Carbine or Rifle?

[Snapshot]

   After seen my friends original Spencer Carbine again,
And knowing that it used to belong to Custer's 5th Michigan.

I have been fighting the psychic hardship one has to endeavour when it comes to choosing between Rifle or Carbine.....
I have come to the conclusion That leaving this world without ewer owning a Carbine of some sort, would not be good..!! 
Yà all see, I already have loads of different rifles, and not one Carbine. So that is why my new 56-50 Spencer has to be a Carbine.

It will suit my historic persona of a Indian War Scout or a CW Horse-soldier to.
And it probably handles well on a CAS stage to?

Pro`s or Con`s on this matter is welcome!

[DJ]

FWIW, I have tried both a Spencer rifle and Spencer carbine in cowboy shoots and personally prefer the rifle by a (pardon my pun) long shot.  In my experience, the magazine full of heavy cartridges really tends to pull the butt of the carbine down off my shoulder when cocking the hammer and working the lever, bringing the muzzle up above the targets.  As a consequence, I have to re-shoulder the carbine for almost every shot.  With the rifle, the balance point is pretty close to where my left hand holds the stock, so it tends to remain in place on my shoulder while working the action and making sighting in for followup shots a lot faster. 

But you should probably get one of each just to be sure you have all your bases covered.

[Glenn]

I have the rifle and love it.  I would like to try a carbine.  But historically....the 5th started with the rifles, that's what they had at Gettysburg.  Wilder's Lightning Brigade and the Ohio Sharpshooters also had rifles. (I had a very distant relative in the 5th)  The carbine was the big item in the Indian Wars.  I've handled a lot of the carbines and the rifle does balance better and doesn't feel that much heavier.  Glenn

[gotzguns]

have both from taylor's. i tend to shoot rifle more then carbine. can't really say why. i just tend to pick the rifle out of the gun raack when i decide to fire off a few rounds from the back porch.i guess it just feels better or something. gotsguns

[Tuolumne Lawman]

I have the Taylor's rifle also.  I also prefer it to the carbine.  It is only 10 inches longer, so it is still handy.  It get's lots of "Oooooo's and Ahhhhhh's" when I bring it out at a match.

I had to trim the front sight down quite a bit, though, as it shot about 12 inches or more high at 25 yards.

[Snapshot]

Thanks guys, this makes it even harder. Yaàll seem to enjoy the Rifle more than the Carbine........
Best solution is of course to get one of eatch! But my wallet tells me only one is achiveable at the moment.

I have the Sharps Percussion Rifle, in apperance simular to the Spencer, so there is another reason for the Carbine.
How about reloading on the clock, witch one will be most handy?

Witch one will be the better one when on horse back?

My desition is not final, so I would like to hear your opinion!
My friend who imports the Navy Arms Spencer to Norway told me there would be no problem changing the order.

How about accuracy? I do belief them to be equal, it is just that a shorter Carbine needs a better marksman to shoot as good
as the rifle. Due to posible enlarged sight errors on the shorter firearm.

[DJ]

They're both pretty slow to reload, and I don't know that one is faster than the other in that respect.  The manual of arms for the rifle has you put the muzzle on the toe of your left boot while charging the magazine--that probably gives a little more stability, but I think it would violate safety rules at most cowboy matches. 

I haven't shot the repros, so don't know how their sights are.  The rifle and carbine share the same rear sight, with its tiny notch.  The carbine front sight is raised up quite a bit more off the barrel than the rifle front sight, so acquiring a sight picture with the carbine might be a little quicker.  However, the biggest difference I've found remains the tendency of the carbine to pull down off of my shoulder when cycling the action.

[Drydock]

For horseback use, the carbine would be handier, and it does have the sling ring that the rifle would lack.  I've tried them both, and prefer the carbine when moving thru a stage.  I've never had the slipping problem, just tuck it in tight like you should.  I suspect with our low recoil loadings a lot of us cowfolks tend to hold the long guns a bit loose. (NOT a criticisim, please!) My other CAS rifle is a Henry, which is about as muzzle heavy as they get.

Its really just pure personal preference.  Historicaly, the carbine was far more common than the rifle, with over 10 produced for each rifle.  Post CW, the army issued only the carbine, the few rifles used in the CW were purchased by state units.  Thus a Post war trooper, Scout or teamster would have a Carbine.  If it was issued by the Regular army, its a carbine.

[Major 2]

I've had an original for some 28 years , It was with the 5th. New York at Gettysburg  according to Moffett.
I have an S&S CF block in it and the bore is mint ... so it was natural to get a carbine when one availed itself.
Granted it is not the 56-52, but I'm fine with the 45 Sch. costs for plinking.
I have not had the pleasure to shoot a Rifle.... But I smile ear to ear every time I shoot my carbine.

[Arizona Trooper]

I've carried both on horseback and actually prefer the rifle. With a carbine on a standard cavalry sling, you have to be careful to get the barrel under your right leg or it flops around and is very annoying, especially in a trot or canter. The rifle slings over your back and is mostly out of the way. The only exception is if you post or stand up in the stirups and have the butt slip into the middle of your lower back. When you sit back down, especially if you do it quickly, it can bring tears to your eyes.  If you do carry a rifle on horseback, you have to be sure to wrap your arm through the sling when firing. Otherwise, if you drop it, it's gone.

I have seen two genuine Wilder's Lightning Brigade rifles with sling rings made from a saddle lead strap ring and coach strap staple. One is pictured below. It was carried by Henry Salmon of Co. A, 112th Ill. (and I got to shoot it!!!) I'd be willing to bet that they used the carbine sling just to catch it if dropped on horseback, but still carried it on the rifle sling over their backs.

[Drydock]

For mounted carry the carbine was held by a socket attatched to the saddle.  The mounted sling was indeed only for retention, not carry.  Sockets of the proper type can be found at www.fburgess.com

[Arizona Trooper]

Actually, very few troopers used sockets, which is why you can find so many nice originals today. The problem comes when you fall off. The barrel will often not come out of the socket, you can't get out of the sling, and your horse spooks. There were some nasty dragging incidents, which got really fantastic in the cavalry rumor mill. The result was that almost no one would use carbine sockets. A "C" shaped spring steel socket came out after the war. It was supposed to release the barrel when jerked hard, but was never popular.   

I have been so authentic as to fall off a couple times, once with a carbine and once with a rifle. I'm glad I wasn't using a socket. Even so, things went better with the rifle on my back. The carbine pretty much attacked me on the way down. 

[Drydock]

Post war the army went the other way, with troopers in the field pitching the sling and retaining the carbine in an extended boot, which by the SAW had become a full scabbard, though the sling ring would be retained until 1899, when finaly deleted on the last model of Krag Carbine.

[Snapshot]

Yaàll have made me want bouth Rifle and a Carbine. I will get the rifle first.....
Thanks all for constructive and good responce to my question!

[Wes Tancred]

I normally favour full length rifles, but I found the Spencer carbine exceptionally appealing and selected that version. But my reason for posting this message is to point out that there is a third alternative, not yet offered by Armi Sport: a Spencer in sporting rifle configuration, with an octagonal barrel. Had this option been available, I would likely have chosen it; though I have been very pleased with the look and handling of the carbine. The military Spencers do have a greater historical connexion with the war of northern aggression, and with the Indian wars, but I am sure that some Spencer sporting rifles must have been involved in exciting (or should I say grim?) frontier adventures. Here are two images I found on the internet (with octagonal and round barrels, respectively):

[Dakota Widowmaker]

Carbine, as its easier to stick in the back of my car with its shorter carrying case.

Its also less prone to stupid stuff, like whacking it into the side of a loading table or such.

I guess I just prefer shorter rifles with short cartridges. All my "long guns" have "long cartridges" to match.
30-30 is the "shortest" I have in a rifle over 20" long.