Custer period carbine question?

[Dick Hosmer]

Overall, a very nice specimen, and my faith in the market is somewhat restored by the healthy price (Trump economics?). I'm bothered by a couple of other things: The gun has seen a lot of use - why the minimal (almost non-existant) extractor divot on the block? Why the slotted screws on the sight? How did the matching chips on BOTH sides of the forend occur - almost seem to have happened when barrel was not in place? The stock comb profile appears to be just a hair off, but that may be the result of wear. I believe the hammer is, or could be, correct though.

[rayg]

Approx. when did they start using the type 2 hammer and was it used through out the rest of the TD production? Ray

[Dick Hosmer]

If I recall correctly, around 30,000 - but that was one of those changes that would have been blurry. They used whatever came out of the barrel, and the "criss-cross" type finally ran out. No, the second-style hammer was made obsolete by the one having the lip, in early 1880. THAT one then went the rest of the way.

[rayg]

Thanks Dick, really appreciate your responses and answers to my questions. Ray

[rayg]

Here's an old post I had made about my carbine some years ago. There's a lot of info on it regarding the Custer carbines, Ray

https://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?366705-Possible-7th-Cav-Custer-carbine&p=3039900#post3039900