Follow Up To Battlefield Bullet Bonanza

Valley Ranger · Oct 30, 2011

This is a follow up to my post yesterday. http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,431046.0.html I was hoping someone might be able to give me some detailed ID on these two bullets. The large one on the right appears to be an Enfield. It measured between .56 and .57 caliber and is about 1.16 inches long, hollow base. The other one appears to have 2 rings, measures just a bit over .55 caliber and is a little over .80 inches long and is solid base. Any help would be appreciated.

romeo-1 · Oct 30, 2011

The bigger one looks like an Enfield...anything in the base? Number or letter?

Valley Ranger · Oct 30, 2011

romeo-1 said:
The bigger one looks like an Enfield...anything in the base? Number or letter?

No, nothing.

cumberlandgray · Oct 30, 2011

I think the one on the left is a fired Spencer bullet. The one on the right...

...looks like an Enfield.
Great finds!

Old Stonewall said:
This is a follow up to my post yesterday. http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,431046.0.html I was hoping someone might be able to give me some detailed ID on these two bullets. The large one on the right appears to be an Enfield. It measured between .56 and .57 caliber and is about 1.16 inches long, hollow base. The other one appears to have 2 rings, measures just a bit over .55 caliber and is a little over .80 inches long and is solid base. Any help would be appreciated.

TheCannonballGuy · Oct 30, 2011

Old Stonewall wrote:
> I was hoping someone might be able to give me some detailed ID on these two bullets.
> The large one on the right appears to be an Enfield. It measured between .56 and .57 caliber
> and is about 1.16 inches long, hollow base.

You didn't tell us the shape of the cavity ("plug" type, or cone, or cone-with-teat). Without that information I cannot give you a 100%-certain ID. It looks like bullet #221 in the McKee-&-Mason book, which is 1.18-inches long. That bullet has a "plug" cavity.

> The other one appears to have 2 rings, measures just a bit over .55 caliber and is a
> little over .80 inches long and is solid base.

It's a close call, between being a Burnside or a Spencer. To me, it appears to be a US-made Burnside .54 which has been fired. The reason your fired bullet measures about .55 is the raised ridges made by the gunbarrel's rifling "add onto" the bullet's original (unfired) diameter. You can check the Burnside ID by counting your fired bullet's rifling grooves. The Burnside Carbine had 5-groove rifling. The Spencer had 6-groove rifling.

Valley Ranger · Oct 30, 2011

TheCannonballGuy said:
Old Stonewall wrote:
> I was hoping someone might be able to give me some detailed ID on these two bullets.
> The large one on the right appears to be an Enfield. It measured between .56 and .57 caliber
> and is about 1.16 inches long, hollow base.

You didn't tell us the shape of the cavity ("plug" type, or cone, or cone-with-teat). Without that information I cannot give you a 100%-certain ID. It looks like bullet #221 in the McKee-&-Mason book, which is 1.18-inches long. That bullet has a "plug" cavity.

> The other one appears to have 2 rings, measures just a bit over .55 caliber and is a
> little over .80 inches long and is solid base.

It's a close call, between being a Burnside or a Spencer. To me, it appears to be a US-made Burnside .54 which has been fired. The reason your fired bullet measures about .55 is the raised ridges made by the gunbarrel's rifling "add onto" the bullet's original (unfired) diameter. You can check the Burnside ID by counting your fired bullet's rifling grooves. The Burnside Carbine had 5-groove rifling. The Spencer had 6-groove rifling.

Thanks Cannonball. The Enfield's base is cone shaped, no teat. The other bullet appears to have 5 grooves.

TheCannonballGuy · Oct 30, 2011

You're welcome. Thank you for the info that your Enfield's cavity is a simple cone, not a cone-with-teat or other cavity-variation.. With that info, I'm able to confirm for you that it is indeed a CS-made Enfield minie, not a British-made one. At 1.16-inches long, we call it a Confederate "Long-model" Enfield minie. Unfortunately, it is not pictured in the McKee-&-Mason book on civil war bullets.

The five-groove rifling on your other bullet confirms that it is a fired Burnside, as I suspected.

VOL1266-X · Oct 30, 2011

Two nice ones O.S. WTG on the lead. CB Guy really knows his lead. Enfields are getting harder to recover each year. HH, Quindy.

Valley Ranger · Oct 30, 2011

TheCannonballGuy said:
You're welcome. Thank you for the info that your Enfield's cavity is a simple cone, not a cone-with-teat or other cavity-variation.. With that info, I'm able to confirm for you that it is indeed a CS-made Enfield minie, not a British-made one. At 1.16-inches long, we call it a Confederate "Long-model" Enfield minie. Unfortunately, it is not pictured in the McKee-&-Mason book on civil war bullets.

The five-groove rifling on your other bullet confirms that it is a fired Burnside, as I suspected.

Thanks again Cannonball. I really appreciate your time and expertise. For both ID purposes and learning the history of Civil War era bullets, could you recommend some books?

Valley Ranger · Oct 30, 2011

VOL1266-X said:
Two nice ones O.S. WTG on the lead. CB Guy really knows his lead. Enfields are getting harder to recover each year. HH, Quindy.

Thanks Quindy.

ynpto804 · Oct 30, 2011

Man, Its a shame you are not going to be able to dig that spot again. That spot should produce some good buttons.

Valley Ranger · Oct 30, 2011

ynpto804 said:
Man, Its a shame you are not going to be able to dig that spot again. That spot should produce some good buttons.

I don't know for sure. There's a good chance, just not certain. Yes, I'm a bit surprised I didn't find more brass, though I was moving pretty fast to cover as much ground as possible.