1873 Carbine

[jt2778]

I tried to post about my 1873 Carbine sn 33xxx and now can't find my post?? Anyway! How can I find out if this is a Custer Gun? It has been in my collection about 35 years. All complete, and I never thought much about it until I read the page in AMERICAN RIFLEMAN a few days ago. Now I'm wondering and would like more info. JT in Ga

[Dick Hosmer]

I have now logged about 60 33,000 carbines, perhaps including yours - I've been collecting data for 45 years - but only a couple have any association with the 7th Cav. Of course, "33xxx" is meaningless - if you are seriously interested, I'll need the actual number. My three are 16572, 34752, and 43584. It would help to see pics to determine whther or not it has been upgraded, as well.

[Tom Trevor]

You piggybacked your" LOST "post onto the post MFG 1874 which Mr. Hosmer answered there also. Its not the best idea to start a new subject at the end of an older post many do not go back and recheck them. Hope that helps.

[jt2778]

Dick, the sn is 33747. I have never posted anything about this rifle anywhere. Its been in my collection about 35 years. Although I have always been interested in the Custer story, any even went out there two times to tour the field of battle, I never looked for any connection. I am very interested and I will post pictures as soon as I figure out how to do so. Any thing you can tell me will be very greatly appreciated. Also I would like to get your book.Thanks in advance. JW Tipton

[m1903rifle]

It is not listed in the SRS data.

[Dick Hosmer]

Dick, the sn is 33747. I have never posted anything about this rifle anywhere. Its been in my collection about 35 years. Although I have always been interested in the Custer story, any even went out there two times to tour the field of battle, I never looked for any connection. I am very interested and I will post pictures as soon as I figure out how to do so. Any thing you can tell me will be very greatly appreciated. Also I would like to get your book.Thanks in advance. JW Tipton

JW, am away from my stuff - will respond tonight or early tomorrow.

[Dick Hosmer]

Your carbine falls between previously recorded arms 33742 and 33759. At the risk of raising your adrenalin, the latter was turned in ('surveyed' due to damage) at Ft. Keogh in April of 1878, presumably from the 7th Cav.

[jt2778]

Dick: That is rather exciting. What can I conclude from this? Or speculate with some assurance? I've got to re-familiarize myself with some of the info I once knew. I've forgotten where Ft. Keogh is and what part it played in this saga. I have the book "Son of the Morning Star," I can use it to bone up on some the history, but can you recommend any other works for info. Also how can I get one of your books? JT

[Dick Hosmer]

I was almost afraid to say what I did. You can assume NOTHING from what is shown for another - even consecutive - arm. They were not made, packed, shipped, or issued in any sort of order. Crates of 20 often (from surviving records, which were of a later period - but the process did not change) contained arms thousands of numbers apart.

I'll have to do some research as to books - there must be hundreds of them - have you tried Amazon?

Fort Keogh was/is in Miles City, Montana. Google, and Wikipedia, should be your constant companions!

As to mine - $25 to POB 1367 Colusa CA 95932 - let me know how you want it signed. That is for my .58/.50 book from 2006. The sequel, covering all of the rare .45-70s, was just turned in for editing, and is due out in 2015. I do not know cost (will certainly be similar) but I plan to offer signed copies of it as well

[raymeketa]

I have sorta lost all of my references on the Cal .45 Carbines and Rifles after selling my collection nearly 20 years ago. But, three things I learned back then was, verify, verify, verify.

For example, Mr Hosmer's reference to the Ft Keogh carbine. As I remember, Ft Keogh was a Yellowstone District Infantry post. That does not mean that there were no carbines in the armory or that a Cavalry troop was not stationed there in 1878, but it casts a big shadow of doubt on it being a 7th Cavalry carbine. But, never say never and always avoid the word always.

Ray

[raymeketa]

I have sorta lost all of my references on the Cal .45 Carbines and Rifles after selling my collection nearly 20 years ago. But, three things I learned back then was, verify, verify, verify.

For example, Mr Hosmer's reference to the Ft Keogh carbine. As I remember, Ft Keogh was an Infantry post. That does not mean that there were no carbines in the armory or that a Cavalry troop was not stationed there in 1878, but it casts a big shadow of doubt on it being a 7th Cavalry carbine. But, never say never and always avoid the word always.

Ray

[Dick Hosmer]

I agree, and cannot immediately trace where the 7th Cav supposition originated. However, I'm not sure that a unit would have to be stationed at a post to turn in an arm there. Truth is, in most cases we will never know. I have spoken to more than one skilled forensic examiner about the infallibility (or lack thereof) of case comparision - and it is an inexact science at best, open to subjective, and suggestive, interpretation. It was even alleged by one party that who turned in the samples for comparison could make a difference in the results if it was "close".

[jt2778]

I'm finally figuring how to post the pictures of my 1873 carbine, sn 33747. JW Tipton

[jt2778]

More pics.

[Dick Hosmer]

Thanks for posting the pictures - the process here is considerably more complicated than some other sites - I have no idea why.

Your carbine has been fitted with a later lock assembly, and a later trigger. While those are believable upgrades due io breakage, etc. it is unfortunate.

[jt2778]

Dick: I confess to not being up to date on info about 1873 carbines. Do you have any informative suggestions about this lock and trigger? I'm not going to sell or get rid of this carbine, just interested in building as much of it's story as I can. Thanks again for your expertise. JT

[Dick Hosmer]

It would be impossible to tell when the parts were replaced, or by whom. The lock dates from 1880, and the trigger from 1883. The lock would be the most believable "official" repair, though both are tarnished by the fact that all such guns were supposed to have been turned in in 1879, therefore, they should not have been in the army's hands to be repaired or upgraded. Obviously, not all arms were turned in, which leaves the water muddy. Does the stock have dings from the swivel? Is the matchup of the witness mark absolutely PERFECT? Are there proofmarks (V/P/eagle) on the barrel?

[StockDoc]

I have sorta lost all of my references on the Cal .45 Carbines and Rifles after selling my collection nearly 20 years ago. But, three things I learned back then was, verify, verify, verify.

For example, Mr Hosmer's reference to the Ft Keogh carbine. As I remember, Ft Keogh was an Infantry post. That does not mean that there were no carbines in the armory or that a Cavalry troop was not stationed there in 1878, but it casts a big shadow of doubt on it being a 7th Cavalry carbine. But, never say never and always avoid the word always.

Ray

I believe it was a Cavalry post, used for patrols to prevent Souix from escaping into Canada Wiki list it in the first years as being Cavalry, till 1888 then 22nd infantry till 1896. Hope that Carbine can be attached to the Little Big Horn.

How about it being a Carbine of an Indian Scout?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Keogh

http://1-22infantry.org/history3/keogh.htm

http://www.ars.usda.gov/Main/docs.htm?docid=6395

[wstrayer]

Like so many here none of my Trapdoors have been listed. Same for my Sharps Carbine. The best I ever did was that my Sharps is in the middle of a group issued to 10th Ill Vol Cav in 1863.
Given that these guns were just pulled from crates and distributed, odds are you cant make any inferences on original unit of issue.

[jt2778]

It would be impossible to tell when the parts were replaced, or by whom. The lock dates from 1880, and the trigger from 1883. The lock would be the most believable "official" repair, though both are tarnished by the fact that all such guns were supposed to have been turned in in 1879, therefore, they should not have been in the army's hands to be repaired or upgraded. Obviously, not all arms were turned in, which leaves the water muddy. Does the stock have dings from the swivel? Is the matchup of the witness mark absolutely PERFECT? Are there proofmarks (V/P/eagle) on the barrel?

Finally got back to the 73 Carbine: I,m going over it with mag. glass, there is VP Eagle on the barrel. The witness mark seems to be ok. There are some dings at rear of the ring loop. Minor only. There is a small A at the front of the trigger guard,also a circle with some kind of emblem inside at the rear end of the trigger guard, (in the wood.) Dick if you look at this, is there any significance to any of this?

[Dick Hosmer]

Bad news - there should not be any barrel proofs below about 40,000. So it appears that has been replaced as well. Sorry - it will likely remain a mystery.

[jt2778]

Well! So be it. I didn't pay much for it and its still a solid gun. What does this do to the value? I take it its not a $4000 gun. Ha! jt2778@bellsouth.net I have another one I'd like to run by you at some point. Its a long gun, model 86, rescued from the scrap pile years ago. Anyway thanks again.

[Dick Hosmer]

Well, it is still, apparently, a real trapdoor carbine, with a provocatively numbered receiver, and, as such, could bring between $1500 and $2000, perhaps - but - the big money is, alas, out the window.