US SpringField 1857

[Ron Morgan]

Great comments from all. I hope the close up photo of the lock plate may shed some more light on what it really may be. It definitely looks like the lock plate says 1867 not 1857. Hope that may help.

 

[Tumblernotch]

It may help, though I'm not sure if any of the post war conversions (to the Allin Trapdoor system) had that date stamped on the M1863 lockplates. I'm certainly no expert on the Trapdoor rifles, but I'm sure somebody on here can say whether or not Springfield used newly stamped plates. Closeups of both sides of the breech area and a measurement between the band spring mortises would probably help. I couldn't read all the numbers on your tape measure. Also, as I mentioned earlier, even when I zoomed on the picture I couldn't make out whether or not there was a boss on the trigger guard where the sling swivel would have been mounted. Is there one at the rear of the trigger bow? I've seen a few where someone removed the bow from the plate and reversed it when they put it back together. This is an interesting piece. It's obviously been changed from whatever it was originally and it's always fun to try to figure out what is what.
I'm looking forward to the new pics and other info.

 

[Jim Blair]

The 1st Allin conversion had a lock plate stamped 1865.The rest of them until the 1873 model came out will have lockplate dates of 1863-64 common to the M1863 RM.

Edit:In checking Dick Hosmer's book on the .58 and .50 cal Springfields there is one which would have an 1867 date,the Model 1866 Cadet Rifle.There is no provision on this one for a sling swivel on the trigger bow either.The stock length is 44 3/4 inches,barrel band shoulders are 16 1/8 inches apart.There were very few made,less than a 1000.Author notes when found they are often in very heavily used condition.They have a length of pull of 12 1/2 inches which is a little over an inch shorter than the normal musket stock.

 

[Tumblernotch]

That's what I have found but wasn't sure if there may be a few out there that may have had new in stock plates that hadn't been stamped. But I realised that since they were altering existing and most likely unissued muskets it would be highly unlikely that they would be using new parts out of the bin and even more unlikely that there would be any unmarked plates. I seriously doubt that we will see any 1867 marked plates of any kind unless the above scenario took place, which probably did not.

Phew, that's a lot of words just to say I agree.

 

[Jim Blair]

LOL Check my edit,you may find it of interest,we were both typing at the same time. :haha:

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

Interesting possibilities discussed above. I did receive Ron's email but the photo did not come through. Maybe he can try sending it by computer rather than the iPhone?

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

Ron is fast! Thanks Ron, here are the pictures that you sent:

As you can see, the lock is definitely dated "1867", taking the lock into the post-War period of the early trapdoor rifles.

Also very interesting is the excellent visibility of the bolster. It is not a '55 - '61 bolster, it is a modified M1841 Rifle or M1842 Musket bolster. The earlier barrel was modified to fit the post-War stock. Ron, can maybe you have already told us, but can you tell us what the barrel length is? Measurement should be from the muzzle to the area where the barrel and breachplug tang fit together. Also, what about caliber?

 

[Tumblernotch]

Looking at a few rather poor pictures in my books, I think I can confirm what you're saying. The hammer is wrong, but if the trigger pull matches what you're saying, I'd say there's an excellent chance that this is a Cadet rifle. It's a shame that the original barrel is not on here. Of course if it was we probably wouldn't be wondering what it is. :grin:

 

[Tumblernotch]

I'd say you're on the nose there. It looks like somebody trimmed a bit off the bolster on the side towards the hammer. It's a bit smaller than what it should be and that threw me off a little until we got the enlargement. Boys, we's gettin' thar!

 

[Jim Blair]

I'm gonna dig around in some of my old gun catalog reprints and see if a similiar gun was offered by anyone circa 1890-1900.

If Ron could check some of the stock measurments against the ones I posted and get a good clear picture of the triggerguard to confirm there is no sling swivel provision on it,it might tie down the stock ID or LOL make it more confusing one.Like to hear more about the barrel,caliber,smooth or rifled,OAL.

 

[Jim Blair]

Remember when Numrich had those kits to convert your trapdoor to muzzleloader.You got a barrel and an 1863 hammer,dropped the barrel in your stock,changed the hammer on your lockplate,bingo a ML musket.This is a "little" prior to that though isn't it. :grin:

 

[Tumblernotch]

Those were the days! I compared the length between the butt and the trigger in the picture with that on a Richmond (M1855) and it is about an inch shorter. I have photos (rather small) of three models of Cadet Rifles ('68, '69 and '73) in Gluckman's book and it appears that the '68 had a shorter stock than the later models. They appear to be of standard length. None have sling swivels. This does look like it could be something that someone with a Numrich kit may have put together or maybe even a Bannerman creation. Anyone could have cobbled it together with parts picked up here and there.

Another thing, the OA length of the '68 was 51 7/8" compared to 48" for the '69. Problem is, without the original barrel, the OA length means nothing. Oh well. It's been interesting if nothing else.

 

[Ron Morgan]

Guys,
Great responses. Looks like we are getting there. The gun is at a second home and I will not have a chance to get there and take more photos for two weeks. I will take close ups of trigger guard assembly. Tell me again in simply words what measurements are needed. I know the terms of bolster and tang and breech etc are common to you but not to me. I will do my best to get measurements you guys need and provide photos to Va Manuf to post and send along. I appreicate all of your help on this. So in essence it may be a cadet rifle, I think is the most common assumption.

 

[Jim Blair]

Here's some measurments to take for the stock for the 1867 Cadet Rifle-

Center of buttplate to center of trigger- 12 1/2 inches.

Overall length of stock only roughly from the center of buttplate to top of forend where the metal cap is- 44 3/4 inches.This measurement might also be from the top of the butt to end of stock too,not sure.

Band spacing from bottom to bottom of the inletting cuts for the bands- 16 1/8 inches.

A picture of the breech and lock area,rear 6 or 8 inches of the barrel,looking down from the top would help too.Any rear sight on it or holes indicating there was one?

 

[Ron Morgan]

Jim,
Thanks I will get photos of those to send to VA Manuf to post along with the measurements.Will be sending back to you in the next two weeks. I appreciate your and everyone's input.
Ron

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

I am sorry but I have hit numerous problems with time getting Ron's last pictures up. Here they are:

Ron, my sincere apologies for the delay.

 

[cynthialee]

Imagine what she looked like the day the artisan said 'its ready to sell'.

Looks like it has seen alot of use.

 

[Jim Blair]

Wish he'd taken a picture from the top at the breech to see if there was an extractor cut in the stock to determine if that was a M1866 stock.

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

Ron just sent this one for you Jim:

Hope it helps.

 

[jim bowie]

Please forgive the intrusion, however i noticed you referenced gluckmans, i need to verify a reference to a w sites which may be listed in that book,: my understanding is they list a flint lock built by him.i think he is a relative of john p sites which i have posted about here and in the gun building section of this forum. This may intrest you as it may be that w sites is from senaca rocks wv. Very sorry to intrude on your conversation im just desperate for more info respectfuly fatcat