Quoted: I don't usually drool over older style rifles but that is one hell of a sales pitch! Lucky for me, I'm much to poor to go out and do something rash... like buy one . Once again, I salute you and your fine taste. - BG

Thanks.

But there is no reason you can't have one just like it.  Just set a goal to save up the money.  It may take a while, but you can do it.

That's what I did.

Very nice gun! Shiloh's are QUALITY...but a bit out of my price range.

I have an Italian copy...it is very nice, and it looks good...heavy octagonal barrel, long range vernier sight, straight butt. Nice tight action...but still doesn't compare to a Shiloh I am sure...

I like the old stuff...I also have an original Model 1884 Trapdoor, and a H&R copy of an 1873 Model trapdoor carbine (have you seen what an original Custer era carbine goes for?). Its actually a very nice copy...and much better made than the current Italian copies. Plus the former owner put on a correct original carbine rear sight....

I also have a Martini-Enfield...not as fun as the original Martini-Henry in .577-450, but a lot easier and cheaper to shoot.

Nothing like clouds of black powder smoke and the boom of manly rounds going off!

Quoted: I like the little level on the front sight

Believe it or not, that device is not superfluous.

Almost every time that I get ready to shoot, I look at the level at the last moment and notice that the rifle is slightly tilted to one side or the other.

The last thing I do before pulling the trigger is to get it level.

It makes a difference.

Beautiful rifle!

Incredible rifle.  What a great thread!

Thanks for sharing.

- Go

Quoted: Beautiful rifle!

Thanks.

It shoots just like it looks.

C Sharps Highwall in .40-65 -




This one has a highly figured tiger stripe maple stock that doesn't show in this quick photo.

I'll be ordering a Hoke rear sight shortly.  The front sight is an MVA Sharps sight with level.

I've had a bug for a '74 and '75 Sharps and a Ballard for a while now.

BTW, I use a front sight level on my AR match rifle, especially at the 600 yard line; these rifles are similar to the BPCR's with tall sights.

I'll need to get me a front sight like that if I do get into shooting it more... cant can really mess up your windage.  At longer ranges, the rear sight is so high off of the tang, a little twist can really throw you off!

The one flaw with my rifle is that the barrel is just a hair past even on the top flat... like it was torqued in just a little further... the front sight leans a little, because the front notch is cut relative to the flat of the barrel (1/3 octagon), not the receiver.  Someday to make weight for Silhouette, I might cut a couple inches off of the barrel, and I'll have a smith true up the front sight notch with the receiver.  

Quoted: I'll need to get me a front sight like that if I do get into shooting it more... cant can really mess up your windage.  At longer ranges, the rear sight is so high off of the tang, a little twist can really throw you off!

I believe that you have hit it right on the nose.  The high rear sight would indeed require a non-canted rifle.  I had not thought of that.

The one flaw with my rifle is that the barrel is just a hair past even on the top flat... like it was torqued in just a little further... the front sight leans a little, because the front notch is cut relative to the flat of the barrel (1/3 octagon), not the receiver.  Someday to make weight for Silhouette, I might cut a couple inches off of the barrel, and I'll have a smith true up the front sight notch with the receiver.

Something like that will just drive me nuts!

They could have spent just a few minutes and got it right the first time.

Quoted: Incredible rifle.  What a great thread! Thanks for sharing. - Go

Thanks!

Who says that we never post anything interesting on GD?

Oh, and for those interested, I think Dixie Gun Works has some different Pedersoli models.  I believe I saw a few below $1000.  

Pedersolis are probably the best non-high end (not Shiloh or C. Sharps, Axtell or other high end rifle) reproductions.  Stay away from EMF/Pedretti.  They have had quality issues, but have been getting better of late.  

I love my Pedersoli.  The ONLY thing I disliked was the rear sight.  It was junk.  Just not very useful at all.  If you search the Shiloh boards for 'Heilman', you can find a guy named Ron Heilman that hand makes sights.  I have one of his, cost half what an MVA sight cost, and it's just as good.  I'm extremely happy with it.  

I have a Shiloh Sharps "Quigly" in .45-70 but with extra fine wood and so forth. Sure is fun. very nice example O_P.

Although I must admit,....if I was going to spring for a Shiloh...I would do it all the way and go with the .45-110!

Boy I bet that one would roar!

Good pics and info.

Quoted: Although I must admit,....if I was going to spring for a Shiloh...I would do it all the way and go with the .45-110! Boy I bet that one would roar!

It kills on one end and wounds on the other.

DROOLING

Hope to see some Box-of-Truth action from that mighty fine rifle of yours too.

Quoted: Quoted: Although I must admit,....if I was going to spring for a Shiloh...I would do it all the way and go with the .45-110! Boy I bet that one would roar! It kills on one end and wounds on the other.

Have you ever fired a .45-110? If so how does it compare to the .45-70?

I realize you won't be shooting a lot of rounds with the .45-100...but man, that is a big cartridge!

Awe-Freaking-Some.  I've always wanted a Shiloh Sharps (Cavalry Carbine for me, please) but yours is just beautiful.  You should be very proud and I -- am VERY envious.  As soon as I finsh pimping up my current AR, then build a 6.8, then buy the new Browning .308 lever action, then buy me a new Colt .45, then...I'm just going to HAVE to get me one of those. <wonder how long that'll take me).

Nederland, huh?  Almost married a girl from there.  Did y'all escape most of Rita?

Quoted: DROOLING Hope to see some Box-of-Truth action from that mighty fine rifle of yours too.

As you know, I've used it before.

www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot4.htm

I'll use it again.

1874 Long Range Express in .45-70 is on my list of "get next rifles"

Quoted: Although I must admit,....if I was going to spring for a Shiloh...I would do it all the way and go with the .45-110! Boy I bet that one would roar!

Unless you're gonna load black powder, don't bother getting anything larger than .45-70.  You'll end up with too much room in the case to fill with smokeless.  You'll blow up the rifle or rip off your shoulder before you get anywhere close!

Best to do even if you DO want to shoot black powder is to start with .45-70, get some experience with it, then have the chamber reamed to a larger cartridge size.

Quoted: Quoted: I like the little level on the front sight Believe it or not, that device is not superfluous. Almost every time that I get ready to shoot, I look at the level at the last moment and notice that the rifle is slightly tilted to one side or the other. The last thing I do before pulling the trigger is to get it level. It makes a difference.

Oh, I'm sure it does.  Wasn't making fun of it, I've just never seen anything like it, thought it was cool.

Quoted: Quoted: I like the little level on the front sight Believe it or not, that device is not superfluous. Almost every time that I get ready to shoot, I look at the level at the last moment and notice that the rifle is slightly tilted to one side or the other. The last thing I do before pulling the trigger is to get it level. It makes a difference.

Well clearly what you need to do is make one for the AR-15, paint it black, and call it "tactical". When it sells like hotcakes you can afford to buy the engraved model with gold embelishment.

Beautiful rifle OP

Here is something of interest .......45-70 at 2 miles (Sandyhook tests of 1879)

THE SHOOTER at the heavy bench rest squinted as he aligned his .45-70 Allin-Springfield Model 1873 Army rifle on the distant target. The rifle fore-stock and barrel was cradled in a rest; the butt was supported by his shoulder. The rear sight was flipped up to its full height, so with no stock support for his head, the rifle tester from Springfield Armory worked carefully to align high rear and low muzzle sight on the speck that was the target - a surveyed 2,500 yards distant.

Holding his breath, he squeezed the 7-pound trigger. The rifle fired, and some 15 seconds later, signals from the target indicated that his shot had struck well inside the 6-foot diameter bullseye on a target well over a mile away!

The Report of the Secretary of War, 1880, Volume III, under the chapter titled, "Extreme Ranges of Military Small Arms," had this to say:

"The firing was done by Mr. R.T Hare of Springfield Armory who has the enviable distinction, so far as is known, of being the only person in the world who has hit the 'Bull's-Eye' six feet in diameter at 2,500 yards with three different rifles, and who has ever fired at and hit so small a target as that described in this report at 3,200 yards.

In comparison with this, all other so-called 'long range firing' pales into insignificance. The gun was held under the arm, a muzzle rest only being used."

The chapter on long range firing begins with a report from the Armory at Springfield, Massachusetts, May 9, 1879. It records the results of long range tests of U.S. Army Model 1873 .45-caliber rifles using 405 and 500-grain lead bullets, including variations in muzzle velocity and penetration of lead bullets through one-inch target boards and into sand. These tests were made at the request of the Chief of Ordnance. His interest had been aroused by reports of long range infantry fire, up to 1½ miles, during the1877-78 Turko-Russian War.

The line age of the "trapdoor" rifles used in the tests is apparent from the separate lock plate, the massive side hammer, the milling out of a portion of barrel and fitting a breechblock hinged at the front - all clear indications that the rifles were merely breech-loading variations of the traditional muzzle-loading infantry-man's rifle. The Allin conversion of the 1861 and 1863 models Springfield muzzle-loaders came out first in .58 caliber rimfire. Later refinements resulted in the .50-70 rimmed centerfire for the 1866 model. The .45-70 cartridge was first introduced with the Model 1873 single shot Springfield. Several model changes were made from 1873 through 1889, relatively minor differences being the type of sights, modified and improved breech-blocks and changes in stock furniture.

The first long range tests were made at ranges of up to 1,500 yards on the Springfield Armory test range at Long Meadow, Massachusetts. These tests compared the long distance shooting and penetration performance of the .45 caliber trapdoor Springfield and the .45 caliber Martini-Henry rifles.

The Springfield rifle weighed about 9.6 pounds, had a rifle barrel 33 inches long with a bore diameter of .450-inch, three grooves and a right hand twist and groove depth of .005-inch. It fired the then standard Service round consisting of the 405-grain bullet in the rimmed straight case 2.1 inches long with 70 grains of black powder giving a muzzle velocity (MV) of 1,350 feet-per-second (fps). With the same weight of bullet and a charge of 85 grains of powder, the MV was 1,480 fps.

The British Army .450-577 Martini-Henry lever-operated, drop-block action was far stronger than the Allin trapdoor breech. The Martini-Henry weighed about 9½ pounds, had a barrel 33 inches long with a right-hand twist, seven groove bore. The bore diameter was .450, and the groove diameter was .463. The .450-577 Martini-Henry cartridge was a muscular creation. It was based upon a sharply necked-down and lengthened .577-inch Snider case, loaded with a 480-grain lead bullet of .445 diameter, backed by 85 grains of black powder for a muzzle velocity of 1,253 fps.

The following table gives the angles of elevation for these loads from the actual test firings at 1,000 and 1,500 yards. Accuracy firings of the rifles were made at 300, 500 and 1,000 yards.

SPRINGFIELD and MARTINI-HENRY ANGLES OF ELEVATION

1,000 yards 1,500 yards .45-85-405 Springfield Long Range 2d 40' 53" 4d 35' 34" .45-70-405 Springfield Service 3d 6' 37" 5d 20' 4" .45-85-480 Martini-Henry 3d 18' 36" 5d 41' 24"

VERTICAL and HORIZONTAL SHOT DISPERSION AT 1,000 YARDS

Mean Mean Mean Horizontal Vertical Radius Springfield 9.23" 16.8" 19.1" Martini-Henry 10.9" 14.55" 18.2"

Though there is no direct relationship between mean radius and group size figures, a mean radius of 18 to 19 inches would probably translate into a group size of between 55 and 70 inches. Old Ordnance records show that when fired from a machine rest the .45 Springfield was expected to group all of its bullets inside a 4-inch circle at 100 yards, in a 11-inch bull's-eye at 300 yards, and inside a 27-inch circle at 500 yards.

At 1,000 and 1,500 yards, as expected, the mean vertical figures are considerably larger than the mean horizontal. (See the above table.) This is the result of variations in muzzle velocity, which gives this dispersion at long range, and also the effect of the high trajectory of these rifle bullets since the target is perpendicular to the ground, while the bullet is descending at an angle.

The report of October 15, 1879, covers long range firing at Sandy Hook, New Jersey. This was done along the beach to make the location of the bullet strike easier to find. Also, the long beaches allowed shooting back to 3,200 and even 3,500 yards.

The rifles tested included a special "long range" Springfield chambered for a 2.4-inch shell instead of the standard 2.1-inch case. The 2.4-inch case held 80 grains of black powder behind the new prototype 500-grain lead bullet. The other loads tested were the standard .45-70-405 Army load in the issue M-1873 Springfield, and the .45-85-480 load in the British Martini-Henry rifle.

The report states that a leaf to the rear sight several inches long was prepared in order to obtain the necessary elevation. A combination of the V-notch slide of the regular issue sight and a screw at the bottom of the leaf afforded means of correcting for wind and drift.

The target, which had been 12 feet by 12 feet square at 1,500 yards, was changed to one 44 feet long by 22 feet high. The extended wings had a height of 16 feet.

Since one of the test's objectives was to gauge bullet penetration, the huge target consisted of three 1-inch thick boards, separated by 1-inch cleats. The target was supported on 6-inch spruce posts and was constructed partly of spruce and partly pine, since this was the wood at hand.

In the tests at 2,500 yards, the target was hit five times in seventy rounds with the .45-70-405 service load, only once with the Martini-Henry in eighty rounds, and four times with the long range Springfield in thirty shots.

When the Springfield long range cartridge was fired, the 500-grain blunt nosed lead bullets propelled by 80 grains of black powder in the 2.4-inch cases at about 1,375 fps penetrated right through the three inches of wooden target and buried themselves in the sand. One 500-grain slug pierced three inches of target and buried itself in a supporting six-inch post, giving a total penetration of a measured 5.25 inches. The Service 405-grain bullet gave a penetration of just 1.12 inches, and the Martini-Henry 480-grain bullet, 2.50 inches.

Angles of rifle elevation were: Springfield service .45-70-405 - 17°08'16"; Springfield long range .45-80-500 - l0°38'21"; and Martini-Henry .45-85-480 - 13°20'18".

The angle made by the shot holes with the face of the target appeared to be about 40 degrees for the service Springfield, 45 degrees for the Martini-Henry, and 50 degrees for the long range Springfield. This angle is taken from the vertical and thus the lower angular reading indicates the higher angle of descent. Various kinds of bullets were dug out of the sand within 45 feet of the target and directly behind it. This shows the great angle of trajectory at this range and how extremely difficult it was for Mr. R.T. Hare to hit a 2,500-yard target the size of the one used.

The target 22 feet high by 44 feet long was then placed at 3,200 yards from the firer. The range chosen was fortunate in that it was found to be the extreme for the Martini-Henry. When the firer was instructed to increase his elevation, the range decreased. On decreasing the elevation, the range increased to a certain point.

The majority of the Martini .45-85-480 balls fell from 50 to 100 yards short, while the others did not go more than 25 yards beyond. More than 300 Martini-Henry cartridges were fired, but the target was not hit.

The long range Springfield's 500-grain bullets hit the target four times - twice where it was one board thick, and twice where it was two boards thick. In each case the heavy blunt nosed lead bullet punched through the wood planks and buried itself several inches into the sand.

At this extreme surveyed range, the angle of fall of the Martini 480-grain lead bullets was about 65 degrees to 70 degrees judging from the holes in the moist sand. Bullets were found in the sand behind the 22-foot-high target at a distance of only 35 feet. It was evident that they struck the sand point on, as the lead noses were always found rough.

In the case of the long range Springfield, the angle of the shot hole with the face of the target was about 30 degrees and the heavy bullet in punching through two one-inch boards actually penetrated a total of 2.5 inches. Those lead slugs that struck in the sand generally penetrated to a depth of 8 to 10 inches, sometimes more.

In this respect the Armory's 500-grain balls surpassed the Martini's 480-grain balls, which did not penetrate more than 6 inches into sand. In trying to get the correct 3,200-yard elevation, the long range bullets were thrown over 300 yards beyond the target. These were then dug out of the beach and all were found to have struck point on.

For the .45-80-500 2.4-inch case Springfield long range rifle at a MV of about 1,375 fps, the angle of elevation was 20°51'37". For the .45-85-480 Martini-Henry at 1,253 fps MV, the angle of elevation was 26°5l'.

The report of November 13, 1879, lists the results of firing tests made at 3,500 yards distance with two long range Springfields. One had a rifle barrel with a l-in-18 rifling twist, the other .45-80-500 had a 19 5/8-inch twist. Two different loads were used: .45-70-500, and .45-80-500. The Martini-Henry .45-85-480 and the service .45-70-405 Springfields were again tested against a Sharps-Borchardt using the same loads as in the long range M-1873 Allin-Springfields. After firing many rounds, the service Springfield and Martini-Henry rounds failed to reach the target at 3,500 yards.

In these firing experiments, two telephones provided with Blake transmitters were used for timing the bullet's flight. One was placed within a few feet of the rifle, to receive and transmit the sound of the shot. The other Blake unit was nearly two miles downrange in the shelterproof, which was located about 30 feet in front of the right edge of the target. At the instant the sound of the discharge was heard over the telephone, a watch ticking fourth-seconds was started. At the sound of the bullet striking target or sand, it was stopped. Average time of flight for the .45-70-500-grain load was 21.2 seconds, With the more powerful .45-80-500-grain cartridge the time-of-flight was 20.8 seconds.

For 3,500 yards distance, angles of elevation ran from 27 degrees to 29 degrees. This varied drastically from day to day due to the effects of head and tail winds. The quicker-twist rifles required less elevation than the others at the same range. The greatest distance obtained with the .45-caliber long range, 1-in-18 twist Springfield rifle was 3,680 yards. Angle of elevation didn't exceed 32 degrees on a day when an angle of about 25 degrees placed bullets all around the target at 3,500 yards range.

While these tests may be considered mere oddities today, they proved extremely useful at the time. The fact that the 500-grain bullet penetrated through the three-plank target and eight inches into sand meant that it could kill or wound enemy troops at extreme distances, even if they were partially protected and that was significant military information in a period when it was quite usual for large masses of troops to form up within view of defenders. Although no average infantryman could be expected to equal Mr. Hare's accuracy, a large number of defenders shooting from barricade rests and given the proper sight adjustments for the range could severely harass companies and larger bodies of enemy troops at previously unheard-of ranges. It may have been these tests, and this line of thinking, that caused military theoreticians to employ machine guns for indirect, high trajectory fire in the same manner as artillery during the earlier stages of World War I.

Since the tests showed that the 405-grain service bullet failed to perform as well as the 500-grain, and that the 500-grain bullet showed relatively little difference when propelled by either 70 or 80 grains of black powder, the .45-70-500 load in the service 2.1-inch case was adopted as standard for rifles. Thus those little-remembered Sandy Hook tests of 1879 had a lasting impact on firearms history without them, the gun companies might have recently resurrected the .45-80.

My .45-70, it may not be a rifle but it's just as fun to shoot.

Cool thread.

Tagged to see what obscure corner it gets moved to.

Quoted: Have you ever fired a .45-110? If so how does it compare to the .45-70? I realize you won't be shooting a lot of rounds with the .45-100...but man, that is a big cartridge!

No, I have not.  

But I have a friend that has one and he assures me that you can carry all the rounds that are fun to shoot, in your shirt pocket.

As mentioned earlier, the extra length case is only useful with black powder.  Smokeless powder will not fill a 110 grain case without over-pressure loads.

Interestingly, my barrel is marked, ".45 Calibre, 2 1/10th", which is the length of the case in inches. That was the original designation of this round.  Using black powder, you can just fill it up to the base of the bullet and slightly compress the powder.

Shiloh Sharps catalog expressly warns that the .45-110 will be unpleasent to shoot in matches and most shooters find it difficult to shoot throughout a whole match.

Quoted: ... Shiloh Sharps catalog expressly warns that the .45-110 will be unpleasent to shoot in matches and most shooters find it difficult to shoot throughout a whole match.

Same thing for the .45-90, although a few hardy souls shoot silhouette with this cartridge.  A 40 round match, plus sighters, takes its toll, so everyone is looking for just enough gun to do the job well without pounding the snot out of their shoulders.  Hence the popularity of the .45-70.  The .45-90 and .45-110 are pretty much reserved for hunting and long range matches by most folks with several guns.

A friend sends me an IM and asks:

Tell me what 'gas checked' means and what it does?

A gas check is a small copper cup, the diameter of the base of a cast bullet, that is placed on the base of a lead bullet and crimped into place.  This is done as you size the bullet and put lube in the groves.  I use a Lyman Sizer-Lubricator to do both tasks.

Some "leading" from cast rifle bullets can be due to melting of the lead on the base of the bullet caused by the hot gases of the burning powder.  This is especially true if "hot" loads are shot.

The gas check protects the base of the bullet from the hot gases and helps prevent leading.

Also, many believe that the base of any bullet is very important to accuracy and the gas check also helps insure an exact and precise base on every bullet.

Do they work?  

Seems like it to me.  I never have problems with leading with any gas checked bullet.

I also load gas checked bullets on my .357 magnum pistols and my .44 Magnum pistols.  They work great there as well.

Bullet casting is becoming a lost art.  I enjoy casting the bullets almost as much as shooting them.  It gives you a real sense of accomplishment when you shoot a really tight group and know that you made the bullets that did the deed.

Thanks buddy!

Quoted: Quoted: DROOLING Hope to see some Box-of-Truth action from that mighty fine rifle of yours too. As you know, I've used it before. www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot4.htm I'll use it again.

Darn, I knew you used a .45-70 in some of your tests but didn't look in detail at the rifle.

Wow. That is a beauty.

Quoted: Thanks buddy!

No problemo.

Once, long ago, somebody had to explain it to me.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: DROOLING Hope to see some Box-of-Truth action from that mighty fine rifle of yours too. As you know, I've used it before. www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot4.htm I'll use it again. Darn, I knew you used a .45-70 in some of your tests but didn't look in detail at the rifle.

It's all in the details.

So how do the Pedersolli rifles compare to the Shiloh?

Are the Pedersollis even close to them in terms of fit and finish and of course accuracy?

Quoted: So how do the Pedersolli rifles compare to the Shiloh? Are the Pedersollis even close to them in terms of fit and finish and of course accuracy?

I will give my opinion on the issue......

As always, you get what you pay for.

The Pedersolli rifles are not as costly.  They are fine rifles, but they are not Shiloh Sharps rifles.

No one should be ashamed of owning a less expensive rifle.  They are great shooters and are worth what they cost.

But it is like comparing apples and oranges.  It is not fair to compare a $800 rifle and a $3,000 rifle.

I have a Pedersoli Sharps. Truly a beautiful rifle. I have seen a Shiloh Sharps and they have a warmth the Pedersoli doesn't have. It's tough to describe, the Pedersoli is like a beautiful tool, but the Shiloh is a functional work of art.

Quoted: Cool thread. Tagged to see what obscure corner it gets moved to.

From my understanding, the secret is not to ask any questions.

If I asked a question about reloading, for instance, it would be  moved to the Reloading Forum, if there is such a forum.

But I have asked no questions.

I have just posted a story about something.

I hope I understand the rules.

Quoted: I have a Pedersoli Sharps. Truly a beautiful rifle. I have seen a Shiloh Sharps and they have a warmth the Pedersoli doesn't have. It's tough to describe, the Pedersoli is like a beautiful tool, but the Shiloh is a functional work of art.

I have admired the Pedersoli rifles at the SHOT Show.  They are fine rifles.  I wouldn't mind owning one.

I bet they shoot better than me.

Quoted: Quoted: DROOLING Hope to see some Box-of-Truth action from that mighty fine rifle of yours too. As you know, I've used it before. www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot4.htm I'll use it again.

Old_Painless Buffalo-of-Truth?

Damn it, now my Marlin 1895 seems so... inadequate.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: DROOLING Hope to see some Box-of-Truth action from that mighty fine rifle of yours too. As you know, I've used it before. www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot4.htm I'll use it again. Old_Painless Buffalo-of-Truth?

I understand that this rifle will make two holes in a buffalo.....one going in, and one going out.

Damn it, now my Marlin 1895 seems so... inadequate.

I'd love to have a 1895 Marlin.  I may look this weekend at the gun show.

Quoted: Quoted: I have a Pedersoli Sharps. Truly a beautiful rifle. I have seen a Shiloh Sharps and they have a warmth the Pedersoli doesn't have. It's tough to describe, the Pedersoli is like a beautiful tool, but the Shiloh is a functional work of art. I have admired the Pedersoli rifles at the SHOT Show.  They are fine rifles.  I wouldn't mind owning one. I bet they shoot better than me.

It shoots better than I can hold. I have a vernier tang rear sight and a spirit level front with the changeable inserts .I've had 1 inch groups at 100 yards with 405 grain bullets with BP and home made lube,  ATF and beeswax. Way too messy of a lube. I need to setup my reloading equipment and work up some loads for 500 grain bullets I have.

When I first bought it I worked up a few loads with 405 grain bullets and smokeless powder, trying to get max velocity with safe pressures for the rifle. That load kicked my butt. Eyes watered, hat flew off, rifle pointed up about 40-45 degrees. I'm now satisfied with BP level loads which are fun to shoot.

Thats probally the most sweetest rifle made, It has history, Guts, Looks and Class........
That rifle deserves a name like you would give a Battleship or a Bomber from WWII.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I have a Pedersoli Sharps. Truly a beautiful rifle. I have seen a Shiloh Sharps and they have a warmth the Pedersoli doesn't have. It's tough to describe, the Pedersoli is like a beautiful tool, but the Shiloh is a functional work of art. I have admired the Pedersoli rifles at the SHOT Show.  They are fine rifles.  I wouldn't mind owning one. I bet they shoot better than me. It shoots better than I can hold. I have a vernier tang rear sight and a spirit level front with the changeable inserts .I've had 1 inch groups at 100 yards with 405 grain bullets with BP and home made lube,  ATF and beeswax. Way too messy of a lube. I need to setup my reloading equipment and work up some loads for 500 grain bullets I have. When I first bought it I worked up a few loads with 405 grain bullets and smokeless powder, trying to get max velocity with safe pressures for the rifle. That load kicked my butt. Eyes watered, hat flew off, rifle pointed up about 40-45 degrees. I'm now satisfied with BP level loads which are fun to shoot.

I have bought 405 grain cast bullets at the gun show.  I could never get them to shoot well for me.

I know some folks can make them work, but I have had better luck with the 500 grain variety.

Kicks a little harder, but shoots a little straighter.

Quoted: Thats probally the most sweetest rifle made, It has history, Guts, Looks and Class........ That rifle deserves a name like you would give a Battleship or a Bomber from WWII.

It's got one.

The Shiloh Sharps .45-70 Long Range Express.

Quoted: I have bought 405 grain cast bullets at the gun show.  I could never get them to shoot well for me. I know some folks can make them work, but I have had better luck with the 500 grain variety. Kicks a little harder, but shoots a little straighter.

I bought the 405 grain bulets because that's all I could get locally without modern lube. Actually, they were moly lubed, but the grease grooves were clear. I think they were from mold 457193, don't know the manufacturer. From the BOT webpage it says 515 grain bullet at 1500 fps, what kind of recoil does it have? The 405 grain nightmare I tried should have been about 1900 FPS out of an 11.5 lb. gun. Load was not chrono'd

Quoted: Quoted: I have bought 405 grain cast bullets at the gun show.  I could never get them to shoot well for me. I know some folks can make them work, but I have had better luck with the 500 grain variety. Kicks a little harder, but shoots a little straighter. I bought the 405 grain bulets because that's all I could get locally without modern lube. Actually, they were moly lubed, but the grease grooves were clear. I think they were from mold 457193, don't know the manufacturer. From the BOT webpage it says 515 grain bullet at 1500 fps, what kind of recoil does it have? The 405 grain nightmare I tried should have been about 1900 FPS out of an 11.5 lb. gun. Load was not chrono'd

I believe that my load with the 510 grain bullet (between 510 and 515 grains, depending on casting mixture) will do about 1450 to 1500 fps, according to the manuals.  The 13 pound rifle will help dampen the recoil.

With this round (.45-70) maximum velocity is not the goal.  If we wanted that, we would shoot a .458 Magnum.

I want consistancy and accuracy.  My load gives me that.

I believe that the bearing surface of the 510 grain bullet, which is greater than the 405 grain bullet,  is important for accuracy.

It works for me.

Beautiful rifle OP. You're obviously a man of refined taste!

You might like this link  OP   Black Powder Rifles and BPCR

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I have bought 405 grain cast bullets at the gun show.  I could never get them to shoot well for me. I know some folks can make them work, but I have had better luck with the 500 grain variety. Kicks a little harder, but shoots a little straighter. I bought the 405 grain bulets because that's all I could get locally without modern lube. Actually, they were moly lubed, but the grease grooves were clear. I think they were from mold 457193, don't know the manufacturer. From the BOT webpage it says 515 grain bullet at 1500 fps, what kind of recoil does it have? The 405 grain nightmare I tried should have been about 1900 FPS out of an 11.5 lb. gun. Load was not chrono'd I believe that my load with the 510 grain bullet (between 510 and 515 grains, depending on casting mixture) will do about 1450 to 1500 fps, according to the manuals.  The 13 pound rifle will help dampen the recoil. With this round (.45-70) maximum velocity is not the goal.  If we wanted that, we would shoot a .458 Magnum. I want consistancy and accuracy.  My load gives me that. I believe that the bearing surface of the 510 grain bullet, which is greater than the 405 grain bullet,  is important for accuracy. It works for me.

The max velocity attempt was a wild hair when i first started loading for it, something I had to try and then never do again. The beauty of these rifles is the number of variables you can tinker with. I probably tried a dozen different recipes for home-made lube, and have reloaded 300 grain and 405 grain bullets. Next are the 500 grain+. I'd like to try paperpatched bullets at some point also.

Many years ago, I read an article by a guy who was deer hunting with his Sharps using 500+ grain bullets. A big buck stopped, hiding his vitals behind a pine tree. Deer wouldn't move and hunter got impatient so he shot through the tree. Bullet also went through the deer and was not recovered.

I love the big old cartridges