For some updated, direct research and documentation, please visit www.researchpress.co.uk/index.php/firearms/british-military-longarms/small-arms-trials/measuring-accuracy
This particular rifle is recorded in the Whitworth Research Project database. It was first noted in 1963, although prevenance is now established to 1951. It has possibly a small Enfield style lock, with Enfield-pattern military sights, and Enfield barrel bands. Whitworth's establishing a relationship between rifling pitch, bore size and bullet weight/length are I think a greater contributon to accuracy than the hexagonal rifling.
Nice to see the Whitworth on parade, as it were! I'd reiterate David's comments about accuracy. The number you gave for the 500yd group is not the group size but rather the Figure of Merit. It's an arcane method (by todays practice) but one that is very much more telling. Don't worry, you're not alone, Ian from Forgotten Weapons gave a similar description in his video(s) on the subject and those are worth the watch too! David was kind enough to kindly give clarity there too! He's your man for all things 19th Century target shooting!
@@ILoveMuzzleloading 19th century arms are so fascinating. The Whitworth was an imperfect military arm but certainly was instrumental in the adoption of what was then, "small bore" arms which lasted for may years all hovering around the .45 range...
Nice to see a chat about an early example of the Whitworth rifle. Whilst the Whitworth was undoubtedly an accurate rifle for its time, setting standards for other gunmakers to aspire to, contemporary reports can be misunderstood. The presentation unfortunately misrepresents the accuracy of the Whitworth. The system used to measure precision of rifled arms was the "Figure of Merit" (FoM). It is a measure of mean radial distance of shots from the centre of a group. This is not group size. The actual size of the original group cannot be determined from the Figure of Merit, however for a 20 shot group multiplying the Figure of Merit by about three and half will give an indication of the likely overall size of the group. So in trials in 1857 the Whitworth was recorded with a FoM of .37 feet (or 4.44 inch) - based on the above this would be a group size in the order of 15.5 inch. At 1100 yards the FoM of 2.41 feet was recorded - so a group size in the order of 8.5 feet. At 1880 yards the FoM was 11.62 feet, or a group size in the order of 40 feet. See the following article and videos to which it links: www.researchpress.co.uk/index.php/firearms/british-military-longarms/small-arms-trials/measuring-accuracy
I only heard about a rifle that shot hexagonal bullets. Never followed it up. Thanks for the lesson, quite interesting, as well as the input in some of the comments.
From what I learned these were going to _replace_ the Enfield, but due to the ammo and the design it was not acceptable for Infantry use, so the purpose changed which in a way hampered the intent for the rifle and so affected popularity.
For some updated, direct research and documentation, please visit www.researchpress.co.uk/index.php/firearms/british-military-longarms/small-arms-trials/measuring-accuracy
This particular rifle is recorded in the Whitworth Research Project database. It was first noted in 1963, although prevenance is now established to 1951. It has possibly a small Enfield style lock, with Enfield-pattern military sights, and Enfield barrel bands. Whitworth's establishing a relationship between rifling pitch, bore size and bullet weight/length are I think a greater contributon to accuracy than the hexagonal rifling.
Nice to see the Whitworth on parade, as it were! I'd reiterate David's comments about accuracy. The number you gave for the 500yd group is not the group size but rather the Figure of Merit. It's an arcane method (by todays practice) but one that is very much more telling. Don't worry, you're not alone, Ian from Forgotten Weapons gave a similar description in his video(s) on the subject and those are worth the watch too! David was kind enough to kindly give clarity there too! He's your man for all things 19th Century target shooting!
Thank you for the comment! More research is always in order and this video was a stiff reminder. Thank you again and thanks for all the great videos
@@ILoveMuzzleloading 19th century arms are so fascinating. The Whitworth was an imperfect military arm but certainly was instrumental in the adoption of what was then, "small bore" arms which lasted for may years all hovering around the .45 range...
Nice to see a chat about an early example of the Whitworth rifle. Whilst the Whitworth was undoubtedly an accurate rifle for its time, setting standards for other gunmakers to aspire to, contemporary reports can be misunderstood. The presentation unfortunately misrepresents the accuracy of the Whitworth.
The system used to measure precision of rifled arms was the "Figure of Merit" (FoM). It is a measure of mean radial distance of shots from the centre of a group. This is not group size. The actual size of the original group cannot be determined from the Figure of Merit, however for a 20 shot group multiplying the Figure of Merit by about three and half will give an indication of the likely overall size of the group.
So in trials in 1857 the Whitworth was recorded with a FoM of .37 feet (or 4.44 inch) - based on the above this would be a group size in the order of 15.5 inch. At 1100 yards the FoM of 2.41 feet was recorded - so a group size in the order of 8.5 feet. At 1880 yards the FoM was 11.62 feet, or a group size in the order of 40 feet.
See the following article and videos to which it links: www.researchpress.co.uk/index.php/firearms/british-military-longarms/small-arms-trials/measuring-accuracy
Thanks! Added the link to the pinned comment above
Man, gives me goosebumps!
Great video!
Thank you!
I will be interested when you test the accuracy claims with that replica. As a machinist and gun enthusiast Wintworth is a interesting figure
That's an original, not a replica.
Should have mentioned one of the key features of the early Whitworth prototypes - the screw-off triggerguard.
Please desist from using the term 'sniper'. In the recent ACW the term used was 'sharpshooter', as in Colonel Hiram Berdan's specialist unit.
Absolutely Tac, I've learned since publishing this video and won't make the mistake again. I appreciate you looking out!
I only heard about a rifle that shot hexagonal bullets. Never followed it up. Thanks for the lesson, quite interesting, as well as the input in some of the comments.
From what I learned these were going to _replace_ the Enfield, but due to the ammo and the design it was not acceptable for Infantry use, so the purpose changed which in a way hampered the intent for the rifle and so affected popularity.
How much lenth?
Well I bought one suppose to come today
I want a repro of one
They are called NAILS not lock bolts...................