Parker-Hale Enfield modified for reenacting

As a Confederate impression reenactor, I went to great lengths to make my impression correct. I twice won 1st person impression competitions including the one at Carnifix Ferry in W.VA. That was a small event but their 1st person impression was known as "the Inquisition." The examination was conducted by 3 fellows at the same time. Any one or two of them could be pawing over your gear, and questions coming from all around all at the same time. One of the guys was a police detective and another an insurance investigator. Don't know about the third. After winning the cop told me I was the "biggest BS'er he'd ever interrogated!":super: That was part of the secret of my success. People forget or don't realize the questioners don't necessarily know the answers to the questions they're asking. It's the reaction you give that counts. I mean, you're supposed to be a Civil War soldier but you don't know who your third Corporal or 1st Sgt is?! You were a farmer but don't know what a "cradle" is? (I don't mean what you rocked the baby in either!) One thing I used to do was keep a loose list of prepared names in my head. Ask me somebody inconsequential I didn't know? I had a name for you!

Well the upshot of all this is, that some feature or detail of imported equipment has tripped up some one competitor or another time to time. That lead me, with some encouragement from a fellow in our unit to update and "defarb" my musket too. Our "Lt." had been part of the Park service's 7th Cavalry living history impression group and they were anal about detail. He pointed out several indiscretions between my "1853 Enfield" (a first generation P/H) and what the soldiers of the 1860s would have carried. So we set out to 'correct some of them.

One thing I had going for me was my base rifle- Mine was a "1st generation," English made Parker-Hale Enfield, (mfg in the 1970s), reputed to be one of the best repros made, then and now. At some point in the past, these ceased to be made in England and the quality dropped. Anyway, Parker/Hale were said to be an original manufacturer of the 1853 and it was claimed they still had and used the same drawings and some of the tooling or forms for the reproduction. An example of the detail lies in the rifling. It was claimed that the original M1853 had tapered rifling going shallower towards the muzzle to reduce gas blow by thereby increasing pressure and improving accuracy- or so it was claimed. At this time, (I bought the rifle in the 70s IIRC) wide shallow grooves were rather the norm for repro rifle(d) muskets.

All modifications were done by my friend and based much on his knowledge which was (I hoped) far greater than mine. Any gaffs are his and beyond my correcting. He wanted to do a full make over obliterating all modern markings. I put the brakes on that for two reasons. First of all, I was proud of having a P-H and wanted to hang on to that fact. Therefore the lock plate and stock cartouche will not be altered, therefore not strictly "correct." Not really secondarily, but another reason was that I was concerned about somebody trying to pass off this thing as original should it escape my hands. I have no intention of trying to literally "fake and original."

Anyway, here's the pics and descriptions of modifications. As I said, My knowledge of the specific details of the original weapons is limited. So if any particular errors are there, feel free to point them out. It matters little to me as I am long since retired from the hobby. As did the veterans of old, my uniform lies tucked away in a cedar chest along side my US army (the modern or "real" one) uniform. I like to say I was "killed" at Gettysburg 125th reenactment in 1988 when a pasteboard pyrotechnic fragment thumped my hat on the top of my head.:yikes: Had that been the real deal... lets just say it was a sobering thought.:ugh:

Some pics descriptions (from Left)...
1. A view from the business end.
2. the Parker/Hale lock plate and 'hammer' Quality of fit and finish are evident compared to most modern reproductions.
3. Birmingham (England) proof stamps. Other changes: The P-H brass guards around the screw heads had round ends. The originals were square. I cannot now recall if these are original or whether we made these from sheet brass. Some parts on this are original replacements. The "JG on the stock do not belong there. They are my initials for identification so disposed as to be unobtrusive and hopefully overlooked in the event of theft.
4. That's P-H's cartouche. Carved star adds 'flavor' but, I put it there mainly as a means of rapid identification.
5.& 6. The original P-H bluing was very dark, black. That was stripped and this finish, imitating the originals applied by an older process. P?H stamps (crudely) removed and original stamps put on. Where he got the stamps, I don't know. I think some were original borrowed from a museum the fellow (our Lt.) worked with.
7. P-H bbl bands replaced with originals.
8. Original stamp on breech left of nipple.
9/10. Bayonets can be problematical especially as to fit. This one, an 'original' but whether actually an 1853 model I'm not sure, came out of India. It was at one time in Brit service having their "broad arrow" stamp upon it. Just how or when it came to these shores, I have no idea. Enfield bayo reproductions were rather hard to come by back then if I recall correctly, or maybe having found this one, I just liked it. I don't remember now. Unfortunately, the leather scabbard, a repro fortunately, has succumbed to time and poor storage conditions for many years. This bayonet was wobbly loose so I lined the socket with JB Weld and ground, sanded it out to a close fit.

There you have it folks. The weapons that have stood me in good stead through many hard fought conflicts and a few hunting trips. As it happens, this musket and a "one that got away" story, had me on a local TV sporting show not too long ago. Awww, fame...
As it happens, I have been generating a few cartridges for the first time in many years. May be I can post a range report in the near future.

I also have a PH enfield. Two band variety. Takes a sword bayonet!

I like what you have done to yours.

What load and bullet do you use in yours? I use mine during PA's muzzle loader season. I really get some strange looks from other BP hunters. Most are use to modern day BP rifles.

Thanks for the compliment. You know, I have heard that these first generation P/H weapons have attained a near collectible status of their own. I wonder what my modifications have done to it's monetary value? Likely lowered it by a considerable amount. No matter. I do not intend to part with it in this life and I have held onto it thru some pretty major financial setbacks.

Concerning hunting with it, I did so in Ohio's primitive season. You think your 2 bander gets some odd looks!:yikes: Once after coming down out of a public hunting area, (empty handed) there were a couple fellows in the parking lot. They were quite curious. To unload it for their inspection, I made a snap shot in the direction of a water jug on a bank about 60 yards away. Whether through luck or my intense practice prior to deer season (over 1000 .22 rds, 250+ Enfield rounds, misc assorted other), or maybe both, I clipped the top of the jug. The fellows were suitably impressed wowwing over its being a 'snap shot' too.:dancingbanana: For the record, I didn't attempt to repeat the performance for them.;)

This all happened some 20 years ago. The old rifle/musket has been moth balled for a good many years only recently having been pulled back out due to a discovery of a box full of reenacting blanks with a couple tins of caps (musket 'top hat' variety). I bought some cast Minie's from a fellow on my- call it "home forum."
But my hunting loads were 90 grains of 3f (yes, three) fffg black powder. Weren't many alternatives back then, only one come to think on it, and I never fooled with it. Bullet was a swaged .575 HP by "Buffalo bullets." I don't think these are mfg any more. I didn't need HP of course but that was the only offering in that caliber.
(FYI for any reader that may not know)
"Swaged" bullets are formed by forcing cold/solid lead into a mold under pressure. It guarantees complete filling and uniform balance and weight, bullet to bullet, whereas any cast may contain bubbles or faults unseen.

These swaged bullets did not have lube "rings" but rather a 'checkered' band around the base and were prelubed. A .575 bullet in the .577 bore was not problem loading for up to 3 rounds w/out wiping. But prior to hitting the woods, I fired 3 rounds wiping with salad oil between shots, hitting the woods after the third wipe and a dry patch wipe. I only used salad oil on hunting day and that to avoid chemical smell. No helping any scent of burned powder. First, clean bore shot was always eccentric to following shots.

I was able to hold a 4" circle at 100yds with this loading. Use of 3fg gave me no excess powder blowing out, a flatter arc which can be problematical w/in 100yds with muskets/rifle(d) muskets. The P/H handled this load w/out difficulty. I don't know that I'd trust a 3fg loading to an import.

Yes I did take a deer with it. Made a good shoulder shot on one at about 35-40 yds. It did about a quarter turn and collapsed. I simply reloaded and watched for a few moments to be sure it wasn't getting up again. It didn't. At the time, I had cardboard tubes from Dixie Gun Works that could hold the powder and be plugged with the bullet and be reused. Later I carried my own made Civil War style cartridges. I could make 3/4 rounds a minute with those.

I know this is long but thought a full detailing of my experience might be of some benefit to others. Health has kept me from the deer woods these many years, but a low stand built in the back forty and a stout son may let me hunt again. We'll see. I just had surgery so can't shoot at all right now.