is the best choice, particularly if you're portraying one of the above units through late 1863.

[StonewallSharpeson]

Re: 1842 Musket: Rifled vs Smoothbore

Craig, my guy (Grayrock Volunteer) has the same numbers as you. I've found his response to this post very informative, if perhaps worthy of confirmation:

https://civilwartalk.com/threads/prewar-production-of-long-arms-in-us.127604/?fbclid=IwAR2WPm4mgqkn9Ksiys8KN0VN_vUvo2GTbkGgdWc4515utXhvRXU2iG8Fde4

I should also add to my above response that I would think Suppliers to the Confederacy would have good info on at least Confederate imported arms.

[thomas aagaard]

Re: 1842 Musket: Rifled vs Smoothbore

What is interesting is that some units only needed 30 rifled muskets (1st and 2nd OVI) and others, (17th OVI) needed 550.

Maybe they did some swapping after the capture of Vicksburg?
It is my impression that a lot of Grants men got hold of enfields this way, with his acceptance, but sort of around the ordnance department?

[Charlestonian]

Re: 1842 Musket: Rifled vs Smoothbore

If I could add from Ron Fields research, in the Charleston Arsenal there were close to 15,000 smoothbores in 1861 that the state sought to have rifled through contract work with more than 11,000 being completed.

I would be interested to learn of any other states taking similar steps.

Kindest Regards,
Daniel Gidick

[Darronway]

Re: 1842 Musket: Rifled vs Smoothbore

Do you think we'll have something like this on a federal level sometime in the future?

[Louisiana Tiger]

Re: 1842 Musket: Rifled vs Smoothbore

I wonder how many 1842s stayed in the North and how many were sent to the South before the war? And of those, how many were smooth bore as opposed to rifled?

[austinmillinder]

Re: 1842 Musket: Rifled vs Smoothbore

I already own a great enfield. Pedersoli, defarbed by Watts. I love it but obviously doesn’t work for everything.

[1stMaine]

Re: 1842 Musket: Rifled vs Smoothbore

Comrades,

Regarding the rifled M1842's, Remington had a contract to rifle/refit some 10K M1842. I do not have the date of the contract, but I have personally seen a rack with 6 of these weapons at the old GAR post in Thomaston, Maine. What was fascinating to me was that these M1842's were also fitted with both long-range sights, AND the Maynard tape primer system. The lot was sold at auction in the late 90's, and their current whereabouts are unknown.

In addition,Dean Thomas' seminal "Ready... Aim... Fire" indicates that,at Gettysburg,more than 40 federal regiments still had .69 weapons. His research indicated that many units preferred the .69 due to both the buck & ball cartridges available, and the normal engagement ranges of under 300 yards.

Against that, the confederate forces engaged there had more rifled units than their federal counterparts.

However, by the start of the Overland campaign, the federal forces in the east, were entirely armed with rifled weapons, the .69 having been replaced and transferred down to various state armories, or to many units engaged in POW camps, the Veterans Reserve Corps, etc.

respects,

- - - Updated - - -

Just a quick note for those unfamiliar with the period weapon terms

ALL muzzle-loading weapons were muskets. However, they were then further subdivided to groups be their manufacturing.

These were smooth-bore muskets, rifled muskets, rifle-muskets,and rifles.

The M1816 & M1842 were examples of smooth-bore muskets

The M1842 refitted with rifling is an example of a rifled-musket

The M1855/1861/etc are examples of rifle-muskets. Weapons manufactured with rifling

The M1841 & M1855 Long Range Rifle are examples of rifles. Shorter than normal infantry weapons.

Not trying to preach to anyone here, just pointing out the terms the Ordnance Department used back then,

Respects,