Parker Hale 1858 Enfield -- Tips for accuracy

In November 2011 I purchased a like-new 1858 Enfield made by Parker Hale, probably in the 1980s. Serial number 77XX. Parker Hale made these Enfields from 1972 to 1990.
Haven't shot it much, because beginning in February 2012 we experienced drought conditions in the northwestern Utah desert. Shooting was unsafe through December 2012, for fear of starting a range fire. At least 30 range fires were attributed to shooters in 2012.
But what little I've fired it, it's been outstandingly accurate.
This rifle, like the originals (upon which it was cloned by Parker Hale), has the progressive depth rifling and 1:48 twist. Other rifles may have the 1:48 twist, but not the progressive depth rifling.
The rifling is deeper at the breech, then "chokes down" as it nears the muzzle. A hollow-based Minie' bullet, upon firing, flares its skirt out to engage the rifling. As the bullet moves down the bore, it encounters progressively tighter rifling to grip the bullet firmly.
This progressive depth rifling, heavy barrel and relatively fast twist (the longer 1853 Enfield has 1:72 twist) accounts for the 1858's accuracy, especially at long range.
Today, British shooters compete with Enfields out to 600-800 yards, shooting at targets 6X8 feet. Most winners will have placed their shots within an 18-24-inch circle at these ranges. Pretty good for a muzzleloading rifle and iron sights of authentic military design (no modern iron sights allowed).
My most accurate load, which I've fired out to 100 yards, is detailed below. At 100 yards, this load will put five bullets into a 2” circle.

Lyman 575213PH bullet -- This bullet weighs 566 grains when cast of pure lead. It has a shallow hollowbase, to resist deformation of the skirt in the progressive depth rifling. This increases the weight over the Lyman standard 5752123 bullet, with a deeper hollowbase. The PH suffix means that this bullet is designed expressly for the Parker Hale and original Enfields with progressive depth rifling.
Bullet diameter is .575 or 576 inch.
If you cannot find the 575213PH, use the 575213 or the 575213OS (Old Style, patterned after Civil War bullets). All three moulds are still sold by Lyman, if you wish to cast your own.

Bullet lubricant -- I use a homebrew lubricant based upon a 19th century factory recipe for black powder cartridges: 1 part canning paraffin, 1 part mutton tallow and 1/2 part beeswax. All measurements by weight, not volume. I've been singing the praises of this recipe -- with these exact ingredients -- for years.
I posted it so much that my tweaked recipe was dubbed, "Gatofeo No. 1 Lubricant" by others -- and so it's known today. You have to make your own, it's not sold commercially.
Good substitutes for it are Ol' Zip Patch Grease (sold by Dixie Gun Works), SPG or Lyman Black Powder Gold. The original British military lubricant for the Enfield was about 80% tallow, 20% beeswax. I believe these ratios were measured by weight.
Melt enough lubricant in a shallow can (tuna, pet food, etc.) at low heat to dip bullets. Gently grab the bullet's nose with needle-nosed pliers and dip quickly into the melted lubricant.
If you allow the bullet to linger too long, it will heat up to the lubricant's temperature and most of the lubricant will run off when removing. A 1-second plunge is about right.
I don't worry about having a little too much lubricant on the bullet, it will be removed as you thumb the bullet into the muzzle. The excess lubricant at the muzzle can be added to the nose of the next bullet before ramming; a little extra lubricant won’t hurt.
Some folks use Crisco, and fill the bullet's hollow base, but the long-range Enfield shooters decry this practice. They say accuracy is poorer if the hollow base is filled with lubricant. These guys have a wealth of experience, so I'm inclined to believe them.

Goex FFFG black powder -- The standard British service load used 2-1/2 drams (68.3 grains) of fine-grained powder with a 450-500 gr. Minie' bullet. Autopsy of original British paper cartridges has revealed the use of finer-grained powder than was used in American paper cartridges.
British powder equaled today's FFFG granulation. Vintage American cartridges were loaded with FFG-equivalent granulation.
My limited experience, and from what I have gleaned from the internet, indicates that the Enfields are more accurate with FFFG granulation powder, and create less fouling than with FFG.

Powder charge -- Under the 566 Lyman bullet, I use the British military standard load of 2-1/2 drams (68.3 grains). I have an antique powder measure that throws 2-1/2 drams, but you can make a measure to throw 68 to 70 grains of FFFG.
There's the rub: many powder measures are made to throw X-amount of coarser-grained FFG powder. Check your measure against a powder scale, using FFFG powder.

Musket caps -- I use RWS Dynamit Nobel No. 1081 musket caps for the above load, when I'm striving for high accuracy. For plinking, I save the sometimes-hard-to-find RWS caps and use Speer musket caps instead.
The RWS caps are more powerful than the CCI caps. I've proven this to my satisfaction with a simple test: pointing the muzzle at a snow patch 12 inches away, and firing the unloaded rifle with nothing but a cap.
The noise is greater with RWS, and the divot punched out of the snow is wider and deeper by a couple of inches than with CCI caps. Sometimes, you don't need high-falutin' scientific instruments to prove a hypothesis.
Galileo dropped cannonballs from the Tower of Pisa to prove his theories about gravity. The "Gatofeo Snow Divot Determination" works.
I don't find a difference in accuracy between using the RWS or CCI caps, but the stronger RWS cap makes me more confident. The Enfield's design requires the flame to make a 90-degree turn to reach the powder charge, so I'll take every advantage.

Seating the Minie' bullet -- Because the Enfield's muzzle is tighter than the rest of the bore, the bullet is medium-tight fit in the muzzle. Past the muzzle, the bullet is easily rammed.
But don't overdo the ramming! Medium pressure upon the ramrod is best.
The Enfield's ramrod stops only a few inches out of the muzzle when the Minie' is seated.
Some folks bang the ramrod a couple of times hard on the bullet, believing that this flares the bullet out and prevents it from moving forward.
This may be useful for combat, especially if your rifle will be carried and jostled muzzle-down in a rifle scabbard on a horse, but it plays hobs with the bullet's accuracy because it may deform the bullet's nose.

Ramrod notes -- The steel ramrod causes wear on the muzzle, affecting accuracy. Original Enfields, or Parker Hales used a great deal, exhibit this wear. Any rifled barrel's muzzle is a critical section, because it's the area last encountered by the bullet.
I purchased a Musket Cleaning Rod from Winchester Sutler for $17.50 at http://winchestersutler.com/ShotLoad.html.
Made of aluminum to avoid wear, it has a bushing that fits in the bore to keep the rod from touching the bore. Threaded for a shotgun brush, it has a built-in cleaning jag. A 20-gauge shotgun bronze brush works beautifully.
It's one-piece, so it's a bit cumbersome to carry but worth the effort.
This ramrod/cleaning rod is very well made and a bargain at less than $20.
Read the entire page of Winchester Sutler. It's a good education on using your rifle.

Bullet notes -- Minie' bullets vary in price from about 36 to 75 cents each, depending upon store and whether they are cast or swaged. Some swaged versions are hollow-pointed for hunting, which drives up the price.
Best source I've found for the Lyman 575213PH is R&R bullets at http://www.readbag.com/ovpl-ca-r-r-bullets.
Cost is $14 for 50 Lyman 575213PH bullet, which is amazingly inexpensive. I can’t vouch for their quality, never having ordered them.
I ordered my bullets from S&S Firearms, but I now see that S&S only offers bullet moulds and no longer bullets. At least, I can’t find them. Check http://www.ssfirearms.com/

Soft steel? -- There is a rumor making the rounds that Parker Hale Enfields have barrels made of “soft steel,” that wear quickly and lose their accuracy. Steer poddy!
This rumor is countered by competitors who have been shooting their Parker Hale Enfields since purchasing them in the early 1970s. These rifles have been fired thousands of times, often with full charges, and the rifles remain amazingly accurate.
Whoever started the rumor was either malicious, deluded or a know-it-all who wanted to appear an “expert.”

I’m no expert, but I do have a little experience with my Parker Hale Enfield. And because I couldn’t shoot the blamed thing, I did a lot of internet research. Some of it I recognized as questionable or prejudiced, but when I noticed different people all over the net with the same findings – based on decades of experience – I took notice.

-- Gatofeo

Did you size your Minies? I'm guessing you did, or your casting technique was immaculate... Oh, wait, yours were commercial. Sweet.

I have the PH 1853, never got anything like that accuracy out of it with Minies. With carefully patched round balls I could get something like 4" at 50 yards. Some Minies would drop in. others had to be pushed in, some had to be beaten in. I was using the Issue type, and Wadcutter type. After a while, I learned to shoot the drop-ins and beat-ins into the butts.

I have had my 1858 for over 15 yrs and shoot it at N-SSA, I shoot it with the 578 hodgon bullet sized to 578 with 45 gr goex FFFg, my bore dia is .579. use lube of 75% crisco and 25% bees wax. It is a tack driver, X ring groups from the bench at 50yds, 10 ring groups at 100. I cast my own out of pure lead and weigh bullets on a Dillon digital scale to make sure there are no air pockets. I'm not aware of soft steel, my rifle has been fired an excess of 5K times and I do not see any change in accuracy.

Here is a period document..the Handbook of the British School of Musketry at Hythe:

http://archive.org/stream/handbookfo...ge/n6/mode/2up

Here is an article by the late Tony Bagdon on how to develop an accurate load for your Minie Rifle. Many top shooters in the N-SSA consider the article to be the "Holy Grail" when it comes to accuracy:

http://www.n-ssa.org/NATIONAL/CONTRIB/bagdon.html

The "Parker-Hale Barrels Are Made Of Soft Steel Hoax" was developed by Re-enactors who apparently know next to nothing when it comes to replica arms. Parker-Hale barrels were made by the "Hammer Forging" method which produces a barrel that is made of work hardened steel. Some of the Italian manufacturers of replica rifles use "Free Machining Steel" which is indeed a softer steel. They do this because their tooling last longer and cutters and bits have to be sharpened much less. So, some Re-enactors have gotten things bass ackwards!

Suggest you take up casting. It is something that is easily learned and you know you can make better bullets than someone who only cranks them out to make money.

GOOD LUCK-SOUNDS LIKE YOU ARE DOING FINE SO FAR!!!

The Lyman 575494 Semi-wadcutter minie is also very accurate in the 1853 and 1858 PH rifle-musket and rifle.
Jon

The Confederate Army of Northern Virginia did extensive accuracy tests on all the Minie Rifles in use in that army in 1862. What they found was that all rifle and rifle=muskets were roughly equally accurate out to around 400-500 yards EXCEPT FOR the 1858 Enfield Naval Rifles and the 1860 Enfield Army Short Rifles [both models used the same "heavy" barrel with the 5 Land and groove, Progressive Depth Rifling with the 1 in 48 inch twist. These two rifles (when shooting British made .577 ammunition) were accurate out to 800-900 yards. Hence these two rifles became the "rifles of choice" of the Confederate Sharpshooter Battalions of the ANV.

The "Genius" of Progressive Dept Rifling is that it allows the use of undersize bullets. Matter of fact, when the British Ordnance Department went from issuing .568 Diameter Pritchett Balls in their cartridges to .550 Pritchett Balls they found that not only were their rifles and rifle-muskets were easier to load when fouled, but the smaller diameter bullets proved to be more accurate.

In the British Isles in the 1860's, the Enfield Naval Rifles and the Army Short Rifles were known to be so accurate, any soldier or civilian participating in a British NRA sponsored rifle match with one of the above mentioned rifles automatically had 10% deducted from his final score because the Naval and Short Rifles were acknowledged to be so much more accurate than the standard issue P-53 Enfield.