British No. 2 Musket cartridge (AKA WR .500-450)

[John in PA]

I just had a brainstorm. (or at least a brief shower )

*Assuming* the gun is a toolroom job made to experiment with a variant of the ammunition then in service, (or proposed for the Romanian contract), what if the " - 05 " stamped at the breech signifies "minus .050" ", as in .050" smaller than standard body dimensions for the #2 Musket, which is exactly what the chamber cast measures out at?

Thoughts??

[martinibelgian]

Hmmm... As it dates later than the model designation, and there are issue rifles chambered for the no.2 Musket, it would be highly improbable to propose some alternative to a round recently accepted in the service and in general issue. I would suggest either something commercial, or a test model for some other country that wanted another cartridge type (of course - you cannot have the same cartridge as your potential opponents...)

[John in PA]

Has anyone seen a Steyr commercial military musket? Are they serial numbered? What other markings do they display?

Also, do all known variants (South Africa, etc) have the ladder extension on the sight like the Romanian? (This one does)

I did send an inquiry to Steyr-Mannlincher to see if they had a company historian who could shed any light. No clue if such a person exists, or whether I'll get a reply, but figured they might at least know of some advanced collectors and point me in a direction.

[woodbutcher]

And another mystery to be solved.Love these threads.Calling Sherlock Holmes.HELPPPPPPPPPPPPP.That`s a fine looking gun.All the best with it.
Good luck.Have fun.Be safe.
Leo

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Hmmm... As it dates later than the model designation, and there are issue rifles chambered for the no.2 Musket, it would be highly improbable to propose some alternative to a round recently accepted in the service and in general issue. I would suggest either something commercial, or a test model for some other country that wanted another cartridge type (of course - you cannot have the same cartridge as your potential opponents...)

I don't believe there was much issue of the No2 Musket in the English speaking world before it was more or less wiped out by the .577/.450 Martini-Henry. The .45 New South Wales might also have got wider circulation, if it hadn't suffered what the military .223 did to the .222 Remington Magnum. (I mistakenly described this one as .450 New South Wales earlier, of possible significance to anyone looking it up.) It seems a pity, for devoted as the current following of the .577/.450 is today, the two smaller cartridges, drawn brass cases and a better rifling form were surely better for ordinary military purposes. Indeed this was eventually recognized with the .402 cartridge which was pre-empted by the introduction of the .303. This was a slightly tapered shoulderless case which kept an elongated bullet within manageable weight, and was surely about as good as black powder cartridges get, for soldiers who might have to fire a very large number of shots without cleaning.

There was very little carryover of cartridges from western Europe and America to central Europe, and especially for military use. Besides, there was a long period of a manageable number of available cartridges, but the late nineteenth century enjoyed (or something) a hundred times as many cartridges as reasonable applications for them, just as we do today. I would be surprised if a Steyr rifle, for use in that area, had been chambered for the No2 Musket.

I agree that this is most likely a development rifle, either for internal by Steyr, an ammunition manufacturer or some manufacturing gunsmith's own use, or for showing to a customer. Unfortunately unless you are comparing rifles for an identical cartridge, it is generally impossible to determine whether the sight calibrations are for metres, yards or the Austria-Hungarian schritt.

I used to have a Portuguese Guedes which lay in the Steyr factory in thirteen years after cancellation, before supply to the Transvaal, and I've seen Mannlichers, as in my Adolf Frank catalogue of 1913 which this firm supplied to the Ulster Volunteer Force Northern Ireland (then an approximately legal loyalist militia) in 1914. Both of these rifles had two sets of stamps, Portuguese and Transvaal on one, UVF and A Romanian phoenix on the bolt of the other, since they were made with leftover parts. This argues that they were done in the Steyr factory, and your rifle wasn't supplied to a national entity big enough to specify markings.

Incidentally congratulations to John in PA on the Parrot rifle. Everybody should have one. I still remember with glee the History Channel episode in which convincingly thrashed the Canadian Army's modern light field gun in a 1000 yard contest. Not that artillery hasn't improved since the 1860s, for in practical use rapidity of fire and quality of fragmentation would have been on the modern gun's side. But it does outline that black powder can be an exceedingly consistent propellant, in any size.

[John in PA]

Incidentally congratulations to John in PA on the Parrot rifle. Everybody should have one. I still remember with glee the History Channel episode in which convincingly thrashed the Canadian Army's modern light field gun in a 1000 yard contest. Not that artillery hasn't improved since the 1860s, for in practical use rapidity of fire and quality of fragmentation would have been on the modern gun's side. But it does outline that black powder can be an exceedingly consistent propellant, in any size.

Yep, that was my Parrott on that show. Thanks for the kind words. In fairness to the Canadians, they almost never do direct fire, and their range officer told them to use Charge 4's, which actually put their time of flight to target at 1300 meters longer than ours, so I guess those big long H.E. rounds they were using were minimally stabilized. A Viet Nam vet buddy trained in artillery told me they were always told to use Charge 7's (max velocity) for direct fire. Here's a piece with our Parrott in action at the Grayling Historic Artillery Match (This year's will be held on 7/30-31--spectators welcome!!)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EL13quhcUMw

[Ballistics in Scotland]

That is impressive. Is it a modern replica? I thought the lanyard was a bit short for an original Parrot, and shrinking on the steel hoop by cooling from the inside seems a very dubious way of going about it. But it could be made in one piece of steel nowadays.

I suppose the Canadians got to choose their weapon, and direct fire is the easy end of the business, so your performance remains quite an achievement. So often dramatic new TV documentary revelations turn out to be things that have been known for decades. But life doesn't offer many moments like that.

[martinibelgian]

No.2 Musket wsn't wiped out by 577-450 - far from it, it was actually loaded up to WWII, and enjoyed a good following - both as a hunting cartridge (esp. in south africa) and as a target round. It just did everything the 577-450 was designed to do with less fuss and bother, in a smaller package.
And yes, the Roumanian 11x60 cartridge is to all intents and purposes just about a clone of the no.2 Musket. Having rifles for both, I can vouch for that. Just like the .45 Turkish is but a minor variation of the same theme, with the shoulder set a bit further back. In actual fact, I just trimmed my no.2 Musket die a bit in order to be able to form .45 Turkish... And that one might even be the best of the lot, with its longer neck.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

I agree about its qualities, but the most popular target shooting in the UK was with the issue military rifle, and survival rates suggest that a lot more rifles were made for the Express rounds than the Musket - mistake though that was, in the days when the extremely hollow Express bullets were getting hunters killed.

[John in PA]

I know it's similar (?identical?) to the #2 Musket, but what is the correct metric (or English) designation for the Romanian military cartridge? Is it 11.43 X 60mm R? I've not found it in COTW or the encyclopedia of case forming. Is there a reference for the cartridge, or was it so short lived that it escaped notice in the reference books. And what is the correct data for the Romanian round for future reference?

[Bad Ass Wallace]

My No.2 musket is built on a nice Belguin Pieper Martini

[Ballistics in Scotland]

I know it's similar (?identical?) to the #2 Musket, but what is the correct metric (or English) designation for the Romanian military cartridge? Is it 11.43 X 60mm R? I've not found it in COTW or the encyclopedia of case forming. Is there a reference for the cartridge, or was it so short lived that it escaped notice in the reference books. And what is the correct data for the Romanian round for future reference?

There are two Romanian Peabody-Martini cartridges, the 11.43x49R and 11.43x60R. The database on http://members.shaw.ca/cstein0/metric.htm (an excellent resource, well worth saving) gives them a base diameter of .562 and .576in., but I wouldn't be surprised to find some slight or even non-slight variations elsewhere. There are also two Turkish Peabody-Martinis, 11.43x41R and 11.43x59R, which could have argued a crafty intent by the Romanians to secure one-way compatibility of ammunition, if they hadn't had bases of .586 and .576in. Now is all that perfectly clear, you at the back there?

Both progressed from long to short. That database gives the introduction of the 11.43x60R as first of the four, in 1868, when Romania was under the semi-autonomous suzerainty of the Ottoman Empire. While that may be true, it should remind us how even one typo in the measurements could lead us astray.

I've been through that database and several books looking for your .536in. head, and haven't found it in any common case that isn't disqualified by date, rim design, length or whereabouts. I think I might have found one or two of its friends and relations, though. The 6.5mm. Daudeteau is itself a rare item, being best known in conversions of the French Gras, and saw either limited service with Uruguay, which is not a big place. This and the 5mm. Daudeteau had a base diameter of about .490in. and probably count as semi-rimless. But there were also 7.65mm and 8x60R Daudeteaus with a base of .533in. and a rim of about .625in. The wider rim recess in your rifle doesn't mean that all of it was used. It does seem possible that there could have been some common origin for the brass used.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

My No.2 musket is built on a nice Belguin Pieper Martini

Ah, Pieper! Would that be the Anciens Etablissements Pieper, i.e. the firm reconstituted after a bankruptcy? Let me know if you could use a better copy of this case label, which I made up for my 24ga shotgun. There has to be a snag somewhere, though. It is a fake, which I copied and extensively reworked from a share certificate I bought on eBay, and a catalogue picture. If the company was never formally wound up, I could be the owner of part of some long-forgotten bank deposit, which after several devaluations of the Belgian franc could easily amount to more than a dollar.

[martinibelgian]

That database gives the introduction of the 11.43x60R as first of the four, in 1868, when Romania was under the semi-autonomous suzerainty of the Ottoman Empire.

Incorrect - before the Steyr/Witten Martini's, The Roumanians were armed with a Peabody rifle, which wouldn't even come close to swallowing the longer 11.43 x 60 cartridge, the action being quite a bit shorter: The longer case definitely came later, and coincided with the introduction of the Martini, with Roumania's independence. Must be an error in the database.

I took the liberty to copy this pic from militaryrifles.com: Nothing better than the visual comparison.

[John in PA]

Yep, what he said. I've got a dandy Romanian Peabody, and have already worked with the 11.43 x 49R. The later cartridge and M-H rifle were no doubt prompted by the beating the Romanians took at the hands of the Turks with their longer-ranged .45 Turkish P-M rifles at Plevna.

Here's the thread with pictures on the Romanian Peabody http://castboolits.gunloads.com/show...-SHOOTING-TEST

And the preceeding case-forming thread http://castboolits.gunloads.com/show...s-11-43X49mmR)

[martinibelgian]

The area was a hotbed for military activity in the day, so usually no expense was spared there to get the best military equipment money could buy - which at that time was the Martini rifle. And as Brit producers were wholly incapable of supplying all those rifles to foreign nations, other producers were so considerate as to help out... . I have little doubt that the Sight used was a direct consequence of the Plevna battle - it is most awkward to use at those extremely long ranges - but really very nicely made indeed. Point blank range was the holy grail back when - as flat a trajectory as possible, but over extended ranges - hence some one-upmanship between countries.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Yep, what he said. I've got a dandy Romanian Peabody, and have already worked with the 11.43 x 49R. The later cartridge and M-H rifle were no doubt prompted by the beating the Romanians took at the hands of the Turks with their longer-ranged .45 Turkish P-M rifles at Plevna.

Here's the thread with pictures on the Romanian Peabody http://castboolits.gunloads.com/show...-SHOOTING-TEST

And the preceeding case-forming thread http://castboolits.gunloads.com/show...s-11-43X49mmR)

There is no doubt that the Russians were badly beaten most of the way through the siege of Plevna, although with the disparity in numbers, they could afford to be beaten more often than the Turks could stand that kind of winning. It is a question, however, how much of the killing was caused by the Turkish superiority in long-range rifles. Osman Pasha disarmed his cavalry and gave their Winchesters (all or mostly the 1866) to the infantry. So many had two long guns apiece, to change over as the Russians pressed frontal assaults.

[John in PA]

The story of the Plevna Delay is fascinating, with the Turks using the Winchester Model 1866 (military version) and the Peabody-Martini in .45 Turkish tactically to positively destroy the assaults of the Russians and Romanians. http://militaryrifles.com/Turkey/Ple...evnaDelay.html

[Ballistics in Scotland]

The story of the Plevna Delay is fascinating, with the Turks using the Winchester Model 1866 (military version) and the Peabody-Martini in .45 Turkish tactically to positively destroy the assaults of the Russians and Romanians. http://militaryrifles.com/Turkey/Ple...evnaDelay.html

Yes, and most nations learned the wrong lesson, just as they had been doing since the American Civil War. The real test of a military rifle is far more often how it and its user stand up to a large volume of fire at relatively close range, without anything going wrong. The British fought the only major war in which the long-range rifle has been the dominant weapon, in South Africa. Or at least it seemed major at the time. But it was still more or less by accident and lack of modernity that we got the least jammable bolt action in the First World War.

[sthwestvictoria]

Chamber cast is from the 1882 Steyr.

Chamber dimensions as follows:
Rim .663"
Head .532"
Shoulder diameter .518"
Length from breechface to start of shoulder approx 1.6" Neck diameter .473


Any ideas??

I agree that is a really small case head diameter, compared to comprable cartidges like the various british .450 bores, this is from the Kynoch catalogue: