The Samuel Gardiner "Musket Shell"

[leadhead]

Terry,

Riflemen were generally only concerned with effective range (based on the weapon they were using) and once a target was in effective range the shooting began. I have never read any accounts of troops armed with Gardiners trying to get a specific distance from their target to maximize the explosive characteristics.

Because of the construction of these bullets and the composition of the "wick" (densly packed fine powder leading from the base of the bullet to the explosive acorn) they were extremely unreliable and the 1 1/2 second delay was a gross approximation. Exploded specimens exhibit everything from a perfect detonation that turns the entire nose of the bullet into shrapnel (extremely rare) to nearly complete bullets with a small blow out hole in the side of the bullet (more common). As vicious as it may sound, the intent of the bullet was not to explode in midair like an artillery shell but to explode after it had entered the target, so for maximum effectiveness you would want to be below the 1 1/2 second flight time distance when shooting.

The truly unique aspect of the Gardiner patent was the delayed explosion. European and CS explosive bullets were intended to explode on contact, depending on a pellet of fulminate (usually mercury) to detonate the bursting charge. This would either be in the nose of the bullet, or in the base (CS 2 piece) and struck by an iron firing pin (or cut nail). The biggest problem with these designs is that excessive force when ramming the bullet could in fact detonate the round (ooops!), blowing out the breech of the weapon (never a good thing). The Gardiner could be struck with a hammer without detonating and required ignition by the propellant charge in the weapon.

One of a long list of "Fabulous Failures" in the world of ACW projectiles.

TomH

[Henry Moon]

Thanks Tom for all the info, and the information on CW shotguns as well. Do you and your website talk about artillery shells too, or mainly small arms? If not, can you recommend a good website to learn about the various artillery projectiles?


Terry

[leadhead]

Terry,

My area is small arms projectiles, 19th Century cartridges and Model 61/63 Springfields and Contracts.
 
Civilwarprojectiles.com is a community of projectile collectors, both small arms and artillery, plus cartridges and firearms. On the artillery side, some of our more noteable members are Jack Melton, John D. Bartleson and Pete George, all published and considered the top people in the field. On small arms our crew includes Dean Thomas, Jim Thomas and Terry White, again, the top authorities available, and a bunch of really nice folks.

In my opinion, the top artillery site is Jack's at http://www.civilwarartillery.com/.

Later,
TomH

[Johan Steele]

Terry... the average CW soldier was just not that well trained in how to shoot.  Quite a few men had experiance w/ firearms, in particular the smoothbore shotgun which does not really equate to the Rifle Musket.  Though many men brought their firearms skill & knowledge w/ them to war there is an enormous difference between being a good shot while hunting or at the range and being a good shot while others are trying in earnest to kill you.

There were regiments that received reputations, deserved or not, of being outright brutal or extremely effective w/ their rifles.  Two examples being the 4th & 5th MN VI both had large numbers of men who had very real experiance fighting the Sioux.  An example from the Southern side would be Terry's Texas Rangers; men w/ real experiance fighting the Commanche.  Whenever I think of those men I'm reminded of an incredulous Alabama soldier who watched one of Terry's men mount his horse to cross the street.

There is a big difference between being a good fighter and a good soldier; by the end of the war both sides had superb soldiers but the learning curve was steep and rather unforgiving.

[ole]

There is a big difference between being a good fighter and a good soldier; by the end of the war both sides had superb soldiers but the learning curve was steep and rather unforgiving.

We can always count on you, Shane, to cut to the chase. And I'm especially appreciative of Leadhead's contributions as well.

In the context of the Gardiner round we find the seeds of the repugnance of such as the dumdum. Just make the guy on the other side step away; there is no honor in maiming him.

Anyone ever watch "The Wind and the Lion"? In it, Sean Connery's character says some very insightful words on the nature of combat and personal honor. Something like "you look into the eyes of your opponent and he looks into yours ... that is honorable."

Shoot! Now I have to go out and buy that movie.

ole

[Johan Steele]

TomH have you ever come across CW references to the "glass bullet"?  I've read a couple accounts of men on the receiving end (I'm still a touch dubious as to how they knew they were glass) and an example where some men intended to hang a soldier w/ "glass musket balls" in his pack his life was spared only by an angry NCO pointing out they could as easily be marbles.

In my life I've seen two glass bullets, one dug from the Vicksburg area in about .54 cal round ball w/ obvious rifling marks in the glass.  W/ the other that may or may not have been a .69 round ball.  All of my reading shows such a thing to be about as common as black confederates and galtroops.  I'm just curious if you've ever run across any real info on such.

[leadhead]

Shane,

That's a first for me! I would be really interested in seeing that glass ball with rifling marks. The only time I have run across the use of glass in any projectiles was a reference to a CS 12 pound case shot being filled with glass chunks.

All the period marbles that I have seen were glazed clay, not that I have looked for them.

Bottom line, you can find examples of all kinds of things being shot out of period weapons.

Thanks for the info,
TomH

[ole]

You gotta love finding two experts in slightly different fields comparing notes. You go, guys!

ole

[Johan Steele]

TomH I've also run across reference to glass being used in canister but doubt very much that it was a common thing.

The glass ball w/ rifling marks is in a personal collection.  I'll see if I can get a photo and send it on to you but knowing the man I kind of doubt it.  He thinks Computers are the spawn of satan.  IIRC he was thinking it had been fired from an M1841.  I don't recall whether he said it had come from Raymond or the area of the works around Vicksburg.
I don't really recall the context of his acquiring it but believe it was one of those things someone had found and kept for a generation or two before selling it.  That's the way I came up w/a couple minnies dug from the Hatchie anyway.

The reason I asked about the glass bullets... thought it would be nice to come up w/ some more data.

Ole... expert me?  Thanks for the compliment; I'm just a professional amatuer.

[leadhead]

Shane,

So many relevant artifacts are in private collections and unaccessible for study. Makes you wonder if there is a "Rosetta Stone" equivalent out there in somebody's collection yet to be discovered.

Regarding glass bullets, your mention of it was the first I had heard and I would love to examine one to try to determine the rationale behind their use. The whole concept of the 19th century elongated ball was to produce a bullet that was smaller than the bore to facilitate easier loading. The bullet would contain a cavity which would trap the propellant gasses and, being very malleable lead, would expand to destroy the windage (to make use of the majority of the energy produced by the propellant) and engage the rifling to impart ballistic spin on the projectile. Glass would neither expand to fill the bore nor extrude into the rifling to engage! The result would have the trajectory of a smoothbore musket.

As far as glass being used in canister, I have read reports of everything from nails and chain to glass and rocks used in place of canister balls, but then again, canister was not designed to make use of a rifled barrel.

Ole, I am not an expert but just a student of a very small subject within the huge tapestry of ACW studies. I know a little about bullets cartridges and firearms but that is the extent of it.

This thread has mutated into a very interesting discussion. Love it!

Later,
TomH
time to go classify and record some new aquisitions, a perfect .69 cal elongated ball cartridge (very rare these days), a .50 cal Maynard cartridge with the pointed bullet (rare) with an extra bullet to match, and a couple of gen-u-wine Selma produced Sharps bullets (the result of a recent research trip by Dean Thomas