-
Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.
We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.
Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103
Enfield lockplate ???
- Thread starter Vgaby
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
Vgaby,
Don't have any info but try: www.google.com and search
Enfield lockplate...Lot of info there. Come back and join in when you can..
snake-eyes :hatsoff:
Don't have any info but try: www.google.com and search
Enfield lockplate...Lot of info there. Come back and join in when you can..
snake-eyes :hatsoff:
Tumblernotch
69 Cal.
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2005
- Messages
- 3,370
- Reaction score
- 11
It appears to be just below bolster area. Are there any other marks on the plate or the barrel of the gun? I don't know of any English made Enfields with that mark, but it may be Belgian made or even Spanish. Is it a two band or three band? If you have access to it, take some pictures or write a description of all that you can, including the rear sight. I have a notion that it could be Spanish.
Tumblernotch
69 Cal.
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2005
- Messages
- 3,370
- Reaction score
- 11
I wish I could say that I know what you have there, but I can't. I've looked through everything I have about Enfields and their foreign copies, but have drawn a blank. The proofmarks on the barrel are very similiar to Birmingham lock marks found on the inside of lock rather on the barrel. It appears that the U-shaped parts of the marks are the result of sloppy stamping of the "Crown" part of the marks. The Lion on the lock appears to be engraved but possibly stamped, I don't have anything to identify it. The engraved number and letters on the barrel on the right side are probably a rack or regimental mark.
The inside of the lock is unlike any Enfield I've ever seen. There is no mainspring stirrup, the spring acts directly on the tumbler, and on the '53 models and later, the foot of the mainspring rested against a round boss instead of the plate as it is here. And I've seen that peculiar type of hammer screw on French muskets.
The stock is obviously handmade (as were most Enfields), but not of the same quality. The trigger bow appears to be of a sporting shotgun style, not military. The hammer, at least on the outside, appears to be of English make, or possibly a good Belgian copy.
As I was looking for information I also found that some Enfield pattern guns were made in Brazil, but I don't have any specifications or descriptions.
Sorry I couldn't be of any help. All I can say is, it doesn't appear to be an English made Enfield. Somebody had access to drawings and maybe some parts and built their own version, how many, who knows? You do have a very interesting piece there. Good luck!
:thumbsup:
The inside of the lock is unlike any Enfield I've ever seen. There is no mainspring stirrup, the spring acts directly on the tumbler, and on the '53 models and later, the foot of the mainspring rested against a round boss instead of the plate as it is here. And I've seen that peculiar type of hammer screw on French muskets.
The stock is obviously handmade (as were most Enfields), but not of the same quality. The trigger bow appears to be of a sporting shotgun style, not military. The hammer, at least on the outside, appears to be of English make, or possibly a good Belgian copy.
As I was looking for information I also found that some Enfield pattern guns were made in Brazil, but I don't have any specifications or descriptions.
Sorry I couldn't be of any help. All I can say is, it doesn't appear to be an English made Enfield. Somebody had access to drawings and maybe some parts and built their own version, how many, who knows? You do have a very interesting piece there. Good luck!
:thumbsup:
robinghewitt
62 Cal.
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2004
- Messages
- 2,605
- Reaction score
- 21
Easy, that's the later East India Company mark :thumbsup:
best regards
Squire Robin
best regards
Squire Robin
robinghewitt
62 Cal.
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2004
- Messages
- 2,605
- Reaction score
- 21
You also have a broad arrow ordnance acceptance mark and ordnance stampings, so presumably it's been in the British Army at some time. Nice to see the individual parts of the lock stamped, it was supposed to be normal for pattern tested locks but I only have one lock with them on.
Tumblernotch
69 Cal.
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2005
- Messages
- 3,370
- Reaction score
- 11
I noticed that Broad Arrow myself. Apparently the barrel went through the Proof House at some point. Does it look to you like someone only got half of the Crown stamps into the barrel? I'm assuming that the Crown over B 7 is a Birmingham storehouse acceptance mark.
Would this gun have been manufactured at an Indian armory using Birmingham made barrels and locks? I'm not familiar with some models, so I'm also wondering if this is an 1851 Pattern lock. P53/3's and later that I've seen have a stirrup on the mainspring. This one is obviously a well made lock, but just a bit different from what I've seen. What I've seen of the stock doesn't strike me as the usual fine British quality finish and fitting.
:thumbsup:
Would this gun have been manufactured at an Indian armory using Birmingham made barrels and locks? I'm not familiar with some models, so I'm also wondering if this is an 1851 Pattern lock. P53/3's and later that I've seen have a stirrup on the mainspring. This one is obviously a well made lock, but just a bit different from what I've seen. What I've seen of the stock doesn't strike me as the usual fine British quality finish and fitting.
:thumbsup:
robinghewitt
62 Cal.
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2004
- Messages
- 2,605
- Reaction score
- 21
Bill Curtis is the man to decipher Ordnance stampings, but these look to be part worn away, makes it tricky if you don't have both letters and the number.
Slight concern on this gun, the back end of the barrel doesn't look to be snug against the stock. If there's any kind of gap the lock takes the recoil and eventually cracks the back of the lock mortise. Some iron packing might save the day.
If there is a gap then it could be a replacement barrel which would easily explain ordnance marks on the barrel, the EIC marking on the lock and why the stamps are worn away on top :thumbsup:
EIC guns were usually made cheaper than the ordnance pieces, they weren't fussed about things like barrel poishing which was time consuming and costly.
best regards
Squire Robin
EDIT: But it wouldn't explain the rear sight, would it :hmm:
Slight concern on this gun, the back end of the barrel doesn't look to be snug against the stock. If there's any kind of gap the lock takes the recoil and eventually cracks the back of the lock mortise. Some iron packing might save the day.
If there is a gap then it could be a replacement barrel which would easily explain ordnance marks on the barrel, the EIC marking on the lock and why the stamps are worn away on top :thumbsup:
EIC guns were usually made cheaper than the ordnance pieces, they weren't fussed about things like barrel poishing which was time consuming and costly.
best regards
Squire Robin
EDIT: But it wouldn't explain the rear sight, would it :hmm:
Tumblernotch
69 Cal.
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2005
- Messages
- 3,370
- Reaction score
- 11
I like your comments on this. About that rear sight, it wouldn't be because it's maybe on a Pattern 1843 smoothbore would it? Maybe rifled at some point or somebody just wanted a cheap block sight on it. :hmm:
robinghewitt
62 Cal.
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2004
- Messages
- 2,605
- Reaction score
- 21
If it was a smoothie the bore would be over .75", except for the Sepoy which was 16 gauge.
They did polish out and recut rifling, probably used for training rather than active service, I have a 3 band reamed out to .60" and sawn off to a 2 band then sold out of service. That one has more of them little stamps than you can shake a stick at.
These are musket sights, sepoy and Victiria carbine.
They did polish out and recut rifling, probably used for training rather than active service, I have a 3 band reamed out to .60" and sawn off to a 2 band then sold out of service. That one has more of them little stamps than you can shake a stick at.
These are musket sights, sepoy and Victiria carbine.
robinghewitt
62 Cal.
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2004
- Messages
- 2,605
- Reaction score
- 21
It gets worse ::
The bore looks like an Enfield, you can see where the barrel mounting lug has been moved.
Problem is, if it was an Enfield it wouldn't have any barrel mounting lugs :shocking:
What is the bore and barrel length?
The bore looks like an Enfield, you can see where the barrel mounting lug has been moved.
Problem is, if it was an Enfield it wouldn't have any barrel mounting lugs :shocking:
What is the bore and barrel length?
Tumblernotch
69 Cal.
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2005
- Messages
- 3,370
- Reaction score
- 11
If that barrel was four grooved, I'd tend to think it was from a Pattern 1851 musket. It appears though to be three. The reason I say this is because I believe it was a pin fastened barrel on that model and that could explain the old barrel lug. But, it also could be that this barrel was on another half stock rifle in some previous life. If it is .702 cal. I'd be pretty sure it was an M1851. I don't have enough British musket data to be sure of anything.
In that overall view of the gun, it is a pretty good looking piece. I like the buttstock style.
In that overall view of the gun, it is a pretty good looking piece. I like the buttstock style.
robinghewitt
62 Cal.
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2004
- Messages
- 2,605
- Reaction score
- 21
Good point. the 1851 was pinned, 4 grooves barrel 39" by .702
The 1842 was 39" by .758, 3 or 4 grooves, and there was a shorter sea service version 30" long :thumbsup:
The 1842 was 39" by .758, 3 or 4 grooves, and there was a shorter sea service version 30" long :thumbsup:
robinghewitt
62 Cal.
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2004
- Messages
- 2,605
- Reaction score
- 21
It's been sporterised, the back sight doesn't really go with the chequering. Hasn't got a pineapple by any chance? I'm really good with pineapples ::
Tumblernotch
69 Cal.
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2005
- Messages
- 3,370
- Reaction score
- 11
You're right about that sight not going with that checkered stock. It is rather primitive. I thought the lock panel looked a little rough, but overall, that's a nice stock, and the patchbox is a nice touch. I reckon somebody just sporterized a British musket like they did the American muskets over here. It would help if we knew the caliber. ::
I admire your knowledge ! :master: I taken my question in best place ! 
eace:
I measured the barrel it's caliber are 0,60" equal 15,3 mm and 27,5" long equal 700 mm. I tried to the stock a new Euroarms 33" Enfield barrel.
Unfortunately the barrel inside is very rusty. :cry:
I think I'll give it a brand new barrel. :thanks:
eace:I measured the barrel it's caliber are 0,60" equal 15,3 mm and 27,5" long equal 700 mm. I tried to the stock a new Euroarms 33" Enfield barrel.
Unfortunately the barrel inside is very rusty. :cry:
I think I'll give it a brand new barrel. :thanks:
Tumblernotch
69 Cal.
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2005
- Messages
- 3,370
- Reaction score
- 11
:thanks: If it measures .60 cal. it is probably from a P/53 Enfield. That barrel measured .577, so there is undoubtably some wear in the bore, or you measured across the grooves.
That new barrel looks like a good fit. If it's real rusty, you may be able to save it with proper cleaning. Check some of the threads on the Forum for different methods. Other than some pitting, the picture you posted of the other barrel shows that the rifling is still intact on the old barrel. It may do pretty good. I would have a gunsmith check for soundness first though.
A 20 gauge shotgun barrel would be a nice addition as well.
Good luck with this piece. It looks like a good project with a lot of potential. ::
That new barrel looks like a good fit. If it's real rusty, you may be able to save it with proper cleaning. Check some of the threads on the Forum for different methods. Other than some pitting, the picture you posted of the other barrel shows that the rifling is still intact on the old barrel. It may do pretty good. I would have a gunsmith check for soundness first though.
A 20 gauge shotgun barrel would be a nice addition as well.
Good luck with this piece. It looks like a good project with a lot of potential. ::
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2005
- Messages
- 7,017
- Reaction score
- 5,240
Dear Sir - As Squire Robin notes, your lockplate shows the cypher of the East India Company. The standing lion holding a crown was adopted in 1810.
Previous to that, the lock markings on the East India Muskets were the 4 quartered heart with the letters "V" (United), "E" (East), "I" (India), "C" (Company) with a cross or the figure "4" at the top (the cross was changed because of Moslem objections). The contractor's name was engraved in the center and the date above the heart.
From the mixture of markings on your piece, and the rather odd selection of marks on the lock itself, I am of the opinion that you have a Khyber Pass special, made to please the many tourists in that part of the world for the last 200 years. In comparing the fit and finish of your lock with that of a Pattern 53 from 1861, yours appears to have been made by somebody who has certainly seen one, but not clearly.
Our American brothers-in-arms are bringing these 'antiques' back to the US by the container load, in the mistaken belief that they are valuable antiques. In truth, 99% of them are made up from bits left over from other bits left over from making other bits. The poor finish of the curved cut-out at the breech end, where the pen-knife used to cut the curve can be clearly discerned, are typical of the genre, as is the habit of cutting bits off, like lugs, or putting bits on, like sights. A look at a genuine P53 or similar weapon of the same era will show a clean, machined finish to the wood in this location - because it WAS a machined finish. The appearance and colour of the wood is also a mite suspect...but then I'm not an expert. All I know is that my two old Sniders, fence post drivers both, rather than tack drivers, have much closer-grained stuff of much darker colouration - less like a modern wood dye.
Interesting for what it is.
Enjoy.
tac :grey:
Previous to that, the lock markings on the East India Muskets were the 4 quartered heart with the letters "V" (United), "E" (East), "I" (India), "C" (Company) with a cross or the figure "4" at the top (the cross was changed because of Moslem objections). The contractor's name was engraved in the center and the date above the heart.
From the mixture of markings on your piece, and the rather odd selection of marks on the lock itself, I am of the opinion that you have a Khyber Pass special, made to please the many tourists in that part of the world for the last 200 years. In comparing the fit and finish of your lock with that of a Pattern 53 from 1861, yours appears to have been made by somebody who has certainly seen one, but not clearly.
Our American brothers-in-arms are bringing these 'antiques' back to the US by the container load, in the mistaken belief that they are valuable antiques. In truth, 99% of them are made up from bits left over from other bits left over from making other bits. The poor finish of the curved cut-out at the breech end, where the pen-knife used to cut the curve can be clearly discerned, are typical of the genre, as is the habit of cutting bits off, like lugs, or putting bits on, like sights. A look at a genuine P53 or similar weapon of the same era will show a clean, machined finish to the wood in this location - because it WAS a machined finish. The appearance and colour of the wood is also a mite suspect...but then I'm not an expert. All I know is that my two old Sniders, fence post drivers both, rather than tack drivers, have much closer-grained stuff of much darker colouration - less like a modern wood dye.
Interesting for what it is.
Enjoy.
tac :grey:
