Operation of the Spencer repeater?
Forum rules
Welcome to the Leverguns.Com General Discussions Forum. This is a high-class place so act respectable. We discuss most anything here other than politics... politely.
Please post political post in the new Politics forum.
Welcome to the Leverguns.Com General Discussions Forum. This is a high-class place so act respectable. We discuss most anything here other than politics... politely.
Please post political post in the new Politics forum.
-
- Levergunner 3.0
- Posts: 509
- Joined: Sat Aug 03, 2013 12:21 pm
Operation of the Spencer repeater?
Can anybody tell me if the Spencer repeating action used by the USA during and after the Civil War was self-cocking? Or did the shooter have to cock the hammer every time he ejected a fired shell? And could he close the breech and chamber a round without cocking the hammer, for example if he wanted to carry his Spencer loaded but not cocked? Or did he have to de-cock the hammer manually?
I recently saw an example of a Springfield Armory conversion of a Civil War Spencer carbine into an infantry rifle and realized I really don't know how a Spencer works! (They apparently did about 1100 of these conversions around 1870--not sure who used them. They look just like the original Spencer "muskets" that a few Union infantry regiments used in the CW).
I recently saw an example of a Springfield Armory conversion of a Civil War Spencer carbine into an infantry rifle and realized I really don't know how a Spencer works! (They apparently did about 1100 of these conversions around 1870--not sure who used them. They look just like the original Spencer "muskets" that a few Union infantry regiments used in the CW).
Re: Operation of the Spencer repeater?
For sure, it is not self cocking.
But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Romans 5:8
-
- Senior Levergunner
- Posts: 1459
- Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:31 pm
- Location: Arizona Territory
Re: Operation of the Spencer repeater?
Lever cartridge in chamber then manually cock the hammer. each and every time. Rather slow by todays standards of the Lever action. But a far cry over a ML musket, or over a single shot cartridge Fire arm.
SASS# 51223
Arizona Cowboy Shooter's Assoc.
Cowtown Cowboy Shooter's Assoc.
Uberti 73/44-40 carbine, Rossi 92/44-40,
Marlin 94CB/44 24" Limited, Winchester 94/30-30
Arizona Cowboy Shooter's Assoc.
Cowtown Cowboy Shooter's Assoc.
Uberti 73/44-40 carbine, Rossi 92/44-40,
Marlin 94CB/44 24" Limited, Winchester 94/30-30
-
- Levergunner 3.0
- Posts: 509
- Joined: Sat Aug 03, 2013 12:21 pm
Re: Operation of the Spencer repeater?
Thanks, guys! Feel like I know a little about why Spencers didn't become the issue infantry rifle.
As to the speed of reloading, I wonder if a Spencer really could be fired faster than some self-cocking single shot breechloaders? I'm thinking of the English Martini-Enfield as a military rifle and carbine and the Winchester 1885 as a sporting rifle (the original design, not the one with the rebounding/decocking hammer). Don't have a Spencer to compare (and it would require a really trained Spencer user to be fair), but those two single shots can be reloaded and fired REALLY fast by a trained and practiced user, as can the Ruger #1.
I would guess one place a Spencer would beat out any breech loading single shot would be as a cavalry carbine. Not having to handle loose rounds on a moving horse would be a big advantage, in my unpracticed opinion. My experience (little and mostly bad) with horses is that they are never what I would call rock steady....What say you, horse lovers? Or did cavalry always dismount to use their long arms in the 19th Century?
As to the speed of reloading, I wonder if a Spencer really could be fired faster than some self-cocking single shot breechloaders? I'm thinking of the English Martini-Enfield as a military rifle and carbine and the Winchester 1885 as a sporting rifle (the original design, not the one with the rebounding/decocking hammer). Don't have a Spencer to compare (and it would require a really trained Spencer user to be fair), but those two single shots can be reloaded and fired REALLY fast by a trained and practiced user, as can the Ruger #1.
I would guess one place a Spencer would beat out any breech loading single shot would be as a cavalry carbine. Not having to handle loose rounds on a moving horse would be a big advantage, in my unpracticed opinion. My experience (little and mostly bad) with horses is that they are never what I would call rock steady....What say you, horse lovers? Or did cavalry always dismount to use their long arms in the 19th Century?
Re: Operation of the Spencer repeater?
I would also like to know if they will inadvertently discharge if the action is operated with the hammer down. I know a Sharps reproduction cartridge carbine would fire upon raising the lever if the hammer was not at least at half-cock. I did this only once.
-
- Advanced Levergunner
- Posts: 6972
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 8:52 pm
- Location: Ridgefield WA. USA
Re: Operation of the Spencer repeater?
The hammer is cocked manually,independant of the lever. I believe it was tought to cock the hammer first and then cycle the lever.
Re: Operation of the Spencer repeater?
Very interesting.
Here's some Maine history on their use!
This is from the the 1st Maine Cavalry use of Spencer carbines and Henry rifles:
Chaplain Merrill wrote this description of the incident: “An incident is worth relating as an example of the coolness of the men. Col. Cilley is a little near-sighted. After forming the regiment on the Boydton Plank Road, the men opened a rapid fire with their Spencer and Henry rifles. A moment later, seeing no enemy and thinking they were wasting their ammunition, the colonel rushed along the line, directing the men to cease fire. Coming up to Corp. Gurney of Co. B, he shouted: “You are acting like a fool with your ammunition, corporal.” “The rebs are right out there,” the corporal replied. “That may be so but wait till you can see them.” Kneel down here, colonel; now look through there.” The colonel said no more of the wasting of ammunition, but remained on his knee and commenced firing with his revolver.”
Old No7
Here's some Maine history on their use!
This is from the the 1st Maine Cavalry use of Spencer carbines and Henry rifles:
Chaplain Merrill wrote this description of the incident: “An incident is worth relating as an example of the coolness of the men. Col. Cilley is a little near-sighted. After forming the regiment on the Boydton Plank Road, the men opened a rapid fire with their Spencer and Henry rifles. A moment later, seeing no enemy and thinking they were wasting their ammunition, the colonel rushed along the line, directing the men to cease fire. Coming up to Corp. Gurney of Co. B, he shouted: “You are acting like a fool with your ammunition, corporal.” “The rebs are right out there,” the corporal replied. “That may be so but wait till you can see them.” Kneel down here, colonel; now look through there.” The colonel said no more of the wasting of ammunition, but remained on his knee and commenced firing with his revolver.”
Old No7
"Freedom and the Second Amendment... One cannot exist without the other." © 2000 DTH
- Ysabel Kid
- Moderator
- Posts: 28220
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:10 pm
- Location: South Carolina, USA
- Contact:
Re: Operation of the Spencer repeater?
You hit upon the quandary the US Military was in at that time. They wanted a repeating arm to use from horseback. Something stronger than the percussion revolvers of the day. The Spencer was ideal; easy to use from horseback (relatively), with a much stronger round than even the Dragoon Colt revolvers. The Henry was around, and was the fastest to shoot and reload, but expensive and not as durable.Mike Armstrong wrote:Thanks, guys! Feel like I know a little about why Spencers didn't become the issue infantry rifle.
As to the speed of reloading, I wonder if a Spencer really could be fired faster than some self-cocking single shot breechloaders? I'm thinking of the English Martini-Enfield as a military rifle and carbine and the Winchester 1885 as a sporting rifle (the original design, not the one with the rebounding/decocking hammer). Don't have a Spencer to compare (and it would require a really trained Spencer user to be fair), but those two single shots can be reloaded and fired REALLY fast by a trained and practiced user, as can the Ruger #1.
I would guess one place a Spencer would beat out any breech loading single shot would be as a cavalry carbine. Not having to handle loose rounds on a moving horse would be a big advantage, in my unpracticed opinion. My experience (little and mostly bad) with horses is that they are never what I would call rock steady....What say you, horse lovers? Or did cavalry always dismount to use their long arms in the 19th Century?
The army brass though was concerned about soldiers wasting ammunition. A perennial concern, dictating arms choices, well past the Indian War period and almost to the turn of the century and beyond. I think WWII finally cracked the back of that concern, when they realized that ammo was relatively cheap compared to trained soldiers, and that move-and-fire tactics enabled a smaller force to do much more damage.
-
- Levergunner 3.0
- Posts: 509
- Joined: Sat Aug 03, 2013 12:21 pm
Re: Operation of the Spencer repeater?
Thanks, Kid! I'm sure the Henry was faster firing than the Spencer (not, as you point out, entirely a virtue to the command structure of the day!).
But it isn't THAT much more powerful than the 1860 Army and 1858 Remington Army revolvers, and the exposed magazine tube must have been very fragile compared to the enclosed tube on the Spencer.
But it isn't THAT much more powerful than the 1860 Army and 1858 Remington Army revolvers, and the exposed magazine tube must have been very fragile compared to the enclosed tube on the Spencer.
Re: Operation of the Spencer repeater?
The Spencer was used on the plains after the Civil War until the trapdoors finally supplanted them. The Battle of Beecher Island was a battle that was heavily reliant on the repeating capabilities of the Spencer to repel charges of the Indians. The unit was formed of scouts and frontiersmen, not regular Army.
Very interesting story. One account I read was from someone that was present at the battle, and it was recounted in an outdoors magazine of the day from the 1920s I believe.
Jack Stilwell went with one other guy on foot for help. He reportedly had the guys gather up moccasins off the feet of dead Indians within their reach, he wanted to leave only moccasined tracks in his escape.
The defenders hid behind dead horses on an island in the river, they survived on raw, rotting horse meat until rescued.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Beecher_Island
Jack Stilwell was reburied at Trail Town in Cody Wyoming in 1984.
Very interesting story. One account I read was from someone that was present at the battle, and it was recounted in an outdoors magazine of the day from the 1920s I believe.
Jack Stilwell went with one other guy on foot for help. He reportedly had the guys gather up moccasins off the feet of dead Indians within their reach, he wanted to leave only moccasined tracks in his escape.
The defenders hid behind dead horses on an island in the river, they survived on raw, rotting horse meat until rescued.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Beecher_Island
Jack Stilwell was reburied at Trail Town in Cody Wyoming in 1984.
Last edited by Malamute on Sat Jul 30, 2016 12:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs even though checkered by failure, than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat." -Theodore Roosevelt-
Isnt it amazing how many people post without reading the thread?
Isnt it amazing how many people post without reading the thread?
- Buck Elliott
- Member Emeritus
- Posts: 2830
- Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 12:15 pm
- Location: Halfway up Sheep Mountain -- Cody, Wyoming
Re: Operation of the Spencer repeater?
The magazine of the Spencer is housed in the butt-stock.
The .44 Henry RF Flat is about equal in power to the .44 Special revolver cartridge..
The .44 Henry RF Flat is about equal in power to the .44 Special revolver cartridge..
Regards
Buck
Life has a way of making the foreseeable that which never happens, and the unforeseeable, that which your life becomes...
Buck
Life has a way of making the foreseeable that which never happens, and the unforeseeable, that which your life becomes...
Re: Operation of the Spencer repeater?
Yes, I think the 44 rimfire is a step up from the 44 percussion pistols, and certainly faster loading and easier to shoot well in open country. The Henry was a bit easier to use than the Spencer, but the Spencer was a fairly good gun for the time.Buck Elliott wrote:The magazine of the Spencer is housed in the butt-stock.
The .44 Henry RF Flat is about equal in power to the .44 Special revolver cartridge..
"Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs even though checkered by failure, than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat." -Theodore Roosevelt-
Isnt it amazing how many people post without reading the thread?
Isnt it amazing how many people post without reading the thread?
-
- Advanced Levergunner
- Posts: 9426
- Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 10:05 am
- Location: The Land of Enchantment
Re: Operation of the Spencer repeater?
Takes a while to get used to the rhythm of a Spencer when you have spent most of your life with conventional lever guns. I wish I still had mine. Accurate little rascal, andn I found the .56-50 handloads were also nicely accurate in a Swedish rolling block. A Montana friend has taken whitetails with his.
-
- Levergunner 3.0
- Posts: 559
- Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 7:53 pm
- Location: Surrey, England
Re: Operation of the Spencer repeater?
The firing pin doesn't retract when the action is cycled so it's best to cock the hammer before chambering the next shell. There's a short clip of me firing my original Spencer, converted to centre fire here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hHw2qwImiQ
I also have a couple of videos on making the conversion and suitable ammo on my You Tube channel.
Perry
I also have a couple of videos on making the conversion and suitable ammo on my You Tube channel.
Perry
"Always carry a firearm east of Aldgate Watson."
-
- Senior Levergunner
- Posts: 1459
- Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:31 pm
- Location: Arizona Territory
Re: Operation of the Spencer repeater?
The US Army would still insist on a single shot capable ability in the 1894 Bolt Action Krag. The piece has a magazine cut-off lever for single shot use.
SASS# 51223
Arizona Cowboy Shooter's Assoc.
Cowtown Cowboy Shooter's Assoc.
Uberti 73/44-40 carbine, Rossi 92/44-40,
Marlin 94CB/44 24" Limited, Winchester 94/30-30
Arizona Cowboy Shooter's Assoc.
Cowtown Cowboy Shooter's Assoc.
Uberti 73/44-40 carbine, Rossi 92/44-40,
Marlin 94CB/44 24" Limited, Winchester 94/30-30
- Ysabel Kid
- Moderator
- Posts: 28220
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:10 pm
- Location: South Carolina, USA
- Contact:
Re: Operation of the Spencer repeater?
Correct on both counts!Malamute wrote: Yes, I think the 44 rimfire is a step up from the 44 percussion pistols, and certainly faster loading and easier to shoot well in open country.
The original Henry round used 26-28 grains of blackpowder, so, as you note, roughly in the same charge-range as the 1860 Army Colt and 1858 Remington New Model Army revolvers. The bullet was a bit heavier, but the charge was pretty light - for a rifle or carbine. That was why the .44-40 WCF chambered in the 1873 Winchester was considered such a big improvement, with the powder charge going up 40% or so!
The Spencer loads (depending on the caliber) were 320-400 grain bullets over 45 grains or so of blackpowder. A lot more power.
With a Blakeslee loading tube the Spencer could be reloaded faster than the Henry. That would change, of course, with the King's Patent loading port on the 1873 Winchester and the further rifles along that line.
If it was me, given a choice between a Henry and a Spencer, I would have picked the Spencer. Later though, I would have converted to the 1873 Winchester, and picked up a "Frontier Model" 1873 Colt to have the ammo interchangeability.
Take that with a grain of salt though. I still think that the 1860 Army Colt is one of the best combat handguns every made...