Sharps 63 - long range ?

[Sebastian]

Hello.
I'm Sebastian from Poland.It's my first post.
I've just read what you wrote about Sharps 63 accuracy on long range.
I'm going to buy Pedersoli 1863 .45 Sharps Sporting.Of course I'd preffer a Shiloh Sharps but here in Europe it's too expensive for me (taxes,duties etc.).Here in Poland, we can use only muzzleloaders or other rifles developed before 1850.So Sharps 74 or BPCR are out of range.
Next year our black powder community are going to organize a long range shooting competition at military area.We want to shoot at 300,800 and 1000 yards.Nobody of us were shooting at this range before so we don't know much about this style of shooting.We use mostly 1863 Sharps and other muzzleloaders.
Have you any experience with 63 Sharps at this range ?
Did anyone of you shoot so far ? Is 63 Sharps suitable at this distance ?
Any advice ?
Thank you.
PS. Sorry for my poor english.

[Sebastian]

Nobody will help me ?

[Lee Stone]

Sebastian:
Please be patient. Sometines the gentlemen who know the '63 Sharps the best are not reading the forum. But I am sure there will be someone who will be able to help you soon. I wish I could help you but I know nothing about the '63. I have some '74s and love them very much. But I am not at all familiar with the '63. So please stay with us here on this forum. There are a lot of very nice people on this forum who are very knowledgeable about shooting these wonderful rifles we love so much.

P.S.
Your English is quite good.

[dakotasharps]

Yes, your're asking a complex question. To answer it you need someone who is not only familiar with shooting a '63 but also someone who shoots one at very long ranges.

Off hand, the potential problem I see would be the limited lenght and powder capacity of the paper cartridge further agravated by a non-compressed powder charge. I'm not sure how much velocity you are going to get or how steeply your bullets will be arriving at 800-1000 yards. If they arrive at too steep an angle, it could create a hazard for the people pulling the targets.

[Rich Siegel]

Sebastian,

Both Lee and Dakota Sharps had good points.

I shoot a Shiloh '63 military carbine in 54 cal. in relatively short range matches, offhand. With a 490 grain ringtail bullet and a paper cartridge, I shoot 50 grains of FFG GOEX black powder. Velocity is very low, around 800 feet per second. My normal groups at 100 yards from a bench rest are only 2 to 3 inches for five rounds. Not real good by Shiloh 1874 cartridg rifle standards but good enough for my type of offhand shooting.

I do know that I owned a Shiloh military rifle in 54 percussion several years ago and it would hold 70 grains of black powder with a 490 grain ringtail bullet and a paper cartridge. I never worked up an accurate load however, before I sold the gun.

If you don't load a paper cartridge, just breech seat a bullet and then pour powder into the chamber, you can probably increase the powder amount by 20% but it's messy to load and against our competition rules.

I hope someone with a '63 civilian rifle will jump in to tell you what results they get from a heavy barreled rifle.

Rich

[dakotasharps]

I own a Pedersoli 1859 in 54 cal and Rich answered my question whether the Shiloh chamber was any longer.

I had Rapine modify one of their moulds to remove the ring tail. I form the nitrated paper around a brass tube, glue the edge, insert the bullet nose first and press it to the front of the tube where it stays in place with friction. Then drop tube the powder into the cartridge. This gives me room for 60 grains of FFG and a velocity of about 850 fps. Removing the rintail helped accuracy slightly, shrinking groups to about 2 MOA.

[gmartin]

Sebastion,
Did you recieve my PM? I recommended, for anybody else interested, that it may indeed be possible by altering a gas seal Sharps, or creating your own, by increasing the twist to 1/22 -1/36" or so, having a heavy sporter type rifle with "std." BPCR type sights, knowledge of tight paper constuction making, and a smaller calbre, say .40 to .44 with 80 g. in a paper cartridge. Though outside the legitamacy of this type of action historically, such an alteration may aid Sebastion's unique purpose. As far as owning a Pedersoli instead of a Shiloh Sharps, no apology needed! I do so love my early Farmingdale carbine, but what one may own and shoot is up to their taste and mometary applicability.
And, it IS an interesting idea for someone to pursue.
Best, Gregg

[dakotasharps]

My Pedersoli has a floating sleeve in the chamber which limits the options substantially.

On rifles that do not use this approach and have only the gas plate on the breech block, it would be relatively easy to lenghten the chamber to accommodate a larger charge of powder. In a .45 caliber rifle, this would work well I think.

[HvyMtl]

Hello Sebastian,

I read your post the first day you posted it and contacted some of the guys to try and answer it as I am not that knowledgable about them even though I own two. I have one Ped. 1859 Sharps Berdan sniper rifle and one Farmingdale 1863 Shiloh Sharps, both are in 54 cal. and both are older rifles in perfect condition. I mostly shoot the Ped. because I have owned it longer and have not had the time to work with the Shiloh as yet.
For the Ped. I use a Lyman mould which puts out a mini bullet at about .536-.537, I dont usually make the paper cartridges rather just drop the bullet in followed my the powder. This rifle is very accurate at 100 to 200 yds. after that I can't say because I haven't shot it any further.

Hope this helps

Ken

[Sebastian]

Thank you all for your responses and PM's.
I've never realized that it'll be so hard to decide.
I'm going to buy Pedersoli's Sharps Sporting with fast twist 1-18 in .45 cal.
I think it should stabilize bullet very well.The only problem is gas leakage you've mentioned above.Maybe brass cases could resolve it ?
Folks from ML forum advice that good ML like a Gibbs,Witworth or Rigdy could be better than perc. Sharps. In many ways they have right.ML's are very reliable guns just for the job.But ....
If the 63 Sharps has the same barrel (which is most important thing in gun) it should do job same way like 74 Sharps.Preventing gas leakage by using brass cases should make this gun so hermetic like 74 with cartridge.
So what's the difference ?
Am I wrong ? Maybe, should I give up and buy ML ?
Regards.

[dakotasharps]

It's sad to say, but the guys in the ML forum are probably right.

1. With a muzzle loader you can add virtually as much powder as you want, while with a percussion Sharps powder capacity is fixed. That's an advantage for the muzzle loader and will allow you to achieve much greater velocity. Score one point for the muzzle loader.

2. As long as you are using and can stabilize a suitably heavy bullet and can seat it squarely at the muzzle, accuracy should be excellent at long range in a muzzleloader. Score another point for the muzzle loader.

3. Powder compression is much harder to do and do consistently in a muzzle loader than in an 1874 sharps, but then you have the same problem with compression in an 1863. So that one is a tie.

That's basically 2 to 0 in favor of the muzzle loader.

Historically, the advantage of the paper cartridge Sharps was that it could be fired more rapidly than the rifled muskets of the day and could be readily loaded from the prone position - something that became more important as the Civil War progressed and it became obvious that troops with minie balls and rifled muskets had made napoleonic tactics a very costly proposition.

Accuracy was really not the primary consideration with the 1859 or 1863 military rifles and, Berdan "Sharpshooter" stories aside, the rifles of choice for long range sniping in the American Civil War were muzzle loading target rifles.

[Rich Siegel]

Sebastian,

I would recommend against using the brass cases in a percussion Sharps. More problems then what they are worth. A well made new 1863 Sharps will not leak gas. If fired for years, the gas seal might start to erode and then leak gas but as far as a Shiloh is concerned, Kirk stated that his guns are 100% warranted and he would replace the gas seal. If you buy a Pedersoli and have that problem, you can have certain gunsmiths here in the States do repair work at a reasonable price.

Best regards,

Rich

[HvyMtl]

Sebastian,

Not to confuse your question, I have both a Ped.1859 and a Shiloh 1863. While I haven't shot the Shiloh all that much only due to the fact that I am working on getting the correct size bullet for it, I have shot my Ped. many times at my local BP match. I have never been beaten by any ML and have beaten one Shiloh 45/70 ( sorry guys ) by one X. I have NEVER had any problem with any gas leackage and have fired up to 10 consecutive shots with good accuracy. I'm not trying to dispute the other guys oppinions but this is what I have been able to do. I have so much confidence in my Ped. that it is my first pick for hunting up to 125 yds. I did shoot it at 200 yds. once and the first and second shot were less than one inch from each other and then I developed some leading problems. This has been done with a bullet that is too light for this rifle but still very accurate. I now have the right bullet for the rifle which is made by the way by Pedersoli and I know that I will be able to stabilize the bullet for longer distance shooting. All this being said I still don't think it will ever be able to compete with the 45/70's or shoot that well over 300 yds.

Ken


P.S. I have the brass inserts from Pedersoli and they don't fit into the breech of either rifle, I was thinking of turning them down and using them for blow tubes.

[Ray Newman]

Dakota Sharps: I've watched a few LR ML Shooters @ shoots, & based on these observations, I think that there are 2 big disadvantages of a LR ML loader:

1- The Shooters can loose good weather conditions very easily since it does take a while to properly load a LR muzzle loader.

2- Getting constantly in & out of position as well as up & down can be physically tiring.

The above aside, a good LR ML will shoot & shoot very competitively. The ML Shooter just had some different disadvantages or challenges to deal w/....

[Todd Birch]

Sebastion

I own a Shiloh '63 Military Rifle in .50 calibre. Last year a few of us shot in a postal match out to 200 yards.
I chose the .50 so I could use the same bullets in my .50-70 cartridge rifle.

We were quite pleased with the results, but it became apparent that we were not shooting long range rifles with target grade accuracy.

Loading loose powder behind a seated bullet does not offer any form of compression or load consistency and increases cavitation of the breech face.
Loose powder can also accumulate where you don't want it and cause problems.
I started out shooting paper cartridge tubes (60 grs) behind a breech seated lubed bullet. The shearing action spilled powder. I reduced the charge to 50 grs and was able to close the breech behind the paper tube.
I also used a dowel to put some compression in the powder.
I used both plain paper and nitrated which didn't seem to offer any advantages.

I then rolled some rounds using a .54 Pyrodex 60 gr. pellet. I not only got uniformity, it makes into an authentic looking cartridge that takes handling well.
These are the rounds I shot in the postal match and I was quite pleased with them. I intend to hunt moose next year with that load.

I can't offer you any historical references to long range shooting with percussion fired paper cartridges, and I doubt that they were used much in that role.

As to practicality, I found that after a few rounds, (BP or Pyrodex) it became necessary to squirt a little cleaning fluid on the breech block in order to open the rifle.
You also need to ensure that there is no glowing paper remaining in the barrel before inserting another round.

Cleaning requires removal of the shear plate every time as well as the flash hole screw. If you don't, it will seize permanently.
Using an anti-seizing compound on that screw and the cone of the shear plate is a good idea.

I wish you luck, but I don't regard the '63 as anything more than a pleasant rifle for hunting to 100 yards and informal target shooting to 200 yards.

TB