Tell me more! Carved rear sight?

[Kyle Kalasnik]

Good afternoon,

How common was it to carve a rear sight into a 1842 Springfield? This a smoothbore not the "rifled"version.

I would assume this was done post war, as it could be considered destruction of Government Property.

Or was this authorized by higer ups?

I have seen this done to Revolutionary War muskets, but how common was it in the Civil War?

Thank you all in advance.

Respectfully,
Kyle Kalasnik

 

[ConfederateCanuck]

That's not a rear sight. It's the marks that are used to line up the barrel with the breech plug (i.e. which appears as the "rear tang" in the buttstock). You will notice that the same marks appear on rifled guns that were manufactured with front and rear sights.

Nice crisp markings on your gun...I like!! More pics, pretty please!

 

[Kyle Kalasnik]

That's not a rear sight. It's the marks that are used to line up the barrel with the breech plug (i.e. which appears as the "rear tang" in the buttstock). You will notice that the same marks appear on rifled guns that were manufactured with front and rear sights.

Nice crisp markings on your gun...I like!! More pics, pretty please!

Thank you so much. Now to be an even bigger pain in the neck, what about the missing date?

It is not mine, just found it on the internet and was curious.

 

[ConfederateCanuck]

Thank you so much. Now to be an even bigger pain in the neck, what about the missing date?

It is not mine, just found it on the internet and was curious.

Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean by "missing date"? Missing where?...but then I am not particularly knowledgeable about the 1842s, so I will defer to others. Speaking about muskets in general, most manufacture dates (if any) appear on the lockplate and/or the rear tang, and sometimes on the barrel near the breech. Not all musket types will have such a date, though.

 

[Kyle Kalasnik]

My apologies,

Here is an example. Upside down, I apologize for that as well.

I would assume it was removed when they made the mark?

 

[Grayrock Volunteer]

I am not familiar with any US made muskets that left armories with an alignment mark on the top of the barrel and tang. Rather, they were applied on the underside of the barrel and tang. The same thing can't be said for many European muskets, as they often do have an alignment mark on the topside of the barrel, usually with either end of the line terminating with a dot.
Unless a particular gun shows signs of being worked over post military service I assume a mark like the OP posted is some kind of rudimentary rear sight. Usually the line is shallow enough the only rear use it would have is guiding windage, which would no doubt be handy.

 

[ConfederateCanuck]

I am not familiar with any US made muskets that left armories with an alignment mark on the top of the barrel and tang. Rather, they were applied on the underside of the barrel and tang. The same thing can't be said for many European muskets, as they often do have an alignment mark on the topside of the barrel, usually with either end of the line terminating with a dot.
Unless a particular gun shows signs of being worked over post military service I assume a mark like the OP posted is some kind of rudimentary rear sight. Usually the line is shallow enough the only rear use it would have

 

[ConfederateCanuck]

I am not familiar with any US made muskets that left armories with an alignment mark on the top of the barrel and tang. Rather, they were applied on the underside of the barrel and tang. The same thing can't be said for many European muskets, as they often do have an alignment mark on the topside of the barrel, usually with either end of the line terminating with a dot.
Unless a particular gun shows signs of being worked over post military service I assume a mark like the OP posted is some kind of rudimentary rear sight. Usually the line is shallow enough the only rear use it would have is guiding windage, which would no doubt be handy.

Oops, my apologies. I stand corrected...I was thinking of my Enfield when I replied. So I will stand on my other point...that I am not familiar with the 1842 musket....(shuffle feet in awkward, silent embarassment)...good intentions gone bad

 

[Kyle Kalasnik]

I am not familiar with any US made muskets that left armories with an alignment mark on the top of the barrel and tang. Rather, they were applied on the underside of the barrel and tang. The same thing can't be said for many European muskets, as they often do have an alignment mark on the topside of the barrel, usually with either end of the line terminating with a dot.
Unless a particular gun shows signs of being worked over post military service I assume a mark like the OP posted is some kind of rudimentary rear sight. Usually the line is shallow enough the only rear use it would have is guiding windage, which would no doubt be handy.

So you think this was done during the war? It looks professional enough too, in my opinion not some half a$&@! cobbled together job.

 

[Craig L Barry]

So, the US 1842 had the date on the tang which should match the date on the lock plate. This is just an educated guess...it looks like the breech plug was replaced at some point (hence the timing mark) and as such did not have the date stamped on the tang as it did when it originally left the US Armory at Harpers Ferry or Springfield.

 

[Kyle Kalasnik]

So, the US 1842 had the date on the tang which should match the date on the lock plate. This is just an educated guess...it looks like the breech plug was replaced at some point (hence the timing mark) and as such did not have the date stamped on the tang as it did when it originally left the US Armory at Harpers Ferry or Springfield.

Appreciate it.