1881 Trapdoor Carbine

[Wade]

I found this carbine and would like opinions on it please. The barrel was shortened about 3/4" for some reason, and the rear sight area has a crude dovetail cut into the barrel. There are markings on the side of the butt stock, and a cartouche that is hard to read. I know the brass ring is not correct.

[Wade]

more

[Wade]

and more

[Wade]

last

[Dick Hosmer]

Well, not so good news. While that number itself is not listed in the SRS books, there are NO carbines anywhere near it, at all. That MIGHT explain the cut barrel, though I think it is a carbine barrel which was cut to remove damaged rifling at the muzzle. Front sight blade is wrong (they were steel not brass) and the whole sight looks a little funky. A proper rear sight should cover the dovetail. Stock looks right. The breechblock does not match the width of the receiver; it is of the early style, but that can be easily fixed. Hope that helps, and that you didn't pay a high price for it.

[Wade]

Hi Dick,
I paid $300 for the carbine. I figured just the parts were worth that. Thank you for the comments.

[Wade]

Dick,
Where can I find the correct rear sight for this model? It can be well used. Which model is this carbine?

[Dick Hosmer]

That would be the Model 1877. Rear sights (you want an 1879 "buckhorn" style) can be had from S&S, Granpas Gun Parts, Lodgewood, and others. You'definitely want a block too - that is a mismatch that SA would NEVER, EVER have done. It's worth $300 - I was worried you'd paid more.

[Wade]

Thank you Sir for your expertise. I am not sure what you are pointing out about the breech block.

[Dick Hosmer]

The width is wrong. Receiver and block were widened by about 1/16" at 96300. You have a narrow block that is correct for up to about 75000. From about 75000 to 96300 the block was still narrow, but had a less-pronounced "arch" at the underside. While the blocks freely interchange, they were NEVER issued as mixed width.

[Wade]

Thank you Dick.

[Wade]

Dick,
How were the slotless rear sight screws installed?

[Dick Hosmer]

Had to have been done with a collet/clamping device of some sort. IF I am remembering correctly, the tool itself has never been found/identified. I suspect they might have been run in by hand as far as possible and then tightened with the tool. When removed they apparently used a little chisel, which explains the mutilated screws found today with two little stab marks. I have never seen a detailed description of the install process, but am GUESSING they may have installed the sight on the barrel before installing the leaf - either way the spring had to be compressed, and if the base was already on the barrel it might have saved a vice operation.

[Wade]

Thank you for the explanation. The collet tool makes sense to me.

[Wade]

Dick,
Would the wider breech block be dated 1873 or another date?

[Dick Hosmer]

It should be marked "US/MODEL/1873". For your era, it should have the smaller font of the two versions made, but that is not super important - biggest thing is to get the width right.

1873 dated blocks were used well into 1887 (three years after the "Model 1884" was adopted) because they had thousands on hand and the ONLY difference was in the marking. The term "Model 1884" basically referred to the flat "Buffington" rear sight as there were no other changes.

[Wade]

Thanks again Dick. Does anyone have a wide breech block to trade for a good narrow one?

[Dick Hosmer]

I'll take a look to see if I have one that would be right, but it may take awhile.

[Wade]

I appreciate that Dick.

[Wade]

What thread size is the rear sight screw?

[Dick Hosmer]

8-32 can be forced, but not a good choice. All SA screws are 26tpi. There are no commercially-available replacements at the Ace Hardware level. Outfits like Grainger or McMaster-Carr may be able to help. Personally I'd pay whatever originals cost from gun-parts dealers like S&S..

[Wade]

Now I know what to look for. Thank you Dick.

[JohnMOhio]

Where would we be when it comes to these firearms if we didn't have Mr. Hosmer? Totally confused or lost. Maybe both. Thanks Mr. Hosmer for educating us all.

[Allen]

Where would we be when it comes to these firearms if we didn't have Mr. Hosmer? Totally confused or lost. Maybe both. Thanks Mr. Hosmer for educating us all.

+1

[Dick Hosmer]

You are all quite welcome - actually - at 87 in a couple of weeks - I still enjoy it, maybe I'm a frustrated teacher underneath the curmudgeonly exterior? Jailhouse lawyer for sure!