Smith Carbine - Comparison with Spencer - More - Smith Articles added

[Tuolumne Lawman]

Howdy to the camp,

I just acquired a Navy Arms/Pietta SMith Calvary Model Carbine .50 with all the goodies.  Any one have a source of info on Smith's, (besides Bilby's book Revolution in Arms or in Echoes of Glory ) please send me PM so as not to hi-jack  and tie up the Spencer list with Smith info, unless OKed by Two Flints. 

I have wanted a Smith for years, as it is second only to Spencers and Henries (and way ahead of Sharps) in my personal likes. Much easier to make live cartridges and blanks than a Sharps, and more durable.  I have both plastic and brass cases and Dixie Spire point bullets.

I just haven't found a lot on the web on it.

Thanks in advance.

[Harve Curry]

I read in "Carbines of the Civil War" by John D. McAulay that the Smith was surpassed by gov't procurement only by Spencer, Sharps and Burnside cavalry carbines. ISBN : 0-913159-45-2

Poultney paper & foil cartridges were.0525 bullet, 376gr, 40gr powder,case lengthL 1.34", OAL 1.75" ,

Rubber cartrtdge took .50" bullet at 350gr, 40gr powder, case lenght 1.47", OAL was 2" .

I can copy the 8 pages and send it to you if you like.

[Tuolumne Lawman]

Great!  Thank you.  I am building a binder, but can't afford to buy every book that mentions them!

If you scan, you can send them as an attachment.

If you copy. send them to:

Bernie Molloy
P.O. Box 483
Grass Valley, CA  95945

[Advertising]

[Tuolumne Lawman]

The powder charge and bullet info are intersting.  About the same weight and diameter bullet, but a little less powder than
 the Spencer.  I think the Burside and Sharps carbine rounds had about 50 grains of powder.

[Two Flints]

TL,

Please clarify -

Was the Smith Carbine - a breechloader?  Any connection with Smith or Smith & Wesson?

Two Flints

[Tuolumne Lawman]

It was designed by Glibert Smith of Buttermilk Falls, NY (no known link to Smith and Wesson) in 1857, and had been accepted by the Army in the late 1850s. 

It is a breech loader. The barrel tips down, when the release in the trigger guard is pushed up, displacing  a large latch engaging a lug on the frame.  The cartridges were either gutta percha (hard rubber) or foil with a bullet seated over a powder charge, and a flash hole in the center of the rear.  It has a side hammer like the sharps and Spencer, and is percussion. 

The barrel is tipped down and the cartridge is placed into the chamber end of the barrel, bullet end first.  the rear 1/2 of the cartridge protrudes from the chamber, and is enclosed in the breech in the reciever when the action is closed.  The cap is placed on the cone and fired like a Sharps.  The action is opened, the rear of the gutta percha case is grabbed, withdrawn, and discarded, and a fresh cartridge entered.

The former Cavalry re-enactor pard of mine I got it from said it was the easiest to reload on horseback. Much easier than a Sharps or Burnside, and easier than a Spencer after the magazine was emptied.

They are very simple and easy to clean, MUCH easier to clean than a Sharps percussion with its sliding chamber and gas seal breech face!

The pics are from a Tony Beck article online at Civil war news.

[Tuolumne Lawman]

It's also great for re-enacting.  The modern hard rubber cases are 4/$1, so it's not as expensive as Spencer blanks at 2/$1. They also hold 40 grains of powder instead of the 15 grains of the plastic Spencer blanks.  As I said, they are also easier to make and much more durable than than the Sharps paper cartridges and blanks.

[Two Flints]

TL,

Why not Email me the photos and I'll post 'em for you...same charge as before.

Two Flints

[Tuolumne Lawman]

Howdy,

Those were low res on the web site.  I will take some good ones this week end also comparing Sharps, Spencer, and Smith, as well as their cartridges.  I have some Sharps cartridges already made up, though they use CVA hollow base bulltes instead of ring-tails!

[Two Flints]

TL,

Because of your recent daliances, first with the Henry, then the Sharps, and now the Smith, as Moderator of SSS, I felt obliged and compelled to visit my local church and light a candle in your behalf, and pray that you will see the error of your ways and return to the bosom of your first love, the Spencer Repeating Firearm

Two Flints

[Two Flints]

TL,

Go for it!

http://www.auctionarms.com/search/displayitem.cfm?ItemNum=7993115

More info:

http://www.civilwarguns.com/9812.html

http://www.angelfire.com/vt/milsurp/smithc.html

http://www.sharpsburg-arsenal.com/Rifles___Muskets/F351_Smith_Carbine/f351_smith_carbine.html

[Mick Archer]

  Howdy Pards!

  I shot a Smith cavalry and a Smith artillery carbine in the N-SSA for 15 years...  Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...

  I prefered the white nylon cartridge over the soft vinyl tubes as the soft tubs leaked too much blow-back and were dirtier.
  As a brrechloader, the design was ingenious- push up the button and it upset the flat spring latch alllowing the barek end to drop down exposing the breech for the cartridge and cleaning.
   My "Yeck Smith" shot the best group with 36 grains of FFF rather than the 40 FF of the military cartridge, and with either a .520 or .525 bullet.

   The first of the repro's were made by Mike Yeck of Dundee, Michigan in the mid 1970's.  There were a great carbine, except for two things.  One, to simply produciton, Mick extended the frame and eliminate the "floating" collar between the frame and teh buttstock that absorbed recoil.  As a result, the recoil tended to pry and chip up the grain where the wlanut met the frame.
And two, the worst, his line of M1861, M1863 Springfields, "1862 Richmond" rifle-muskets and the SMith carbines suffered from random Quality Control problems which eventually forced Mike out of business in the late 1970's...

   Mike sold the Smith machinery and tooling to Navy Arms who "sat on" it for years before turning it over to the Italians who later came out with the new Smiths (and apparently adding the floating collar).

   Mike also had one of only two known prototypes for a Smith rifle that he kept in his store/factory.  Unfortunately it was stolen as part of a burglary and I believe never recovered.

    Mick Archer
   

[Tubac]

Are the copies all .520? My original is .510".

Tubac

[Mick Archer]

  Howdy Pards!

  I sold off my originals, and I sold my last two Yeck Smiths two weeks ago, so I have nothing to measure.

  All of my resources say the original bore is .50, however, they do not say whether that is groove-to-groove or "land-to-land measurement.

  Cartridges are more complex.

  The concept of the breechloader is to take an bore-oversized bullet and squeeze it down into the rifling.  In my day, with the Yeck Smiths, that was tpically a .520 bullet.  But I seem to hear lads shooting the Navy Arms/Italian made "New Yeck"s are favoring .516 moulds.
   
   The "stats" McAulay shares do not match two Smith rubber cartridge or paper wrapped cartridge I had.  Their cartridges  both have .512 bullets, but one has a 50 grain FF charge and the other a 52 grain FF charge.
   This is not unusual as period makers often are slightly diferent if one takes a survey of as surviving bullets or cartridges for all manner of Civil War guns..

     Mick Archer

[Fox Creek Kid]

I believe the troopers at the Battle of Red Buttes had Smith carbines and look what happened to them. 

http://www.sufpw.org/historicwyoming/Historic%20Sites/Red%20Buttes%20Battlefield/index.htm

[Tuolumne Lawman]

TL,

Because of your recent daliances, first with the Henry, then the Sharps, and now the Smith, as Moderator of SSS, I felt obliged and compelled to visit my local church and light a candle in your behalf, and pray that you will see the error of your ways and return to the bosom of your first love, the Spencer Repeating Firearm

Two Flints

AH, Father Two Flints, l Thank you!

Actually, I have shot Henries since I started CAS in 1994, and have not spent more than a year all totalled without one!  The Sharps was foisted on me by the 2nd Mass, as they would not let me carry my Spencer.  It's OK, but not a Henry or Spencer!

Now as for the Smith.....

I really do love this little gun!  Even though I feel that I am being unfaithful to my Spencer and Henry, and cheating on them  !

As for comparison photos of guns and ammo, and some specifically about the Smith's unique action, maybe tonight. My dear wife had every minute of my weekend from 5pm friday to 10 pm last night pre-scheduled.

[Tuolumne Lawman]

I had a pard contact me off list and ask why I don't like the Sharps paper cartridge carbines.  The reason I prefer Spencer above all other guns (except maybe Henries<g>) for shooting and re-enacting is obvious.  Firepower! Even with the anemic plastic Spencer blanks, they are preferable to the Sharps.  The Spencers are fast and the blanks are easy to make and easy to load. In real life, having 8 rounds in your carbine (7+1) while on horseback is unbelievable firepower for a Cavalryman.

Below is the text of my response why I prefer the Smith to the Sharps.

"I like the paper cartridge Sharps in live fire, with real bullets!  The cartridge, especially if packed tight, loads very well.  The original linen cartridges were even better, I assume.  My replica shoots 1 foot high at 25 yards, but I could change the front sight.

Paper cartridge Sharps suck for re-enacting!

Floppy blanks used in re-enacting are a pain in the butt to load.  Also, the small amount of powder that shaves off and sets on top of the breech block flashes if you don't tip it or blow it off.  Then there is the powder that accumulates inside the spring hollow in the rear of the handguard.  It can go off like a grenade. Without the back preasure of a live round going down the barrel, the free floating breech plate does not seal, and there is blow-by both up and down.  Now lets talk about cleaning the BP sharps.  Complete disassembly of the breech block, including the breech face is a must.  The flash channel from the cone is also a pain.

The Smith is MUCH simpler to load, maintain, and MUCH MORE easy to clean.  I think the blanks made from the black plastic case load easier than the paper ones in the Sharps."

[Mick Archer]

   Howdy Pards!
 
   The Italian repro Sharps  "foul" easier than the originals due to their redesigning the Sharps floating gas check plate making that portion of the breech block a solid piece, and inserting what is supposed to be a "floating sleeve" in the chamber.  (However due to inconsistent Italian workmanship/quality control the "sleeves" are often improperly isntalled and bind rather than "float.")
   And blanks foul worse than live rounds too.
   As a result some pards take it out and refnish/refit the modern sleeve to make it "float," , while some others go the opposite direction and epoxy it in place.

   Hi.  My  name is Mick, and I am a Sharpsaholic.

   I love CW era carbines and have shot the Smith, Maynard, Gallagher, Sharps, and Spencer.  I love the Sharps but found the "rolling: of nitrated paper cartridges or the making of nitrated linen cartridge to be time consuming both for N-SSA as well as reenacting  (living history where not that many shots were fired was better).

   IMHO, the paper Sharps cartridge can be rolled around a former to actual cartridge size- allowing a portion up front with balled toilet paper or a large cotton ball to serve in place of the bullet (which may or eliminate the guillotine effect of leaving loose powder on the breech block and the need for a "Sharps' Wrist Flick" while loading.
   However, IMHO, for ease of cartridge making the Smith or Gallagher is hard to beat.   

    Of course, this is all secondary as Civil War and Indian Wars troopers did not have to make their own rounds...        

     Mick Archer

[Appalachian Ed]

Well as long as we are talking about single shot carbines.......The Model 1 Maynard is hands down the most accurate of the bunch. And used primarily in Dixie to Boot!! now if you want to talk about a gun that make everyone else stop shooting and look... I get out the Keene and Walker.

[Tuolumne Lawman]

My Armi Sport SHarps has both the floating chamber and the two piece breeck block (front breech plate set into main block by round gas seal flange.) With loads with projectile, it seals fairly well.  With blanks, not at all!

My original 1860 .56-56 Spencer carbine , on the other hand NEVER fouls its action<g>.  I have yet to fire the Smith with either blanks or live rounds.  I have both brass and plastic Smith cartridges.

BTW, the spire point Smith bullets I got from Dixie (.515 I believe) have an unusual sprue piece on the base that almost looks spiral.  It is uniform on all, and protrudes almost 1/8+"  IS that supposed to be there?