1863 Brass Cases by Buffalo Arms

Texas Shooter · Post by **Texas Shooter** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 12:34 am

To All:

Do the brass cases sold by BA work well in these rifles?

Thanks,

Texas Shooter

http://www.buffaloarms.com/browse.cfm/4,4274.html

http://www.buffaloarms.com/browse.cfm/4,4275.html

Sharps Brass Cartridge f/1859 & 1863 Perc. Sharps
Brass / .46 Caliber and Up

Sharps Brass Cartridge f/1859 & 1863 Perc. Sharps

Item #: USA517451

Favorites

Your Price: $4.95 / Each
We usually ship all in stock items the same day when ordered by 2 P.M. Pacific Time.

This is for the 1859 and 1863 45 caliber paper cartridge Sharps firearms.

JMLange · Post by **JMLange** » Wed Jul 21, 2004 7:12 pm

Pedersoli makes those cases. I bought some, but have not had the chance to try them. Supposedly they are popular with the reenactors, but I have never seen anything on the NSSA board about them.
They may have to be trimed for length to fit a specific gun, and they will cut down on powder capacity. They fit the chamber of my '63 sporter very nicely, but I have to carefully file or stone down the cutout in my gas plate. It's just a little too high and the cases hang up on it.

John

ShilohSharps · Post by **ShilohSharps** » Sat Nov 27, 2004 3:41 pm

Thinking of purchasing these brass cartridges for a .54 caliber Shiloh Sharps percussion (farmingdale ) has anyone had experience with these from Buffalo Arms?

JAGG · Post by **JAGG** » Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:54 pm

How do you get these fired cases out of the chamber ? Do you need a rod for this ? JAGG

gmartin · Post by **gmartin** » Wed Feb 09, 2005 8:48 pm

Gentlemen,
People, when they bring up the topic of brass in a gas seal system, seem to invariably discuss problems they find until they get it right.
With all due respect, I would wager that a well constructed paper cartridge with your favorite bullet would shoot just as well, cost less in the long run, and, dare I say, be abit more traditional even if one loads with a charge of Pyrodex and perhaps uses SPG lube.
It seems that this rifle wasn't designed for this step, one however used in other Civil War actions and self contained cartridges soon to gain wide acceptance.
I wish you well, really, but wouldn't use those in my '63.
Gregg

Todd Birch · Post by **Todd Birch** » Wed Feb 09, 2005 11:41 pm

Hey Gregg

Gee, a while back I posted an inquiry about those brass '63 cases and got buried by folks who thought it awful that I would consider using such items in a paper cartridge rifle!

I shocked them further by admitting that sometimes I roll paper cartridges using .54 calibre 60 gr. Pyrodex pellets with lubed bullets. Bear in mind, my Military Rifle is in .50, so they are ideal being just under sized.

I wonder how the brass inserts would work with those same pellets? Might be a quick and easy way to reload right at the range with BP or Pyro.

'Course, then you wind up with some grungy brass to clean just like them '74 shooters.....a giant step backward.

Todd

Todd Birch · Post by **Todd Birch** » Thu Feb 10, 2005 1:15 pm

After my tongue-in-cheek comments re: brass chamber inserts for '63 percussion rifles, a thought occurred to me......

A known problem with these rifles is cavitation of the gas plate, usually, but not always caused by using loose powder loads rather than paper rounds.

It strikes me that these brass chamber inserts might be a way of (a) avoiding this problem, and (b) solving the gas leakage problem on rifles that already have developed the problem.

They certainly qualify historically as many such reuseable cartridges were around during the Civil War, all transitional steps toward self contained ammunition.

Todd

Ray Newman · Post by **Ray Newman** » Thu Feb 10, 2005 1:45 pm

Maybe Kirk would have the best answer?

Todd Birch · Post by **Todd Birch** » Thu Feb 10, 2005 2:32 pm

He'll probably suggest some us buy some and give them a try.

If they work, it may influence shooters to order '63 percussion rifles, and that ain't a bad thing.

Todd

gmartin · Post by **gmartin** » Thu Feb 10, 2005 6:47 pm

Todd and others,
Interesting feedback. The cartridges you speak of as I envision them have a hole flush with the block's gas seal so to insure ignition. As I said prior, other carbines used such a thing, such as the Maynard. I see possible problems with the gas seal colapsing with time.
To me, each his own, but the desire to own this system in a rifle would stem from using the unique transistional step of paper or linen.
Muzzle loaders are proudly shot as well by those who enjoy that passion.
And, I don't include IL.
Gregg

Todd Birch · Post by **Todd Birch** » Thu Feb 10, 2005 7:52 pm

Gregg

Yes, of course they have a flash hole in the base. Check the links posted by Texas Shooter.
The questions in my mind are chamber fit and set back locking up the breech block.
Since these items were first offered by Pedersoli, does anyone know if their breech block has the same recess around the flash cone?

Todd

SHARPS54 · Post by **SHARPS54** » Thu Feb 10, 2005 8:30 pm

Gregg,
I totally agree with you on the use of brass cases. The 63 Sharps wasn't intended to shoot them! First off i cant see how they could be extracted without being a problem or having to modify the gun in some way or the use of a ramrod. Another problem is that brass doesn't seal and you have blow by, meaning that the case will get dirty and possibly stick in the chamber making it real hard to extract. also what if under recoil it gets pushed back into the gas plate? Then there is the cost. at 4.95 each! I also have a Smith carbine and the brass costs only 95cents each! Ive been shooting my Sharps carbine in N-ssa competition for 25 years,it will shoot a 1 inch group at 50 yds all day long if i can hold it. Buffalo slug,45grs of 3f 18grs of c.o.w PAPER CARTRIDGE! Why try to make a gun do what its not intended to do!
Just my 2 cents worth
Rick

HvyMtl · Post by **HvyMtl** » Fri Feb 11, 2005 5:03 pm

I have these brass cartridges and they don't fit neither the Ped. 59 or the Farmer. 63 and i'm not about to start to file or sand or stone anything off to make them fit!

Ken

gmartin · Post by **gmartin** » Sun Feb 13, 2005 3:17 pm

Rick,
Glad to hear what you say. The guns designed to shoot with alternate cartridges of copper, brass, hard rubber, etc., were designed for them and shoot best with their proprietory ammunition. The gas seal action of the '59 and '63 were not. Why make them eat them?
This though, being a forum to discuss loading, shooting and ideas is of course open to all opinions. For those trying to force feed your '63 a possibly damaging cartridge, I really wish you luck, it's expensive to replace that gas seal, and Rick illuminated other potential problems.
I also use a Buffalo supplied with my carbine in 1978 and yes, it shoots that well with a paper cartridge, at 50 yd. and farther. I have been playing with a well shooting NEI # 383 ring tail, and just bought an NEI # 388 at 525 g. modified ring tail. Not cast from it yet.
We shoot an informal "Postal Shoot" and the 2nd. annual is this year. I found the # 383 shooting well at 200 yd., the Buffalo seemed to lose its stabilization some where between 130 and 200 yd.
All are welcome to participate, just shoot with a gas seal Sharps.
Best, Gregg

Todd Birch · Post by **Todd Birch** » Sun Feb 13, 2005 7:33 pm

"Proprietary ammunition", you say......

You mean like those ca'tridge fellers shoot with faster twist riflings and heavier bullets than the "propritary ammunition"? Duplex loadings and (shudder.....) smokeless powder? '74 rifles chambered for ca'tridges they was never chambered for at Bridgeport or Hartford?

Oh yeah, I done heard of that kind of 'proprietary ammunition".

Todd

Shiloh Rifle Forums