Rifles with top and bottom levers

36
Rifles with top and bottom levers
The Urbanus Sartorius carbine in the position before loading: the barrel is moved forward, the barrel handle is raised up, the charging chamber, which plays the role of a bolt, is raised up. Photo: cablesfarm.co.uk


“...and throw away the old for the new.”
Leviticus 26:10

stories about weapons. Let's start by turning to the words of the epigraph and remember that this advice does not always work, and that people are most often reluctant to throw away the old for the sake of the new. However, there are also those for whom the main thing is novelty. And who themselves are constantly working on something new and very willingly accept the innovations of others. Most often this happens at the turn of the era. When knowledge, certain experience and, of course, technology are accumulated. Then we can expect a surge of innovation and many new original proposals and technical solutions.




Sartorius carbine in the same position. View from above. Photo: cablesfarm.co.uk

It was exactly the same with weapons, in particular, at the very beginning of the 19th century, when Samuel Pauli (or Pauly) proposed his cartridge, and Alexander Forsythe came up with his “bottle” lock for firearms. Very soon, capsule systems appeared, but they still fired with old paper cartridges. They also retained the old problem of bullet “chatter” in the barrel, which is why the shooting accuracy from such smooth-bore guns was low. It was also inconvenient to load guns with long barrels. True, first in the English army, equipped with the Brown Bess musket, and then in others, it became fashionable to drive a bullet into the barrel by hitting the butt on the ground, without using a ramrod. However, this method was not suitable for cavalry, who had to load their carbines while sitting in the saddle. A system for loading their guns from the breech would be very useful to them, and such a carbine was created very soon.


Sartorius carbine in loading position. Side view. British Royal Arsenal, Leeds

It was proposed by Urbanus Sartorius, who patented his breech-loading system in 1817 and 1819. Moreover, it used the same old, time-tested flintlock. But the highlight of Sartorius’s design was the handle on the barrel and its locking mechanism, which later found application in... gun piston locks!


Sartorius carbine with a closed bolt. Side view. British Royal Arsenal, Leeds

However, connecting such a rather complex breech-loading mechanism to a flintlock or percussion gun was quite difficult, primarily due to problems with leakage of powder gases and clogging. Nevertheless, Sartorius carbines were produced, although the total number of copies produced is unknown. Their manufacturer was Anthony Bevan, a British industrialist who manufactured them from 1822 to 1825 at 16 Regent Street in London.


Sartorius carbine. Its flintlock is clearly visible. Photo: cablesfarm.co.uk

For that time, the design turned out to be quite original. The bolt was opened by rotating a handle attached to the barrel. Since the barrel had a sector groove, in which rifled and smooth sectors alternated, the barrel and the bolt, which was a charging chamber, became uncoupled. At the same time, the barrel itself moved forward along with the handle. But the bolt was lifted into a vertical position for loading by the ring on it. By design, it was a typical three-stroke gun breech, but in this case it was the barrel that was movable, not the breech. Moreover, the barrel could be completely removed from the forend. But this was not allowed to be done by a spring clamp, which controlled the degree of freedom of the barrel using a protrusion attached to the barrel. Pay attention to the beautiful brass handle in front of the trigger guard - in this place the carbine had perfect balance, so it was very comfortable to hold it by it. Apparently Sartorius was a good engineer if he thought about this too.


The bolt of a 76-mm cannon of the 1902 model. Very similar to the Sartorius shutter, isn't it?

Well, then everything was very simple. Gunpowder from the cartridge was poured into the charging chamber, after which a bullet, slightly larger than the caliber of the barrel, was inserted into it. Then gunpowder was poured onto the powder shelf, covered with a lid with a flint, after which the carbine was loaded. Moreover, due to the fact that the diameter of the bullet was greater than the diameter of the bore, the bullet from it, when riding on horseback with the barrel lowered down, as was required by the regulations, could not roll out under any circumstances. Well, thanks to this, the combat of the carbine was very strong and more accurate than that of guns in which the bullet entered the barrel freely. But, despite the fact that the carbine worked well, the British army did not accept it as an armament, pointing out the complexity of the design and ... gas breakthrough, even if only a small one, back.

And the gunsmiths of that time were very fond of piston bolts, which locked the barrel according to the “plug” principle, that is, they simply plugged it, and that’s all. This path was followed, for example, by the Belgian gunsmith Joseph Montignier from Fontaine-l'Evêque, who in the future became famous for creating an original buckshot. The rifle he created in 1835 fired paper cartridges and had a bolt controlled by a lever located on top.


Model 1835 Montignier rifle with the bolt lever raised and the chamber open for loading. Photography by Alain Dobress


The Montignier rifle's bolt cover completely prevented dirt from getting into the receiver. But where is the trigger for the primer on it? And he was below! Photography by Alain Dobress


The Montigne-Fusno carbine looked roughly the same: the bolt lever was at the top, the trigger striking the primer was at the bottom! Photography by Alain Dobress

“Tailed”, that is, with a bolt lever placed on top of the stock, was also used by the British cavalry in 1855-1865. Westley Richards carbine, 11,6 mm caliber. It also had a primer ignition and a piston bolt controlled by a lever. For the characteristic shape of the lever, it was given the nickname “monkey tail”.


Westley Richards carbine, 1865, from the collection of... the British Library!

Of course, there was immediately a person who thought that exactly the same lever for the shutter could be placed below, under the stock! This is how the rifle of George Jamard from Liege appeared, in which the barrel also moved forward with a lever, releasing the chamber into which a paper cartridge was inserted.


The photo shows the stock of a Zhamara rifle with a barrel control lever! Photography by Allen Dobress


And here the same rifle is shown in close-up. The lever is pulled down, the barrel is pushed forward. Photography by Allen Dobress

However, the barrel can be pushed forward by turning it in the same way as on the Sartorius carbine. And on the Zhamard-Schmits rifle of Jean Henri, the barrel was made to extend forward by a handle attached to it, holding which, the shooter pushed it forward and at the same time turned it. Loading combined with locking occurred in the reverse order. The sight also slid along a guide plate onto which it was secured using a butterfly screw. Rifle caliber: 11x52R.


Jamara–Smits rifle. General form. Photography by Allen Dobress


Jamara–Smits rifle. The barrel handle is on the right. The table is locked. Photography by Allen Dobress


Jamara–Smits rifle. The barrel handle is on the left. The barrel, together with part of the stock, is pushed forward. Photography by Allen Dobress

In England, a rifle with a barrel that moved forward for loading with a paper cartridge was proposed in February 1855 by the London gunsmith Frederick Prince. But although it performed well in testing, it was also considered too complex for mass production.


Frederick Prince carbine: top - with the barrel locked, bottom - in the loading position. Photo armorersbench.com


Close-up of the breech of the Frederick Prince carbine. Photo armorersbench.com

Around the same time, needle systems became very popular, especially in Germany. The first needle rifle, Johann Nikolaus von Dreyse, was adopted by the Prussian army in 1841.


This is what this 1841 rifle looked like. Army Museum. Stockholm


Dreyse rifle of the Jaeger battalions 1854. Army Museum. Stockholm

But it is clear that there were immediately people who wanted to make something better, more perfect out of it. In particular, a certain Georg Bitter tried himself in this field, in 1850 he offered his needle rifle to the Royal Württemberg Arsenal in Ludwigsburg, combining elements of Dreyse’s design with his own parts. The military considered it too complicated and impractical, but the arsenal still bought one rifle for the Württemberg weapons collection.


The bolt of Georg Bitter's rifle. The folded massive bolt handle is clearly visible. Photography by Allen Dobress


The shutter is open. The handle still lies along the bolt. Photography by Allen Dobress

So on the way to modern, perfect types of weapons, we can come across many highly original models, often in some ways ahead of their time!
36 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +6
    5 January 2024 06: 38
    Wonderful! Vyacheslav hi
    Excellent examples of weapons from the Age of Change
  2. 0
    5 January 2024 06: 43
    The piston gun lock was known much earlier than the Sartorius carbine; it was called “vingrad”. The Kremlin stores samples of guns with similar closures. Sartorius simply applied a well-known design solution to his carbine.
    1. +7
      5 January 2024 08: 28
      The piston gun lock was known much earlier than the Sartorius carbine; it was called “vingrad”.

      Vingrad has nothing to do with gun locks.
      Vingrad - all smooth long guns, as well as some rifled guns loaded from the muzzle, had a ridge at the end of the breech called a vingrad. The gun had a generally varied shape, but most often it was made in the form of a ball, connected by a neck to the breech of the gun, or its side surfaces were planes and a through hole was made in the wing. V. served to facilitate auxiliary actions with a gun, such as, for example: during transportation, when placing a gun on a carriage, etc., and a rope or trouser was attached to the wingrad.
      1. +5
        5 January 2024 09: 39
        To continue. The part that is called a prototype of a piston bolt on a certain “forum of forum experts” is called the breech.
        For ease of manufacture, guns loaded from the muzzle were not made with a solid bottom, but the latter was formed by a screw screwed into the breech of the gun. This screw, generally called a breech, usually consisted of three parts: a) a screwed part - a hemp, b) a cylindrical heel - for screwing in the breech and c) a tail or hook - for connecting the barrel to the stock. Some types of weapons used a patent or chamber breech, invented by the English master Henry Nock. In this breech chamber (powder chamber) was made in hemp and the seed was carried through the breech to the bottom of the chamber. With such a device, in the event of the prime being in full swing, the gun barrel did not deteriorate and only the breech needed to be replaced.
      2. -3
        5 January 2024 11: 30
        So here it is. Without further ado, the piston valve that is turned out along the thread was also called a vingrad. It also performed the functions of a classic wingrad and what was the point of changing the name.
        1. +3
          5 January 2024 14: 11
          So here it is. Without further ado, provide a link to some serious source in which
          a piston valve that is turned out along the thread was also called a wingrad.

          Internet resources such as the “forum of fort experts” are not serious sources.
  3. +6
    5 January 2024 07: 03
    Vyacheslav Olegovich thank you for the article, I came for breakfast with coffee!
  4. +5
    5 January 2024 08: 02
    Again in the morning my soul was poisoned. It makes me want to hold it in my hands and twirl it. Sorry, never.
    1. 0
      5 January 2024 09: 27
      The piston bolt was the most common method of locking the barrel (the “piston” enters the breech and turns there) in fact, any rotary bolt with lugs can be classified as a piston bolt
  5. +2
    5 January 2024 11: 59
    Those were the times! (With)
    Listen, where does all this come from?
    Echo of War (s)
    Brother 2 good drinks
    Vyacheslav, Happy New Year and Happy Old Year! drinks hi The year seems new, but old laughing
    1. +5
      5 January 2024 12: 19
      Thank you, dear Alexey! Yes, it’s funny how we do it - New New Year, Old New Year... And it’s all a holiday!
      1. +4
        5 January 2024 12: 21
        As Zadornov joked... Well, stupid... (c) don’t understand what the Old New Year is good drinks
        It's simple, just put your face in the salad once again drinks
        1. +3
          5 January 2024 13: 22
          Quote from Enceladus
          It's simple, just put your face in the salad once again

          Exactly!
      2. +4
        5 January 2024 15: 46
        Good afternoon, Vyacheslav!))
        Thank you, good and competent article..
        I remembered that back in the 18th century there were attempts to increase the rate of fire of weapons, I mean the Fergusson carbine.
        The Ferguson rifle is a 65-caliber (about 16,5 mm) breech-loading rifle developed by British Army Major Patrick Ferguson in the mid-1770s, based on the earlier French Sachs system.[3]
        1. +2
          5 January 2024 16: 30
          Quote: Sea Cat
          I remembered that back in the 18th century there were attempts to increase the rate of fire of weapons, I mean the Fergusson carbine.

          Fergusson's rifle did not shine with anything but its rate of fire. There are a lot of turns that need to be made to open or close the screw valve. At the same time, it had a nice habit of jamming due to small particles getting into the threads.
          1. +5
            5 January 2024 17: 11
            At the same time, it had a nice habit of jamming due to small particles getting into the threads.

            “It was stuck,” the trigger was pulled, the flint was loose, the quality of the metal corresponded to the time of production. And this was true of any handgun of that time.
            But Fergusson’s carbine, whatever one may say, was still a step forward. Otherwise, no one remembered him in our time.
            1. -1
              5 January 2024 17: 18
              Quote: Sea Cat
              But Fergusson’s carbine, whatever one may say, was still a step forward. Otherwise, no one remembered him in our time.

              We remember it as a curiosity. The introduction of poorly thought out and practically untested systems rather slowed down progress.
              1. +5
                5 January 2024 17: 33
                I'm not really sure. Any new idea gives impetus to those who have brains in their heads.
                And how to deal with it is everyone’s business.
                1. 0
                  7 January 2024 14: 34
                  Quote: Sea Cat
                  I'm not really sure. Any new idea gives impetus to those who have brains in their heads.

                  So we see in the article a fountain of crazy ideas from the inventors of that time. Looking at which the military men were baptized and, quite reasonably, tried to stay away. laughing
                  1. 0
                    7 January 2024 17: 33
                    Well, probably not everyone was baptized, many used these weapons, otherwise they would not have been so famous.
                    1. 0
                      8 January 2024 20: 58
                      Quote: Sea Cat
                      otherwise it would not be so famous.

                      Still would. More than 20 thousand pieces were produced. And it was precisely the extremely sad experience of operating this crazy Fergusson design that turned the military away from breech-loading systems in principle for a long time.

                      The sad history of Fergusson rifles is somewhat reminiscent of the no less dark history of Lancaster guns (by the way, almost a fetish for our Makhov). An interesting solution that worked on guns turned out to be completely unsuitable in artillery and set the British back for a long time in naval artillery as a whole. It was precisely because of lobbying and the lack of a clear testing program that the British eventually abandoned rifled guns for a long time, giving primacy to Krupp, and eventually to Russian gunsmiths.

                      This is what I remind you of how mindless adherence to fashion and the calls of ardent inventors ends. smile
  6. +7
    5 January 2024 15: 11
    A system for loading their guns from the breech would be very useful to them, and such a carbine was created very soon.
    ...
    It was proposed by Urbanus Sartorius, who patented his breech-loading system in 1817 and 1819. Moreover, it used the same old, time-tested flintlock. But the highlight of Sartorius’s design was the handle on the barrel and its locking mechanism, which later found application in... gun piston locks!

    What is different about this author’s articles about weapons is the complete absence of any system. The author persistently ignores the need to study the issue before publication, as a result of which he regularly and systematically misleads the inexperienced audience, providing them with unreliable information.
    Dear author. Sartorius had no special features! The Sartorius system is based on two earlier developments - the German gunsmith Peter Duringer, who proposed a mechanism back in 1680 that "later found application in... gun piston locks" (photo 1) and Italian gunsmith Giuseppe Crespi, who developed a breech-loading system for the Austrian Empire in 1760 (photo 2).
    That is, Sartorius’s merit lies in the fact that, based on previous developments, he created a more advanced design. But he didn’t develop any “highlights”; they were developed before him.
    1. -4
      5 January 2024 15: 57
      Well, by God... well, I didn’t hold a candle for such antiquity. That's when we talk about PSM, PM, PMM, Ksyukha, SVD/SVU/SVDS... AS VAL/VSS...you're welcome. What is the point of arguing about pictures of that era, which is confusing and mixed up and there were also their own authors. No one has the complete truth
    2. -3
      5 January 2024 17: 31
      [quote=Dekabrist][quote]A system for loading their guns from the breech would be very useful to them, and such a carbine was created very soon.

      Dear author. Sartorius had no special features! The Sartorius system is based on two earlier developments - the German gunsmith Peter Duringer, who proposed a mechanism back in 1680 that "later found application in... gun piston locks" (photo 1) and Italian gunsmith Giuseppe Crespi, who developed a breech-loading system for the Austrian Empire in 1760 (photo 2).

      That is, a more perfect design in this particular case cannot be called a highlight? Or do you think that where I got the information about Satorius there was no information about Crespi and Dühringer? Was. But there were no illustrations that suited me. Or do you advise me to show me the black and white horror that you found? Why is this? There is no need to overload people with unnecessary information just to show off your knowledge.
      1. +4
        5 January 2024 18: 17
        Are you familiar with the concept of priority as it relates to technology? This means primacy in time in obtaining practical results, that is, recognition that some person or group of persons was the first to make a discovery or invention.
        In this case, it turns out that you, for the sake of convenience, since you did not find illustrations that suited you, took away priority from one designer and gave it to another. Just so as not to overload readers with unnecessary information. Do you think this interpretation of events is normal?
        As for the “black and white horror”, it perfectly shows the design features. Whether it is black and white or not is not at all important.
        1. -5
          5 January 2024 19: 51
          Quote: Dekabrist
          Do you think this interpretation of events is normal?

          Absolutely. Excess information is just as harmful as its lack. You can’t see anything “beautiful” in your black and white photograph. It would only spoil the look of the article. And... how much can you remind VO of a popular science site for easy reading. Whoever needs it should take Markevich, Bolotin and read a lot of other things. And you don’t need to teach me or prove anything to me. In the 8 years of my work here, no one has ever succeeded in this and no one will succeed... You shouldn’t try either. In this case, my opinion matters, but not yours, even if you are right three times.
          1. +5
            5 January 2024 20: 31
            And you don’t need to teach me or prove anything to me. In the 8 years of my work here, no one has ever succeeded in this and no one will succeed...

            And then Ostap suffered

            Vyacheslav Olegovich, no one is going to prove anything to you. My comment is intended solely to demonstrate to the audience who will read your article the fundamental errors and blunders contained in it (the article). I just chose the comment form as a dialogue.
            As for your opinion, it means nothing at all in relation to the issue under discussion. You have not yet achieved such power to “redistribute” the authorship and priorities of technical developments, do not overestimate yourself.
            1. +3
              5 January 2024 20: 53
              You can’t see anything “beautiful” in your black and white photograph.

              Well, if you don’t like black and white, look at the color one.
              Pistol by Viennese gunsmith Jacques Lamarre - 1680. Here you will, I hope, consider that the mechanism that
              "later found application in... gun piston locks"

              was known long before Urbanus Sartorius designed his carbine.
              So whether you wear a shirt or not, it won’t change anything.
            2. -2
              5 January 2024 21: 09
              [quote=Dekabrist][quote]
              Stop worrying about the audience, this is just your way of expressing yourself and proving to everyone that you are not worse, but better. By the way, everyone has long understood this. An offended ego demands compensation, so you are trying to surf the entire Internet just to show it. By the way, it looks very childish. Only in childhood they measure with a ruler - who has the longest, and you - with comments, but the pleasure is the same, probably.
              1. +1
                5 January 2024 22: 59
                This is just your way of expressing yourself and proving to everyone that you are not worse, but better.

                In analytical psychology, this is called projection - attributing one’s own qualities, feelings and desires to another person. This happens unconsciously, that is, a person, carrying out a projection (for example, being vain, knowingly believes his opponent to be equally vain) is absolutely sure that the other person really possesses these qualities.
                1. -1
                  6 January 2024 06: 43
                  Quote: Dekabrist
                  I'm absolutely sure

                  Continue to demonstrate erudition. That's all you can do here.
                  1. 0
                    6 January 2024 16: 08
                    That's all you can do here.

                    The question arose - what else can one “do” here, other than demonstrating erudition or ignorance?
  7. +3
    5 January 2024 16: 39
    It is interesting that among the numerous “cuckoo clocks” of witty inventors of that time, the first “bolt” was modestly found - the Dreyse rifle, which became one of the most successful inventions in the field of weapons. The time is especially impressive - 1841, while the Prussian army was rearming with bolt guns, the French proudly adopted the Minié bullet. The most interesting thing is that Dreyse first offered his rifle to the French, but the French Military Academy rejected the offer. Academicians laughing
  8. 0
    5 January 2024 16: 54
    Very nice article!!
  9. +3
    5 January 2024 17: 39
    The article clearly traces the evolution of gunsmiths' thoughts from a fixed bolt, united with the USM prototype, to a moving bolt, separated from the latter. It's a pity that the last two samples didn't pay much attention to this. But in any case, thanks for the article and high-quality illustrations!
    1. +1
      5 January 2024 19: 52
      Quote from cpls22
      It's a pity that the last two samples didn't pay much attention to this.

      I hope that after receiving more solid information and photographs this will be resolved.