Manual for Rifle Practice
10 March 2026 06:50 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dime_novel_heroToday’s National Rifle Association is all about the 2nd Amendment. Well, no. Not really. The willingness of the NRA to take money from the Russians, their heavy lean into the most reactionary of conservative right wing politics, and their echoing silence over the murder of Alex Pretti, makes it clear that 2A rhetoric was really just that. . . rhetoric. This should probably not be surprising because the NRA was actually never really about the 2nd Amendment. Not when they started their current iteration in 1977 with the “Cincinnati Revolt”, not when they supported the Gun Control Act of 1968, and not when they supported the National Firearms Act of 1934.
I don’t want to talk about that here, however. This is to be about one of the NRA’s foundational documents. A document that defined very clearly the original purpose of the National Rifle Association of America.
Captain George Wood Wingate was a lawyer and veteran of the Civil War and, in 1871, held a commission of the New York State National Guard. He joined with Colonel William Conant Church (publisher of “The Army and Navy Journal and Gazette of the Regular and Volunteer Forces”) and other veterans with collective concern over the appalling lack of marksmanship they personally experienced on both sides of the late unpleasantness.
Closely modeled on the National Rifle Association of the UK (established 1859), the American NRA set up ranges at Creedmoor, New Jersey and quickly established their prominence with state, national, and international competitions.
The introduction to the 7th revised edition (1879) of the “Manual for Rifle Practice” boasted that the period from 1875 to 1877 saw “the number of troops practicing in Class-Firing has increased from 7,670 to 13,343; that the number qualifying in the Third Class has risen from 2,235 to 8,024, an increase of 258 per cent.; those qualifying in the Second Class from 802 to 4,930, an increase of 514 per cent., and the Marksmen from 533 to 2,126, an increase of 300 per cent.”
Impressive numbers, but what does it mean really? Comparing the numbers concerning improvement, and factoring in more than doubling overall membership, it would seem that in 1875, there was generally a 30% advancement from one class to the next higher class but after two years, the rate of advancement had increased to 60%. Honestly, though those numbers are less impressive than hundreds of percent, it’s still quite good performance.
Chapter 1 of the Manual is all about range officers and staff. Chapter 2 is an introduction, a table of contents if you will, about the important stuff in Chapter 3 starts with care and feeding of the various service rifles of the time; the Remington Rolling Block 1867, the Trapdoor Springfield 1873, and Peabody conversions of 1867. There is also ballistics basics concerning how rifling works and how bullets arc in their trajectories.
Chapters 7, 8, and 9 are about target construction and range construction and management. There are extensive appendices covering organization of matches and meetings, range rules, suggestions on clothing, diet, and other marksmanship suggestions, and finally, a number of advertisements for purchasing rifles, sights, powder, and other accessories (Remington breech-loading “Creedmoor” rifles for as low as $55, directly from Remington, POBox 3994).
It is in the third part of Chapter 3 that it starts getting to the meat of the matter and the part I care about by focusing on aiming. There is the use of the rifle being viced into a tripod so that the instructor can line the sights up properly and then the line of student step up to observe correct sight alignment for themselves. It seems that, at this time, a “half sight” alignment was to be taken with the top of the ^ of the front sight resting midway down into the V of the rear sight (modern iron sights typically have a flat-topped front sight in line with the flat top of the rear sight as a proper alignment).
The manual then moves on to positions of standing, kneeling, and prone, focusing on properly keeping the rifle against thew shoulder and, of course, repeating emphasis on sight picture and steadiness of dry fire.
The Wingate Indicator (described in more detail in later chapters) consists of a rod inserted into the barrel with a spike at the end. The force of the firing pin upon the rod is sufficient to throw the rod forward to impact a target on a nearby wall (and not the instructor’s eye). Lacking such a device, students will use blank cartridges (no powder or bullet, only the primer) to fire at a lit candle a yard away. Students then move on to full power blank firing to become accustomed to the report.
But it’s not to the range yet. While still at the armory or barracks (this is a paramilitary, after all), students will be trained with underpowered ammunition or converted 22 rifles.
And then to the range, but not to actually fire. Oh no. There is an extensive section of judging range, first with measuring devices such as stadia or telemeters, and then with mark one eyeballs with knowledge such as “At 50 yards the observer can name any one of his comrades readily . . . at 100 yards the lineaments of the face are no longer visible, the buttons down the front of the coat appear one continuous line . . . at 225 yards the face now resembles a light-colored ball under the cap.” Students are tested on this skill and only advance to the next level when range estimation has been mastered.
We are nearly half way through the manual and, only now, are getting to the point of firing and scoring. There is firing singly, in ranks, in volley fire, and also sections of firing from horseback, but I want to focus on firing singly.
The Class 3 target consists of a 6 foot high by 4 foot target board, a 46 inch outer circle, a concentric 26 inner circle, and an 8 inch bullseye. They are scored respectively 2, 3, 4 and 5 points for a bullseye. Novices fire 5 rounds from the standing position at 100 yards, and 5 rounds at 150 yards. A score of 25 points is required to advance to the title of Third Class Shooter. Those who do not pass will be considered “drilled soldiers” and will practice at 150 and 200 yards until the next qualification.
The Class 2 target consists of a 6 foot by 6 foot target board, a 54 inch outer circle, a concentric 38 inner circle, and a 22 inch bullseye. They are scored respectively 2, 3, 4 and 5 points for a bullseye. Class Three shooters fire 5 rounds from the kneeling position at 300 yards, and 5 rounds from the prone position at 400 yards. A score of 25 points is required to advance to the title of First Class Shooter.
The Class 1 target consists of a 6 foot by 12 foot wide target board, a 6’x6’ outer box, a 54 inch inner circle, and a 36 inch bullseye. They are scored respectively 2, 3, 4 and 5 points for a bullseye. First Class shooters fire 5 rounds from the standing position (I assume at a Third Class target) at 200 yards, and 5 rounds from the prone position (at the First Class target) at 500 yards. A score of 25 points is required to advance to the title of Marksman.
It can be a challenge to compare the expected performance for these drills and classes to modern qualifications (and even among modern qualifications) but, by my calculations, and generally speaking, if you can hit the “paper” with every shot, that should be sufficient to advance to the next class. Is my understanding accurate? I would probably need to engage the course of fire myself but huge targets such as those described would be a challenge, as would the ranges necessary. The clubs at which I am a member don’t have ranges out beyond 300 yards (though I hear the Beaver Valley club is building a range out to 500 yards). I have a period Martini-Henry (comparable to the proscribed Peabody) but firing that is expensive at over $5 a round and I honestly don’t trust the nearly 150 year old Nepalese twisted-steel barrel for that much usage.
My other recourse is to talk with people who have engaged the course with period weapons. As the NRA of America’s guidelines are based on the NRA of Great Britain's standards, I am sure YouTuber BritishMuzzleloader (link) would be able to tell me.
What I can confidently take away from Wingate’s course of training is the importance of sight picture and dry fire drill. He spends a lot of time on those fundamentals and, only when they are mastered, does he move on.
This attitude is also borne out by experience. I recently purchased a new pistol. Not having an opportunity to take it to the range right away, I spent some time doing sight picture and dry fire practice. Not much, admittedly, but some. When I did get out to the range, my first magazine through the gun was, I thought, pretty good. The next magazine, not so much. Even the third magazine, paying as much attention to sight picture, grip, trigger control, and so on, did not produce a better group than the first string. And I have had this experience with other range days with various long guns. It’s counterintuitive but apparently true. Sight picture and dry fire are fundamental.
And in terms of paramilitary training or even self defense, this seems the way you want it to be. Surprised, called to action, unprepared, however you want to characterize it, when you need to use the gun you won’t have time for ranging shots, sight adjustments, or reevaluations. Your “out of the gate” performance will be the deciding performance.
Forty years ago, I became a NRA certified instructor. Though I allowed the certification to lapse in the long meantime, I don’t recall any detailed instruction on sight picture and try fire training on the level of Wingate’s “Manual for Rifle Practice” in the modern NRA coursework. Yes, traditional iron sight picture was gone over but it was a single point of knowledge, not the starting point of extensive training and practice. What online NRA documentation I have been able to find gives similar slight attention.
I believe Captain Wingate would be disappointed in what his National Rifle Association has become. For a multitude of reasons.
I don’t want to talk about that here, however. This is to be about one of the NRA’s foundational documents. A document that defined very clearly the original purpose of the National Rifle Association of America.
Captain George Wood Wingate was a lawyer and veteran of the Civil War and, in 1871, held a commission of the New York State National Guard. He joined with Colonel William Conant Church (publisher of “The Army and Navy Journal and Gazette of the Regular and Volunteer Forces”) and other veterans with collective concern over the appalling lack of marksmanship they personally experienced on both sides of the late unpleasantness.
“. . . for not only the conflict between Prussia and Austria, but the more recent French and Prussian contest, have demonstrated that the very accuracy and rapidity of fire which renders these [long-range breech-loading] arms so formidable in the hands of trained marksmen, simply results in a waste of ammunition with those unfamiliar with their use, which leaves an army helpless at the decisive moment of battle. Other nations, recognizing these facts, have long since instituted a thorough system of instruction of rifle practice . . . In this country, on the other hand, the matter has been entirely neglected.”
Closely modeled on the National Rifle Association of the UK (established 1859), the American NRA set up ranges at Creedmoor, New Jersey and quickly established their prominence with state, national, and international competitions.
The introduction to the 7th revised edition (1879) of the “Manual for Rifle Practice” boasted that the period from 1875 to 1877 saw “the number of troops practicing in Class-Firing has increased from 7,670 to 13,343; that the number qualifying in the Third Class has risen from 2,235 to 8,024, an increase of 258 per cent.; those qualifying in the Second Class from 802 to 4,930, an increase of 514 per cent., and the Marksmen from 533 to 2,126, an increase of 300 per cent.”Impressive numbers, but what does it mean really? Comparing the numbers concerning improvement, and factoring in more than doubling overall membership, it would seem that in 1875, there was generally a 30% advancement from one class to the next higher class but after two years, the rate of advancement had increased to 60%. Honestly, though those numbers are less impressive than hundreds of percent, it’s still quite good performance.
“The instructor should not allow the recruits to be discouraged by any previous ignorance in the use of arms, nor by any imagined unsteadiness of the nerves, but should explain to them in the first instance, that any man who has no defect in his sight can, by perseverance, become a good shot.”
Chapter 1 of the Manual is all about range officers and staff. Chapter 2 is an introduction, a table of contents if you will, about the important stuff in Chapter 3 starts with care and feeding of the various service rifles of the time; the Remington Rolling Block 1867, the Trapdoor Springfield 1873, and Peabody conversions of 1867. There is also ballistics basics concerning how rifling works and how bullets arc in their trajectories.
Chapters 7, 8, and 9 are about target construction and range construction and management. There are extensive appendices covering organization of matches and meetings, range rules, suggestions on clothing, diet, and other marksmanship suggestions, and finally, a number of advertisements for purchasing rifles, sights, powder, and other accessories (Remington breech-loading “Creedmoor” rifles for as low as $55, directly from Remington, POBox 3994).
It is in the third part of Chapter 3 that it starts getting to the meat of the matter and the part I care about by focusing on aiming. There is the use of the rifle being viced into a tripod so that the instructor can line the sights up properly and then the line of student step up to observe correct sight alignment for themselves. It seems that, at this time, a “half sight” alignment was to be taken with the top of the ^ of the front sight resting midway down into the V of the rear sight (modern iron sights typically have a flat-topped front sight in line with the flat top of the rear sight as a proper alignment).
The manual then moves on to positions of standing, kneeling, and prone, focusing on properly keeping the rifle against thew shoulder and, of course, repeating emphasis on sight picture and steadiness of dry fire.
“[the instructor] should occasionally place himself in front of each man, and cause him to aim at his eye with a view to ascertain if he attains the alignment quickly and readily, and does not loose his aim in pressing the trigger.”
The Wingate Indicator (described in more detail in later chapters) consists of a rod inserted into the barrel with a spike at the end. The force of the firing pin upon the rod is sufficient to throw the rod forward to impact a target on a nearby wall (and not the instructor’s eye). Lacking such a device, students will use blank cartridges (no powder or bullet, only the primer) to fire at a lit candle a yard away. Students then move on to full power blank firing to become accustomed to the report.
But it’s not to the range yet. While still at the armory or barracks (this is a paramilitary, after all), students will be trained with underpowered ammunition or converted 22 rifles.
And then to the range, but not to actually fire. Oh no. There is an extensive section of judging range, first with measuring devices such as stadia or telemeters, and then with mark one eyeballs with knowledge such as “At 50 yards the observer can name any one of his comrades readily . . . at 100 yards the lineaments of the face are no longer visible, the buttons down the front of the coat appear one continuous line . . . at 225 yards the face now resembles a light-colored ball under the cap.” Students are tested on this skill and only advance to the next level when range estimation has been mastered.
We are nearly half way through the manual and, only now, are getting to the point of firing and scoring. There is firing singly, in ranks, in volley fire, and also sections of firing from horseback, but I want to focus on firing singly.
The Class 3 target consists of a 6 foot high by 4 foot target board, a 46 inch outer circle, a concentric 26 inner circle, and an 8 inch bullseye. They are scored respectively 2, 3, 4 and 5 points for a bullseye. Novices fire 5 rounds from the standing position at 100 yards, and 5 rounds at 150 yards. A score of 25 points is required to advance to the title of Third Class Shooter. Those who do not pass will be considered “drilled soldiers” and will practice at 150 and 200 yards until the next qualification.
The Class 2 target consists of a 6 foot by 6 foot target board, a 54 inch outer circle, a concentric 38 inner circle, and a 22 inch bullseye. They are scored respectively 2, 3, 4 and 5 points for a bullseye. Class Three shooters fire 5 rounds from the kneeling position at 300 yards, and 5 rounds from the prone position at 400 yards. A score of 25 points is required to advance to the title of First Class Shooter.
The Class 1 target consists of a 6 foot by 12 foot wide target board, a 6’x6’ outer box, a 54 inch inner circle, and a 36 inch bullseye. They are scored respectively 2, 3, 4 and 5 points for a bullseye. First Class shooters fire 5 rounds from the standing position (I assume at a Third Class target) at 200 yards, and 5 rounds from the prone position (at the First Class target) at 500 yards. A score of 25 points is required to advance to the title of Marksman.
It can be a challenge to compare the expected performance for these drills and classes to modern qualifications (and even among modern qualifications) but, by my calculations, and generally speaking, if you can hit the “paper” with every shot, that should be sufficient to advance to the next class. Is my understanding accurate? I would probably need to engage the course of fire myself but huge targets such as those described would be a challenge, as would the ranges necessary. The clubs at which I am a member don’t have ranges out beyond 300 yards (though I hear the Beaver Valley club is building a range out to 500 yards). I have a period Martini-Henry (comparable to the proscribed Peabody) but firing that is expensive at over $5 a round and I honestly don’t trust the nearly 150 year old Nepalese twisted-steel barrel for that much usage.
My other recourse is to talk with people who have engaged the course with period weapons. As the NRA of America’s guidelines are based on the NRA of Great Britain's standards, I am sure YouTuber BritishMuzzleloader (link) would be able to tell me.
What I can confidently take away from Wingate’s course of training is the importance of sight picture and dry fire drill. He spends a lot of time on those fundamentals and, only when they are mastered, does he move on.
“No advantage is gained by firing more than ten shots at a distance.”
This attitude is also borne out by experience. I recently purchased a new pistol. Not having an opportunity to take it to the range right away, I spent some time doing sight picture and dry fire practice. Not much, admittedly, but some. When I did get out to the range, my first magazine through the gun was, I thought, pretty good. The next magazine, not so much. Even the third magazine, paying as much attention to sight picture, grip, trigger control, and so on, did not produce a better group than the first string. And I have had this experience with other range days with various long guns. It’s counterintuitive but apparently true. Sight picture and dry fire are fundamental.
And in terms of paramilitary training or even self defense, this seems the way you want it to be. Surprised, called to action, unprepared, however you want to characterize it, when you need to use the gun you won’t have time for ranging shots, sight adjustments, or reevaluations. Your “out of the gate” performance will be the deciding performance.
Forty years ago, I became a NRA certified instructor. Though I allowed the certification to lapse in the long meantime, I don’t recall any detailed instruction on sight picture and try fire training on the level of Wingate’s “Manual for Rifle Practice” in the modern NRA coursework. Yes, traditional iron sight picture was gone over but it was a single point of knowledge, not the starting point of extensive training and practice. What online NRA documentation I have been able to find gives similar slight attention.
I believe Captain Wingate would be disappointed in what his National Rifle Association has become. For a multitude of reasons.
