What do I really have?

[Gerald]

Thanks to Tom for getting me here from TrapdoorCollector.com

My post there was:
My rifle was purchased as an original 1873 Trapdoor. It was a really good price, so I am not disappointed even if it is an inconsistent reproduction. Comparing the rifle to one that I KNOW is an original there are the following differences muzzle to butt Cleaning rod head is a smooth cylinder with patch slot and includes a cavity on the tip. It is held in the rifle by a spring in the stock. There is no locking grove on the shaft. Single 1 5/8 swivel on the first band. Serial number on lock work marked 1873 seems to be ?156 Hammer plate is beveled and marked 1863 behind the hammer. All engraving seems to have be painted. Trigger guard seems to be heavier than the example, with a smooth trigger. Trigger breaks at about 4 lb. What is it?

Questions about the sights, (blade, ladder (pic)) and Caliber (45/70)

Further information. The paint on the hammer plate seems to be gold.

20210331_132622[1].jpgswivel[1].jpgsight[1].jpgsight[1].jpghammer_plate[1].jpg

[Tom Trevor]

Unknown rod from?? Buffington sight, Lock is likely from 50-70 rifle.How long is barrel? slide rod into muzzle until it touches breech face measure to muzzle. 32 5/8 rifle 29 cadet.you need a 45-70 rod and complete 45-70 lock so far.

[Gerald]

Unknown rod from?? Buffington sight, Lock is likely from 50-70 rifle. How long is barrel? slide rod into muzzle until it touches breech face measure to muzzle. 32 5/8 rifle 29 cadet. you need a 45-70 rod and complete 45-70 lock so far.

Thank you for your quick reply. You gave me a couple of more leads. The 1873 is a rifle. I tested the ramrod from my first 1873 (1889 build)(#1) and tried it in the new purchase (#2). It did not lock in place as on #1. I removed the iron work from both rifles. to inspect the stocks because of the ramrod. There were two major differences. At the fore end, #1 had a ledge, while at the same location #2 had a flat. This flat did not look like it had been ground down from a ledge. At the breech end, #1 was smooth, while #2 had an inserted spring (to lock the cleaning rod). This is the same set-up that my rifled muskets have for the ram rod (you can just barely see the end of the spring because of stock discoloration). A minor difference was that the breech band for #1 had a grove machined in it for the sight to drop into, while #2 had that location ground flat.
I have an email to US Martial Arms for the serial numbers for the 5 rifles produced in 1873 (since my rifle serial number seems to be within that years 1949 numbers.

20210331_212039[1].jpg 20210331_212303[1].jpg 20210331_212925[1].jpg

[David Bell]

[QUOTE=Gerald;613759]Thanks to Tom for getting me here from TrapdoorCollector.com

Looks like a .50 caliber rifle because the stock is made for the beveled lock. It could have an 1873 block replacing the .50 type, or maybe an '45-70 barreled action dropped into a .50-70 stock. Look to see if there is paper or cork under the barrel, and see if the rear band has been hand filed for the Buffington sight groove. Nice looking piece. I would just buy an early 1873 rod, original, or re-pro, and call it good. What did you give for it? if you do not mind my asking. Best, Dave

[lyman]

take the rifle out side in the shade on a sunny day and take some overall pics, as well as some detailed pics of the markings,

[Gerald]

[QUOTE=David Bell;613800]

Thanks to Tom for getting me here from TrapdoorCollector.com

Looks like a .50 caliber rifle because the stock is made for the beveled lock. It could have an 1873 block replacing the .50 type, or maybe an '45-70 barreled action dropped into a .50-70 stock. Look to see if there is paper or cork under the barrel, and see if the rear band has been hand filed for the Buffington sight groove. Nice looking piece. I would just buy an early 1873 rod, original, or re-pro, and call it good. What did you give for it? if you do not mind my asking. Best, Dave

Dave, the more I look at replacement parts, the more I think you are right with the barreled action. The last photo on my second post shows the rear band having been filed down for the sight grove. Flat, not valley. The barrel does not have cork or paper under it, however, if I squeeze the middle of the barrel to the stock, there is about 1/4 inch movement. I decided to take your advice even before I read it. I picked up a repo rod for $65 including shipping, and a replacement rod lock for $16 including shipping. The lock work is sweet, 4lb pull and very little creep. I paid $600 for the rifle. I'm still wondering about the 156 serial number though.

[Gerald]

take the rifle out side in the shade on a sunny day and take some overall pics, as well as some detailed pics of the markings,

I am replying to both you and David Bell.

Thanks for the advice and further leads. I took David's advice, purchased a proper ramrod ($50) and ramrod catch (16) and just now installed the catch. Took the recommended sunny/shade pictures and attaching them(with some others).

Further observations: Pulled the lock plate. Inside dry of oil, no noticeable rust or rust pitting (photo). No evidence of grease. Interior wood very dry. Same with the stock tip (photo). Lock plate screw washers are magnetic and looks to be steel.

The upper barrel band WAS ground flat to work with the sight (photo comparing with a proper band). The interior of the stock had a retaining spring for a rem rod/cleaning rod instead of being smooth (my 1889 production trap door (photo).

I don't know for sure yet about the ironwork (proof marks seem to be in the proper location, but could not find any inspector marks). But what I believe I have is a 45/70 trapdoor in an older stock (may be a modified 1863 stock)(moves when it is squeezed against the barrel) with a replica 1863 lock plate and works. Hammer may be original or replica. Iron work most likely replica.

But, for $600, I still think I got a buy.

20210407_113335[1].jpg20210407_113357[1].jpg20210407_115231[1].jpg20210407_115341[1].jpg20210407_114454[1].jpg

[Gerald]

[QUOTE=David Bell;613800]

Thanks to Tom for getting me here from TrapdoorCollector.com

Looks like a .50 caliber rifle because the stock is made for the beveled lock. It could have an 1873 block replacing the .50 type, or maybe an '45-70 barreled action dropped into a .50-70 stock. Look to see if there is paper or cork under the barrel, and see if the rear band has been hand filed for the Buffington sight groove. Nice looking piece. I would just buy an early 1873 rod, original, or re-pro, and call it good. What did you give for it? if you do not mind my asking. Best, Dave

See my response of today to both you and Lyman. Attaching a couple of pictures here (ground barrel band and rod retainer vs smooth stock)

20210331_212925[1].jpg 20210331_212207[1].jpg

[Tom Trevor]

Musket / 50-70 stock Spoon rod retainer was not used on 45-70 rifles. Just took 50-70 barreled action out and put 45-70 action and barrel into it. Value would be the gun parted out.