Bullet and Shell Civil War Projectiles Forum
Relic Discussion => Bullets => Topic started by: modockowando on September 10, 2012, 09:43:50 PM
-
Clearly, I am here to learn.. my thoughts, possibly an enfield or whitworth.
diameter - .456"
length - abt 1.283"
no weight
-
Modockowando again welcome to the forum. With the length, dish cavity and the flatter looking nose I believe this is a post war 45-70. I couldn't tell in the photo if the cavity has a dot base or not and if if does it is a 45-70. Ian, Pete, or Jim I think yall have the reference books on the 45-70 and your thoughts would be appreciated.
Where was this bullet dug?
-
No dot in the base that i can see using a loop. It was dug in southern coastal area of maine.. Portland region to be more specific. I have dug at this location on and off for abt a year or so.. Found a fair number of pieces. Only recently tried to learn more abt them given some things got in the way of doing this earlier. This bullet is a more unusual find at this location. I can post pictures of some of the other bullets if anyone is interested.
-
I would be interested in seeing pics of the other bullets you have pulled out of the ground from the area the above bullet was dug. I didn't know they even used guns in Maine, I thought they used harpoons for weapons. :)
-
"ah-yup" ;D
I'd like to find an original harpoon down in the water $$
Glad to ship out some pix.
-
That is a .45 Sharps. It could be one of several variants and all of them have to due with the powder charge behind them. These would have had a brass cartridge with a paper patch around the sides.
-
A few weeks ago (Aug. 31), I wrote a reply-post in discussion of the "Whitworth ID Question" posted by PIA in this forum.
I wrote: "Perhaps you have an older, obsolete version of the T&T "Handbook Of Civil War Bullets & Cartridges." In the Revised 2007 Edition, on page 25 it says T&T-65 has a cone cvity. At the bottom of that page there is a photo showing three bullets, with text saying:
".45-70 Sharps -- Previously believed to be Whitworths, these have since been identified as coming from post civil war Sharps metallic cartridges (1876-1880s). Dished base with [raised] dot in center. Long and short variants."
In doing subsequent research, I have not been able to find any photos of .45-70 Sharps bullets/cartridges to verify the shape of those bullets. Howver, I did find a photo of some .44-77 Sharps cartridges (which, like the .45-70, are all post-civil-war era). They show the shape of the exposed part of the .44-77 Sharps bullet, AND the linen wrapping mentioned by ACWbullets.
Additional information, from http://www.chuckhawks.com/buffalo_cartridges.htm
.44-77 Sharps and .44-77 Remington
This pair is actually the same cartridge. The .44-77 was introduced in 1869 by Sharps for their Model 1869 rifle, and was based on the Sharps 2 1/4" rimmed, bottleneck case. This case had a base diameter of .516", shoulder diameter of .502" and neck diameter of .467". Bullet diameter was .446" and cartridge overall length was 3.05". It was also available under the Remington name in their No. 3 Rolling Block rifle. The .44-77 was used for both hunting and target shooting. Factory loads were provided with various bullet weights up to 470 grains. Using a 365 grain bullet, one typical factory load had an advertised MV of 1460 fps and ME of 1730 ft. lbs.
Note that it says the .44-77 bullet's diameter was .446" and weight was 365 grains up to as heavy as 470 grains
And also from that website, specifying .45 bullet-weight of 400 grains:
45-75 Sharps (.45-70 Sharps)
In 1875 a civilian version of the .45-70 Government was produced by the Sharps Company as the .45-75 Sharps (Straight), and sometimes called the .45-70 Sharps. The Sharps Company liked the name on their rifles to match the name on the cartridge it used, a common marketing strategy at the time. These cartridges were actually dimensionally identical to the .45-70 Govt., and factory loads used a 400 grain bullet at a MV of 1330 fps and ME of 1580 ft. lbs.
Here's the photo of the .44-77 Sharps cartridges.
Regards,
Pete
-
Wow! I'm impressed! Thanks so much for digging into this further. It's no wonder I have had a tuff time making ID. Now I need to look back at some of the other dig finds for this area. Comments on photos posted are most welcome. :)