7th calvary carbine on gunboards

[free1954]

anyone see this thread? http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?366705-Possible-7th-Cav-Custer-carbine&p=3039900#post3039900

[Dick Hosmer]

I've already logged that one, back in 2001. Falls between carbines 35609 and 35624. Closest attributed 7th Cav gun is 35548. Nice-looking carbine, appears to be all correct.

The (comparatively successful) Yellowstone Expedition should not be confused with the Sioux campaign of 1876, and the weapons carried on the earlier foray were .50 cal. Custer had both Allin and Ward-Burton 1870 carbines on trial then.

The 17400 lower limit is incorrect - there are a number of 7th Cav carbines in the 16xxx range, and the lowest verified one is 12221

The number of recovered carbines (at Slim Buttes) was not large, only a handful. More were turned in later, some of which are listed in OM115.

Even though Reno, Benteen, and the pack train suffered far fewer casualties, their carbines were still subject to the great recall of 1879 (which resulted in the starred arms of 1881/82) which means that the usable parts from most of the surviving LBH guns had a later life. ALL of the 20,073 "long wrist" carbines are old enough to have been at LBH. There were 12 troops at the battle, of which 5 were wiped out, leaving about 350 carbines in the hands of the survivors. 1,000 is too high a figure.

All-in-all, a very nice piece of history - only forensic testing - which is NOT 100% reliable - will validate any individual specimen. It is unlikely that such testing will ever be done again, at least on a large scale.

So far as the "carbine" (8874) connected to the pile of shells - I have SERIOUS doubts, since there are virtually NO other carbines nearby - that is a rifle number range, and, IIRC, the gun has some - shall we say - inconsistancies. I have discussed this arm with Dr. Scott, whose archeological qualifications are unquestioned and far beyond reproach, but admits to not being terribly knowledgeable about the guns themselves.

Here is one of mine:

[rayg]

Dick I had put that carbine on this site here some time back when I knew nothing about it except it was a early carbine. As mentioned in my post on Gunboards, I just read those magazine article copies that I had collected years ago just the other day. Those articles are from the Man at Arms and the Arms Gazette and dated 1974, and 1995 so some of the information may not be up to date.
I would appreciate any other or new information regarding these carbines and of course any info concerning my carbine's place in history. Ray

[Dick Hosmer]

Hi, Ray - I don't know that much "new" is going to come out. You do have a very nice, apparently original (save perhaps for the unforrtunate removal of some patina) carbine, in a believable s/n range. We only have inferred 7th usage for about 68 guns, or roughly 10% of the arms there on that fateful day, so the field is wide open for suggestion as to the other 90%. Unfortunately, the nicer the gun, the less likely it saw ANY hard frontier service, let alone LBH. I've seen a couple of minty ones (in which their owners set great store) but, one short look will tell you they spent their lives in a barracks in Connecticut!

"Condition, condition, condition" has been preached and drummed into us for so long that we sometimes slip into the trap of believing it is the only criteria. When one is seeking an example of a model to fill the slot of a "type" collection that rule is absolutely true, buy the best you can afford, but if looking for a historical artifact, the mantra should be "originality, originality, originality." Look at the photos of the real ID'd LBH pieces - they're turds (but I love 'em)

[rayg]

Hi Dick, your quote: "The (comparatively successful) Yellowstone Expedition should not be confused with the Sioux campaign of 1876". That was my error, not the articles. I meant to type the LBH incident. Ah well, story of my life, so many errors and so many more to come, Lol,
Are any serial numbers of those 68 close to mine? Of course that doesn't mean/prove anything but just curious, Ray

[rayg]

Dick check this post out regarding a possible Custer carbine,on Military Surplus Collector's forum, http://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=49286&p=305249#post305249

[Dick Hosmer]

Hi Dick, your quote: "The (comparatively successful) Yellowstone Expedition should not be confused with the Sioux campaign of 1876". That was my error, not the articles. I meant to type the LBH incident. Ah well, story of my life, so many errors and so many more to come, Lol,
Are any serial numbers of those 68 close to mine? Of course that doesn't mean/prove anything but just curious, Ray

35548 is still the closest.

[Dick Hosmer]

Dick check this post out regarding a possible Custer carbine,on Military Surplus Collector's forum, http://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=49286&p=305249#post305249

That's an interesting find, and a new number to me. Could be OK, as others are nearby. Wonder if he lives anywhere close to Dusan Farrington. I think I still "belong" to milsurps - I should get over there once in awhile.