What is this? 1862 Tower Musketoon?

[InuChris]

Hello, I have recently purchased this gun and was told it was one thing but i dont know if it was correct based on similar guns ive seen here. I need more experienced eyes to look this over. I have no experience with original guns. I can provide any other pictures just let me know where you would want one of

 

[scooter748driver]

Welcome from the Fort Sumter and the Fredericksburg forums. The experts like @Lanyard Puller and @johan_steele will be along shortly to let you know the details of what you have.

I'd venture a guess but I only know enough to be dangerous.

 

[Old Soldier]

It is a two-band Enfield made by civilian sub contractors - the stamped names are component makers and gunmakers (the firm which assembled it). The ramrod is not original. I am undecided as to whether it was an 'issue' gun as it has no sign of service proofs, however, it has the V.R under the crown and 'sold out of service' opposing arrows (-X-) on the butt and barrel (but both have been damaged for some reason) which would be appropriate for an issue weapon.. The London House proof for a .577 would be appropriate for both a civilian rifle or a sold-on rifle. There are no sling swivels, but a hole in the triggerguard for one. There is no sign of any bayonet lug on the barrel either, so was it was made to take the issue bayonet - or is it a cut-down barrel? My first impression is that this is a civilian-made 3-band rifle which was 'bought-in' for issue to militia or training company. Enfield was making all the regular issue weapons at this time. This was then sold on and at some time, the barrel was cut down and the foresight remounted.

Questions (photos if possible)
What length is the barrel excluding tang? (Inches - To determine the type of rifle)
Any marks on the top of the buttplate tang? (to determine any unit markings)
Is there room to mount a sling swivel on the top band? (Is it a real top band or a middle one?)
Is there any sign of a hole for a screw in sling swivel on the underside of the butt halfway between buttplate and trigger guard tang?
How many grooves in the bore?

BTW - 'muskatoon' This is NOT a name of any British P53 or derivative. Parker-Hale produced a copy of the P1861 Artillery Carbine and called it a 'muskatoon' for the US market. The term was a NAVAL slang term for an v short barrelled (12") smooth-bored musket with a flared muzzle.

 

[yulzari]

In British service 'Musketoon' up to the later 18th century was an informal name for a really short musket. Corrupting the original French 'mousqeton' (little musket) as usual. In those days carbine referred to a smaller carbine bore rather than the size of the musket but by the 19th century carbine became a description of a very short version of the infantry longarm for cavalry and artillery both of whom needed to be able to use a sword or serve a gun so a short weapon was easier to carry and work. In British service at this time it would be called a carbine but musketoon was still current in the USA. Whilst the seller would have called it a carbine they would have been prepared to call it a small Peruvian warship if it helped sell it.

 

[bayonet]

Well as some of the very knowledgeable collectors on this website have said over & over it's best to buy some good research books on the subject before you buy. What did you pay for it so you can be advised that you got a steal or you were taking to the cleaners?

 

[Tanglewood]

That would be a very unusual rear sight for a P53 artillery carbine, also an unusual barrel length. The trigger guard has the hole for the sling swivel, per P53 musket (the rear swivel for the artillery carbine is directly mounted into the stock forward of the buttplate). The barrel band spacing looks off for the carbine pattern, and the barrel looks thick at the muzzle. My opinion, as Old Soldier previously indicated, is that what you have is a cut down Pattern 1853 musket, nicely done, including mounting a front sight. The V.R. on your lockplate make U.S. Civil War usage highly doubtful.

 

[JOHN42768]

Welcome, enjoy

 

[bayonet]

That would be a very unusual rear sight for a P53 artillery carbine, also an unusual barrel length. The trigger guard has the hole for the sling swivel, per P53 musket (the rear swivel for the artillery carbine is directly mounted into the stock forward of the buttplate). The barrel band spacing looks off for the carbine pattern, and the barrel looks thick at the muzzle. My opinion, as Old Soldier previously indicated, is that what you have is a cut down Pattern 1853 musket, nicely done, including mounting a front sight. The V.R. on your lockplate make U.S. Civil War usage highly doubtful.

I used to thing the same thing of the V.R. on the lockplate that they never made it over here during our ACW. I was corrected in another thread about a year ago and apparently some did.

 

[Tanglewood]

I used to thing the same thing of the V.R. on the lockplate that they never made it over here during our ACW. I was corrected in another thread about a year ago and apparently some did.

Yes, you are right. That's why I said "highly doubtful", it took me a while to learn, but I never speak in absolutes about CW imports, especially Confederate.

 

[InuChris]

Thank you all for your input

Barrel is 26"
No Markings on the butt
The top band is the one in the picture, the second one is not the same
No screw hole for sling
I cannot see well enough down the barrel yet, my flashlight is charging

I paid 1000 for this and a sword, did not get a chance to do much research. A friend of mine was told it was a confederate artillery musketoon and thought I would want it. I did not see it until after I purchased it unfortunately and I seen the discrepancies, and by the sound of it we got bamboozled

 

[Old Soldier]

I used to thing the same thing of the V.R. on the lockplate that they never made it over here during our ACW. I was corrected in another thread about a year ago and apparently some did.

Quite right - and ALL of them were surplus weapons, civilian proofed and usually the obsolescent type 2s and type 1s. The problem is with this rifle is WHEN it was made surplus and why. Is there a mirrored 'R' on the barrel? That is, a rifle condemned as not accurate enough or not repairable and thus, sold on. If it was any good, it would have been converted into a Snider after 1866. Is that when it was condemned? It has a 26" barrel, as opposed to the 24" P1853 and P1861 carbines but that is NOT the sight for either rifle, nor the forestock.

 

[InuChris]

This is a bad picture of the barrel, it needs some cleaning, I'll get a better one later tonight. The 2 bands are different also

Where would the R be located?

 

[InuChris]

More pictures

 

[bayonet]

Thank you all for your input

Barrel is 26"
No Markings on the butt
The top band is the one in the picture, the second one is not the same
No screw hole for sling
I cannot see well enough down the barrel yet, my flashlight is charging

I paid 1000 for this and a sword, did not get a chance to do much research. A friend of mine was told it was a confederate artillery musketoon and thought I would want it. I did not see it until after I purchased it unfortunately and I seen the discrepancies, and by the sound of it we got bamboozled

Well hold on and show us the sword, maybe you didn't get "bamboozled" just yet.

 

[Old Soldier]

Quite right - and ALL of them were surplus weapons, civilian proofed and usually the obselescent type 2s and type 1s. The problem is with this rifle is WHEN it was made surplus and why. Is there a mirrored 'R' on the barrel? That is, a rifle condemned as not accurate enough or not repairable and thus, sold on. If it was any good, it would have been converted into a Snider after 1866. Is that when it was condemned? It has a 26" barrel, as opposed to the 24" P1853 and P1861 carbines but that is NOT the sight for either rifle, nor the forestock.

View attachment 485569

I suspect it will have the 3-groove/78" rifling too.

View attachment 485616More pictures

View attachment 485614

View attachment 485615

Yup. It's a cut down P53 type 3. The mirrored R, if there is one, will be near the proof marks. It may have been sold on because it wasn't an Enfield-made piece. The barrel has had a hard life too - the bore looks reasonable (just), but the outer is well pitted, unlike the rest of the piece. The backsight slide is missing too. It would make a good wall piece - or even a 'play' shooter (200 yards max), but get it checked first if you do!

The reason for cutting down barrels is often because the top of the bore is badly corroded, but this one may have been cut down to make it a shorter 'sporting' piece.

 

[InuChris]

This is the sword I got with it. It's a little beat up

 

[bayonet]

So sorry my Man but it's my opinion you did get "bamboozled" as you say. That's just a sword in pieces and not complete (looks to be the remains of a M1860 saber). Would cost more than it's worth to made it whole but can be done by Tom Nardi if you want. Other wise just get a complete saber out there for a few $ hundred. It's just me but I'd try and get your money back from the character you brought the 2 from who told you a C*** & Bull story about them! Sorry

 

[Trooper "D"]

This is the sword I got with it. It's a little beat up

View attachment 485640

View attachment 485641

View attachment 485642

View attachment 485643

View attachment 485644

I bet Atlanta Cutlery could send you a leather wrapped wood handle and a butt cap and you could assemble it yourself. Even Dixie Gun Works has the parts to complete the saber. I wonder who manufactured what you have there in pieces?

 

[Trooper "D"]

Hello, I have recently purchased this gun and was told it was one thing but i dont know if it was correct based on similar guns ive seen here. I need more experienced eyes to look this over. I have no experience with original guns. I can provide any other pictures just let me know where you would want one of

View attachment 485458

View attachment 485459

View attachment 485460

View attachment 485461

View attachment 485462

View attachment 485463

View attachment 485464

View attachment 485465

View attachment 485466

View attachment 485467

View attachment 485468

View attachment 485469

View attachment 485470

View attachment 485471

View attachment 485472

View attachment 485473

View attachment 485474

View attachment 485475

If it will fire blanks reenactor might use it for a mounted services short weapon. I have an old India manufacture 2 band .69 cal. Smoothbore cut down to carbine length. Being that it is an imported, cheaply made, light weight weapon it makes a great Horsey Gun. Its has the swivels so I have a canvass sling on it but I also put a slide bar and ring on it for a carbine sling snap hook to carry it.
Your cut down weapon in the right hands with a swivel barrel band and the trigger guard swivel installed could be cut down a little bit more and made functional for Living History and reenactment purposes. I bet you could find a buyer if you talked it up enough. What do you have to lose by exploring your options?
I do agree with the other gentleman who suggested to attempt a refund first and foremost. If not possible then brainstorm possibilities.
Good Luck
Cheers!

 

[Trooper "D"]

Thank you all for your input

Barrel is 26"
No Markings on the butt
The top band is the one in the picture, the second one is not the same
No screw hole for sling
I cannot see well enough down the barrel yet, my flashlight is charging

I paid 1000 for this and a sword, did not get a chance to do much research. A friend of mine was told it was a confederate artillery musketoon and thought I would want it. I did not see it until after I purchased it unfortunately and I seen the discrepancies, and by the sound of it we got bamboozled

This is how we learn.