Did I do good??

[Dick Hosmer]

Opinions have blown both ways about the rack-and-pinion over the years, so I'm not TOTALLY convinced we have it right - I'd pay a GREAT deal of attention to patina, color, dings on the screws, crud in/at the joint line of sight and barrel, etc. before I changed it. Conversely, if it's a lousy match with scarred screws, I'd be quicker to "fix" it. Getting the rifle basically for nothing gives you the luxury of being able to shop for a sight until you find that perfect one. Congratulations on a great find. Now you need to find a positive-cam. One was bought as a standard rifle at Baltimore about 20 years ago - think THAT guy was happy?

[Carlsr]

Thanks Dick, here are some photos. It is now dark by the time I get home now so the lighting is not very good plus bad photo skills LOL!!
IMG_1604.jpgIMG_1603.jpgIMG_1605.jpgIMG_1606.jpgIMG_1607.jpg

[Carlsr]

IMG_1608.jpgIMG_1609.jpg

[Carlsr]

I removed the sling tonight and although it seemed to be in good shape it was not. When removing the hook the leather ripped through one of the holes. Seems to be kinda dry rotted so don’t even think Picard would help. Even if it did not sure how I would repair the tear??

[Kragrifle]

If there is no R on the slide wouldn?t this prove it is the correct sight? Aren?t all the other TD Buffington sights marked R on the rifles?

[Dick Hosmer]

The gear-driven ones do lack the R, but that alone doesn't mean they are (or are not) the correct ones for the gun. Supposedly, the gear-driven slide, thought to be an improvement, wasn't, and it is believed that no arms were actually issued with it.

Mine, 318991, issued, per SRS, to my (VERY distant) cousin CPT W. C. Manning, 23rd Infantry, was returned to SA for "problems with the sights" and now has a standard "R" Buffington, which does appear to have slightly less wear than the rest of the rifle. No way of knowing what it was originally issued with. It bears dual cartouches [SWP/1885] & [SWP/1887] signifying the rework.

[Tom Trevor]

Just to muddy things a bit I have a rack and pinion Buffington sight with the R . Reports are it moved under recoil not much but did move. and It violated the Maynard patent on their rack and pinion tang sight. Perhaps to avoid a lawsuit over it like the add on pistol grip suit that went on into the 1920's it was dropped from production.

[Carlsr]

Well Tom, that did muddy the water a bit. Could be possible but who knows. There is a difference in the color of the slide and the leaf. Can’t be sure if parts were swapped out but the knob fell out while I was removing the sling. There’s no pin to hold it in so I just slid it back in.

[Tom Trevor]

Also I have seen Buffington sights with The binding knob but used the rack slider as it worked and they did not waste parts. Put the knob on and use a safety pin for the knob pin just push it in untill its tight and trim both ends off.

[Carlsr]

That’s a great idea Tom but there is no hole for a pin. Seems that the knob is inserted then on the opposite side there is an indentation which expanded the rod to hold the knob in. The windage knob does have a pin, not sure why the elevation knob would not??
Al has some knobs on his site, may have to ask him how to correct this issue.

[Carlsr]

Just when you think a good deal has been had you find out that it was not
Turns out that this M84 is an imposter!!! I couldn’t figure out why the bayonet was so difficult to remove along with discovering that the 1882 HSE would not fit in the butt stock along with the wiper??
I disassembled the rifle and found that the rod channel was originally fitted for the triangular rod bayonet making this stock for an M80 not the M84.
I was bamboozled I cannot believe that someone would fake such a rare rifle along with destroying another.
Just wanted to let all know that this rifle was not as posted but is now a replica of a rare trapdoor. Just a reminder also to keep an eye out for these imposters while shopping for these awesome rifles.

[Tkacook]

I hate to hear that. I'm sorry it didn't turn out to be what you expected. I have seen that in the last few years, people will fake almost anything.

[Carlsr]

Thanks Tkacook. It is still a nice looking rifle and will most likely be a good shooter since the bore is nice and shinny.
At least the price wasn’t that astronomical that I wouldn’t be able to recoup my money should I sell it.

[Dick Hosmer]

I guess, looking at this from a distance, this is just another confirmation of the old adage that "if something is too good to be true, it probably isn't". That said, I hasten to note that had I seen it - as it was represented - I'd have done EXACTLY what Carl did!!! The fault lies with the seller - who (now with the advantage of hindsight) I think may have known more about the gun than he divulged to Carl.

Many, many years ago, before I found my good one, I had a "maybe" '84 in an '88 stock, which I ultimately sold, with warts out in the open, very cheap, to a guy who was OK with a "lookalike". Some people are fine with them - others not. I have a project which I've been fooling around with for years - maybe I'll finish it, maybe I won't. I own a genuine M1882TRB bayonet, one of 26, and am slowly building a gun around it! A Jouster friend (thanks, John H.) machined the bayonet housing for me, and the rest is from the parts box, except for a bastard stock obtained from Al Frasca. It was a .50-70 stock with tip damage and the flats all rounded off. Totally NFG, EXCEPT for being PRECISELY what is needed to build a "tribute" M1882TRB!!! With original guns north of $25,000, I will be very happy with what should turn out to be a very nice "5-footer". Maybe next year I'll be able to post a family picture of all four RBs.

[Tkacook]

I for one would love to see pictures.