Spencer carbines: the first multi-shot rifle of the US Army and the Italian company Chiappa

4 765 29
Spencer carbines: the first multi-shot rifle of the US Army and the Italian company Chiappa
An American cavalryman with a Spencer carbine.


He fired once, and he fired twice,
And the bullet whistled through the bushes...
"The Ballad of East and West" by R. Kipling




stories about weapons. The American Civil War primarily utilized muzzle-loading, cap-and-bolt rifles, but advances in arms development had accelerated so rapidly that breech-loading rifles and the first practical repeating rifles were tested and perfected during the conflict. These included the Henry and Spencer rifles, introduced in 1860. Although the Winchester rifle was based on the Henry rifle, it was the Spencer that was adopted, despite its technical limitations.

And it so happened that the 1850s became a turning point in stories A field of gunsmithing that is often underestimated. Flintlock muzzleloaders, used in previous centuries, were still widespread, but by the end of the decade, the first breech-loading guns with cap ignition appeared. And it all started with cap ignition, which made breech-loading systems more practical. It didn't take long for copper caps to be simply lengthened, thickened, and then combined with gunpowder and a bullet to form a single unit. This approach was successfully tested in European Flobert cartridges.

Later, in 1857, Smith & Wesson put this idea into practice by developing the .22 Short cartridge for its No. 1 revolver. The company's line of cartridges was subsequently expanded to include larger rimfire cartridges and, eventually, firearms capable of using them.

Benjamin Tyler Henry used the ill-fated Volcanic pistol as a testbed for what would become the Henry repeating rifle, chambered for the .44 Henry cartridge and fed from a magazine beneath the barrel. But former Colt employee Christopher Spencer took a different approach. He improved on the Sharps rifle's drop-bolt design and created a lever-action rifle fed from a magazine in the buttstock.


The Sharps carbine of 1859 is very similar in appearance to the Spencer...

In fact, the Spencer carbine was very similar in appearance to the Sharps carbine. The Spencer had the same side trigger and locking lever as the Sharps, but the operating principle was completely different. Instead of a rising and falling bolt, the Spencer used a round bolt that fed cartridges from a magazine in the buttstock into the barrel. The feeding mechanism was not connected to the hammer in any way, and it had to be cocked manually to fire.


The Spencer carbine of 1860 is very similar in appearance to the Sharps, but its internals are completely different.


The Spencer rifle differed from the carbine only in the length of the barrel.

The Spencer rifle was produced with a 30-inch (762 mm) barrel or as a 22-inch (558 mm) cavalry carbine. It was originally chambered for the .56-56 rimfire cartridge, which was almost identical to the military .58-caliber rifled musket cartridge in use at the time.


Shot at close range

Although the Spencer rifle was invented before the Civil War, artillery The US Army Corps under General James Wolfe Ripley refused to accept it. Ripley primarily considered the investment already made in new rifled muskets. But there were also other reasons related to training and logistical considerations regarding the introduction of a new weapons system in the face of a rapidly growing army. However, Spencer had influential friends, and eventually, in 1861, his company received its first contract with the Navy. fleetBut it wasn't until Ripley himself fired the carbine, and Christopher Spencer staged a demonstration with US President Abraham Lincoln, that the rifle was adopted for service in 1863.


A Union soldier with a Spencer rifle

Between 1860 and 1869, Spencer Arms produced over 200,000 rifles and carbines, the lion's share of which went to the Union Army. The 22-inch-barreled carbine was popular with cavalrymen, who used it as their primary longarm. It was later replaced by the Springfield Model 1873 carbine, a controversial development. However, despite the design's success and some limited sales abroad, improving the Spencer proved nearly impossible, and Spencer Arms went bankrupt in 1869. The rival Henry rifle, deemed too fragile for the military, became the Model 1866—and thus was born the iconic Winchester brand, which survives to this day.

And then, in our own time, the Italian company Chiappa Firearms entered the world arena and decided to produce all modern Spencer rifles and carbines. They are available in carbine or rifle configurations in a variety of calibers, including .44-40, .45 Schofield, .45 Colt, and .56-50.


Receiver and cartridges

This Chiappa Firearms carbine features a solid walnut stock and forend, like the original models. It also features a solid receiver, bolt, and lever made of hardened steel. The 20-inch (508 mm) barrel is round and blued. The sights consist of a fixed front sight and a sliding V-notch with a 100-yard sighting bar, adjustable from 300 to 900 yards.


A very simple sight

The stock is also meticulously machined and finished, and holds a detachable seven-round magazine. Like any cavalry carbine of the period, the Chiappa Spencer features a single-point sling attachment (a ring on the brace) on the left side of the stock. A rear sling attachment is also included.


Cavalry carbine stock neck with sling ring

The overall length of the carbine is only 37 inches (939 mm), but it weighs 3,9 kg. It is noted that one of the most popular carbines is the one chambered for the .44-40 Winchester cartridge, a cartridge that became popular many years after the Spencer carbine was discontinued.

Modern Spencer repeating rifles are excellent, though their design was a dead end. The bizarre lever-action mechanism, disguised as a single-shot rifle, makes shooting awkward, albeit exciting. And while the Henry repeating rifle, which later became the Winchester, was clearly superior, shooting the Spencer demonstrates why it became the US Army's first repeating rifle and was beloved by so many.


Magazine in the butt

The surprises began with the loading process, which was the Spencer rifle's main advantage. The magazine tube was protected from damage by the stock body and accessed through the butt plate. The magazine tube had to be rotated 45 degrees to the right. After that, it was easily removed from the stock. The cartridges were then dropped into the stock, tip down, after which the tube was inserted and rotated again, but in the opposite direction. The US Cavalry used hexagonal Blakesley magazines, in which the cartridges were stored in the tubes for quick reloading. But even without this convenience, seven rounds could be quickly inserted into the tube and the carbine was quickly loaded. Furthermore, this was less hassle than muzzleloading a Henry rifle or even a modern Winchester, equipped with the "Royal Innovation"—the side-loading system.

Although the Spencer was quick to load, it wasn't the best in accuracy. After reloading, the hammer had to be cocked manually, as the bolt was not connected to it. Therefore, shooters who used Henry and Winchester rifles but later picked up the Spencer sometimes forgot to cock the hammer before firing. Despite this drawback, the Spencer's rate of fire was superior to both rifled muskets and breech-loading single-shot rifles chambered for cartridges.


Before firing, the trigger was cocked with a finger

In defense of the Spencer, the wide V-shaped rear sight and front sight placement ensure excellent off-hand shooting, not at paper targets. Shooters noted that it is comfortable to hold, easy to handle, and that the barrel balance remains unaffected by the ammunition being stored in the rear rather than in a tube under the barrel. This was especially unimportant for cartridges such as the .44-40 and .56-50, intended for short-range shooting. At ranges up to 100 yards (90 m), the Spencer performs excellently in target shooting. Overall, shooters past and present have noted that the Spencer rifle feels good in the hand and shoots superbly.


The rifle can be held with one hand...

The Spencer repeating rifle was an invention that marked a step forward in firearms. Today, the word "revolutionary" is so overused in marketing that it no longer attracts attention. But in the 19th century, it played a crucial role, setting the trend for the future. Incidentally, Christopher Spencer himself understood perfectly well that the repeating rifle was the weapon of the future, but he never fully thought it through. The Winchester, however, proved to be a step ahead of the Spencer, and that sealed the deal. Be that as it may, today this weapon is once again produced by Chiappa Firearms, allowing historical firearms enthusiasts to compare both the Winchester and the Spencer.

Now, a little about this company. Chiappa Firearms, also known as Armi Sport di Chiappa, is an Italian firearms manufacturer based in Brescia. It was founded in 1958 by Ezechiele Chiappa as Armi Sport. Total production is approximately 60,000 units per year. The company's US headquarters are located in Dayton, Ohio. We'll tell you about their other products another time...

P.S. All photos by Chiappa Firearms
29 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +5
    28 September 2026 05: 58
    Thank you, Vyacheslav Olegovich, it was an interesting read! The illustrations accompanying the article are very informative.
    Although, to be honest, it looks more like an advertising release from an Italian company that produces Spencer replicas.
    Good day everyone, with respect to Kote!
    1. +3
      28 September 2026 06: 07
      Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
      Although, to be honest, it looks more like an advertising release from an Italian company that produces Spencer replicas.

      It's difficult to rewrite advertising text with a high novelty index so that it ceases to be 100% advertising. This, no matter how you look at it, is a production cost.
      1. +5
        28 September 2026 06: 18
        Vyacheslav Olegovich, nothing personal!
        I know from personal experience that it’s hard to “squeeze” a role out of yourself.
        In your case, a university lecturer in the PR department." hi
        1. +4
          28 September 2026 06: 46
          It's easier when you have a lot of roles to play. The main thing is not to mix them up.
          1. +4
            28 September 2026 06: 57
            Quote from Korsar4
            when there are many roles in stock.

            It's still difficult. For example, I never write on the same topic back-to-back—it's boring. I'm working on two models at the same time; one is boring. I work at the dacha—to get dog-tired. It's a great way to rest from writing. Then I go for a walk—I recently hit 5,9 km/h. It's nice... I make zucchini soup and fish soup—made from canned mackerel—my signature dish. So, having so many roles helps!
            1. +1
              28 September 2026 22: 23
              Quote: kalibr
              I make zucchini soup and fish soup from canned mackerel - my signature dish.

              You're a real provocateur, sir!))) And my belly is growing...
              1. +1
                29 September 2026 07: 09
                Quote: AlexSam
                You're a real provocateur, sir!))) And my belly is growing...

                Dear Alexey! I love to eat and I love to cook, and my wife, daughter, and granddaughter all cook well. But none of us have big bellies. In my opinion, bellies don't grow from food, but from beer, primarily, and from improper nutrition. For example, we always have a light dinner. Always at 7 o'clock, and we go to bed at 10:00 so everything has time to digest. For dinner, a glass of kefir with chokeberry syrup is an excellent complement to yogurt and lowers blood pressure. And walking... 4-5 thousand gags a day is bad. You need at least 6-7. Then it's excellent. The healthiest sport. And brisk walking - 5,2, 5,4 km/h. Recently I got up to 5,9 km/h. Excellent!
      2. +4
        28 September 2026 07: 03
        It seems to me that the very fact of translation, even of advertising text, into another language carries a sufficient index of novelty to avoid fear of accusations of plagiarism.
        1. +3
          28 September 2026 07: 18
          Quote: 3x3zsave
          the very fact of translation

          Exactly, Anton. But you can't afford a clumsy translation. Time is a big factor. You can't spend 5-6 days working on an article or a chapter. 2-4 hours at most, otherwise you'll be left penniless.
  2. 0
    28 September 2026 09: 42
    Good day!
    The company is actually called "Chiappa" and not "Chiappa".
    Best regards,
    Alexander
  3. +1
    28 September 2026 09: 52
    Unfortunately, none of the photos captured the reloading process. As far as I understand, it had to be done with the trigger guard, essentially just the index finger. If so, then Henry's trigger guard clearly has an advantage.
  4. 0
    28 September 2026 10: 09
    Author, it's wonderful that you're so searchingly presenting American sources, but in Russia, caliber is usually expressed in millimeters. So, out of respect for readers, it would be worthwhile to include a conversion of the American caliber gradation into national units in millimeters in parentheses.
    1. +5
      28 September 2026 10: 59
      Quote: Tank DestroyerSU-100
      So, out of respect for the readers, it would be worthwhile to provide in parentheses the conversion of the American caliber gradation into national units in millimeters.

      Why bother? Anyone who needs it can easily multiply 2,54 by the number of inches on a mobile phone. And those who don't really need it can do just fine with what's available! And not American, but American. Even an enemy shouldn't be denied the correct, not the boorish, name. It turns out that this is the only way a person can "harm" them...and nothing else! Changing the enemy won't make them great.
    2. +1
      28 September 2026 20: 34
      Well, it seems like "any" gun enthusiast can imagine a .45 caliber and probably doesn't think about millimeters, just like .38, .22, and the like. A small-bore can be scaled up to 3mm and approximated.
      I have never seen the 22nd converted into millimeters.
  5. +5
    28 September 2026 12: 33
    I read the article with great interest and discovered the Italian company Chiappa Firearms, based in the province of Brescia and with a subsidiary in the United States. As far as I understand, the company specializes in producing replicas of famous firearms from various eras—from Civil War-era models to more modern ones, such as the M1-22 carbine (used by American soldiers during World War II), as well as versions of the M16 rifle and the RAK-9, a Kalashnikov-based rifle chambered for 9x21 cartridges. They also sell replicas of Springfield and Winchester rifles, revolvers, and other items, as well as airguns for recreational shooting. As for the prices, I assume they are lower since they are replicas. At this point, I don't know the quality of these guns, and I haven't read any reviews about them.
  6. +7
    28 September 2026 12: 34
    In the first illustration, the shooter wears a funny "bonnet." This headgear has a complex history, with numerous names and many interesting details about its origins.
    Many Union Army (Northern) caps (or rather kepis) during the American Civil War had a crown (top part) that was not flat, but slightly concave or slanted forward—this created the effect of an “unusual crown.”
    It all began with French influence. In the 1830s, during the conquest of Algeria, the French military sought a lighter and more comfortable alternative to the heavy shakos (shakos) for everyday service and campaigns. This led to the development of a series of lightweight fabric caps on a cane frame—the casquette d'Afrique. Over time, the design evolved: the kepi developed a cylindrical, but often slightly concave or forward-sloping crown, a short, rigid visor, and sometimes a chin strap. By the 1840s, this headgear was officially enshrined in French military regulations as a practical option for service. This design quickly spread throughout European armies, and the United States was no exception. 
    The kepi was officially adopted by the American army in 1858. And when the Civil War (1861–1865) began, this headdress became widespread, especially in the Union Army. Sometimes this style was even called the "McClellan cap"—in honor of General George Brinton McClellan, who played a major role in the formation and unification of the Union Army and actively promoted this type of headdress. 
    It's believed that the forward slant provided better protection for the forehead from sun and rain, and the uniform itself left enough room on the crown for insignia (branch emblems, regimental numbers)—they were usually attached just above the peak. Another style, the forage cap (also known as the "bummer cap" or "McDowell cap"), was also commonly worn by soldiers, but its crown was flat, without a concave curve. So, if a soldier wears a cap with a forward-slanted crown, he's wearing a classic version, popularized by the Union Army; if the crown is flat, it's a forage cap.

    Why was the crown made to slope forward? There are several possible factors:
    * Practicality. This angle helped better protect the forehead from the sun and rain—the peak, combined with the angled crown, created a more effective "visor" over the face. 
    * Place for insignia. The slightly raised front portion of the crown was convenient for displaying branch emblems, regimental numbers, or other identification marks. 
    * An evolution from earlier American models. The United States had previously had its own variations of forage caps. Some of these (for example, the so-called McDowell pattern) also had a slightly curved, "drooping" crown—a feature that carried over into the more standardized 1858 model. Soldiers sometimes referred to this cap as "shapeless as a feedbag"—meaning the shape was less strictly geometric and more practical and "soft." 

    What and where was attached
    According to army regulations, insignia were attached to the cap's crown. They were usually arranged like this:
    * in the center - the emblem of the branch of the armed forces (infantry, cavalry, artillery);
    * directly above it is a letter denoting a company;
    * The regiment number is located below the emblem. The badges themselves were made in various ways: embroidered with thread (sometimes "bullione" wire was used, which created a striking shine), cut from colored fabric, or cast from brass. Officers' badges were often of higher quality and more individualized—they were often commissioned from jewelers. 
    The kepi's slanted crown proved a convenient location for this task—it was both visible and accessible. If you look at old photos of soldiers from that era, you can often see these small details on the kepi.
  7. +3
    28 September 2026 15: 15
    Plus it was less hassle than charging from the muzzle of a Henry rifle

    ??
    1. +3
      28 September 2026 21: 42
      Quote: Senior Sailor
      from the muzzle of a Henry rifle

      The Henry rifle's magazine was loaded from the muzzle. First, the spring had to be cocked using the lever until it was completely retracted into the short cylinder just below the muzzle, then released from its engagement with the magazine tube. Fifteen rounds, bullets first, had to be inserted into the magazine opening, then the cylinder and spring had to be aligned with the barrel again and released by turning the lever. The spring then pressed down on the rounds, dropping them into the feed tray.
      1. +2
        29 September 2026 11: 03
        Quote: kalibr
        First, the spring had to be cocked by the lever until it was completely retracted into the short cylinder, right up to the muzzle, then released from its engagement with the magazine tube. Fifteen rounds had to be inserted into the magazine opening, bullets first, then the cylinder and spring had to be aligned with the barrel again and released by turning the lever.

        Damn me!
        It is not surprising that they preferred a different system.
        Now it’s clear, thanks.
        1. +2
          29 September 2026 15: 30
          Quote: Senior Sailor
          It is not surprising that they preferred a different system.

          But the advertising brochure said: "You can load it on Sunday and finish shooting on Monday!"
  8. +1
    28 September 2026 15: 24
    What is that round patch on your headdress?
  9. +1
    28 September 2026 15: 55
    Colleagues, who knows? Is the "civilian" checkered shirt sticking out from under the uniform a reenactor's oversight, or is that "just as possible"? laughing
    I composed it from two photos, but the same thing happens in the subsequent ones.
    1. +3
      28 September 2026 22: 57
      Not so simple wink .
      Army regulation shirts (those issued centrally) were solid colors: white, light gray, light blue, or undyed flannel. Checkered patterns were not included in the official uniform.
      However, the Civil War was fought with a huge number of troops for the United States. There weren't enough standard uniforms for everyone, especially in the Southern army. Soldiers often used civilian clothing as part of their uniform. For example, Southerners widely wore civilian hats instead of army caps. They also wore civilian shirts under their uniforms (like flannel), but with patterns, particularly checkered ones. It's said that photos of such soldiers can be found in the Library of Congress, but getting there has become quite a hassle...
      1. +3
        28 September 2026 23: 41
        I looked at the works of Mathew B. Brady (c. May 18, 1822 – January 15, 1896)
        Matthew B. Brady[1] (May 18, 1822 – January 15, 1896) was an American photographer. Known as one of the earliest and most famous photographers in American history, he is best known for his work on the American Civil War. He studied under inventor Samuel Morse, who pioneered the use of the daguerreotype technique in America. Brady opened his own studio in New York City in 1844 and went on to photograph U.S. Presidents John Quincy Adams, Abraham Lincoln, Millard Fillmore, Martin Van Buren, and other public figures.

        When the Civil War began, Brady, using a mobile studio and darkroom, captured thousands of vivid photographs from battlefields to convey the reality of war to the general public. He also photographed generals and politicians on both sides of the conflict.
        In his photo there are soldiers in white shirts.
        1. 0
          30 September 2026 14: 02
          Thank you!
          There was not enough standard uniform for everyone, especially in the Southern army.

          But the character presented is a cosplayer of the northerners. hi
          Perhaps they didn't think it through before filming, hoping it wouldn't be noticeable, but then the "It'll do..." attitude took over.

          — Rate your level of tediousness on a 100-point scale.
          — 86,456. No, 86,457.
          1. 0
            30 September 2026 16: 23
            At this level of tediousness, the problem is studied down to quantities of the third order of smallness.
            A white undershirt worn under the uniform. It's more like underwear, with a low stand-up collar to prevent chafing against the uniform collar, a buttoned closure, and a 3-4-button placket under the throat. This cut later became popular in Henley shirts. However, if it was cold, a shirt from personal stashes might be worn under the uniform. Recall the British cardigan during the Crimean War.
            1. 0
              5 October 2026 10: 54
              The topic is open and closed. hi
  10. +1
    28 September 2026 17: 54
    Interesting.More about early rifles please.
    Most interesting world be Russian post Napoleonic wars before world war 1.
  11. 0
    2 October 2026 15: 41
    Quote: kalibr
    Quote: Tank DestroyerSU-100
    So, out of respect for the readers, it would be worthwhile to provide in parentheses the conversion of the American caliber gradation into national units in millimeters.

    Why bother? Anyone who needs it can easily multiply 2,54 by the number of inches on a mobile phone. And those who don't really need it can do just fine with what's available! And not American, but American. Even an enemy shouldn't be denied the correct, not the boorish, name. It turns out that this is the only way a person can "harm" them...and nothing else! Changing the enemy won't make them great.

    For me, they are American; I have no respect for this crowd.