Bullet and Shell Civil War Projectiles Forum

Author Topic: 6lb Borman sideloader  (Read 8438 times)

CarlS

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2475
    • Email
Re: 6lb Borman sideloader
« Reply #15 on: December 06, 2017, 11:17:09 PM »
Regarding the Bormann side loader I do know of a no doubt very nice condition one with a Bormann replacement fuse in it rather than an actual Bormann so no reason there couldn't be one with a Bormann fuse.  I'm still checking to find an example.  Side loaders in the 6-lber size are uncommon no matter what type of fuse they have in them. 

Regarding the pine sap matrix I think that it can be yellowish and is sometime thought to be a dulled sulfur matrix.

Interesting discussion.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2017, 09:58:11 PM by CarlS »
Best,
Carl

CarlS

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2475
    • Email
Re: 6lb Borman sideloader
« Reply #16 on: December 11, 2017, 11:47:05 PM »
Checking around I've found Bormann replacement fused shells but not another example of one with the Bormann fuse in it.  Does that mean when these were made they weren't using the Bormann fuse?  That would seem to make sense.  But how did this one came to have the Bormann fuse I guess we may never know.
Best,
Carl

callicles

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 287
    • Email
Re: 6lb Borman sideloader
« Reply #17 on: December 12, 2017, 01:06:33 AM »
Well, did the switch from lead case-shot balls to iron case-shot balls (as mentioned in Pete’s previous post) also coincide with the South’s cease and desist order regarding the Bormann fuse? In other words, was the switch to iron balls codified in some order from the Confederate government like the one affecting the switch to the replacement fuses? Or was the switch to iron a gradual one based largely on availability? Maybe the two are intricately related somehow...

CarlS

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2475
    • Email
Re: 6lb Borman sideloader
« Reply #18 on: December 12, 2017, 01:31:37 PM »
The CS Bormann was discontinued in about 1862 and the side loaders showed up about a year later so there would appear to be no overlap.  But that doesn't preclude them finding an unused one on a shelf and using it or a US caisson being captured and the fuses being sent back to the arsenal/armory where they get used.  I can see that as the kind of situation where we find just a few of some oddity.

See this nice discussion we had on the Bormann fuse around March-June, 2016:
      http://bulletandshell.com/forum/index.php?topic=1897.msg14679#msg14679
« Last Edit: December 12, 2017, 01:37:28 PM by CarlS »
Best,
Carl

callicles

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 287
    • Email
Re: 6lb Borman sideloader
« Reply #19 on: December 12, 2017, 02:10:35 PM »
I’m glad you like that discussion. I’ve periodically updated it over the last several months with forum members’ knowledge of Bormann related topics. In fact, I’ve added Pete’s discussion about sideloaders from this thread to that discussion you linked. I’m hoping Pete will return to this particular thread. I would like to add pine-resin to the Bormann Compilation under “Ways to Distinguish CS-Bormanns from US- Bormanns” to it but not sure that’s a sure-fire means for distinguishing them yet. I would also like to add more information about iron case-shot to it too— thus the reasons I’m always asking crazy questions about the Bormann fuses related issues here.

noonanda

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 24
    • Email
Re: 6lb Borman sideloader
« Reply #20 on: December 15, 2017, 01:17:34 PM »
Well, did the switch from lead case-shot balls to iron case-shot balls (as mentioned in Pete’s previous post) also coincide with the South’s cease and desist order regarding the Bormann fuse? In other words, was the switch to iron balls codified in some order from the Confederate government like the one affecting the switch to the replacement fuses? Or was the switch to iron a gradual one based largely on availability? Maybe the two are intricately related somehow...
IIRC the change to Iron case shot happened in mid-summer 1862 didnt it? Cant remember where I read it (and I defer to the experts) but wasnt it after the 7 days battles due to a lead shortage?

Pete George

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 711
    • Email
Re: 6lb Borman sideloader
« Reply #21 on: December 17, 2017, 01:34:41 AM »
  Carl, I'm not picking on you by quoting you several times in the following. :) It's just that your posts have the shortest version of various questions that have been posted lately, which makes the quoting simpler to do (see the > below).

CarlS wrote:
> Regarding the pine sap matrix I think that it can be yellowish and is sometime thought to be a dulled sulfur matrix.

  The pine-sap matrix can be pale yellow, pale greyish-yellow, or pale grey, or dark-ish grey... because the manufacturers were not concerned with keeping the collected pine-sap "clean and pure" in the sap-gathering process and matrix production process. Also, I suspect the manufacturers weren't concerned about washing the melting-pots before each use and re-use.  ;-)

Alwion wrote:
> Not to mix threads, but Mike once offered me a cut ball with pine matrix, and it was still a little stickey still and was  tar sap of a dark semi translucent color like old varnish, much darker than what pete posted, almost black.

  Heating the collected dried/gooey pine-sap hot enough to melt it for pouring into the shells can cause the original color to change. If heated too hot over an open fire, it can start blackening.

  To determine whether the matrix is sulfur or pine-sap, I suggest doing the "scratch-&-sniff" test.  Or a similar equivalent. If necessary, heat (or burn) a tiny bit of it. Pine-sap has an unmistakable odor.  I've smelled the distinctive odor of asphalt/tar when working on Case-Shot shells with that matrix.

Callicles wrote:
> In other words, was the switch to iron balls codified in some order from the Confederate government like the one affecting the switch to the replacement fuses? Or was the switch to iron a gradual one based largely on availability?

  The switch was immediate at major CS artillery shell manufacturers, like Tredegar and Samson-&-Pae in Richmond, but smaller manufacturers seem to have continued using lead for a while even in the "new" copper-timefuzed 12-pounder Case-Shot.  I've owned a few such balls, with a copper fuzeplug but no sideloader plug, and weighing almost 11 pounds, which means they must have lead case-shot balls inside them.

CarlS wrote:
> The CS Bormann was discontinued in about 1862 and the side loaders showed up about a year later so there would appear to be no overlap.

  No offense, but there definitely was overlap. According to Mike O's research, the CS Ordnance Department's first order for manufacturing Sideloader 12-pounder Case-Shot was placed in October 1862.  Bormann fuze manufacture was stopped after prematurely-exploding ones caused many Confederate casualties at the battle of Fredericksburg, in December 1862. Existing stock got used up, rather than destroyed. We know that Lee's artillery fired a good number of CS Bormann-fuzed 12-pounders at Gettysburg.

  Although we know when the first iron-ball (Sideloader) Case-Shot shells were ordered, we cannot know precisely when they first got used in battle. Sideloaders were produced in time to be present at Fredericksburg (Dec. 1862), but because they were used in the Second Battle of Fredericksburg (May 1863), we can't tell when the ones we dig at Fredericksburg were fired.

  I should mention, there is definitely some significant lag time between ordering, manufacturing, and first use in combat.  More than just the few weeks lag we'd assume.

CarlS wrote:
> Checking around I've found Bormann replacement fused shells but not another example of one with the Bormann fuse in it.  Does that mean when these were made they weren't using the Bormann fuse?

  Yes. Insofar as I'm aware, use of the CS Bormann Replacement papertime fuzeplug did not occur until latter-1864, as a desperation tactic to get some use out of the many leftover Bormann shell-bodies from the condemnation of the CS Bormann fuze in very-late 1862 by E.P. Alexander.

Noonanda wrote:
> IIRC the change to Iron case shot happened in mid-summer 1862 didn't it? Cant remember where I read it (and I defer to the experts) but wasn't it after the 7 days battles due to a lead shortage?

  You might be confusing the Spring 1862 discontinuation of Confederate manufacturing of lead artillery sabots with the October 1862 switch to iron case-shot balls.  The 7-Days battles (end-of-June/start-of-July 1862) were the last gasp of Archer projectile (lead sabot) usage in Virginia, except for a few that (in desperation) were sent with Lee into Pennsylvania, and got used at Gettysburg.

Regards to all,
Pete
« Last Edit: December 17, 2017, 07:54:10 PM by Pete George »

CarlS

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2475
    • Email
Re: 6lb Borman sideloader
« Reply #22 on: December 17, 2017, 07:51:04 PM »
Pete,

No problem.  I'd rather be picked on than ignored.   :o

The 'no overlap' comment was meant more along what the direction for manufacturing was.  There certainly could have been anything used at any time.  Finding unused components, returned ammunition, etc. could certainly cause the one-offs that seem outside what is expected.

And wasn't everything fired at Gettysburg?!??!   If you look at the stuff on eBay it would appear that 2/3rds of all relics were found in southern Pennsylvania.   >:(
Best,
Carl

callicles

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 287
    • Email
Re: 6lb Borman sideloader
« Reply #23 on: December 17, 2017, 10:31:00 PM »
That is some incredible information, Pete. Thanks!!

I want to make sure I’m understanding this before I go off telling other people the wrong thing.

 I have a friend who found a 12-pound Bormann fused Cannonball (not a sideloader) a couple years ago. It has a Confederate fuse. He sent me pictures of it, said he could shake it and hear balls moving in it so it is a case shot. He said because it is Confederate it has iron-balls because only Confederates had iron case-shot. I really didn’t know enough at the time  to say otherwise.

So my telling all this is to make sure I understand it correctly. Seems to me from reading all this, the rule is: if no side-loader, no iron.

If I call him up and tell him that his shell can only have lead case-shot, that there is no way his ball has iron case-shot in it because his is not a side-loader, that only side-loaders could have iron Case-shot (or lead) would I be correct in telling him this or am I missing something? I just want to make sure I understand the issue before I tell him or anyone else.

Pete George

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 711
    • Email
Re: 6lb Borman sideloader
« Reply #24 on: December 18, 2017, 12:34:34 AM »
  Callicles, it is at least "possible" to have iron case-shot balls in a shell with no sideloader plug. It was a very laborious process to produce, requiring considerable skill when you're working only through the fuzehole to arrange the balls in the proper format.  That is why it was much simpler to go with the Sideloader method.

There is also this possibility:
  SelmaHunter put me onto a book (whose name I can't recall at the moment) which contains the reports of a CS Ordnance Department inspector, who was sent on a mission to tour various CS Arsenals and manufacturers to make sure they were producing artillery ammunition according to Ordnance Department instructions. He was dismayed to discover that two Arsenals were still making Case-Shot shells by "the old method"... simply mixing the gunpowder in with loose balls -- no matrix at all.  So, it is theoretically possible that your friend has one of those.

  But that doesn't answer your question about whether your friend's 12-pounder CS Bormann Case-Shot contains iron case-shot balls or lead balls.  The solution is to convince your friend to weigh it on a precision scale like a Postal Shipping scale. A 12-pounder with iron balls will weigh somewhere between a half-pound to one pound less than a lead-ball one. (I'm speaking of their "average" weights, there... they can vary by a lot, see next paragraph.)

  I currently have eleven iron-ball 12-pounder Sideloader Case-Shot shells at my house, and they weigh 9 pounds 10 ounces to 10 pounds zero ounces. Lead-ball 12-pounder Case-Shots tend to weigh 10 pounds 4 ounces to 11.0 pounds.

  Based on those weight measurements, and keeping it simple... here's my "rule-of-thumb" for anybody who wants to print it for their records.
For 12-pounder Case-Shot shells:
9 pounds 9 ounces to 10 pounds 2 ounces means iron balls,
10 pounds 4 ounces to 11.0 pounds means lead balls.

  But of course, as we've seen with civil war artillery projectiles, some exceptions to any rule will always turn up. For example, a dishonest manufacturer could cheat on the contract by not putting as many balls into the Case-Shot shells as the Ordnance Department specifications called for, and bribe the Ordnance Inspector.

Regards,
Pete
« Last Edit: December 18, 2017, 03:03:57 PM by Pete George »

Jack Bell

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 53
    • Email
Re: 6lb Borman sideloader
« Reply #25 on: December 18, 2017, 10:15:03 PM »
Just to muddy the water some in this discussion, I have a 6-pounder side-loader case shot with a Bormann replacement fuze in it and an iron side loader plug. But that is different from what Pete said about no 6-pounder Bormann-fuzed side loader has been found.