1866 Allin Conversion

[apollo]

I have an Allin Conversion that does not fit the dimensions shown in Mr Hosner"s book, which I just purchased. (Great info in there.) My rifle has been refinished, polished and blued so it's value is as a shooter to me. Over all length is 48-3/4, stock is 44-3/4, with a 13-1/2 length of pull. band spacing is 11-5/8. ramrod is threaded, 7 roll flat head with a retaining bulb, it looks like the 1868 ram rod. when seated it is the same lenglh as the muzzle. Barrel lenght is 28-3/4 breach face to muzzle. Lock plate is dated 1864, breech block has 1866 date with ealge stamp. Us marked buttplate. No cartouches on the stock and it looks like the wrist has been thinned. It has a single leaf rear sight without any numbers on it. The front sight is 1-1/2 from the muzzle. It looks like the stock was a rifle stock that had the front portion trimmed back and the rear two bands left as is and the nose cap fitted to the shortened stock.
Is this a Bannerman rifle? Or maybe a Bubba job? Any thoughts?
Thanks in advance,
Apollo

[mr.j]

Can one tell the difference between a bannerman made rifle or a well assembled bubba rifle? Is there any markings on bannerman made rifles that would tell you it was made by bannerman? I dont think so. If I am not mistaken bannerman was in the business of scraping metal and happened to obtain large amounts of military surplus that was supposed to be scraped/melted but parts where reassembled into full rifles etc. If bubba would of done the same thing would there be known bubba made rifles? others on this site with serial number history and info may help.

[Dick Hosmer]

I have an Allin Conversion that does not fit the dimensions shown in Mr Hosner"s book, which I just purchased. (Great info in there.) My rifle has been refinished, polished and blued so it's value is as a shooter to me. Over all length is 48-3/4, stock is 44-3/4, with a 13-1/2 length of pull. band spacing is 11-5/8. ramrod is threaded, 7 roll flat head with a retaining bulb, it looks like the 1868 ram rod. when seated it is the same lenglh as the muzzle. Barrel lenght is 28-3/4 breach face to muzzle. Lock plate is dated 1864, breech block has 1866 date with ealge stamp. Us marked buttplate. No cartouches on the stock and it looks like the wrist has been thinned. It has a single leaf rear sight without any numbers on it. The front sight is 1-1/2 from the muzzle. It looks like the stock was a rifle stock that had the front portion trimmed back and the rear two bands left as is and the nose cap fitted to the shortened stock.
Is this a Bannerman rifle? Or maybe a Bubba job? Any thoughts?
Thanks in advance,
Apollo

I'd say a very good case could be made that it is BOTH! Physically, it's a typical Bannerman - but they wouldn't have wasted money on blueing it, which is where Billy Bob stepped in.

[Dick Hosmer]

Can one tell the difference between a bannerman made rifle or a well assembled bubba rifle? Is there any markings on bannerman made rifles that would tell you it was made by bannerman? I dont think so. If I am not mistaken bannerman was in the business of scraping metal and happened to obtain large amounts of military surplus that was supposed to be scraped/melted but parts where reassembled into full rifles etc. If bubba would of done the same thing would there be known bubba made rifles? others on this site with serial number history and info may help.

Aside from the fact that MANY such arms have 1883 or 1884 dated lockplates, I know of no other markings.

[apollo]

Thanks for the replies. After reading "The Book", I was reasonably certain it was not a 1866 Short rifle. It is a shooter and I enjoy it. It looks like a 1950's vintage "I will polish and blue any rifle for 19.95" Earl Schrieb job. Screw heads rounded from over-zealous use of the buffing wheel. And is shoots well.

[Dick Hosmer]

One of life's little mysteries is why, given the 1871 time frame, they did not utilize the current rod design. I suppose it is because they did not want to spend the money for the keepers, and labor for mortising, even though the stocks had to be made new, due to the band differences which precluded a simple circumcision of the existing wood. They really did just make "short M66s"!

[apollo]

It would be interesting to find documents telling why specific versions were made. Cadet rifles, Short rifles, etc. It would also be of interest to see how they aligned the sights after shortening the barrel. I assume there was some sort of jig the rifle was place in to allow the front sight to be re-soldered.
One distinct advantage to my rifle is that I can put it in a normal length shotgun case unlike my Snider.

[Dick Hosmer]

Up through the Model 1866 (aka M1867, due to the unique lockplate marking) version, US Cadet rifles were miniaturized versions of the service rifle. Beginning with the Model 1869, they were made 3" shorter, but not otherwise scaled down.

The "Model 1866 Rifle, Short" came about as the result of muzzle damage found on about 1000 stored full-length rifles. This 'repair' process was confined to the M1866. No other model was so modified, though some 1800 Model 1884 Rifles were converted to Cadets, in 1895, and perhaps more later.