Help reading date on Springfield 1861

[dmahalek]

Forgive me if this appears as a double post. I recently acquired a Springfield Model 1861. I believe it to be an 1862 with an 1864 lock plate. Can anyone help me read the date stamped on the barrel?

 

[Jeff in Ohio]

I'll post photos of an 1862 dated and a 1863 dated barrel. You can see the top of that last numeral is rounded like a 2 or a 3. You'll have to judge whether the lower left side of the numeral on your gun is rounded like the "3" or has a sharp point like the "2"

The lockplate date of 1864 does not match the barrel / barrel band style - notice the early M1861 bolster on the barrel, but the M1863 type rounded barrel bands.

 

[scooter748driver]

If I had to guess (and guessing is what I am doing), given the comparison to your rifle and those posted by Jeff, I would say yours is dated 1863.

 

[RSMorris]

i took a screenshot, then oriented it the correct way and enlarged it. The fourth number is just not legible. Definitely though based on
the curve either a 2 or 3.

 

[bayonet]

I'll post photos of an 1862 dated and a 1863 dated barrel. You can see the top of that last numeral is rounded like a 2 or a 3. You'll have to judge whether the lower left side of the numeral on your gun is rounded like the "3" or has a sharp point like the "2"

The lockplate date of 1864 does not match the barrel / barrel band style - notice the early M1861 bolster on the barrel, but the M1863 type rounded barrel bands.

View attachment 445270

View attachment 445271

Jeff is the "17" on that barrel a Regiment # or a Rack # or something other you think?

 

[Cornpone and Molasses]

If I had to guess (and guessing is what I am doing), given the comparison to your rifle and those posted by Jeff, I would say yours is dated 1863.

That's kind of what I'm seeing there too.

 

[Jeff in Ohio]

Jeff is the "17" on that barrel a Regiment # or a Rack # or something other you think?

I don't know that that 17 is - it is a very sharp marking, and it is not easy to stamp marks into a barrel, compared with the wood of the stock. So it was not a casual decision to make that mark on the barrel. I would think it a rack number.

 

[Old Soldier]

Do US arms from Harper's Ferry or Springfield have assemblers marks? If so, these would be out of sight, but would provide evidence that this was part of the original musket.

 

[bayonet]

I don't know that that 17 is - it is a very sharp marking, and it is not easy to stamp marks into a barrel, compared with the wood of the stock. So it was not a casual decision to make that mark on the barrel. I would think it a rack number.

Bummer. If it meant 17th Connecticut I'd buy it off you!

 

[RicM]

Well I'll jump in here. The 1863 Type 1 did away with the barrel band springs and went back to the screws that tightened the barrel bands. That didnt work well so the Type 2, the barrel bands springs were added back instead of the screwed barrel bands. Also I believe the 1861 had the screwed in bolster (percussion chamber where the nipple attaches to) where as the 1863 and 1864 it was part of the barrel. The hammer on yours appears to be different maybe its an earlier version. Seems you have an 1864 but the barrel is an earlier 1861-62 type of a barrel. You have the correct barrel bands and lock for the 1864. I'm just also comparing it to my 1864 which was also called 1863 Type 2. Either way you have a real fine looking Springfield there!!!

 

[Jeff in Ohio]

Bummer. If it meant 17th Connecticut I'd buy it off you!

Maybe "17" was a number I should have played in a lottery.