Lodgewood defarbed musket

Jobe Holiday's explanation may well be right on that, it sounds right. I don't know of a source that discusses it but I do know they were set up that way with the screws heads all facing to the back by the English commercial gunmakers.
Makes sense to me, you guys know way more than me, I'll follow your lead, although looking at pictures of originals I see them every which way but I'm sure they were removed and not put back on in any particular way. Another nice thing about my gun at most of the events I get to you'd be hard pressed to find another bright finished Enfield and surely not one with Parker Field and Sons on the lockplate. Wouldn't be confused with anybody else's. I've been using it for a couple years now and some guys in my own bunch think I'm still using a Springfield.
 
I bought the rifle from them new and had them do all the work. It started out as a new Armi-sport. I had everything done you could have done to it except reblueing it and case hardening the lock which they can do period correct buts it's time consuming and expensive. It was pretty common for the guys in the field to polish the blueing off and make them bright so I left it that way. For the rifle and work I had done was about 1300. If you go to their site they explain all the options and price for each option. It's actually pretty educational and learned a lot just from reading their options on several different guns.
Never seen actual period debluing of an enfield.
 
Never seen actual period debluing of an enfield.
No Enfields came from the factory in bright finish. The guys in the field would rub the bluing off sometimes for different reasons. some from heavy use and heavy cleaning and some wanted them to look like Springfields. Springfields were considered the best of the best in the US so that's what everybody wanted. Some whole companies, particularly northern, would polish off the bluing so the rifles would match. I've seen orders come down to tell the troops not to do it, there must've been a reason to send such an order. There was a thread on this topic on here a while back, I'll see if I can find it.
 
Never seen actual period debluing of an enfield.
I looked for the thread in mind and found several threads on this subject. If you go to the search box and type in Enfield blued or struck bright you will find several good discussions on this. There's also a couple good threads on the authentic campaigner site about this. There's been a debate on how common it actually was in the field and if any at all came bright as new.
 
I looked for the thread in mind and found several threads on this subject. If you go to the search box and type in Enfield blued or struck bright you will find several good discussions on this. There's also a couple good threads on the authentic campaigner site about this. There's been a debate on how common it actually was in the field and if any at all came bright as new.
Thanks!
 
Just to get her a bit closer to "Georgia Specs" on the defarb process. You might want to smack one of these on the stock {aside from blueing the metal and case coloring the lock}.

20180510_085443_resized (3).jpg


Photo of a Parker Field, Georgia, Sergeants Fusil. off the CSS Gladiator.
 
One period quote from History of the First - Tenth - Twenty-ninth Maine Regiment By John Mead Gould on whether Enfields were ever polished bright:

Oct. 21st (1861), muskets were delivered to the men, and this furnished another excuse for a hearty growl from the 1st Mainers. "Had we not been promised a new blue uniform and Springfield muskets?" To be sure we had the blue uniform and a good outfit every way, "but look at these Enfield muskets," said they, "with their blued barrels and wood that no man can name!" They were not a bad weapon, however, differing little from the Springfield, in actual efficiency, weight, length, and caliber, but far behind in point of workmanship. For a while we kept them blued, then orders were issued to rub them bright and we kept them so ever after.
 
One period quote from History of the First - Tenth - Twenty-ninth Maine Regiment By John Mead Gould on whether Enfields were ever polished bright:

Oct. 21st (1861), muskets were delivered to the men, and this furnished another excuse for a hearty growl from the 1st Mainers. "Had we not been promised a new blue uniform and Springfield muskets?" To be sure we had the blue uniform and a good outfit every way, "but look at these Enfield muskets," said they, "with their blued barrels and wood that no man can name!" They were not a bad weapon, however, differing little from the Springfield, in actual efficiency, weight, length, and caliber, but far behind in point of workmanship. For a while we kept them blued, then orders were issued to rub them bright and we kept them so ever after.
Why deblue. I just don't understand it. Mabey if your the only company in the regiment with blues muskets. Mabey.

I do understand that this one is whole regiment. This is also 1 source.
 
Please let me jump in as this thread is not too old. I, too, am looking at Defarbing my Chiappa Enfield 1853 into something that resembles what my Great Grandfather Jacob Johann Jennewein had in the American Civil War. Being from Wisconsin, company G Wisconsin 42nd Inf. Regiment. He enlisted in August 31, 1864 and mustered out on June 20th 1865, just in shy of one year. My Cousin Larry has his rifle and he sent me pictures of it. I don't think it was bright color, but blued.
Looks blued to me in the picture I'll attach. Also in another picture (attached) is a close up of the side of the lockplate. It is different than a lot of others I have seen as it is "T O W E R" over the date of 1862, where others are made with the date above the TOWER name.

I've sent off an email to Todd Watts to see if he can make it so that the word T O W E R is spaced further apart than what is normally made as a defarb and put the date underneath it. I have seen Lodgewood's website and talked to them. Looks like quite impressive work. VERY impressive.

I cannot have my Great Grandfather's rifle but I would like to have one that looks as much like it as possible. Larry says it still has the original sling and original leather ammo pouch (which has a number of original paper patch bullets).

So, why was the TOWER over 1862 different made than the other way around?

IMG_0489 (Large).JPG


TOWER_over_1862.JPG


IMG950502.jpg
 
Please let me jump in as this thread is not too old. I, too, am looking at Defarbing my Chiappa Enfield 1853 into something that resembles what my Great Grandfather Jacob Johann Jennewein had in the American Civil War. Being from Wisconsin, company G Wisconsin 42nd Inf. Regiment. He enlisted in August 31, 1864 and mustered out on June 20th 1865, just in shy of one year. My Cousin Larry has his rifle and he sent me pictures of it. I don't think it was bright color, but blued.
Looks blued to me in the picture I'll attach. Also in another picture (attached) is a close up of the side of the lockplate. It is different than a lot of others I have seen as it is "T O W E R" over the date of 1862, where others are made with the date above the TOWER name.

I've sent off an email to Todd Watts to see if he can make it so that the word T O W E R is spaced further apart than what is normally made as a defarb and put the date underneath it. I have seen Lodgewood's website and talked to them. Looks like quite impressive work. VERY impressive.

I cannot have my Great Grandfather's rifle but I would like to have one that looks as much like it as possible. Larry says it still has the original sling and original leather ammo pouch (which has a number of original paper patch bullets).

So, why was the TOWER over 1862 different made than the other way around?

View attachment 192694

View attachment 192695

View attachment 192696
I believe if you contact Lodgewood & explain to Dave Stavlo what it is you want and why he could likely do it as well as Todd Watts. IMHO between those two you have contacted the finest defarb men in the US.

The musket tool pictured will set yo back the cost of the defarb job if you are lucky enough to find one.

As to the TOWER markings, they were hand done by various different artisans and are not always that consistent.
 
The musket tool pictured will set yo back the cost of the defarb job if you are lucky enough to find one.

Not worried about the musket tool, just wanted to get the lockplate mechanism right. I really don't want to remove the blue, as I think they did come blued but times being what they were, probably many wished they were Sprinfields, and not Enfields. Perhaps it was their way of "Defarbing" their rifles to look more like the sought after "other" rifle. Plenty of both used I am sure.
 
I bought the rifle from them new and had them do all the work. It started out as a new Armi-sport. I had everything done you could have done to it except reblueing it and case hardening the lock which they can do period correct buts it's time consuming and expensive. It was pretty common for the guys in the field to polish the blueing off and make them bright so I left it that way. For the rifle and work I had done was about 1300. If you go to their site they explain all the options and price for each option. It's actually pretty educational and learned a lot just from reading their options on several different guns.
Do you have period references to that? I just believe it's way overdone in the hobby!

Kevin Dally
 
Last edited:
One period quote from History of the First - Tenth - Twenty-ninth Maine Regiment By John Mead Gould on whether Enfields were ever polished bright:

Oct. 21st (1861), muskets were delivered to the men, and this furnished another excuse for a hearty growl from the 1st Mainers. "Had we not been promised a new blue uniform and Springfield muskets?" To be sure we had the blue uniform and a good outfit every way, "but look at these Enfield muskets," said they, "with their blued barrels and wood that no man can name!" They were not a bad weapon, however, differing little from the Springfield, in actual efficiency, weight, length, and caliber, but far behind in point of workmanship. For a while we kept them blued, then orders were issued to rub them bright and we kept them so ever after.
 
So....one quote means everyone in the army took off the bluing? Still not convinced.

Kevin Dally
 
I doubt everyone in the army took off the bluing. My Great Grandfather apparently did not. I'm just going off human nature, and the psychology of it all. IF the Springfield with it's shiny bright barrel and barrel bands was considered the premier weapon of the day, can't you imagine a lot of soldiers that had blued Enfield rifles might want them to look more like the Springfields? Even today, we buy reproduction Walkers, Colt Dragoons, Springfields, Sharps, Enfields, Remington revolvers ( I have one).... because we all can't all own one of the originals. Prices being what they are, those with money do get some nice originals, but to poorer folks, such as myself, I must be content with getting one "kind-of-like" the original.

Now the Defarbing comes into place. Lot's of owners of modern replicas do some defarbing or have someone do it to look as close to the original as possible. Lettering on barrels, proof marks, maker marks and other on the lockwork, maker marks on the stocks and other places.... all done to make it more into "what we wanted" in the first place. Now, imagine in 1862, you really are hoping for a Springfield rifle as you hear they are the best of the best, and you know it's shinny and looks a lot like the Enfield, except for fit & finish, and the fact that Enfields came blued and the Springfields did not. Would not take a lot of guessing that if you heard of a way to make it look more like what some of the other guys had, you could strip off the bluing to "defarb" it in a way to look more like the Springfield.

Anyways... just my thought on it. Perhaps someone more learned and smarter than me could actually make a better case of de-bluing of the Enfields.
 
Do you have period references to that? I just believe it's way overdone in the hobby!

Kevin Dally
Hi Kevin, my pea brain can't rattle off a bunch of specific sources or references off the top of my head. I will say when I had my Enfield done by Lodgewood I argued with myself about bright or blue. There were a few threads right here on the subject, a couple good articles about it at the Authentic Campaigner, I bought Mr. Barry's book on British imports and probably had at least half a dozen conversations with Lodgewood about it. I didn't make a decision lightly. I've seen originals with my own eyes that were bright and several photos that sure look like a bright finish. I'm satisfied that whether on purpose or by harsh cleaning in the field they did exist. Whether it being overdone in th he hobby in my circles I've only seen a few others done that way so I don't see it that way. What I do see way overdone is rust. One nice thing about mine is it can't be confused with anyone else's in my company anyway.
 
Regarding TOWER over date (1862) or the other way around meaning date over TOWER. No pattern there, I have seen them both ways. One of the books goes into considerable detail on what the significance of TOWER on the lock plate meant.

As far as bright vs blue barrels...it was not one way or the other with the Enfields. Sometimes (as in the 1st/10th Maine citation given) orders were given to have all arms polished probably to affect a uniform appearance in the ranks. One thing a polished barrel will do more than a blued barrel is rust. I have kept my Parker Hale Enfield barrel blued for that reason. My recommendation has always been to keep it blued until through regular field use and repeated cleanings, the barrel finish begins to wear thin. Then polish it to your hearts content. Or do what I did and re-blue it. One of the books has instructions on cold rust bluing to achieve an accurate barrel finish.
 
Back
Top