Help with Springfield Model 1861 ID

[dmahalek]

I am a total novice when it comes to the Springfield Model 1861. I recently asked for help on identifying the date stamped on the barrel of my recent acquisition (1863}. I would like to ask for your opinions on this rifle. I and several people I have talked to believe the rifle to be an 1863 type II with an incorrect bolster and hammer. Is this a "parts" gun or what? I have been researching for 3 days and am still confused…did I buy a "pig in a poke"?

 

[Grayrock Volunteer]

Short answer, yes it is a parts gun. The term "Model 1863 type II" is a collectorism, the Ordnance Department classified it as the Model 1864, even though it was officially adopted in December of 1863. The barrel and hammer are indeed Model 1861 pattern parts. The shield checkering pattern on the hammer identifies it later war, post 1863, anway.
If you want to make the gun "right" you could always buy a new barrel and hammer and sell off the ones you have. You would probably come out even or perhaps slightly ahead. In my experience M1861s are more desirable than later guns. Otherwise, just enjoy it as-is.

 

[Brasky]

Did you acquire this from gunbroker? I almost bid on this rifle. A nice looking rifle even if mismatched parts

 

[dmahalek]

Did you acquire this from gunbroker? I almost bid on this rifle. A nice looking rifle even if mismatched parts

Yes, this is the one from GunBroker. In spite of the mismatch parts I am quite impressed with it. The condition is great, at least to my eyes. The bore is quite good and the action of the lock seems solid, although the trigger pull is a little bit stiff. I paid $1400 for it….I hope I didn't get taken.

 

[RSMorris]

Yes, this is the one from GunBroker. In spite of the mismatch parts I am quite impressed with it. The condition is great, at least to my eyes. The bore is quite good and the action of the lock seems solid, although the trigger pull is a little bit stiff. I paid $1400 for it….I hope I didn't get taken.

I would think the question has to be asked, did it become a parts gun during the war or after? Are there cartouches on the side opposite the lock on the flat? Hard to tell from the pic.

 

[dmahalek]

I would think the question has to be asked, did it become a parts gun during the war or after? Are there cartouches on the side opposite the lock on the flat? Hard to tell from the pic.

There is a very, very faint outline of a partial oval is on the flat. You raise an interesting question about the time line of parts that have been installed. Several sources in this forum state that it is nearly impossible to determine when parts were replaced, wartime or post-war.
Thanks for your response….I'm slowly but surely learning.

 

[RSMorris]

There is a very, very faint outline of a partial oval is on the flat. You raise an interesting question about the time line of parts that have been installed. Several sources in this forum state that it is nearly impossible to determine when parts were replaced, wartime or post-war.
Thanks for your response….I'm slowly but surely learning.

If it has cartouche(s) you know it was proofed by by a government armory so you know the stock was most likely in the war. The barrel is proofed so you know the same. It is a government issued lock. So all the parts of the gun were most likely in the war. Whether they were all on the same gun at the time is anyone's guess. They were all the time mixing and matching parts that would fit to get the musket back on the line. But even if it was put together after the war, the parts were most likely war veterans.

 

[Craig L Barry]

Probably put together post-bellum but as it is configured now, it is a very serviceable piece and displays attractively. Good pick up.