A thread on "sharpshooter" bullets had caught my interest some time ago, but finally, over the Holidays, I had a chance to spend a bit of time with my “sharpshooter” collection. I was first drawn to examine my grouping of CS “sharpshooter” bullets—a number of neat elongated specimens of various caliber, with, of course, a .45 Kerr (M&M 439), and a .45 Whitworth included to bolster the legitimacy of designating this grouping as for possible use by snipers! Anyway, I then examined my Federal “sharpshooter” bullets, and next to a couple of Dimicks was my .54 “Picket” (per Stelma’s “Some Civil War Bullets”) “Pope type for false muzzle rifle” (per M&M—M&M 58 var.). Now here are three things I’m curious about and I invite all who are interested to comment: 1. M&M’s implication of designating this bullet as for use with a false muzzle is that it was for possible use with sharpshooter/target rifles—I accept that as reasonable, having seen bullets that look like M&M 58 actually being used in target rifles (see a modern replica in Edward’s “Civil War Guns”). So, can I keep a straight face when I present the “Pope” as a possible “sharpshooter” bullet, or will I have need to blush? 2. What about the anachronistic designation of this bullet as a “Pope”?--anachronistic in that I THINK M&M are referring to Harry M. Pope, the famous rifle barrel maker of the early 20th century. Now, I know there are bullets named to honor contemporary players who had once been in the area of the find (e.g. “Nathan Bedford Forrest Enfield”), and bullets named to honor modern bullet seekers (e.g. “Hughes”-type), but what about this bullet merits the name “Pope”? 3. M&M lists the "Pope" as of Federal origin--based on location of "Pope" finds perhaps?
"Pope type for false muzzle"
- Thread starter Dr. Beach
- Start date
tom stelma
Established Users
:-?
The Pope bullet is a mis-named bullet. It should be called a Picker (Country Rifle) bullet. As you have said so well Pope was a maker of rifle barrels in the 1880's I believe.
In the Thomas book "Bullets & Cartridges" as well as my CD we both agree as to the bullets called Picket, Sugar Loaf, Country Rifle and Pope are all Picket (Country Rifle) bullets.
The McKee and Mason numbers: 18 through 36, 153 through 157, 160 through 163 and 165 are all Picket (Country Rifle) bullets. MM 255 through 259 are Picket bullets with cavities. MM 615 through 618, 628 and 635 are all Picket bullets.
The Thomas book on pages 58 & 59 show the Picket Bullets. To quote the Thomas book "Pickets were used in the famed Kentucky or Pennsylvania rifles, as well as in some sharpshooting or target rifles."
I hope this helps you have with your question about the Pope bullet.
Tom Stelma
The Pope bullet is a mis-named bullet. It should be called a Picker (Country Rifle) bullet. As you have said so well Pope was a maker of rifle barrels in the 1880's I believe.
In the Thomas book "Bullets & Cartridges" as well as my CD we both agree as to the bullets called Picket, Sugar Loaf, Country Rifle and Pope are all Picket (Country Rifle) bullets.
The McKee and Mason numbers: 18 through 36, 153 through 157, 160 through 163 and 165 are all Picket (Country Rifle) bullets. MM 255 through 259 are Picket bullets with cavities. MM 615 through 618, 628 and 635 are all Picket bullets.
The Thomas book on pages 58 & 59 show the Picket Bullets. To quote the Thomas book "Pickets were used in the famed Kentucky or Pennsylvania rifles, as well as in some sharpshooting or target rifles."
I hope this helps you have with your question about the Pope bullet.
Tom Stelma
Tom, as always, thanks for your friendly, and well-informed, insights. So as a picket, a "sharpshooter" bullet it could very well have been. What about M&M's categorization of their “Popes” as solely “U.S.”?—i.e., Do I have a leg to stand on if I keep it among my Federal Dimicks?
Hey guys,
While I personally believe that pickets were used in Kentucky and Pennsylvania rifles, I have to disagree with Tom and the Thomases about the so-called Popes (M&M 56 - 61). It's my humble opinion that these were indeed sharpshooters' bullets designed exclusively for false muzzle rifles. Maybe not Popes but possibly Morgans.
First of all most pickets and sugarloaf pickets are fairly common and are primarily found on early War Confederate sites. The so-called Popes are extremely scarce and are found on sites as late as 1865.
A few years back I bought some M&M 57s that had been dug out of the same hole at Petersburg. One of these had lands and grooves but had not been fired or pulled. It took a while to figure it out but this bullet had been started but not loaded (run through the false muzzle). I believe that Bill Ewing has this bullet in his collection along with a drop from the same hole.
If Pope Sharpshooter Rifles did not originate until the 1880's, why are they muzzle loaders instead of breech loaders?
Skip
While I personally believe that pickets were used in Kentucky and Pennsylvania rifles, I have to disagree with Tom and the Thomases about the so-called Popes (M&M 56 - 61). It's my humble opinion that these were indeed sharpshooters' bullets designed exclusively for false muzzle rifles. Maybe not Popes but possibly Morgans.
First of all most pickets and sugarloaf pickets are fairly common and are primarily found on early War Confederate sites. The so-called Popes are extremely scarce and are found on sites as late as 1865.
A few years back I bought some M&M 57s that had been dug out of the same hole at Petersburg. One of these had lands and grooves but had not been fired or pulled. It took a while to figure it out but this bullet had been started but not loaded (run through the false muzzle). I believe that Bill Ewing has this bullet in his collection along with a drop from the same hole.
If Pope Sharpshooter Rifles did not originate until the 1880's, why are they muzzle loaders instead of breech loaders?
Skip
emike123
Established Users
Here is a little bugger that has confounded me because of those lands and grooves. Best picture I can produce right now (need to clean it more) -- can you see two lands at the base (lighter vertical lines going about a quarter of the way up the side) and the horizontal line across the middle in this shot?
This would not be the kind you are talking about, would it Skip? It is 0.49" x 0.76"
This would not be the kind you are talking about, would it Skip? It is 0.49" x 0.76"
Thanks emike 123 and Skip!
This is getting interesting. Not to make a Federal case, but can anyone argue that it’s O.K. for me to keep the M&M 58 in a Federal case?! Unfortunately, the provenience of my bullet is unknown. See, I’m a bit obsessive-compulsive when it comes to my Civil War relics. I like my Confederate stuff on one side and my Federal stuff on the other--like peas and mashed potatoes to a kid (I’m O.K. now, REALLY, with peas touching potatoes . . . but C.S. and U.S. relics . . . that’s different!). :lol:
This is getting interesting. Not to make a Federal case, but can anyone argue that it’s O.K. for me to keep the M&M 58 in a Federal case?! Unfortunately, the provenience of my bullet is unknown. See, I’m a bit obsessive-compulsive when it comes to my Civil War relics. I like my Confederate stuff on one side and my Federal stuff on the other--like peas and mashed potatoes to a kid (I’m O.K. now, REALLY, with peas touching potatoes . . . but C.S. and U.S. relics . . . that’s different!). :lol:
Skip:
To kill the cow, go to your profile--then scroll down to "Always check spelling before posting"--select NO with the radio button. It will then not automatically spell-check.
My M&M 58 var. is not accessible here at work, or else I would scan it for y'all today--somebody will probably scan one in for us. Anyway, I'm finding this discussion useful--still looking to see if the exclusive Federal use designation of M&M 58 can be justified.
To kill the cow, go to your profile--then scroll down to "Always check spelling before posting"--select NO with the radio button. It will then not automatically spell-check.
My M&M 58 var. is not accessible here at work, or else I would scan it for y'all today--somebody will probably scan one in for us. Anyway, I'm finding this discussion useful--still looking to see if the exclusive Federal use designation of M&M 58 can be justified.
tom stelma
Established Users
:-?
I do like this string of of stuff.
1. I do owe an apology to Skip (now in Arkansas), to Doc & Mike alias (Pope) if I said the Pope was a rifle maker, what I meant to say & should have said was a gun/rifle barrel maker. I left off the barrel maker, sorry.
2. Let me examine something here called bullet flight characteristics, OK. The so called "Pope" bullets: MM 56 through 62 with the ring at the base of the bullet.
3. It is my belief that a Sharpshooter bullet would be more aerodynamically with no surface to hinder its forward motion or accuracy.
4. The "Pope" bullets seem to break the mold of being a Sharpshooter's bullet, by being flat nosed & flat based with a lip projection thus making them (to me, my opinion) be a short range bullet not long range for sniping or sharpshooting.
5. I am not a ballistic expert just a person looking at the bullets. Let us look at the 45-caliber Whitworth, the 45 & 46-caliber "Kerr" bullets, the Picket bullets MM 255 through 260 and the 3-ring called "Sharpshooter" bullets MM 452 & 453.
6. All these bullets have the same characteristics, a slender type body tapered from the tail to the nose, (the "Popes also have this characteristic), except for the Whitworth (which has a cylindrical or hexagonal body), rounded or pointed nose, hollow cavity and no tail protrusion to hinder the movement through the air, thus being able to go faster & more accurate at greater distances by taking on the rifling as they expand going down the barrel of the rifle.
7. I have sent some inquiries about Sharpshooter ammunition to a few places but as of yet I have received no replies for a small section in my new book.
8. What caliber is the Morgan rifle? What rifles were used as Sharpshooter rifles other than the Enfield, Kerr & Whitworth in the South. What was used by the North?
Thank you for allowing this thread to go on. I am appreciative of the inquiries & answers. :up
Tom Stelma
PS: As to whether a Picket should go North or South I think you either put the in a place marked North or South and say when asked this: I do not know the direction the guy firing the weapon was pointed so I just put them here but they could go there as well.
I do like this string of of stuff.
1. I do owe an apology to Skip (now in Arkansas), to Doc & Mike alias (Pope) if I said the Pope was a rifle maker, what I meant to say & should have said was a gun/rifle barrel maker. I left off the barrel maker, sorry.
2. Let me examine something here called bullet flight characteristics, OK. The so called "Pope" bullets: MM 56 through 62 with the ring at the base of the bullet.
3. It is my belief that a Sharpshooter bullet would be more aerodynamically with no surface to hinder its forward motion or accuracy.
4. The "Pope" bullets seem to break the mold of being a Sharpshooter's bullet, by being flat nosed & flat based with a lip projection thus making them (to me, my opinion) be a short range bullet not long range for sniping or sharpshooting.
5. I am not a ballistic expert just a person looking at the bullets. Let us look at the 45-caliber Whitworth, the 45 & 46-caliber "Kerr" bullets, the Picket bullets MM 255 through 260 and the 3-ring called "Sharpshooter" bullets MM 452 & 453.
6. All these bullets have the same characteristics, a slender type body tapered from the tail to the nose, (the "Popes also have this characteristic), except for the Whitworth (which has a cylindrical or hexagonal body), rounded or pointed nose, hollow cavity and no tail protrusion to hinder the movement through the air, thus being able to go faster & more accurate at greater distances by taking on the rifling as they expand going down the barrel of the rifle.
7. I have sent some inquiries about Sharpshooter ammunition to a few places but as of yet I have received no replies for a small section in my new book.
8. What caliber is the Morgan rifle? What rifles were used as Sharpshooter rifles other than the Enfield, Kerr & Whitworth in the South. What was used by the North?
Thank you for allowing this thread to go on. I am appreciative of the inquiries & answers. :up
Tom Stelma
PS: As to whether a Picket should go North or South I think you either put the in a place marked North or South and say when asked this: I do not know the direction the guy firing the weapon was pointed so I just put them here but they could go there as well.
The term "picket" is a catch-all. As Tom Stelma says, these should more accurately be called target rifle, sporting rifle, and/or country rifle.
One oddity about these bullets is that the flat-nosed bullets are actually more accurate...see "Hints to Riflemen" by Cleveland (1864) for more detailed information on the science of aerodynamic flight.
Dean has a section on these picket bullets complete with excerpts from "Hints" and "Ordnance & Gunnery" in part 3 of "Round Ball to Rimfire". See pages 278-281.
It seems to me that the southerners would have brought more of these types of rifles to the service with them than their northern counterparts...by that's just my opinion toward which cigar box Dr. Beach should put his bullets in.
One oddity about these bullets is that the flat-nosed bullets are actually more accurate...see "Hints to Riflemen" by Cleveland (1864) for more detailed information on the science of aerodynamic flight.
Dean has a section on these picket bullets complete with excerpts from "Hints" and "Ordnance & Gunnery" in part 3 of "Round Ball to Rimfire". See pages 278-281.
It seems to me that the southerners would have brought more of these types of rifles to the service with them than their northern counterparts...by that's just my opinion toward which cigar box Dr. Beach should put his bullets in.
tom stelma
Established Users
:-?
Jim and all on this thread,
I did read your quiet brother's writing on the Picket flat nose.
For much information I think Round Ball to Rimfire I, II & III are excellent in the depth of information given.
It just does not look like it would be a long range bullet but then as the aerodynamics of a pointed or round nose bullet would.
I gather these thoughts from once being a a youngster and sticking my hand out the window opened & it would go go up and down with very little resistance but closing my fist resulted in a rough ride.
I am no expert but I would like to see a shooter of antique fire a Picket flat nose type verses a pointed nose type at a target about 100 to 200 yards just to see the accuracy.
I know the modern bullet will rise from barrel end and fall back into the target. Just questions formed in my mind.
Tom Stelma
Jim and all on this thread,
I did read your quiet brother's writing on the Picket flat nose.
For much information I think Round Ball to Rimfire I, II & III are excellent in the depth of information given.
It just does not look like it would be a long range bullet but then as the aerodynamics of a pointed or round nose bullet would.
I gather these thoughts from once being a a youngster and sticking my hand out the window opened & it would go go up and down with very little resistance but closing my fist resulted in a rough ride.
I am no expert but I would like to see a shooter of antique fire a Picket flat nose type verses a pointed nose type at a target about 100 to 200 yards just to see the accuracy.
I know the modern bullet will rise from barrel end and fall back into the target. Just questions formed in my mind.
Tom Stelma
Yes, thanks for this continued discussion. I don’t have my Edwards’ “Civil War Guns” with me here at work, but in the chapter on sharshooters, there are some nice photos and descriptions of a man loading (utilizing a false muzzle) and firing a target rifle of the kind that would have been used in the Civil War (1860s target rifle, as employed by some Federal forces as I understand—came in several flavors in the .36-.50 caliber range). Most importantly, there are two types of modern replica bullets pictured, one of which looks like rather like our “Pope” type—so agree with Jim about the variation in bullet aerodynamics that are possible with target rifle projectiles. I like Tom’s idea of how to save face with my M&M 58 residing over on the Northern side! You know, what makes me really wonder about M&M 58 as a Federal bullet is that M&M is pretty liberal with their user designation “both.” Of course there are many errors, but the fact that they labeled these as “U.S.” may be significant. Cigar box!?—oh Jim, you blaspheme!—Riker cases, of course! :lol: Well, not sure I’m ready to relegate my M&M 58 to the no man’s land of the Riker case in the center of my display between North and South—my D.M.Z. of bullets that could have been used by either side . . . but I’m reading what y’all are writing and I’m keeping an open mind.
Good evening folks,
Tom, you would have to do this to me. Fortunately most of the reference books are unpacked although laying on everything in the relic room. There is a picture of the Morgan in Time Life's series "Echoes of Glory" in the volume entitled "Arms and Equipment of the Union", pages 44 & 45. It states that it's a .46 caliber. I believe that there is a picture of a Pope in one of their other series but can't be sure.
Like the Dimmicks, these sharpshooter rifles may have come in different calibers. Obviously they weren't very common.
Chuck, if you catagorized every bullet discussion in this forum you could publish one heck of a bullet book.
Skip
Tom, you would have to do this to me. Fortunately most of the reference books are unpacked although laying on everything in the relic room. There is a picture of the Morgan in Time Life's series "Echoes of Glory" in the volume entitled "Arms and Equipment of the Union", pages 44 & 45. It states that it's a .46 caliber. I believe that there is a picture of a Pope in one of their other series but can't be sure.
Like the Dimmicks, these sharpshooter rifles may have come in different calibers. Obviously they weren't very common.
Chuck, if you catagorized every bullet discussion in this forum you could publish one heck of a bullet book.
Skip
Trajectory
JimT is right about the pointed nose bullet having a less consistent trajectory than flat (or hollow point) bullets. The point actually creates more drag when slicing through standing air and can actually form a wave of resistance at the tip of the bullet which can affect the flight. In competition, most high power rifle enthusiasts use hollow point bullets which eliminate this factor and give a much better flight.
TomS mentions that modern bullets rise from the barrel. Actually the sight on a modern firearm aims the barrel above the target to allow for the gravitational pull to drop the bullet to the target. The flight of the bullet does not climb, it is actually aimed that way. The trajectory crosses the line of sight twice, once when it leaves the muzzle (climbing) and downrange when it crosses the sight line (descending) as gravity pulls it back to earth. All firearms have had to deal with this problem and that is why shooters have to sight in their weapons. A modern .223 cal competition round (55 grains) traveling with a muzzle velocity in excess of 3000 feet per second will drop nearly two inches in a 300 yard flight. A standard .577/.58 minie (450 grains) with a muzzle velocity of 850 feet per second would drop almost ten inches on the same flight. The drop is a function of bullet weight, airspeed and gravity.
I always assumed that the Picket bullets were considered sharpshooter bullets because of the weapons that fired them. A .50cal Pennsylvania rifle had considerably less windage than a Model 61 Springfield or Model 55 Enfield. The better contact with the lands and grooves, and the better gas seal caused by the reduced windage, would produce a truer flight pattern.
Just a Humble Opinion,
TomH
JimT is right about the pointed nose bullet having a less consistent trajectory than flat (or hollow point) bullets. The point actually creates more drag when slicing through standing air and can actually form a wave of resistance at the tip of the bullet which can affect the flight. In competition, most high power rifle enthusiasts use hollow point bullets which eliminate this factor and give a much better flight.
TomS mentions that modern bullets rise from the barrel. Actually the sight on a modern firearm aims the barrel above the target to allow for the gravitational pull to drop the bullet to the target. The flight of the bullet does not climb, it is actually aimed that way. The trajectory crosses the line of sight twice, once when it leaves the muzzle (climbing) and downrange when it crosses the sight line (descending) as gravity pulls it back to earth. All firearms have had to deal with this problem and that is why shooters have to sight in their weapons. A modern .223 cal competition round (55 grains) traveling with a muzzle velocity in excess of 3000 feet per second will drop nearly two inches in a 300 yard flight. A standard .577/.58 minie (450 grains) with a muzzle velocity of 850 feet per second would drop almost ten inches on the same flight. The drop is a function of bullet weight, airspeed and gravity.
I always assumed that the Picket bullets were considered sharpshooter bullets because of the weapons that fired them. A .50cal Pennsylvania rifle had considerably less windage than a Model 61 Springfield or Model 55 Enfield. The better contact with the lands and grooves, and the better gas seal caused by the reduced windage, would produce a truer flight pattern.
Just a Humble Opinion,
TomH
Thanks Tom and Skip--
It was instructive to re-read chapter 19 (pp. 210-227) of William Edwards’ Civil War Guns last night. He goes into some detail on Berdan’s famous U.S. 1st Regiment of sharpshooters. When first assembled, many of the men brought their own target and sporting rifles of various calibers (and hoped that the U.S. government would reimburse them). While they also hoped for .52 breech-loading Sharps rifles, they were first issued .56 Colt revolving rifles (later they received their much wished-for Sharps). Now with the target and sporting rifles, seems picket-type bullets were the choice, as Jim, et al. have said. Interestingly, the U.S. 1st Regiment of sharpshooters also had some “big scope” heavy bench-rest rifles of various calibers (it was photos of this type being loaded that I had mentioned). Evidently, these bench rifles used both a picket bullet (the one in the book looks rather like M&M 62 in form) and a standard three-ringer (Edwards mentions, in fact, that many were bench-rest rifles were .58 to accommodate). My guess is that our “Popes” could indeed have been used in target rifles, sporting rifles, or especially the bench-rest rifle (and used with a patch, which is interesting, per Edwards). Edwards writes a lot about the Confederates and their Whitworths, but not sure they had many (or any?) bench-rest rifles. Here’s a thought (and I’m not a black-powder man, so I don’t have the requisite experience): Though my M&M 58 var. has a more pointed tip, could the flat tip of the “Popes” (or other pickets) have been designed so as to aid the seating of them in a muzzle, or false muzzle?—might the flat nose surface be of some advantage in the careful seating of a sharpshooter/target/sporting/sniper bullet? . . . and I'm still wondering why M&M was listing this "Pope"/picket series as of "U.S.A." (based on where they were dug?)--my inner researcher wonders whether the original manuscripts and notes for the M&M book exist in some archive, somewhere (work for the "History Detectives" . . . or the Thomases?!).
It was instructive to re-read chapter 19 (pp. 210-227) of William Edwards’ Civil War Guns last night. He goes into some detail on Berdan’s famous U.S. 1st Regiment of sharpshooters. When first assembled, many of the men brought their own target and sporting rifles of various calibers (and hoped that the U.S. government would reimburse them). While they also hoped for .52 breech-loading Sharps rifles, they were first issued .56 Colt revolving rifles (later they received their much wished-for Sharps). Now with the target and sporting rifles, seems picket-type bullets were the choice, as Jim, et al. have said. Interestingly, the U.S. 1st Regiment of sharpshooters also had some “big scope” heavy bench-rest rifles of various calibers (it was photos of this type being loaded that I had mentioned). Evidently, these bench rifles used both a picket bullet (the one in the book looks rather like M&M 62 in form) and a standard three-ringer (Edwards mentions, in fact, that many were bench-rest rifles were .58 to accommodate). My guess is that our “Popes” could indeed have been used in target rifles, sporting rifles, or especially the bench-rest rifle (and used with a patch, which is interesting, per Edwards). Edwards writes a lot about the Confederates and their Whitworths, but not sure they had many (or any?) bench-rest rifles. Here’s a thought (and I’m not a black-powder man, so I don’t have the requisite experience): Though my M&M 58 var. has a more pointed tip, could the flat tip of the “Popes” (or other pickets) have been designed so as to aid the seating of them in a muzzle, or false muzzle?—might the flat nose surface be of some advantage in the careful seating of a sharpshooter/target/sporting/sniper bullet? . . . and I'm still wondering why M&M was listing this "Pope"/picket series as of "U.S.A." (based on where they were dug?)--my inner researcher wonders whether the original manuscripts and notes for the M&M book exist in some archive, somewhere (work for the "History Detectives" . . . or the Thomases?!).
Whilst the attribution of a "Pope" type of false muzzle may post date the ACW, note that Alvan Clark, of Cambridge, Massachusetts, patented the false muzzle in th US on 24 April 1840.Dr. Beach said:
David
ps. new to board and have been searching the archives, hence resurrection of an old thread!
This a great discussion.
I always felt that the "Popes" were mis-identified. I am glad to see others agree. I have done soem reading on the topic in my 50 odd books on bullets and projectile weapons and would have to say you both could be right (I am not say you are both right - I mean either could be). I personally do not argue this. I just listen and keep collecting. I have 3 "popes" that I found in VA on sites that could be both post, pre, and Civil War.
Nice discussion. I have found it very educational.
I always felt that the "Popes" were mis-identified. I am glad to see others agree. I have done soem reading on the topic in my 50 odd books on bullets and projectile weapons and would have to say you both could be right (I am not say you are both right - I mean either could be). I personally do not argue this. I just listen and keep collecting. I have 3 "popes" that I found in VA on sites that could be both post, pre, and Civil War.
Nice discussion. I have found it very educational.