Questions on my 1888 Springfield Trapdoor

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • salish
    Junior Member
    • Apr 2016
    • 23

    #1

    Questions on my 1888 Springfield Trapdoor

    Hi again,

    I'm making some posts on some of my military surplus rifles today and this one is for my Trapdoor Springfield. I am looking for some information and/or opinions on this rifle. My dad bought this rifle in the mid-to-late 1950's. I have no idea how much he paid but I know these were plentiful in Seattle's gun/pawn shops when I was a little boy. This trapdoor was shot only once since it's been in my family. That was in 1975. We shot 20 rounds of Winchester 405gr jacketed rounds through it. We didn't know about the potential damage from jacketed bullets, but I don't think we damaged the rifling. It still looks crisp and clean. We have always thought this was the 1884 Model based on that date on the trapdoor, but I've come to find out that it is an 1888 model based on the serial number. As a child I thought the ramrod bayonet was really cool, and I still do, but I also know how impractical is was. I have read that some soldiers and National Guard units used these late model trapdoors in Cuba. When I think of young men carrying this rifle to fight the Spanish with bolt action Mauser rifles I shudder. Anyway, I was hoping someone more knowledgeable on trapdoor rifles could clue me in on the origins or meaning of the stampings on the wood and steel. I've attached photos below and in subsequent posts.

    Thanks
    Cliff

    IMGP0287.jpgIMGP0288.jpgIMGP0290.jpgIMGP0294.jpgIMGP0295.jpg
  • salish
    Junior Member
    • Apr 2016
    • 23

    #2
    More photosIMGP0301.jpgIMGP0302.jpgIMGP0305.jpgIMGP0306.jpgIMGP0308.jpg

    Comment

    • salish
      Junior Member
      • Apr 2016
      • 23

      #3
      More photos

      IMGP0309.jpgIMGP0313.jpgIMGP0314.jpgIMGP0316.jpgIMGP0318.jpg

      Comment

      • salish
        Junior Member
        • Apr 2016
        • 23

        #4
        Last photos

        IMGP0323.jpgIMGP0325.jpgIMGP0328.jpg

        Comment

        • mr.j
          Senior Member
          • Feb 2012
          • 141

          #5
          The VP" marking on barrel stand for viewed proof and firing proof, The six numbers on back of breech are serial numbers and indicate the date it was made (1891). the small "A" on top of barrel is a Springfield Armory inspectors initial. The breech block is stamped 1884 and is correct on this model, prior to 1884 the breechblocks were marked 1873. The date and letter P in circle are the stock cartouche, The date on stock indicate when it was assembled and it should match the serial number on barrel breech. The P in circle cartouche stand for firing proof. The letters SWP above date on stock are the master armorers initials (Samuel W. Porter) The large Numbers and letters on butt area indicate the rifle was sent to a state militia/volunteer unite most likely during the Spanish American war, Most if not all of the Regular army were equipped with the new 1896 Krag rifles. official Springfield Cleaning tools and a disassembly tool go inside the buttstock, the two rounds do not belong in there.

          Comment

          • blackhawknj
            Senior Member
            • Aug 2011
            • 3754

            #6
            In his memoir The Little War of Private Post Charles Johnson Post of the 71st New York mention his ramrod bayonet and I have seen a picture of the 71st-and other volunteer regiments showing the ramrod bayonets extended for "Stack Arms". Post also mentions that at the Battle of Las Guasimas they encountered a Rough Rider who said "You can't see 'em!" The M1888 had the Buffington rear sight, the M1896 Krag did not, a curious omission.

            Comment

            • Dick Hosmer
              Very Senior Member - OFC
              • Aug 2009
              • 5993

              #7
              Originally posted by blackhawknj
              In his memoir The Little War of Private Post Charles Johnson Post of the 71st New York mention his ramrod bayonet and I have seen a picture of the 71st-and other volunteer regiments showing the ramrod bayonets extended for "Stack Arms". Post also mentions that at the Battle of Las Guasimas they encountered a Rough Rider who said "You can't see 'em!" The M1888 had the Buffington rear sight, the M1896 Krag did not, a curious omission.
              A major part of the rear sight "problem" with Krags was competing egos in the OD! Whoever was at the top pushed HIS sight preference.

              Comment

              • 5MadFarmers
                Senior Member
                • Nov 2009
                • 2815

                #8
                Originally posted by Dick Hosmer
                A major part of the rear sight "problem" with Krags was competing egos in the OD! Whoever was at the top pushed HIS sight preference.
                Funny you should mention that as, having ejected the job, I finally have time to process the data. The last bit of that puzzle just exploded off a page.

                Timing.

                Comment

                • salish
                  Junior Member
                  • Apr 2016
                  • 23

                  #9
                  Mr. J, thank you very much for the quick lowdown on all the numbers and stamps. I was wondering about the two 45-70 rounds. They have been in there since the 1950's. They fit so perfectly we thought they just belonged in the butt.

                  Thanks to the rest of you who responded. I have ordered the Post book and I am looking forward to reading it. I also have a Krag (sporterized, but a Krag none the less) so I have an interest in these two rifles and the Spanish-American war time frame.

                  Cliff

                  Comment

                  Working...