Research Press - Print Page

Research Press
http://www.lrml.org/cgi-bin/researchpress/YaBB.pl
British Firearms (Pre. 1914) >> Muzzle Loading - Military Muskets and Rifles >> Comparing bullet velocity P1853 with P1863
http://www.lrml.org/cgi-bin/researchpress/YaBB.pl?num=1195715122

Message started by gelderenj on 11/22/07 at 7:05am

Title: Comparing bullet velocity P1853 with P1863
Post by gelderenj on 11/22/07 at 7:05am

Joseph Whitworth used a bullet weight of 530 grain and a powder charge of 70 grain for his Whitworth-Enfield Pattern 1863 rifle, identical to the standard bullet weight and powder charge of the Enfield P1853 Min� rifle.

I would like to know the velocity of both rifles for the following distances:
100, 200, 300, 400, etc. up to 1000 yards.

I have search several sources for it, including the book of Mr. Roads, "The British Soldiers Firearm � 1850 � 1864" but I could not find such information.

I there someone who can help me?

Title: Re: Comparing bullet velocity P1853 with P1863
Post by A._Roads on 11/22/07 at 8:46am

Hi Jan,
I'm curious as to the answer now that you raise it.
When did velocity first become a commonly measured performance I wonder?

Was velocity even tested in the 1855 - 1865 period?
My presumption (never presume, I know....) is that they didn't.
They recorded penetration of the bullet through wet boards, and accuracy at various ranges etc, but the penetration test surely would have answered (crudely by todays standards perhaps) for the velocity question - how hard will the bullet hit?

Also if there were recorded velocity tests I am sure that Mr. Roads would have included them in "The British Soldiers Firearm, 1850 - 1864".
Adrian.

Title: Re: Comparing bullet velocity P1853 with P1863
Post by gelderenj on 11/22/07 at 10:02am

Adrian,

Of course the marksmen of the 19th century didn't have electronic equipment. In the United States the bullet velocity was measured by shooting against a kind of a pendule. (think about it as an old clock). The movement of the pendule, after hitting it, was a strong indication of the bullet velocity.

Now that you are telling me, indeed the mentioning of bullet velocity in documentation of old English rifles is rare. I didn't think about this earlier. You could be right.

I hope that perhaps some of 21st century target shooters measured these velocities of the old standard service loads.

Are you perhaps family of the one who wrote the book in 1964 or is this resemblance pure coincidently?

Title: Re: Comparing bullet velocity P1853 with P1863
Post by A._Roads on 11/22/07 at 11:13am

Hi Jan, You might be lucky, I hope so, though its an expensive exercise to shoot original cartridges in the 21st century!
Probably sacrilegious as well I should think!

Roads is an unusually spelt surname, I am his nephew - I seem to have inherited his passion for this odd hobby, even though I grew up on the other side of the world.
Adrian

Title: Re: Comparing bullet velocity P1853 with P1863
Post by Bill_Curtis on 11/22/07 at 11:16am

Just a quick response on the subject of velocity measurements. Benjamin Robins had devised the Ballistic Pendulum by 1740 and describes it fully in his NEW PRINCIPLES OF GUNNERY of 1742. �The ballistic pendulum was perfected and enlarged up to artillery sizes and lasted until the present day. The Sardinian D'Antoni's Treatises of the 1760s (translated by Captain Thompson 1789) describes a mechanical device where a large diameter wheel, with a raised paper skirt, rotating at a known speed was fired across. �The deflection between the entry and exit holes was used to calculate the velocity. �By the mid 19th Century electrical devices were coming in, Navez and Boulanger come to mind as examples. �However, the penetration comparison tests continued as they were tried and tested, easy to understand and to set up. �Where velocities are quoted, these were normally derived from the pendulum. � I do not believe that mid-range velocities were capable of measurement at that time other than by measuring the gravity drop through paper screens over 100 yard intervals from which the elapsed time between each screen can be calculated by application of the 32 x 32 fps principle.

Title: Re: Comparing bullet velocity P1853 with P1863
Post by dbm on 11/22/07 at 5:36pm

There were various forms of ballistic pendulums used post Robins and in 1858 the Navez electro-pendulum was used in France to measure the time of flight of balls over an interval between two screens. Metford also designed a ballistic pendulum in 1869 which he used in his experiments with Sir Henry Halford.

David

Title: Re: Comparing bullet velocity P1853 with P1863
Post by gelderenj on 11/28/07 at 7:10am

By this I conclude that the researchers and Ordnance Select Committee could have made use from instruments like the ballistic pendulum or otherwise the application of the 32 x 32 fps principle that Bill mentioned. �

Because the Whitworth rifle has a smaller bore, the standard service load of 70 grains black powder would have produced a higher pressure, and therefore a higher bullet velocity than the same load with the same bullet weight of 530 grains in the P1853 caliber . 577" service rifle.

As you probably already know: There were trails between the Min� rifle and Whitworth rifle for penetration. Even if the bullet velocity would have been the same (which it was certainly not) the .451" massive Whitworth bullet would have a superior penetration above the .577" hollow Min� bullet. Penetration can not be an indication for bullet velocity in this particular case.

Roads does mention the muzzle velocity of the P1853 but not of the P1863. I understand that the OSC was more interested in practical matters like flat trajectory, but the question of the different bullet velocity it is still a very interesting one.

You don't have to spoil antique ammo, Adrian of course you were yoking. It is still possible to make this measurement with modern black powder and replica bullets and I hoped somebody already did.