M1888 Differences

[11mm]

I just purchased a Ramrod Bayonet trapdoor in the 502xxx series. ( I am not being coy, I just don't remember the last three digits and I will not be getting it for a while.) As I don't have a book on trapdoors, I am asking the question here that I could research if I thought there was a reliable source to which I had access.
Specifically, outside of the ramrod bayonet, which was apparently acceptable on this model, is there any real difference between this group of late rifles and any ordinary 1884? Were they trying new metallurgy, for instance?

[Dick Hosmer]

Nothing really significant changed after 96300 when the receiver was widened (the block arch had already been reduced) until end of production. Biggest "new" item was the 1884 Buffington sight, and, the firing pin material was changed to aluminum bronze in 1888. The rod-bayonet was meant to save weight and eliminate two loose items from the soldier's kit. It "worked" because it wasn't used - we were very lucky to have not fought a major power during that period.

[11mm]

Thanks Dick. I figured you would know. Looking forward to your book for answers like these.
I shoot several types of European "competitors" (or technological contemporaries) to the Trapdoor, and I find that the Buffington sight makes all the difference...at least with my eyes and skill level. I guess windage and a peep sight just weren't as important in the other armies. Of course, the rod bayonet would, as you point out, have been a real detriment in a battle with most potential enemies.

[blackhawknj]

But the rod bayonet made a great cooking spit. Not a good candle holder, though.

[JimF]

Another of the MAJOR differences in the M1888 is in the trigger guard . . . .it is now a ONE-PIECE, forged affair.

This guard adds a little more weight to the rifle.

In my opinion, the M'88 is the heaviest and most cumbersome of all the TD's, what with this TG, the latch mechanism for the RRB, and the cleaning gear in the butt stock . . . . Which now includes the M79 combination tool!

When I shoulder this weapon, even the length of pull seems LONGER! --Jim

[ebeeby]

I'm sure Dick meant to mention the cartridge change that had occurred by M1888....

[Dick Hosmer]

Actually that had slipped my mind, was thinking about the gun itself, and things that were meaningful from more of an engineering or performance standpoint, as opposed to the simply cosmetic. The change in ammo was much earlier than 1888 - the first 500gr bullets were some of the last IP stuff loaded, in Dec. 1881. But, all good points, and just shows that the more people who contribute, the more gets teased out.

[11mm]

Of course, as long as we are discussing the M1888's debits, one point should be noted about its competitiveness; by 1890, every major power in Europe (and some minor powers) was using a smokeless powder rifle in their regular forces. Good thing we did not go to war then.

[John Sukey]

Well almost. Span Am war. Trapdoors against 7mm mousers. Yes, I know teddy's rough riders had Krags, but everybody else had trapdoors!
And while you could load the mauser magazine with one stroke, you had to load individual rounds in the Krag (while running uphill and pulling each individual round out of your belt loops)

[11mm]

Well almost. Span Am war. Trapdoors against 7mm mousers. Yes, I know teddy's rough riders had Krags, but everybody else had trapdoors!
And while you could load the mauser magazine with one stroke, you had to load individual rounds in the Krag (while running uphill and pulling each individual round out of your belt loops)

Not quite everybody else had Trapdoors...the Buffalo soldiers had Krag carbines, and so did any regular Infantry units in Cuba or the Philippines...and the Marines had their 6mm Lees. However, as you rightly point out, Trapdoors against smokeless powder small bore rifles were a losing proposition on San Juan Hill. There are probably other examples in the 1890's of this same type of confrontation.