Cas City Forum Hall & CAS-L

Special Interests - Groups & Societies => The American Plainsmen Society => Topic started by: Caleb Hobbs on August 29, 2011, 12:42:19 AM

Title: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Caleb Hobbs on August 29, 2011, 12:42:19 AM
Jake brought up an interesting question about allowing flintlock rifles at a match. On the other end of the period, what about cartridge guns such as the Henry and Spencer? I'm curious, what does everyone think?
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Short Knife Johnson on August 29, 2011, 12:53:19 AM
 ;D Would have a negative effect on your times.   :P

I've kind of had the thought staging an unfamiliar weapon (either caplock musket, cartridge rifle or miscellaneous handgun) as a "Battlefield pick up" would be fun. 

Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: wildman1 on August 29, 2011, 05:20:57 AM
;D Would have a negative effect on your times.   :P

I've kind of had the thought staging an unfamiliar weapon (either caplock musket, cartridge rifle or miscellaneous handgun) as a "Battlefield pick up" would be fun. 


NOOO he said the "T" word. WM
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: litl rooster on August 29, 2011, 06:54:53 AM
so how do you handle a no fire, with an in experianced ML shooter?  I am not trying to be a nay sayer. I have thought using one to start the stage or as a bonus would be fun. With no penalty to the shooter for a dry fire a miss fire or even a miss.
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: wildman1 on August 29, 2011, 06:59:26 AM
That shooter would no longer be inexperienced Roo. WM
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: litl rooster on August 29, 2011, 07:06:20 AM
That shooter would no longer be inexperienced Roo. WM

hand them the degree and move them on uh?  kind of like a degree from a on line college
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Tascosa Joe on August 29, 2011, 07:54:02 AM
Personally I like the idea of having the Henry or Spencer allowed.
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: buffalo bill on August 29, 2011, 08:21:10 AM
Just have to be careful not to "re-invent the wheel". One of the main reasons for this group was that our time/guns were not represented. All of the other shooting groups use cartridge guns. . .

"SCOUTIN' for SHAGGIES"

BUFFALO BILL
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: St. George on August 29, 2011, 09:02:32 AM
You need to remember that for the time frame you suggest - it's the 'cartridge' weapon that'd be unfamiliar to most.

This proposed category falls between 'Buckskinner' and 'NCOWS shooter' with no secure footing in either.

If you're serious about APS - pick one and establish guidelines, stick to them and stop trying to straddle a fence that's just going to wind up muddying the waters insofar as your time frame is considered, if you try to accomodate everyone's ideas and fancies.

NCOWS does just that - and beyond reviewing what's approved for weaponry - it manages quite well to keep folks outfitted and shooting happily within their specified era, without any attempt to join an ever-increasing arms race - even allowing pretty much everything you're proposing, so long as you can document how you came by the gear used by your Impression.

If your cut-off is roughly 1865 - then cartridge weapons were 'not' common, and given wartime production, new percussion weapons would've been in short supply, since most arms makers were attempting to fill contracts - early percussion guns and single-shots would've proliferated - despite the advent of the aenemic Paterson, and hard-to-find-at-the-time Walker.

The Navy Colt and Pocket Model would've been cutting-edge - along with the odd Dragoon.

Good Luck!

Vaya,

Scouts Out!






Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Sacramento Johnson on August 29, 2011, 09:50:51 AM
Howdy!

I have no problem allowing the Henry and Spencer.  Sure they would have been fairly rare, but by 1860, flintlock would probably not have been real common compared to percussion except in a few select conditions.  If you're playing a character that's at the end of the period (1860-1865), I could see you having one of those firearms, especialy if you were well off.  The time range agreed upon was a transition period as concerns firearms, and these firearms were authentic to this period.

(Besides, have you all priced modern Henry and Spencer replicas lately?  Given their high cost, I don't think you'll see too many walking around with them, anyway!)
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: JimBob on August 29, 2011, 11:05:58 AM
I think everyone is a little too quick to say flintlocks were gone for the most part in this period.By and large most of the troops in the Mexican War were armed with flint muskets.The flint trade gun was a common item  thru out the entire period almost up to the turn of the century.
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Stu Kettle on August 29, 2011, 12:44:31 PM
I think everyone is a little too quick to say flintlocks were gone for the most part in this period.

So do I JimBob, but this little group already lost my interest when nobody contested the idea that shotguns would be unheard of because of the "great distances" on the plains.  Besides, they've already started the "I ain't never seen one so they won't be allowed" rule.
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Caleb Hobbs on August 29, 2011, 01:28:09 PM
Just to set the record straight, no one said anything about shotguns not being allowed, just that they wouldn't be as common among the plainsmen of the period. Wagon train emmigrants  and '49ers were mentioned as groups who might have shotguns -- the very next sentence, as a matter of fact. I can think of plenty of other groups who would also likely have a shotgun with them. If and how they might be incorporated into a match is a question for down the road. It is true that we are striving for historical accuracy.

Caleb
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Sacramento Johnson on August 29, 2011, 02:05:15 PM
Howdy!
 I have no problem with flintlocks being used as well; they would have been common in the 1840s, I expect and probably into the 1850s as well.  I also like the idea of muzzle loading shotguns.  Not too many reproductions are available and they're a bit pricey, but I think they're quite an authentic long arm for the entire period 1840-1865.

 I see this group using firearms that the Mountain Man groups use and also NCOWS/SASS.  Which one a person ends up closer to depends on what part of the time range that person concentrates on.  I find the eclectic nature of firearms that might show up someday at a 'wagon train starting point' to be one of the cool things about this group. As for how shooting competitions might be done given this variety of firearms, I don't know, but say let's cross that bridge when  we get to it. (Personally, I see the shooting less structured/formalized than in SASS/NCOWS, and closer to Mountain Man (as it's done around here).

I hope this group doesn't get hung up on the 'competition' aspect so much that it artifically limits the firearms to supposedly 'level the playing field', ala SASS, and doesn't turn into thread counter groups that put more emphasis on costuming and relegate shooting to a minor aspect.
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Caleb Hobbs on August 29, 2011, 02:30:49 PM
We share the same point of view on competition, Sacramento. I actually admire the so-called "stitch counters," (didn't even realize it was a derogatory term for a long time), but I don't want to see us going there. On the other hand, I don't want to see an organization with buckskinners loaded down with ten pounds of plastic beads and bells and a full-face coyote hats, which is no more historically correct to the period than a buscadero rig. I think we're heading in the right direction, and things will begin to move a little faster soon, but there will be bumps along the way.

Caleb
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Jake MacReedy on August 29, 2011, 02:41:51 PM
deleted
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Sacramento Johnson on August 29, 2011, 04:16:14 PM
Howdy Jake!
 
You're in a class all your own, don't ya know!!
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: wildman1 on August 29, 2011, 04:18:40 PM
hand them the degree and move them on uh?  kind of like a degree from a on line college
Roo, if ya ever have trouble gettin a flinter or a percussion weapon ta go off holler at me, I know bout every way that there is ta gettem ta go bang.  ;D WM
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Ranch 13 on August 29, 2011, 07:03:56 PM
Just to set the record straight, no one said anything about shotguns not being allowed, just that they wouldn't be as common among the plainsmen of the period. Wagon train emmigrants  and '49ers were mentioned as groups who might have shotguns -- the very next sentence, as a matter of fact. I can think of plenty of other groups who would also likely have a shotgun with them. If and how they might be incorporated into a match is a question for down the road. It is true that we are striving for historical accuracy.

Caleb

 Might just want to go back and take a look at real plainsmen. Shotguns were probably more numerous than other firearms. Flintlocks never fell out of favor with the "plainsmen" until sometime after the railroads came and percussion caps and cartridge guns and their cartridges became more available at the local trading posts.
 So in the end "historical" accuracy is going to include just about every type of firearm avialable at the time.
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Jake MacReedy on August 29, 2011, 07:57:19 PM
Deleted
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Caleb Hobbs on August 29, 2011, 11:07:14 PM
Actually, I've always leaned strongly away from flintlocks. After today, I'm leaning away from cartridge guns as well, which hurts because I do love my Spencer, and at one point I'd pictured myself using that. But, I've also been seriously researching this period since 1974, and even though there are always exceptions to the rule, by and large flintlocks were rapidly growing out of favor among frontiersmen, and guns like the Spencer and Henry weren't yet readily available to the average hunter/trader/wayfarer. I've always liked NCOWS approach to what is acceptable -- was it common? Unfortunately, in my opinion neither style fits that criteria.

I wanted to hear what others thought, but I also don't want to start making exceptions just because someone has a modern muzzle loading deer rifle that's "close," or a camel gun that's a hoot to shoot, or because a military regiment carried a certain type of firearm. When I envision an APS encampment, which I'm hoping will be held at historical sites where a fort or trading post already exists (I'm working on it), I picture a scene that looks like it could have realistically occurred. I'd rather err on the side of caution and maintain our goal of historical accuracy.

Caleb
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Ranch 13 on August 29, 2011, 11:30:18 PM
So basically you're going post 1840 buckskinnin... ::) with percussion Hawkens...
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: buffalo bill on August 30, 2011, 12:04:04 AM
So do I JimBob, but this little group already lost my interest when nobody contested the idea that shotguns would be unheard of because of the "great distances" on the plains.  Besides, they've already started the "I ain't never seen one so they won't be allowed" rule.

 STU KETTLE
   1. I didn't say that shotguns were unheard of. I said that most Plainsmen probably wouldn't have bothered to carry one because of the
       great distances on the Plains. I don't know where you are from but I live in North Dakota and have hunted here for 25 years. If you get
       a shot at any big game animal under 100 yards, it is a rare occasion indeed.  That to me is a great distance for a black powder rifle of any
       kind. I also stated that there were several personnas that would have most likely carried a shotgun on the Plains during our time period.
       Emmigrants, settlers, 49ers etc. You must have misunderstood my post. It happens.

    2. If we, as a group , are not to your liking, why waste your time posting anything on our forum? We have lost your interest? Really?
       You haven't joined us so why even bother? There is always room for differing opinions but with respect. Always with respect.
        No one contested what I said about shotguns because I didn't say what you thought you read! Next time you get worked up about
        something, take a lesson from Davy Crockett, "Be sure that you are right, then go ahead."

   BUFFALO BILL
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Caleb Hobbs on August 30, 2011, 12:08:13 AM
Howdy, Ranch 13:

We're going 1840-1865 -- plainsmen, 49th, settler, emmigrant, etc., with a wide array of firearms common to that time frame. There will be an emphasis on historical accuracy in both what we shoot and how we portray our personas. It might be bumpy in spots, and it won't be for everyone, but I'm confident we'll fill a niche a lot of people are interested in.

Best,
Caleb
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Ranch 13 on August 30, 2011, 08:43:08 AM
Caleb good luck with it, but it's looking like the thing is falling apart already. When you go to "outlawing" firearms that are historically documented to the very folk that you are trying to portray, you're heading right over the cliff.
 If your end date is in 1865 that lets a great big world of cartridge rifles and smith and wesson #1's , floberts, Hall's, Maynard ringballs, peadbody's,spencers, henry's, etc right thru the door.
 Then you have to decide what sort of attire and accoutrements will be allowed....
 Will be watching to see how this unfolds tho.
 
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Stu Kettle on August 30, 2011, 09:24:41 AM
STU KETTLE
   1. I didn't say that shotguns were unheard of. I said that most Plainsmen probably wouldn't have bothered to carry one because of the
       great distances on the Plains. I don't know where you are from but I live in North Dakota and have hunted here for 25 years. If you get
       a shot at any big game animal under 100 yards, it is a rare occasion indeed.  That to me is a great distance for a black powder rifle of any
       kind. I also stated that there were several personnas that would have most likely carried a shotgun on the Plains during our time period.
       Emmigrants, settlers, 49ers etc. You must have misunderstood my post. It happens.

    2. If we, as a group , are not to your liking, why waste your time posting anything on our forum? We have lost your interest? Really?
       You haven't joined us so why even bother? There is always room for differing opinions but with respect. Always with respect.
        No one contested what I said about shotguns because I didn't say what you thought you read! Next time you get worked up about
        something, take a lesson from Davy Crockett, "Be sure that you are right, then go ahead."

   BUFFALO BILL

I didn't intend to waste any more time posting on your forum, but since this is directed at me, I feel obligated to reply.  I live in western Nebraska, on the plains.  I have killed many deer with a .50 cal. muzzle loader, and a few with a muzzleloading double-barrelled shotgun(loaded with patched round balls because buckshot is not legal for deer in Nebraska).  I almost never shoot either of them as far as 100 yards, and most of the deer I have killed have been within 50 yards.  I also find a shotgun handy for taking small game and the wide variety of birds that live out here on the plains.  If I had lived during the time period you wish to portray, and had to choose a weapon for hunting and for defending myself against hostile humans or hungry predators, I would choose the smooth bore double barrel over the rifle every time.

Good luck with your new group.
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: JimBob on August 30, 2011, 09:50:12 AM
Geez guys,give the man a little time to get others thoughts on the subject and think things out a bit.This has only been in the talking stage for a short while. :)
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Caleb Hobbs on August 30, 2011, 10:27:19 AM
Howdy, Ranch 13: Nothing's set in stone yet, and nothing is outlawed at this point; we're still working on it.

JimBob: Thanks, amigo. We're working on putting together a governing body now. I know what I want, but I also want to hear what others want -- without losing sight of our original goal. It takes time.
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: JimBob on August 30, 2011, 11:41:48 AM
A thought about the Spencer.What would have been the civilian availability of these prior to 1865 other than early sporting models?Maybe query TwoFlints on the subject.The carbines weren't being produced till late in the period and then if I'm not mistaken all production was going to the military either state or federal.Were any units stationed in the west equiped with them?
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Mogorilla on August 30, 2011, 12:06:44 PM
I am guessing few, if any of the Spencers/Henrys made it west of the Mississippi during the unpleasantness.  If you are aiming (hee hee) for late 1850s, there were plenty of Sharps in Kansas, aka Beacher's Bibles.   
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Ranch 13 on August 30, 2011, 01:19:15 PM
Both the Henry and the Spencer were in production in 1860. The question becomes so what if the only models available would have been the civilian sporting models? That's exactly what a "plainsman" would of been except for the few hired as scouts and foragers for the Army, and those would of been issued military arms.
 We know that Henrys and Spencers played key roles in the hands of civilians and Army troops in two battles in 67 and 68, Wagonbox and Beechers Island, but then again if the cutoff date is Jan 31 1864.....
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: ChuckBurrows on August 30, 2011, 02:17:27 PM
But, I've also been seriously researching this period since 1974, and even though there are always exceptions to the rule, by and large flintlocks were rapidly growing out of favor among frontiersmen, and guns like the Spencer and Henry weren't yet readily available to the average hunter/trader/wayfarer. I've always liked NCOWS approach to what is acceptable -- was it common? Unfortunately, in my opinion neither style fits that criteria.
Caleb

I have been hesitant to post on this subject so far, wanting to see which way the wind blows and as for joining this group – oh well it sounds like another group being setup based on a limited vision of the period of a few…….the vision I see forming here is more of one based on the timeline of Johnston’s Plainsmen series of the 1860-70’s rather then the earlier period. Also I see a lot of impetus towards the scout and others of that type and not the more common types of folks such as settler, traders, Metis, et al….
And yes I realize all groups have birthing pains, but so far that’s how it looks from over here?????

Anyway here’s my two cents and with all due respect , but if you really think that flintlocks weren't "common" during the 1840-1865 period then you have apparently not been doing in depth research despite the length of time you state (and FWIW and not to start a peeing contest I’ve been studying it since 1962 and have a wall full of books plus Gigabytes of primary docs on my computer all based on study of the 1800-1865 period).
Opinions aside flintlocks were VERY common on the plains and elsewhere up through the 1860's - HBC continued to sell them until the 1920's in fact.
Amongst the Metis and others who hunted buffalo for hides, tongues, and pemmican (a major and little known business on the plains and in the mountains prior to the the hide hunters of the 1870's) the most popular gun was the shortened NW Gun in flintlock. Also Sam Hawken for instance was still building flinters in the 1850’s. In fact one of the most famous Hawkens, the so-called Smithsonian Hawken, built in 1852-53, was originall built as a flinter and is the only verified flint Hawken Mountain rifle.
FWIW – here’s just a bit of period research - dated 1843 which shows how common at this date the flinters still were and as noted above the main fire arm of the military on both sides through the Mexican War of 1846 was the flintlock:
In 1843 Captain Philip St. George Cooke, in command of a dragoon detachment patrolling an area along the north bank of the
Arkansas River, encountered a band of Texas "irregulars/freeboters" who were threatening a Santa Fe caravan. Anticipating trouble
from the captain and his frontier-toughened troops, the Texans hastily concealed a number of their best weapons (including some
Colt repeating rifles), but Cooke nevertheless relieved them of various other guns, including muskets, shotguns, pistols, and rifles.
Among the rifles Cooke confiscated and later turned in at Fort Leavenworth were:
30 flint lock rifles, valued at eighteen dollars each, including the barrel of one which has no stock, which appears to have been lost in
transportation.
12 percussion rifles, valued at twenty two dollars and fifty cents, including the barrel of one which has no stock. . . .
3 half stock Middletown rifles, percussion lock, valued at eighteen dollars each.
1 full stock percussion lock [Middletown rifle], valued at eighteen dollars.
1 halfstock flint lock Middletown rifle, valued at eighteen dollars.
NOTE: The "Middletown rifles" were probably altered U.S. Model 1817 contract arms made by Simeon North
Totals: 31 flinters and 16 percussion

Besides the forty-seven rifles and two "American dragoon carbines" (Hall's maybe - could be either flint or caplock) the Texans were carrying twenty-eight smoothbores of various types:
15 English flint lock shot guns.
3 Tower pieces (most likely India pattern Brown Bess flinters)
1 Large American flint lock shot gun.
2 Double barrelled flint lock, stub and twist, shot guns.
4 Percussion lock, double barreled, stub and twist, shot guns.
1 American musket.
2 Texas muskets (most likely the flintlock M1822 type muskets supplied to Texas by Tryon of Philadelphia in 1840 and marked Texas with a star on the lockplates) - a total of 860 were purchased out of the 1,500 ordered.
Totals: 23 flinters and 4 caplock - the American musket could be of either ignition so was not included in the totals.

The Texas "freebooters" were also rather well equipped with pistols -  Cooke confiscated:
4 pairs of flint lock holster pistols, valued at twenty dollars a pair.
2 pairs percussion lock pistols, valued at forty dollars a pair.
8 flint lock holster pistols, odd, valued at ten dollars apiece.
7 percussion lock belt pistols, valued at fifteen dollars apiece.
1 percussion lock duelling pistol, valued at forty dollars.
Totals: 16 flinters and 13 caplock - just about half and half

I have much more info which I can/will try to post regarding flinters in the west. While it’s true that the caplocks became more and more prominent during this period flinters of all type were in fact very common even in the later days while as noted the Spencer and Winchester were not……..


For some of the best primary info on firearms of the time period 1840-1865 check out Garavaglia and Worman’s “Firearms of the American West: 1803-1865 and Worman’s late book “Gunsmoke and Saddle Leather”

Quote
STU KETTLE
   1. I didn't say that shotguns were unheard of. I said that most Plainsmen probably wouldn't have bothered to carry one because of the great distances on the Plains. I don't know where you are from but I live in North Dakota and have hunted here for 25 years. If you get a shot at any big game animal under 100 yards, it is a rare occasion indeed.  That to me is a great distance for a black powder rifle of any kind.
I take it you never hunted with a muzzleloader? Having live and hunted in the west since 1965 most of my hunting has been done with muzzeloading rifles and with the proper shot 150 years is not out of the question albeit most of mine have been under 100 yards – but then you have to hunt like they did then and not depend on how far your rifle reaches. Muzzleloaders were in fact the primary hunting arm all over the west up until the 1870’s most. The  plainsmen and others all did not run out and get a new fangled cartidge gun, most of which were less powerful than the muzzleloaders of the day. Jim Bridger, a master scout, was still carrying his 52 caliber Hawken in 1865 for instance, since most of the old timers like him did not care for the new guns and their weaker cartidges.


Oh and by the way shotguns were quite common in the period, especially for night guard duty – they are mentioned and documented along the Santa Fe Trail in particular.

Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Mogorilla on August 30, 2011, 02:35:27 PM
I will add that flinters are still in use, or were in the 1980s in AFrica where they were still being sold/traded.  As the AK-47 became more wide spread through blackmarket arms market the were replaced, but college roommate picked up 2 like new flintlocks in Africa ~1989, made in Europe in the 50s for market in Africa.  Easier for the isolated groups to maintain them and shoot them. 
(A flint shooter friend of mine use to say he would switch to percussion when the Good Lord sprinkled percusision caps all over the ground, like he did with flints, he like Bridger is rather set in his ways ;D)    I would say Flinters in the west were the same as Africa, easier to keep operating, all you needed was cans of blackpowder.  I believe Dupont sold theirs in lead containers, so several pounds of that, and flint to be found and you are good to go.  That is a convenience that would be hard to pass up, especially if you are dropping ~85(or more) grains BP and firing Buck and Ball, it makes a critter or opponent take notice.   
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: ChuckBurrows on August 30, 2011, 02:41:25 PM
MoG - yep I saw flinters in Central America back in the late 70's and early 80's as well. For the buffalo runners, those who actually hunted on horseback, during of the 1840-1865 period a flint gun was prefreable due to the ability to self prime - fitting a cap on a cone while riding at break neck speed was not so easy........

L & C had powder containers made of lead, but not sure about the later ones from Dupont - small lead bar stock on the other hand was a common trade item as were all types of shot fro smoothbores and pre-cast balls, the latter in the most common trade gun sizes such as .535" and 550".
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Tascosa Joe on August 30, 2011, 02:47:23 PM
Chuck:
Very interesting and informative.
T-Joe
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: JimBob on August 30, 2011, 03:07:14 PM
Both the Henry and the Spencer were in production in 1860. The question becomes so what if the only models available would have been the civilian sporting models? That's exactly what a "plainsman" would of been except for the few hired as scouts and foragers for the Army, and those would of been issued military arms.
 We know that Henrys and Spencers played key roles in the hands of civilians and Army troops in two battles in 67 and 68, Wagonbox and Beechers Island, but then again if the cutoff date is Jan 31 1864.....

Speaking as to the Spencer only using as a reference source Marcot's book.About being in production in 1860,his patent dates from March 6,1860.Around 36 rifles were built between 1860-61,mostly what would be called tool room models today and the Army and Navy trials guns.The first military contract for rifles dates to Dec.1861 at which time there wasn't even a factory in existence producing Spencers.After that they had trouble keeping up with the military contracts let alone selling any to the civilian market.

As to sporting rifles.First production of these didn't start until 1864,estimated 7 made.1865 estimated 400 produced.Marcot states that they "were special order arms only" and "they were too expensive for most sportsmen to aquire".They cost anywhere from $42 to $52 with globe and peep sights being $5 extra the same price for a set trigger.A substantial sum of money in those days.

I think if you look at a lot of the available information breech loading cartridge firearms would have been pretty much unseen in any quantity prior to the end of the Civil  War in civilian hands on the frontier  and would have been a rarity.

Original source material such as used by ChuckBurrows illustrates best what was actually used in a given period.
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Ranch 13 on August 30, 2011, 03:22:50 PM
Well as I said if you're cut off date is january 31 1864 at 1159 pm..... Then yeh, maybe, but remember the bulk of the Henry's in use during the Civil War were purchased by ciivilians and carried by troops. Also don't forget that when the hostilities ended the government got loose of alot of their surplus.
 To just flat out come out and say " it couldn't of happened" is about as wrong as John Waynes troops carrying Win 92's without the forearms in place of spencers and henry's in the movie cavalry charges.
 Always keep in mind that the folks that came out here in the majority of the time periods pre 1930's started out from the areas east of the Missouri, and the Mississippi, and a great many of those folks that came out west looking for adventure were from east of the Alleghany's. So just about anything and everything that was available to them in their home country they could of and would of brought with them.
 Even the majority of us old terds that are 3rd and 4th generation out here in the Wild Wild west can easily trace our roots to Ioway, Ohio, Pennsylvania etc....
 The kicked the Mormons out of Illinois in 1847, and they made many trips back and forth from the Salt Lake Valley to the eastern trading centers for supplies. Don't forget that Majors, Russell and Waddell made their fortunes hauling freight from the east to the west, and just what do you suppose they hauled in those wagons?
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: ChuckBurrows on August 30, 2011, 03:28:17 PM
As for breech loaders the only real common one of the pre-1865 West would be the Sharps modesl of the 1850's and early 1860's. There were some others, but the Sharps was by far the most common during the early 1850 to 1865 era

William Hamilton in "My Sixty Years on the Plains" notes that upon arriving in California in the early 1850's, his group traded in their Hawken rifles for Sharps and then used the barresl from the Hawkens as pry bars in the gold fields...
see page 217 - http://books.google.com/ebooks/reader?id=IahK17yWrdgC&printsec=frontcover&output=reader
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: St. George on August 30, 2011, 04:35:27 PM
If the APS wants some form of credibility as a nascent organization with a historical bent - then it really needs to avoid the 'Woulda If They Coulda' aspect and concentrate on doing actual research and not supposition or undue belief in novelized versions of the time frame.

The reference books are out there - sitting on the shelves of your Public Library - and available via Inter-Library Loan when they're not.

Growing pains are lessened with a sound outline that's easy to follow from the start, and not cobbled together as the ball's rolling...

Talk this out amongst yourselves, and do so civilly - and when you argue a point - then argue it with some form of reference to back up your positions - 'then' decide on your course, and you'll reach a more harmonious outcome.

Good Luck!

Vaya,

Scouts Out!



Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Jake MacReedy on August 30, 2011, 05:25:31 PM
Chuck,

I agree with you wholeheartedly!

St. George: absolutely!  And this is what Chuck was doing in his message above.

Simple Solution: Set the time period as 1840-1860, and no cartridge firearms.

Jake
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: JimBob on August 30, 2011, 05:36:56 PM
Does anyone have a copy of "Gunsmoke and Saddleather"?There are some remarks on early use of the Spencer and Henry on page 215.I can't get it to come up on the net,all I get is a blank page.

I'm not taking the position no one had one but who and at what point were they readily available and enough of them being used that they were something other than the exception or the odd bird.What I'm trying to get at is if your persona is carrying a Spencer or Henry there is going to be a limited number of years from the 1840-1865 period in which it would be correct.
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: JimBob on August 30, 2011, 05:40:29 PM

William Hamilton in "My Sixty Years on the Plains" notes that upon arriving in California in the early 1850's, his group traded in their Hawken rifles for Sharps and then used the barresl from the Hawkens as pry bars in the gold fields...


 :o    :'(
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Short Knife Johnson on August 30, 2011, 06:26:35 PM
:o    :'(

I had the same reaction to a Mike Venturino article about a Creedmore Rolling Block he had bought to put back into shooting conditiion.  The aft section of the rifle was found in a mechanic's shop.  The guy's brother had tisted off the barrel to use as a jack handle.
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Ranch 13 on August 30, 2011, 06:49:33 PM
Does anyone have a copy of "Gunsmoke and Saddleather"?There are some remarks on early use of the Spencer and Henry on page 215.I can't get it to come up on the net,all I get is a blank page.

I'm not taking the position no one had one but who and at what point were they readily available and enough of them being used that they were something other than the exception or the odd bird.What I'm trying to get at is if your persona is carrying a Spencer or Henry there is going to be a limited number of years from the 1840-1865 period in which it would be correct.

 It says that like the Henry the Spencer was available west of the Mississippi in 1863.
If you look at the large variety of arms available thru the mailorder houses of the day, and take into consideration the relatively small population of the US at the time there's not going to be any firearm that's going to be real common other than a sidelock muzzleloader of some flavor.
The time period being discussed here is extremely short and in the middle of not much happening other than big fights with the Mexican government and the Mormons.

Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: JimBob on August 30, 2011, 07:19:19 PM
The time period being discussed here is extremely short and in the middle of not much happening other than big fights with the Mexican government and the Mormons.



Nope not much,the country increased in size about a third,the gold rush,the Pony Express came and went when they built the transcontinental telegraph,the transcontinental railroad was being surveyed,the Civil War had all but started in Kansas,thousands going over the Oregon and SantaFe trails to settle "out west",the formation of the 1st and 2nd Dragoons to deal with the Indian problem to name a few.But if your trying to relate "happening" to cowboys in this period your right,not much going on there till they got the railroad built.
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: TwoWalks Baldridge on August 30, 2011, 07:50:35 PM
The time period being discussed here is extremely short and in the middle of not much happening other than big fights with the Mexican government and the Mormons.

And not too forget that minor little skirmish called the Border wars between Kansas and Missouri and of course that other minor conflict called the Civil War or the War of Aggression depending on which side you supported.  ;D
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Ranch 13 on August 30, 2011, 08:09:37 PM
Most of what you two are talking about happened between 1860 and 65. So there we are a 20 year period that as far as civilian life (plainsmen) fairly quiet.
 It was the next 20 years starting in 65 when things really got heated up. ;)
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: buffalo bill on August 30, 2011, 08:38:47 PM
I agree with Jake. What if we moved the End date back to 1860, allowed everyone to carry any weapon that could be documented to the 1840-1860 West and get back to having fun instead of acting like children on a playground. I am just as guilty as many of you for trying to push their own ideas on the rest. We all got on board with this group because we share a love for this time and place. The people who settled this great land gave us the right to argue and disagree. They DID NOT say that we had to do it! If one guy wants to carry a derringer and portray a gambler and another guy wants to drive a six-hitch freight wagon full of guns, what does it hurt? As long as we are having fun and maybe learning something in the process, that is what is important. Feel free to agree with me and let's get back to having fun. If you do not agree with me , I am sorry that you feel that way. Thank you for the opportunity to speak my piece.

Chuck- I do ,in fact, hunt with a muzzleloader. I am not ,however, a great shot and therefore try to keep my shots as close as possible for a clean kill. Thanks for understanding.

"SCOUTIN' for SHAGGIES"

BUFFALO BILL
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: TwoWalks Baldridge on August 30, 2011, 08:48:46 PM
What if we moved the End date back to 1860, allowed everyone to carry any weapon that could be documented to the 1840-1860 West
BUFFALO BILL

Sounds good to me!
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: JimBob on August 30, 2011, 08:51:22 PM
Most of what you two are talking about happened between 1860 and 65. So there we are a 20 year period that as far as civilian life (plainsmen) fairly quiet.
 It was the next 20 years starting in 65 when things really got heated up. ;)

LOL Tell that to the half million plus people who hit the trail west in what the history books call "The Period of Manifest Destiny" looking for gold,land,religious freedom and many other reasons between 1840-1865.Texas,California and 4 territories became states during this period.The only reason things heated up after 1865 was because somebody else built the fire they were using. ;D
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Ranch 13 on August 30, 2011, 08:59:36 PM
Guess it's all in ones perception.The heaviest of the migration came in the 60's....
 It never ceases to amaze me that when I go to town most of the highway is along or on top of the Oregon trail. It takes me about 30 minutes to travel the distance those folks traveled in a week. I'ld a thought they'ld of been sick to death of staring at Laramie Peak by the time they turned north and got a different view of the thing... :-\
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: JimBob on August 30, 2011, 09:10:58 PM
Guess it's all in ones perception.The heaviest of the migration came in the 60's....
 It never ceases to amaze me that when I go to town most of the highway is along or on top of the Oregon trail. It takes me about 30 minutes to travel the distance those folks traveled in a week. I'ld a thought they'ld of been sick to death of staring at Laramie Peak by the time they turned north and got a different view of the thing... :-\

LOL You're right about the 60s,lot of em went west.That's when all them dopers and hippies took over Californy. ;D During the period of the gold rush the estimates are 250,000 people headed towards California by various routes and ship.

Wonder if there is any record about people going insane back then when traveling on the prairie where you could see something for days or weeks and never seem to be getting closer?
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Ranch 13 on August 30, 2011, 09:53:46 PM
There's alot of mention in various diaries and logs about the drudgery of their crossing the prairies and how it was mostly a vast waste land. Some folks went nuts and disappeared , some shot themselves and some just got sick and died...
One of my ancestors made the trip 4 times to Oregon to get everybody out there, then turned around a few years later packed up and went back to eastern NE.
 Another went to Kansas spent the winter and told the boys one spring day "pack up the wagon we're going home, we couldn't even keep the dead buried here".
 Both of those fellas only owned a shotgun. ;)
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Caleb Hobbs on August 30, 2011, 11:37:58 PM
Just a reminder that this forum was created to explore the possibility of starting a group interested in re-enacting that period in the West between the mountain men era and the end of the Civil War. Since this group will include plainsmen, settlers, miners, ranchers, Indian fighters, etc., and because of the time frame involved, we'll never have a completely period correct re-enactment. There will always be a California '49er shooting alongside an 1860s Texas settler next to an 1850s Mexican grandee, all of which sounds like a lot of fun to me.

There is, and always will be as long as I'm involved, an emphasis on historical accuracy within TAPS, but we also need to take into consideration the finished product. What were the exceptions, and what was the norm. A historically accurate group will be made up largely of what was normal for that person in that time. I'm not too keen to see an entire shooting line filled with exceptions.

Caleb
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: wildman1 on August 31, 2011, 05:38:11 AM
Near as I can tell Ya'll had an IDEA, 1840 to 1865, now it seems ta me that ya might be considerin changin the date just ta exclude a certain type of weapon. This does not seem right ta me, I don't think ya should change yer original concept just ta exclude somethin. I don't care, personaly, which weapons are used. I am just as at ease shootin a full auto as I am shootin my Clinch Mountain flinter. When ya start narrowin the dates yer gonna narrow the field of players, guess its yer choice.  :) :) WM
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Colt Fanning on August 31, 2011, 09:18:49 AM
Howdy,
We might consider moving the period to end in 1860 rather than 1865.  Although I am sure that some plainsmen didn't return to the east to fight and some remained on the plains as hunters for the RR and mining camps, the main focus of the nation during the CW was not westward expansion.  Also the CW period is well represented by other groups.  I think that this would not impact the Spencer- Henry debate since I think both as well as the Sharps were available to the public prior to 1860.
Regards
Colt
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Ranch 13 on August 31, 2011, 09:37:48 AM
Caleb this may be where you're headed over the cliff.The time period is not that much different from the "mtn man" era, with the exception of some few modern technological advances.
 You'll need to sort out the different classes, and what's allowable in each.
 Such as what exactly is a plaisnman?
 What is a settler and in what part of the country? What a settler in Missouri needed for firearms etc. was a bunch different than those trying to strike out into the eastern Dakotas and Nebraska.
 Miners? the gold strike in Georgia paid off about as good as California....
 Indian fighters? wasn't much going on in the Indian War dept other than the forced relocation of the eastern tribes(and most of that took place well east of the Mississippi) untill after the Civil War and the westward expansion got started. Texas rangers had their handsful, but it wasn't just indians...
 Most all of this time period is very well documented in both print and picture, so you'll just need to lay down some hard and fast rules to get it under way, and then if the need arises make changes in the rules to fix the problem.
 
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Comanche Kid on September 02, 2011, 04:54:45 AM
Alot of good, and some bad, discussion here. I think we need to define a few things here..You know, basic principles set in stone:

1). What is a Plainsman?
2). The definitive Era to be Encompassed?
3). Standards of Conduct.

I am all for informed debate, and am looking forward to this project moving ahead. I think it encompasses a very important time period, and gives all interested a chance to break off from the established norm, and be part of something New and Unique.
   With that being said, Please play Nice and give help to Caleb where You can. The Historical pieces posted here are great info, and I Myself have dusted off a few of My history Books. I have also started looking for period weapons and accouterments that are relevant to the period.. I personal will be carrying a .50 Hawken (percussion) and an 1851 colt .36. This era was very transitional in History, and hopefully we are able to convey this to others....
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Border Ruffian on September 04, 2011, 08:14:45 PM
Caleb, up the ante to 1870, In those 5 years a combination of cap and ball and cartridge guns/ conversions would have been common.
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Sacramento Johnson on September 04, 2011, 08:46:13 PM
Howdy!
 I don't think the date range should be extended further.  Cartridge firearms are already well represented in Cowboy Action Shooting (SASS and NCOWS), rather this is for the earlier cap and ball revolvers and muzzle loading rifles. 
(Cap and ball revolvers are also allowed in SASS, but are extremely rare in comparison to cartridge guns.)
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Jake MacReedy on September 04, 2011, 08:52:11 PM
B.R., according to my research, the only cartridge conversion revolvers being made prior to 1870 were the Remington New Model Army revolvers contracted by B. Kittredge & Co. of Cincinnati, Ohio with Remington and Smith & Wesson (for use of the Rollin White patent for bored-through cylinders, which they owned).  This covered several thousand revolvers, all 5-shot .46 Rimfire,  with production starting in 1868, but they were not in common usage, even by the end of the 1860's.  I realize that Mess'rs. Smith & Wesson started looking into producing their #3 .44 American in the 1868-9 time period, but, again, not in common usage until the early 1870's.  If we are talking the decade of the 1860's, up to 1870, then cap-and-ball revolvers are the norm.

Just my $0.02 worth!
Jake
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Ranch 13 on September 04, 2011, 09:18:21 PM
Howdy!
 I don't think the date range should be extended further.  Cartridge firearms are already well represented in Cowboy Action Shooting (SASS and NCOWS), rather this is for the earlier cap and ball revolvers and muzzle loading rifles. 
(Cap and ball revolvers are also allowed in SASS, but are extremely rare in comparison to cartridge guns.)

 That's where some confusion may be coming in? The period prior to the 1860's is/has been covered pretty well for a couple/four  of decades in various muzzleloading /buckskinning shoots and events.
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Jake MacReedy on September 04, 2011, 09:25:36 PM
Ranch13, I beg to disagree.  The period of about 1750-1840 has been well-represented in reenactment and buckskinning groups, and of, course, so has the Civil War.  But the period of which we are speaking, 1840-1865 (non-Civil War), has had very little representation in either reenactment or buckskinning groups.  I grew up with muzzleloading and cap-and-ball firearms, and was around the NMLRA for decades...am still a member, and set up as a vendor at Friendship, Indiana, when I have the opportunity.  This period of time has never had the representation it deserves, thus the American Plainsmen Society.

Regards,
Jake
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Ranch 13 on September 04, 2011, 09:35:28 PM
Jake, we'll just have to agree to disagree, because the majority of the "rondezvous" in the Rocky Mtn West and the upper great plains cover about as much of the post 1840 era as the pre 1840 era.
  I'm still waiting for a good explanation as to just exactly what was so different about the 20 years between the end of the fur trade and the Civil War Era? Except of course there wasn't a market for beaver plew, the hide trade was still alive and well. Prospectors came and went, and settlers were still expanding slowly outward from the population centers.
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Jake MacReedy on September 04, 2011, 09:49:48 PM
Guess we will.  All of the rendezvous with which I'm familiar, either by being there or the advertising for same, almost always specifies "Pre-1840 only."  Maybe there's been a big change in the last 7 years or so...I've been rather busy overseas.

As to the second part, about the difference in this era: well, if you feel there is no difference, then this is obviously not for you, sir.  Then the question becomes, why keep asking what the difference is, if it doesn't really matter to you, and you believe there is none?

Regards,
Jake
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Ranch 13 on September 04, 2011, 09:56:35 PM
 ;)If you can't answer the question Jake then don't try and put anything on me. I asked an honest question others have asked it as well, and so far nothing  but a bit of smak talk from you. sir. :)
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Jake MacReedy on September 04, 2011, 10:31:16 PM
Let's start here: the production and use of Colt's revolvers in their various forms.  The production and use of percussion firearms in martial and civilian use on a large scale.  The era of Manifest Destiny, and the beginnings of western migration on a more than casual or business-related basis (as with the Fur Trade).  The era of the Gold Rush in California, and the west-bound travel that entailed.  The era of the Oregon Trail, and it's use to help settle the Northwest.  I'm sure you can come up with some yourself, sir.  As to owing you an explanation of why I am interested in a certain time period, well, I don't.  No one here owes you an explanation for this at all.  If it sounds like I'm being "testy", well, I am.  You, sir have come across as being more than a little "testy" in a number of your posts.  My point is this, and remains this: if you don't think there is any reason to be interested in this time period, and wish to do nothing more than point out that you believe this is so,then why are you bothering to ask at all?  I have listed some of the reasons why I am interested in it.

Regards,
Jake
aka Ron Clark (out of Texas, writing from Kirkuk, Iraq)   
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Ranch 13 on September 04, 2011, 10:43:25 PM
Just what exactly is your definition of a Plainsman? Jake?
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Jake MacReedy on September 04, 2011, 10:55:46 PM
A plainsman is someone who made their living in that vast area west of the Mssissippi, stretching clear over to the Pacific Ocean.  That is how I view it in the context of what is envisioned for the American Plainsmen Society.  Are there narrower, more concise definitions out there? Yes, there are. One would be someone working as a scout, guide or hunter on what we term the Great Plains of Kansas, Nebraska, Eastern Colorado and Eastern Wyoming, on up into the Dakotas, and even into the Canadian Great Plains. A "buffalo runner" of the 1850's could be considered one, as could the freighters on the Santa Fe Trail.  What is envisioned here is having a group that acts as an umbrella for the 1840-1865 time period.

As I said, we are stretching the definition to include those who went west of the Rockies and Sierra Nevadas, in search of new homes and new hunting grounds, as well as those who lived and hunted along what is now the southern border of the United States.

And, of course, Merriam-Webster's official definition: an inhabitant of the plains (origin: Great Plains + man, terms first known use:1870, which, of course post-dates out groups time frame)

Regards,
Jake
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Comanche Kid on September 04, 2011, 11:06:42 PM
+5 to Jake,
                 Gents, Let's try and keep this on a civil manner. You are starting to remind me of all the other forums.

Jake, Keep Your Powder dry and keep safe..I'm a Veteran of "The Suck" Myself...Thank You for You service....
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Jake MacReedy on September 04, 2011, 11:35:14 PM
As Comache Kid, said, this exchange is getting nowhere fast.  I will not change your mind, and you will not change mine.  As before, we'll just have to agree to disagree.  Been a long night over here, and it's time to get some sleep.  Fire away, Ranch!  It's all yours pard!  Wasted enough of my time dealing with you for one day.

Your "emoticons" are quite cute, by the way...nice touch.

Regards & Out,
Jake
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Sir Charles deMouton-Black on September 05, 2011, 11:10:01 AM
I have two points;

1.  Please remain civil! 8)

2.  I am another Pard that is having trouble with the details.  When this board first came up I felt it filled in a gap in our living history field.  Now I am having perplexion problems!  This time slot was a period of rapid transition both in technology and in society, and it will lead to debates about what is in and what is not.  If it is left open there will be endless attempts to use a variety of items.  If rules are tightly regulated frustration could set in.

The options are;
a. if a member can prove that it was in (common?) use, bring it and run with it.
b. Set out lists of approved and not-approved kit and stick with it.

Keep up the debate, but be kind to each other.  I hope this can work.
Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: St. George on September 05, 2011, 11:29:45 AM
I'll reiterate what Sir Charles said - keep these discussions polite, and keep them focused.

The thing that most folks are missing is the 'Is There a Perceived Need?' - since the Buckskinning and Civil War folks cover much of the era, and NCOWS already has usable guidelines.

Essentially, this is what NCOWS covers authenticity-wise - but with percussion caps added...

Yes - Westward Expansion and the Gold Rush were pivotal - as was the Pony Express and the ever-expanding freighting and railroading operations - those were what filled much of the West, until the veterans of the Civil War wanted new starts, and left behind the battlefields and shattered communities to begin anew, but what most folks 'understand' are the Indian Wars and the Trail Drives, and it's those two things that 'are' the Old West to them.

This short timespan saw many innovations - but if the organization is to build, it needs to offer something truly unique - unique enough to buy the weapons and outfits and build Impressions, and all just to fill a very small niche.

Stay polite and get focused through  intelligent, well-reasoned and well-referenced  discourse.

Good Luck!

Vaya,

Scouts Out!






Title: Re: flintlocks and cartridge guns
Post by: Caleb Hobbs on September 05, 2011, 12:20:41 PM
I deleted a couple of the more recent posts that did nothing to further the discussion. Jake did a fine job explaining what we're attempting, and it's been covered in several earlier posts, as well. We've got a governing body of folks in place who are excited to see this grow, but it's like I've also said before, we won't be for everyone.

I'm going to lock this thread. It isn't serving any purpose in the direction it's headed now.

Caleb



 
A plainsman is someone who made their living in that vast area west of the Mssissippi, stretching clear over to the Pacific Ocean.  That is how I view it in the context of what is envisioned for the American Plainsmen Society.  Are there narrower, more concise definitions out there? Yes, there are. One would be someone working as a scout, guide or hunter on what we term the Great Plains of Kansas, Nebraska, Eastern Colorado and Eastern Wyoming, on up into the Dakotas, and even into the Canadian Great Plains. A "buffalo runner" of the 1850's could be considered one, as could the freighters on the Santa Fe Trail.  What is envisioned here is having a group that acts as an umbrella for the 1840-1865 time period.

As I said, we are stretching the definition to include those who went west of the Rockies and Sierra Nevadas, in search of new homes and new hunting grounds, as well as those who lived and hunted along what is now the southern border of the United States.

And, of course, Merriam-Webster's official definition: an inhabitant of the plains (origin: Great Plains + man, terms first known use:1870, which, of course post-dates out groups time frame)

Regards,
Jake