Beaumont


#1

Gentlemen,

Any members have information regarding the Beaumont cartridge packet?

Looking for a picture of packet and dimensions for research.

With thanks in anticipation,

G and L A-R-West


#2

I have these Dutch Beaumont packet
Ball round 1895

Blank round 1889


#3

Gyrojet,

Thank you for sending attachments of the Beaumont cartridge packets. Very much appreciated in enhancing our research.

It looks as if the cartridges were packed alternatively bullet to base. Is it a single row of 8 cartridges per packet?

Please could you provide packet dimensions.

Do you know which company/s produced Beaumont cartridges?

With thanks,

G and L A-R-West


#4

The company that produced Beaumont cartidges was the Dutch, ( Patroonfabriek van de Artillerie Inrichtingen)

cartridge were packed in 8 cartridges per packet.

packet dimensions are:ball packet 8cmx7cmx3cm
: blank packet 7cmx7cmx3cm


#5

Thank you Gyrojet.

It would be interesting to know if the single shot Beaumont was issued with the same quantity of cartridges per packet.

The 8 cartridge packet was for the charger loading Beaumont-Vitali.

With thanks again for the information.

Best regards,

G and L A-R-West


#6

Were any of the standard issue Beaumont cartridges loaded with paper patched bullets?


#7

Gyrojet, do you have an example of the slightly shorter cased M.71 Beaumont that you could show in comparison to the long cased late version already shown?


#8

On municion.org, there are two kinds of case lenght: 50mm or 52mm.
It is said that the 52mm case was adopted in 1878. I own a cartridge (with the flat nosed bullet adopted in 1888) headstamped 12 92, and the case is only 50,6mm. Is there a real difference between the 1871 and the 1878 cases? Is there any documents about this modification?
Laurent


#9

Gyrojet,

We have placed 8 cartridges, bullet to case head in a single row, and the length is approximately 112 mm instead of the 8 cm you stated.

Were the cartridges packed in a double row?

With thanks,
G and L A-R-West


#10

packed in a double row …


#11

Hi everybody! I am not trying to veer off course (from the original topic) with my inquiry, as I am very interested in the M1871/88 rifle and any associated information. I was wondering if anyone has ever seen a factory loaded Beaumont cartridge with a paper patched bullet. I have searched the web incessantly, but to no avail. Thank you!


#12

I posted this query a couple of years ago, with no real results. I am trying to find out why the Dutch went to such extremes in designing a new cartridge in 1878? I thought maybe it had something to do with the Vitali Magazine conversion, but that didn’t happen until 1888. The original M71 had an oversize projectile at 0.464 inch for an approximately 0.457 bore. Experience probably showed that a projectile matching bore diameter was more appropriate, so that could explain the M71/78 redesign, but just changing bullet and neck dimensions would have been simpler.

COTW implies that there are two different chamberings in the rifles, and that M71/78 cartridges should chamber in the older M71 rifles, but that the reverse may not be true. Also every edition of COTW that I have owned has switched the drawings of the two rounds. I recently read on the web somewhere, that the Dutch only rechambered the weapons on hand in the Netherlands, and left the weapons overseas in the KNIL in their original condition. I have yet to see a a rechambered Beaumont, and I have owned two and examined the chambers on another five. Can anyone out there point me in the direction of a rechambered Beaumont?

COTW also suggests that the 11.43x50R Egyptian cartridge is probably interchangeable with the M71/78 Beaumont cartridge. I have tried this with modern reformed brass cartridges, and they fed and fired safely, but the brass bulged so badly in the oversize M71 sized chamber, that I imagine that it would be difficult to reload them, and that in any case, case life would be short if the cases were resized back to original dimensions. The same is true of modern loads in cases dimensioned to M71/78 Beaumont specs. If I were to shoot my Beaumont again, I would try using M71 style cases, perhaps necked slightly to hold a 0.458 projectile. Does anyone know if the M71 cartridge will feed through the Vitali magazine?

So in conclusion, I am looking for answers to the following questions:

  1. Why did the Dutch redesign a new round for the Beaumont Rifle? Please cite your source.
  2. Do any rechambered/rebarrelled Beaumont rifles exist? Please cite your source or point me toward a museum that has one.
  3. Will the original M71 dimensioned round feed through the Vitali magazine? I do have a couple of original rounds, but I don’t really want to expose them to possible damage by actually chambering them.

Thanks-Curt


#13

Curt, would you be able to post a photograph of your early M.71 round alongside an M.71/78 to compare the two?


#14

Jim:
My little digital camer probably isn’t up to the task for good close ups. I will try to get some scans or photos for you but it may take some time.
Curt


#15

Is there a marking I should look for on my Beaumont-Vitali to indicate a modified chamber? I use reformed 50-90 Sharps brass with .457" bullets with excellent results. Would measurements of a fired case help to determine if the chamber has been changed?


#16

Paper patched bullets were loaded by SFM in flat (Bloem Type primer) or raised base (Berdan) cases.

[quote]I posted this query a couple of years ago, with no real results. I am trying to find out why the Dutch went to such extremes in designing a new cartridge in 1878? I thought maybe it had something to do with the Vitali Magazine conversion, but that didn’t happen until 1888. The original M71 had an oversize projectile at 0.464 inch for an approximately 0.457 bore. Experience probably showed that a projectile matching bore diameter was more appropriate, so that could explain the M71/78 redesign, but just changing bullet and neck dimensions would have been simpler.

COTW implies that there are two different chamberings in the rifles, and that M71/78 cartridges should chamber in the older M71 rifles, but that the reverse may not be true. Also every edition of COTW that I have owned has switched the drawings of the two rounds. I recently read on the web somewhere, that the Dutch only rechambered the weapons on hand in the Netherlands, and left the weapons overseas in the KNIL in their original condition. I have yet to see a a rechambered Beaumont, and I have owned two and examined the chambers on another five. Can anyone out there point me in the direction of a rechambered Beaumont?

COTW also suggests that the 11.43x50R Egyptian cartridge is probably interchangeable with the M71/78 Beaumont cartridge. I have tried this with modern reformed brass cartridges, and they fed and fired safely, but the brass bulged so badly in the oversize M71 sized chamber, that I imagine that it would be difficult to reload them, and that in any case, case life would be short if the cases were resized back to original dimensions. The same is true of modern loads in cases dimensioned to M71/78 Beaumont specs. If I were to shoot my Beaumont again, I would try using M71 style cases, perhaps necked slightly to hold a 0.458 projectile. Does anyone know if the M71 cartridge will feed through the Vitali magazine?

So in conclusion, I am looking for answers to the following questions:

  1. Why did the Dutch redesign a new round for the Beaumont Rifle? Please cite your source.
  2. Do any rechambered/rebarrelled Beaumont rifles exist? Please cite your source or point me toward a museum that has one.
  3. Will the original M71 dimensioned round feed through the Vitali magazine? I do have a couple of original rounds, but I don’t really want to expose them to possible damage by actually chambering them.

Thanks-Curt[/quote]

There is no such thing as a Beaumont M71/78 cartridge or chamber but this nomenclature was used by DWM for their number 140 case (“Nierderlande M.71/78 Beaumont”) and this is the source of Barnes information. However, that designation was never used by the Netherlands in any of the Beaumont cartridge redesigned variations, which were only designated with numbers (i.e. the first packet posted by Gyrojet contains smokeless powder rounds adopted in 1895 and designated “scherpe Patroon tot Kleine Kaliber Geweer, No. 9”). Also, there are factory loaded DWM 140 cartridges with Harsveldt style round nose bullets (DWM No. 93 as shown in their case book and catalogs) or later flat nosed bullets suitable for the Beaumont-Vitali magazine.


#17

Roundsworth:
I would start this way: Do you think your fired cases look a whole lot different than your resized loaded or new cases?
Assuming that your loaded ammo was formed to the M71/78 dimensions, there will be much less taper from the base to the shoulder in your fired cases, then a sharper shoulder angle. The chamber on my rifle may be oversize to begin with, but the Egyptian cases(from Dixie 50-70) and the Beaumont M71/78(Bertram) were both badly bulged off center. I bought those loads from custom loaders. I am saving my pennies to buy M71 dies and cases, but that project keeps getting pushed back.

I have one case that was blown out fairly concentrically, and I was using that as a rough chamber gauge to check rifles at the gun shows, I will see if I can dig it up. I also have a chamber casting. I ran across it a couple of months ago, I hope I did not remelt it.

I do not know if there are any marks to denote a rechambered rifle. My Beaumont has a date stamped near the breach that matches the manufacture date. The identification of a rechamber mark would help out immensely. To go to a smaller chamber, the original barrel would have to have the shoulder set back on the threads and rechambered, or else just rebarreled. That is a lot of work on a semi-obsolete rifle, which is why I am inclined to believe the Dutch just skipped the whole process. Do you happen to know if KNIL rifles were marked differently than Dutch army rifles?


#18

Fede:
The only thing that could make your post more perfect is a citation for your information. I want that book.
Your information now makes me wonder if the M71/78 cartridges in my collection are chimeras, enigmas or just plain old Egyptian Remingtons!
Curt


#19

Curt, guess that “Fede’s notes” wouldn’t be a serious reference! Sorry, but is hard to mention “A book” because this information came from several sources as catalogs, drawings, documents, actual specimens, etc. You may want to post pictures of the rounds in your collection and I’ll try to help you with their identification.

Roundsworth, I forgot to mention that cartridges loaded with paper patched bullets were also made by UMC but to my knowledge they are not listed in any catalog.


#20

Fede:
I have always had a problem with asking for too much. It never worked well with Santa either. So how about this: What is the first or best reference source that you would recommend to a student of the variations in Dutch Beaumont Cartridges?
Thanks-Curt