Help support TMP


"The Dreyse Needle Gun in the American Civil War" Topic


17 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please don't call someone a Nazi unless they really are a Nazi.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the 19th Century Discussion Message Board

Back to the ACW Discussion Message Board


Areas of Interest

American Civil War
19th Century

Featured Hobby News Article


Top-Rated Ruleset

Volley & Bayonet


Rating: gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star 


Featured Showcase Article

Austro-Hungarian Syren Aeronef

I updated this model, and discovered it's now a collector's item…


Featured Profile Article

Music Video: Lion of the Reus

A sillier version of Vanguard of the Tripartite Fleet.


Featured Book Review


4,208 hits since 27 May 2013
©1994-2026 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?


TMP logo

Membership

Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
optional field27 May 2013 10:07 a.m. PST

I've never read any accounts of the Prussian Needle gun being used in the American Civil War, yet, it was among the best weapons available at the time. Beyond that, thousands of Prussian immigrants living in the US would have been trained in their use after having been conscripted into the Prussian Army. Adopting it, at least in some numbers, seems an obvious thing to do, yet that does not seem to have been the case.

Was the Needle Gun ever used in the war? If not why not?

Rudi the german27 May 2013 10:41 a.m. PST

Prussia had no oversea arms sale programm unlike britain, austira or belgium at this time.

Greetings

GildasFacit Sponsoring Member of TMP27 May 2013 11:32 a.m. PST

Rudi is correct – Prussia did not want them in the hands of her European competitors.

Also the Needle gun was pretty well out of date by 1860, far better arms were available in the US – even if not in quantity they were in limited production.

Britain obtained copies of the needle gun and the Chassepot before they were issued to the respective armies – they were not impressed by the Dryse but the Chassepot hurried up the decision to get a decent breechloader ASAP.

doug redshirt27 May 2013 12:45 p.m. PST

The Needle gun was almost 20 years old at this point. Only the Regular Army was being issued the weapon and there was still units that had not gotten it yet, production and distribution was very slow.

It was not the best weapon at the time either. There were many metal cartridge rifles coming out that put the Needle gun to shame. In fact the Prussians were already looking for a replacement. But it is expensive to reequip an entire army with new weapons. They were rearming their artillery arm with new Krupps at this time period. Right after the Franco-Prussian War the new German Confederation quickly rearmed with the new Mauser rifle after seeing what the Chassepot could do.

optional field27 May 2013 2:44 p.m. PST

I grant that the Neddle Gun was not the most advanced weapon at the time, but it certainly seems a far superior weapon to the muzzle loading weapons that were common during the war.

All things considered, the Dreyse was a superior weapon to the muzzle loading Enfields and Springfields that were the most common weapons seen during the war.

EJNashIII27 May 2013 3:30 p.m. PST

"All things considered, the Dreyse was a superior weapon to the muzzle loading Enfields and Springfields that were the most common weapons seen during the war."

However, that is not a prime consideration. More important 1) cost. a Dreyse, if available, would be 5 to 10 times the cost. Frankly, Irish bodies with cheaper weapons was more cost effective. 2) ammo supply. Again cost. A Dreyse, with a higher rate of fire goes thru 3 or more times as much ammo in a given engagement. Then, how do you get that ammo to the front? An incredible effort had to be made to supply as it was. 3) Tactical doctrine. The American military was already a laggard in doctrine, basically using 1812 era tactics. It took some time before it really sunk in that faster fire weapons were the way the army needed to go.

vtsaogames27 May 2013 3:31 p.m. PST

The Dreyse was generally better than the the muzzle-loaders, but even if available it would have faced the same mind-set against breech-loaders that fought the general introduction of such weapons through the Union army. Many of the units that did adopt such weapons did so on their own hook. The Lightning brigade purchased repeaters after their CO (Wilder) offered to advance the money if the soldiers would repay him from their pay on the installment plan. Many other infantry regiments that fielded such weapons did likewise.

The rap against the advanced weapons was that they were unreliable (true in some cases) and that troops would waste ammo. Again, this was true some times. Against this is the way well-disciplined troops with such weapons could stop attacks in their tracks.

MahanMan27 May 2013 10:43 p.m. PST

Another thing to blame the Dutchmen for, especially after the first few episodes of blinding by a leaking breech seal.

Martin Rapier28 May 2013 3:17 a.m. PST

The real rush to breechloaders came after the Prussians demonstrated how effective they were by shooting the Austrians to bits in 1866.

Somewhat late for the ACW.

Holdfast28 May 2013 5:22 a.m. PST

The real problem with a breechloader is that fire discipline has to be instilled into the troops. The Prussians did this through their three year long conscript service, which included at lot of small unit tactics and marksmanship, with the training overseen by long service NCOs and officers who were appointed rather than voted in. As a result there are very few accounts of Prussian units running out of ammo in the Austro-Prussian War of 1866.
Holdfast

Trajanus28 May 2013 12:51 p.m. PST

Frankly, Irish bodies with cheaper weapons was more cost effective

How dare you! (Its true though!) :o)

charared28 May 2013 6:50 p.m. PST

I'll add a bit to EJNashIII's excellent response…

Elderly, hide-bound officers at the top of the USA Ordinance/Supply branches at the beginning of the war kept a tight lid on the introduction of breech-loading, rapid fire weapons supposedly for tactical/supply reasons. Experimental arms purchases only in small batches and then only grudgingly out of deference to the US administration at the time. (Have a "new" firearm? get President Lincoln to try it out!)

Surprising how many Billy Yanks purchased (with their OWN $$$) Sharps, Spencer's and Henry rifles.

Guess the grunts of the time knew better than the "brass" what it took to "win" (despite the imperfections of metallic cartridges of the time).

Nothing new under the sun!

Murvihill29 May 2013 10:12 a.m. PST

All the way from breechloaders to assault rifles there were concerns by conservative command structures that soldiers would waste ammo with the faster-firing weapons and run out at some decision point, thereby losing the battle. So far as I know, that never actually happened. Soldiers adapted their tactics to match their ammo supply.

John the Greater29 May 2013 11:16 a.m. PST

It is interesting to note that the Brazilians experimented with the needlegun during the war with Paraguay. In addition to the points raised above, there was the problem of the rubber gasket at the breach wearing out (or corroding) making to weapon very unpleasant to fire. One logistical problem too much for the quartermaster.

Cuirassier30 May 2013 9:27 p.m. PST

Guys… John is correct. One Brazilian infantry battalion was equipped with the Dreyse in 1867 or 1868 (I need to check my books for the exact year), during the War of the Triple Alliance/Paraguayan War. The experience was a failure. That battalion went into action with the Dreyse and quite a few soldiers had problems with the needlegun. The battalion was soon re-equipped with Enfield muzzle-loaders. The Brazilian infantrymen simply hated the Dreyse. Apparently, climatic conditions in Paraguay were not ideal for employing the Dreyse needlegun.

On the other hand, the Brazilian cavalry approved and loved the Spencer carbine. Many cavalry units were armed with Spencers by 1868.

The Brazilian army was testing many of the new breech-loaders available around the world. There's evidence that even a few Chassepots were sent to Brazil in 1869 and possibly a few of them saw action very late in the war (in 1870). Don't ask me how, but a few Chassepots arrived in Brazil before the start of the Franco-Prussian War.

AICUSV31 May 2013 9:52 a.m. PST

There is documentation of these guns being used early on during the ACW in limited numbers. They found to be more trouble then they were worth.

Cuirassier31 May 2013 11:10 a.m. PST

The Dreyse needlegun in Brazil

The Brazilian army bought at least 3,000 Dreyses.

In december of 1866, a Company of Chasseurs/Jägers was created to test the needlegun. In january of 1867, Prussian-born Lieutenant Pedro Guilherme Meyer was selected to command this company (he had experience with the needlegun).

This Company grew in numbers and was attached to what was left of the old 15th Infantry Battalion. This provisional battalion was put under the command of the recently promoted Captain Meyer.

The battalion, equipped with the Dreyse needlegun, took part in the assault against the Estabelecimento Redoubt (February 19, 1868). The position was conquered, but many of the soldiers in Captain Meyer's battalion simply threw away their needleguns. They jammed on many occasions. During the battle, these Brazilian soldiers decided to threw away their needleguns and pick up muzzle-loaders rifles off the ground from the wounded and dead soldiers of other Brazilian battalions. Meyer's battalion suffered 128 casualties.

The Dreyse needlegun never again saw action in Paraguay.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.