1816 Springfield/Percussion

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

manmarco

Pilgrim
Joined
Feb 1, 2015
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I have an 1816 Springfield that was converted to percussion. The weapon has been in my family since 1948 and the conversion was done prior to then. I need to replace the nipple, any thoughts on how to locate a proper nipple?
(I am a new member and not yet familiar with all the topics, forums, etc. Any help will be appreciated.)

Thanks, wdb
 
Your original US M1816 musket should take the US standard nipple, sized 5/16 X 24. A new one can be ordered from Track of the Wolf, Dixie Gun Works or any suttler that sells to reenactors. Easiest for you might be to try any local gunsmith.

A link to Track of the Wolf is:
http://www.trackofthewolf.com/list/Item.aspx/807/1

Personally I use the standard steel, many will insist that stainless or Ampco are the only one to get. They all fit and work the same.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you remove the nipple and take it to a good hardware store, auto parts store or engine rebuilding shop any of them will be able to measure the threads on the nipple and tell you what size it is.

If your too proud to ask for help and have access to a good hardware store you can just select a nut and try screwing your nipple into it.
It should go in with just light finger pressure if the threads match.
If it doesn't, try another size nut.

The threads on an original will not be metric size.
 
Are you sure about the threads not being metric? I thought nearly all US martial arms from the 1795 Springfield through the trapdoor Springfield were metric due to our early adoption of and the copying of the French Charleville during the Revolution. I am not " sharpshooting " you Zonie, just trying to educate myself some more if I am wrong, and I may be.
 
I haven't dug out information to prove it but I am pretty sure the US Military guns used the inch system for all of their fasteners in the 1800's.

Although we did use the French Chaleville as a model for our first US made musket our close ties with Great Britain pushed us towards using their inch system of measurement.

By the early 1800's when these muskets were altered to use percussion cones (nipples)I have no doubt that the US Armories were using machine screws based on the inch system and would have standardized the thread size.
 
5/16X24 standard US musket nipple is available from several sources. Be sure to treat the threads with a good anti-seize compound when you install it so it will come out when you need it to.
 
manmarco said:
I have an 1816 Springfield that was converted to percussion. The weapon has been in my family since 1948 and the conversion was done prior to then. I need to replace the nipple, any thoughts on how to locate a proper nipple?
(I am a new member and not yet familiar with all the topics, forums, etc. Any help will be appreciated.)

Thanks, wdb

What type of conversion is it? The most common is the "Belgian" in which the nipple is threaded directly into the barrel. If that's what you have
and you intend to shoot it, you'd be wise to have checked by a gunsmith familiar with them. That conversion is the most prone to failure.

Duane
 
Many Thanks to all who answered my query. Duane, in answer to your question as to what type of conversion it is, I don't know. I'll try to find out more about it in a couple of days. I'll also try to post a pic or two. I actually have 2 of the 1816's, the other is still flintlock. (I inherited both from an uncle who acquired them in the late '40s. The percussion has a bayonet and leather sheath with it,)
 
smoothshooter said:
Are you sure about the threads not being metric? I thought nearly all US martial arms from the 1795 Springfield through the trapdoor Springfield were metric due to our early adoption of and the copying of the French Charleville during the Revolution. I am not " sharpshooting " you Zonie, just trying to educate myself some more if I am wrong, and I may be.

I have forgotten how long it has been since Dixie Gun Works first posed their SPECULATION in their catalogs that M1795 - M1840 Flintlock Muskets were made on the Metric Pattern. I think they had it in the catalog back in the 70's and still had it in their catalog in the early 2,000's. I am not sure if it is more recent catalogs. To make a long story short, it is just not true.

What I believe confused Turner Kirkland all those years ago was the fact he was NOT a gunsmith or machinist, did not understand the shape and pitch of the threads in screw threads was often different back in the period (as early screw threads were often formed rather than cut) AND some of the screw threads per inch Springfield used were very different from modern "standardized" screw threads. This led him to believe the original screw threads were metric, when they actually were not.

Gus
 
Here is the quote from my 2014 Dixie Gun Works catalog : " The earliest U.S. guns were copied after the French which used the metric system of measurement of screws . The use of the metric system started with 1795 Model muskets and the early pistols through about 1890 when the Trapdoor went out of existence. The Trapdoor .45 / 70 used metric size threads. The only thing that is English threaded is the musket nipple used on conversions and the Civil War type guns, it being 5 / 16 X 24." But as you say, some of this may be in error.
 
Thanks for mentioning that. Well, it seems Dixie is still including this unfounded speculation they have had in the catalog since at least the 1970's. Another case of information being inaccurate, but repeated often enough, gets into culture as being partially or completely true.

Gus
 
And to All,

"The bottom line" is to carefully measure the nipple's threads on the musket to ASSURE which is a proper replacement, rather than guessing what you think that it might be.

just my OPINION, satx

yours, satx
 
S&S Firearms and Lodgewood both sell replacement nipples for converted M1816 percussion muskets. Check out their websites and call them if you need further assurance. I've dealt with both and found both companies offer great advice over the phone.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top