1861 Springfield questions

[jethro224]

A 1861 Springfield just came into my possession and I have a bunch of questions. I got it from a guy who was selling it for a friend who's brother, the original(?) owner, passed away. The guy I got it from nor the brother knew anything about it.

It's a .58 caliber rifle. Has 1861 stamped on the lock plate behind the hammer and an eagle just ahead of the hammer. In front of the eagle is stamped U.S. and just below that is Springfield.
The top of the barrel is stamped "Black powder only cal .58". On the left side of the breech, right at the line of the stock is what looks like AC inside of a circle and S45XX.

Those are the only stamps visible without disassembling the musket.

Can anybody tell me anything about this musket?
I'm guessing Armi Sport???
What loads should I feed it?
What are these things worth in pretty good condition? I think I got it for a really good price but don't really know what they go for.
The rear sight has 2 flip-ups. One is stamped with a 3 and the other a 5. What does this mean?
What thread is the nipple?
Anything else I need to know?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Donny]

3= 300 yds
5= 500 yds

 

[Donny]

Probably more or less sighted for 60 gr
FFg & minies...
rb will shoot higher.

I paid $225 for a used Navy Arms Zouave. I don't know about your gun.

 

[Artificer]

AC in an Elipse and/or circle is an Armisport stamp.

1. How much did you pay for it?

2. What is the condition of the bore/rifling?

3. Was there any additional work like a taller front sight added or a trigger job done to it? These are normal modifications for Skirmish Rifle Muskets.

4. It sounds like the gun was not "de-farbed," so there is no added value there.

5. Will have to see if I have any of those cones/nipples in stock to check the Metric Thread pitch.

Gus

 

[Artificer]

OK, Cone/Nipple size is 8 x 1 mm (Metric).

Gus

 

[jethro224]

1. How much did you pay for it?
$200 for it and he threw in a crusty old Jukar Kentucky.

2. What is the condition of the bore/rifling?
Good as far as I can see down it. I don't have a jag that fits.

3. Was there any additional work like a taller front sight added or a trigger job done to it?
I don't think so but not sure how to tell. On the sight anyway... The trigger is not light by any means. Reminds me of my Pedersoli Bess.

 

[RhinoDave]

Current pricing on these is around $800.00 new. They also have a 1:66 twist which should shoot a round ball nicely. I use a patched.570 round ball and 55 grains of 2f in my Zouave and Musketoon so that might be a good place to start. I don't have any experience with the Armi sport replicas so I don't know which size Minie ball to use. I shoot a .581 in the musketoon and a .577 in the zouave but those big bullets use up a lot of lead so I mostly shoot patched r.b..

 

[Artificer]

That was one HECK of a deal, even not including the Jukar KY. Good for you. You could easily get more than that for the gun from a reenactor and the barrel would not have to be very good at all. We used to look for such guns at the NSSA nationals where the bores were shot out, but still otherwise mechanically good for our brand new recruits or as a "loaner" gun for the unit.

NSSA legal target front sights have a MUCH higher blade on them and you file them to shape. Here is an example of what they look like before you file them. http://www.lodgewood.com/Tall-Shooter-Front-Sight-for-Original-Reproduction-Muskets_p_561.html

Yep, no trigger job done if it still weighs and/or feels as heavy as a Brown Bess.

You done good!

Gus

 

[Artificer]

Oh, for best accuracy results for shooting Minie Balls, you must get the actual bore size measurement and swage the bullets at .001" to .002" under that size. Bullet Swaging tools are available in .001" increments.

Gus

 

[Cowboy]

Sounds like you got a great deal Jethro.

I always wanted one of those as well. Keep us posted on how she shoots.

Congrats on getting you a 1861 Springfield!

Respectfully, Cowboy :thumbsup:

 

[jethro224]

Thanks for the info.

The front sight is definitely not the one in that link. I'm guessing it's the original.

I'll probably try that roundball load that RhinoDave mentioned. Really I'm more of a AWI flint shooter, not a CW cap musket guy, but couldn't pass up this deal...

 

[Artificer]

You may be interested that the minimum trigger pull weight approved by the U.S. Government for the M 1861 was 3 pounds. Though I have examined many original guns over the years, I have never seen one with that light of a trigger pull, even on well used guns/locks. (The lightest average trigger pull was probably around 5 to 7 pounds.) The NSSA chose the Government minimum as their minimum trigger pull weight as well.

Because trigger pull weights will naturally reduce with wear and tear from shooting or dry firing, most folks set the trigger pull weights up at 3 1/2 pound minimum so one doesn't get to a major shoot and have the trigger pull fail inspection. However, it takes the higher quality original parts to get a trigger pull that low and so it will last a long time before going lighter. It also requires a lot of modification that was never done to the original guns in general service.

The Armisport parts are not as good as original locks and parts. The only way they could be would be if the muskets cost a whole lot more than the price for which they are sold. The average trigger pull as received probably is in the 9 to 12 lb. pull weight range. However, a trigger pull of around or slightly less than 4 1/2 pounds is quite possible with these locks and when the trigger break is done well, that makes for a vast improvement in the feel of the trigger pull.

Gus

 

[jethro224]

The average trigger pull as received probably is in the 9 to 12 lb. pull weight range.

That sounds about right going by feel on this one.
It looks like it's been quite a while since this musket was taken apart and cleaned/oiled. As soon as I get a chance I will take the lock out and clean it up. Just that may help quite a bit. A bit of polishing may help as well.
4 1/2 pounds pull would be a huge improvement. I'm not sure if I'm up to doing a real trigger job tho.

 

[Artificer]

If you are interested in doing the work, it is not exceptionally difficult, but you have to know a few things.

The following is a pretty good explanation of doing the work, except for a few things. I definitely do not agree about deliberately putting a backward angle on the full cock notch, as talked about in "line B" in the text. For the best trigger pull, the full cock notch needs to be as close as possible to what is called "normal" in the text. From a lot of experience doing these jobs, I also do not recommend taking metal off the full and half cock notches. It is far better to reduce sear engagement by what is shown in Figures 5 or 6 or 7. I usually did it by what is explained in figure 5. Oh, if you have to file/stone the full cock notch to get that face correct, then you have to caseharden that face afterwards. If you do that, caseharden the sear face as well. Finally, grinding down the sear spring as shown in Figure 8 often does not work well with reproduction sear springs. Some grinding like this may be done on tougher original springs, but repro's are made of thinner material and are softer. I usually did not modify repro sear springs most of the time.
http://www.nwtskirmisher.com/useful-locks.shtml

Gus

 

[varsity07840]

I've had good results with several original locks using the figure 5
method.

 

[RhinoDave]

I used the method in fig. 6 to reduce the creep in my Zouaves trigger. Something else to think about, by reducing the amount of sear engagement, you will create a little more slop or front to back play in the trigger.

 

[Zonie]

To any one interested:

The link I read very clearly said, while talking about "line B", not to reduce the angle less than the straight "normal line".

The "normal line" has no rise or fall as the nose of the sear moves across it and it is the ideal condition for the orientation of the full cock notch.

Anything that would allow the nose of the sear to slide off of the full cock notch due to spring pressure or vibration would cause a unsafe condition.

 

[Artificer]

Indeed, the correct/ideal angle for the full cock notch is shown in the link in Figure 2. and in Figure 2.1 as "normal." This is the best angle for the full cock notch both for safety and for the best feeling trigger pull.

The angle shown in Figure 2.1 as "line A" is absolutely the wrong angle and it means the bottom of the full cock notch is further forward than the top of the full cock notch. The further forward the bottom of the notch is, the more likely it is for the sear to slip off due to light vibration or a bump OR not even engage at all. The hammer or cock actually moves down a bit when pulling the trigger, when the full cock notch has a forward angle like this. The person shooting the gun won't see it, but it can be spotted by someone else looking at the hammer when the shooter pulls the trigger.

The full cock notch angle as shown in Figure 2.1 as "line b" and in Figure 2.2 has the bottom of the notch angling backwards. Even a tiny backward angle of the full cock notch means the trigger pull will get harder as you pull the trigger, until the sear is moved completely out of the full cock notch. The more the bottom of full cock notch is angled backward, the harder the trigger pull is. This because you are actually cocking the hammer back by pulling the trigger throughout the trigger pull. A very small backward angle will not easily show this to someone looking at the shooter pulling the trigger, but the more the bottom of the full cock notch is angled backwards, the easier it is to see the hammer being cocked back while the trigger is pulled.

Gus