Why didn't the Spencer repeating rifle help bring an end to the American Civil War?

Answer 1

The Spencer was not adopted by the US Army. It was too new and futuristic, and the US Army wanted to stay with the same .58 muzzle loader which the CS Army was using. A few Northern state infantry regiments received the Spencer rifle, which was made in much smaller numbers than the Spencer carbine, and they used them to great effect in battle, but the US Army did want it the rifle. Had it been adopted, the CS Army would have found itself severely outgunned. Also, the Spencer had a logistical advantage because the South was unable to produce ammunition for it, and captured Spencers were useful only as long as the captured ammunition lasted. * The Henry repeating rifle was also not accepted by the US Army for the same reason as the Spencer. They were new, complex, and costly. It had a higher magazine capacity (15 rounds versus 7) than the Spencer, but the Spencer was much more reliable under combat conditions. As with the Spencer, the South was unable to produce ammunition for the Henry. Both rifles saw service in the Civil War, but not on the large scale which could have been possible if the US Army had been less conventional and more progressive.