Unknown Lead Cup Sabot?

bnoll01

bnoll01

Established Users
Hey guys! Its been a while since I've posted but I found this lead cup sabot and I have no idea what it goes to! Also found the bayonet in same place, already have that ID'ed as an 1816 Springfield model but back to the cup. Im pretty sure it is to a canister round but it doesn't say Hotchkiss 3 like most, it just says BASE with a 3 in the middle on the bottom. Nothing else can be found on it. What do you guys think? Thanks!
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0437.JPG
    IMG_0437.JPG
    433.9 KB · Views: 31
  • IMG_0441.JPG
    IMG_0441.JPG
    438.2 KB · Views: 16
Hi My Fellow TH'ers
Drawing outside the lines with my response to this. Artillery rounds are not my speciality. Have you looked to see if the 3 inch Borman used a sabot? I would also check all the other 3 inch rounds to see if any used a sabot. My guess is that the '3' indicates the size of the shell.
Good luck as I know someone on here will come up with the answer for you.
Dave
'Digger-Dave'
THing4CSA
PS: Remember; Don't leave it in the ground!
 
Congratulations! You've found the bottom of a very-very rare Wiard canister. :) See the photo and info on page 66 of my book "Field Atillery Projectiles of the American Civil War - Revised & Supplemented 1993 Edition."

Have you measured its diameter? In your photo, the bayonet's size indicates you Wiard Canister base is larger than 3 inches.

Also, the faint rifling-marks don't match up with the number of grooves from any version 3"-caliber rifled cannon. It appears to show 15-groove James type rifling, which means it was fired from either a 3.8"-caliber James rifle or a "retro-rifled" 6-pounder smoothbore ...not a 3.6"-caliber Wiard rifle.

Sidenote:
Some of Wiard's 3.6"-caliber rifled cannons had 12-groove rifling ...but your canister-base appears to have 15 rifling-grooves. Please let me know if my eyeball-estimate of 15 is correct, or if your base actually has 12 rifling-marks.

All of that having being said... the designer of this model of Canister, Norman Wiard, is known to have produced at least four 3-inch caliber rifled cannon. Thus, it's at least "theoretically" possible that he also produced a 3"-caliber version of his Canister ammunition. But, as mentioned, the rifling on your specimen's sides doesn't seem to match up with any known 3"-caliber cannon's rifling. So, I'd suspect that the marking on your Wiard canister-base originally said 3.6 inch, and the ".6" is no longer readable.

Please make the best estimate you can of your relic's diameter, and let me know.

Also, if you wouldn't mind, let me know what battlefield it came from. Please be assured, I'm NOT asking you for the exact spot of land you dug it on. Purely for Historical Research data, I'm asking for just the name of the battle, and anything you know about when that particular battle-action took place.

Regards,
Pete [P.C. George]
 
Pete,
Thanks for the reply. It was found in Murfreesboro near The battlefield of Stones River. It was found about 50 yards away from the Wilkinson Pike in someones front yard (large Lot)! In fact, The exact location of where I found this is directly accross the Wilkinson Pike from The National park. I sometimes go near the battlefield and knock on doors on neighboring houses. Most of the time I get a no, but occasionally, I get a yes. It is indeed larger than 3 inches. It is warped from firing but measures about 3 3/4 inches at any point in diameter. It has exactly 15 rifleing groves. Can only make out a 3 bellow BASE. I have heard their were James Rifles here as there have supposedly been James shells found here. So do you think that this fits your theory of of a Wirad round, fired out of a James Rifle? Thanks again!
 
Tn mxt wrote:
>I have heard their were James Rifles here as there have supposedly been James shells found here.
>So do you think that this fits your theory of of a Wirad [Wiard] round, fired out of a James Rifle?

Yes. The shape of the base's lip and the marking proves it is a Wiard Canister base. You said its diameter is about 3.75-inches, so it can't have been fired from a 6-pounder-caliber Rifled Smoothbore (bore-size 3.67-inches). The true James Rifle bore was 3.80, which is the bore-size your cansier base is closest to but not greater than. A cool, and very-very rare find. :) Congrats.

By the way, for anybody here who doesn't already know... the term "Rifled Smoothbore" means a cannon which was originally manufactured as a smoothbore, but at some time afterward rifing grooves were added. You could say it was "retro-fitted" with rifling. In the first year of the war, when the advantages of rifled cannon got proven even to all doubters, both the USA and CSA sent a number of pre-war smoothbore cannons back to the foundry to have rifling-grooves cut into their previously smooth bore.

Regards,
Pete [P.C. George]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top