1816 Conversion (I think?)

rexmerdinus

Cadet
Joined
Jun 24, 2026
Location
Sandusky, OH
Good morning, and thanks for approving me for the forum. I found it because I was researching my twice great grandfather's service (I have his discharge papers and GAR service medal hanging on my living room wall), but now that I'm in I also wanted to post about an old musket I picked up at an estate sale a while back.

The piece is a Springfield with the date 1832 on the lock. From what I've seen, I believe it is a percussion conversion of an 1816 (I don't know anything about Type I, II, III, etc.). First question--am I on the right track in this identification? The wood is very nice, which is what originally got my attention. There are three cartouches I can find--two on the left side and one on the bottom behind the trigger guard--and a partially readable date on the barrel tang on top. The part that the nipple screws into (bolster?) is missing a plug screw. This was actually plugged with a hex nut when I bought it, which didn't seem quite right, but also makes me think maybe the previous owner was actually firing it from time to time This is where my second question begins--the bolster doesn't seem original, but is it even period correct?

The breech of the barrel has a bit of gunk in it--is it advisable to twist out the breech plug for a good thorough cleaning? The barrel is so long that I don't have a modern cleaning rod that will go all the way down!

I'd be interested in any available information for this old beauty. Did I get a good deal at ~$500? I will post some pictures below.


20260624_164254.webp


20260624_164303.webp
20260624_143212.webp
20260624_164411.webp
20260624_143430.webp
20260624_143435.webp
20260624_143220.webp
20260624_164505.webp

20260624_164348.webp


20260624_143206.webp


20260624_164423.webp
 
Good deal at $500. But I agree with you, there is something off about that bolster. It does seem more modern to my eye than the gun itself.
Thanks. Any idea where I can shop for a proper one? Reproduction is OK, but original (or "period" I guess, since calling it an original part seems like the definition of wrong on a converted weapon!) would be far preferable. And, failing either of those outcomes, where I can shop for a screw to plug the hole?
 
Last edited:
Now that I'm doing a little more fine-toothed research into this weapon, I am getting confused. Can anyone tell me from the photos I posted whether this is a Type I (Springfield 1816), Type II (Springfield 1822), or Type III (Springfield 1835)? I'm leaning toward Type II, but my reading suggests this one also has elements of Type III. Thanks!
 
Good deal at $500. But I agree with you, there is something off about that bolster. It does seem more modern to my eye than the gun itself.
It is fairly typical of such conversions at the time. Many were screwed into an enlarged touch-hole and sealed with a screw or plug. The screw/plug may well be missing. This is a repro (Pedersoli) Colt conversion of a Harpers Ferry M1816
1783422887866.webp

See the similarities? It depended who was doing the conversion. Here is a (real) Philidephia conversion:
1783423476858.webp

Springfield conversions tended to put the nipple high on the barrel and seal the original touch-hole. Note the differences in the hammers too. (This is a real one! https://collegehillarsenal.com/outstanding-us-m-1822-28-conversion-musket )

1783423636896.webp
 
Last edited:

Learn About Us
About CivilWarTalk
Contact the Webmaster
Meet the Staff
Link to CivilWarTalk
Join Our Community
Register
Browse Forums
View Today's Discussions
Search the Forum
Get Help
FAQ
Student Guide
Forum Rules & Etiquette
Copyright / DMCA

     Contact Us CivilwarTalk on Facebook CivilWarTalk on YouTube CivilWarTalk on Twitter RSS Feed

Bringing the American Civil War and More to Life.
© 1999 - , CIVILWARTALK, LLC - Site Version 10.0

SlaveryTalk.com - SecessionTalk.com - CivilWarTalk.com - ReconstructionTalk.com
Back
Top