Picking up this 1864 Springfield Type 1. How did I do?

grimes

Private
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Picking up this original 1864 Springfield Type 1 for $600. Has the Model 1863 Type 1 bands, and Type 2 rear sight.

It seems to have an original early .58 Remington Rolling Block cleaning rod. Unless this is what the original 1863/1864 ramrod looks like. Maybe someone has more info on this.

How did I do?

Any more you can tell me about it?


1.jpg
2.jpg
3.jpg
4.jpg
5.jpg
6.jpg
7.jpg
8.jpg
9.jpg
10.jpg
 
I like it at that price. I think you did well. I agree about the ramrod, it is not correct. There was a similar rod adopted with the trapdoor conversions in 1865, but it has a slot similar to what an Enfield rod has. It is also odd to see the combination of the early type bands and the late type sight leaf. However, even if it was put together by somebody (and I'm not saying it was) you still got an original rifle-musket for the price of a reproduction. It even looks like it is in good enough shape to shoot. I also like the stock, pretty color. I bet it looks nice in natural sunlight.
 
Don't be so quick to replace that ramrod! According to Robert M. Reilly in his U.S. Military Small Arms 1816-1865
ISBN O-88227-O19-2 on Page 93, he states that the U.S. Model 1864,:"...the ramrod as specified was also changed more closely to conform to that of the Enfield arms."
 
Don't be so quick to replace that ramrod! According to Robert M. Reilly in his U.S. Military Small Arms 1816-1865
ISBN O-88227-O19-2 on Page 93, he states that the U.S. Model 1864,:"...the ramrod as specified was also changed more closely to conform to that of the Enfield arms."
Could be? I have never seen a type II or model 1864 with an Enfield type ramrod that wasn't an Enfield ramrod that the original was replaced with. Not saying! Could be!
 
Here is a photo of the U.S. ramrod that was modified in appearance to resemble an Enfield rod. The U.S. rod is on top, an Enfield rod on bottom. The length of the slot is the easiest way to tell them apart although the Enfield rod is also thicker. I have always been under the impression that these were introduced with the first trapdoor modifications, but maybe Reilly is correct. He is certainly a respected source. Either way, the ramrod shown in the thread is incorrect, the op is likely correct that it is from a rolling-block. The 2nd photo is of an Argentinian M1879 Rolling-Block, you can see that the profile of it is a good match.

DSC06019.JPG

DSC03985.JPG
 
I have a couple of theories about that rifle:

Possibility #1: When one considers the the rifle is a "Mixmaster" of parts, there is a good possibility that it was put together by Bannerman or one of the other surplus dealers from the surplus parts they purchased at some of the auctions of arms and spare parts that the Ordnance Department held from the end of the Civil War up until past 1900. These dealers were more than happy to cobble together any and all parts they had into firearms so they could be sold for a profit to the public.

Possibility #2: The rifle was issued to a Yankee soldier during the war. At the end of the war when a lot of the soldiers were being mustered out, they were given the opportunity to purchase their issue arm at a very reasonable price Many soldiers did so and carried their rifles home.

The mixture of parts could have resulted because the rifle was repaired in the field during the war, when some of the original parts that came on the arm were lost or damaged in some way. Like they say, too bad these old guns can't talk!
 
IF that is a "2" rather than a "3" following the "186" numerals, then I can only speculate that it was a "prototype" barrel, Springfield Armory had a special "Prototype Department" (my terminology) where prototype arms and parts were developed and made. The Prototype Department at Springfield was considered to be a "public asset," (again, my words) because any citizen could go to the Prototype Department and have a model of a new firearms related invention made for a nominal fee. Before the war, the Abolitionist John Brown had a model revolver he had invented made at Springfield!

The U.S. M1863 was not "officially adopted" until February of 1863, hence the prototype for the '63 would have been developed in 1862. Mr point being IF that is indeed "1862" stamped on the Gentleman's barrel, he does indeed have a much rarer piece than he had previously assumed!

Another example: the available evidence indicates that the "Special Model of 1861" was developed at Springfield Armory and NOT the Colt Armory as is generally assumed. Matter of fact, that famous "Parts Interchangeability Chart" produced by Springfield Armory listing all the parts that are interchangeable between all the models starting with the U.S. M1855 thru the Trapdoor Springfield states emphatically that the Special Model of 1861 was designed and developed at Springfield Armory!
 
Thank you everyone for the replies. I am picking it up today, so I will give some more info/pictures tonight or tomorrow.
 
Dear Grimes:

To make stampings on lockplates and gun barrels stand out for photographic purposes, just sprinkle some talcum powder, flour, etc on the part, then wipe the excess away with a clots. The white powder remaining in the stamping will make the markings and lettering really "stand out" in your photos.

Does the barrel really read "1862?"

THANKS
 
Ok, I picked it up today.




1.) Barrel is dated 1863, and the lock is dated 1864.

2.) It's in good shape, just needs slight cleaning (but leaving the patina) with 0000 steel wool and oil.

3.) Rear band is incorrect (has the 1861 rear band). Already ordered an original to replace it from RQ.

4.) Ramrod looks to be from a rolling block, so I ordered a high quality reproduction 1863 ramrod from Lodgewood.

5.) Barrel has some rust, but has strong rifling, and it had a live charge in it.......yes, a live charge. Pulled that out and it had newspaper dated 1972 as wadding. So it had a live charge in it from 1972.

6.) Nipple was pretty rusted on, but with some "persuasion", it came out without any damage.





Will post pictures when I get a chance.
 
Ramrod has no slot in it, but is the correct length for this rifle and it looks like its been with the rifle for a long time. I'm not sure now if it is from a rolling block. Any thoughts on what it could be?

6.jpg





Anyways, here's additional photos after I cleaned it, including one of the bore.



20130715_150621.jpg





20130715_150638.jpg



20130715_150711.jpg




20130715_150720.jpg





20130715_151010.jpg
 
Back
Top