I found an original civil war Enfield rifle.

[muzzleloadingat18]

I don't think it's a legit Enfield, maybe one of the Nepalese or Afghan made copies. No markings, lock panels shaped wrong, crude workmanship.

It has 3 grove rifling Damascus barrel and the lock isn't original

 

[muzzleloadingat18]

It has 3 grove rifling Damascus barrel and the lock isn't original

Only mark is RK on the stock and 39 on the bottom of the barrel

 

[Trot]

It has 3 grove rifling Damascus barrel and the lock isn't original

I thought you said it was a smoothbore?

 

[muzzleloadingat18]

Th

I thought you said it was a smoothbore?

The kid I bought it from said it was a smooth bore. The rifling was wore out at the muzzle.

 

[Trot]

I just don't see it being a legit Enfield, too many red flags. A lot of crude Khyber pass guns were brought back by servicemen I suspect something of that sort.

 

[TFoley]

Not the original lock. And it has a Damascus barrel so I doubt it's a copy.

Definitely not any kind of Enfield, then. No twist barrels for military firearms- way too expensive.

 

[PathfinderNC]

I

Enfield proofs are usually underneath the breech end of the barrel. Have you looked there?

haven't bought it yet and I don't want to take some guys gun apart.

I thought you said it was a smoothbore?

The kid I bought it from said it was a smooth bore. The rifling was wore out at the muzzle
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So you did buy it. Curious what you paid for it?

 

[muzzleloadingat18]

I

haven't bought it yet and I don't want to take some guys gun apart.


The kid I bought it from said it was a smooth bore. The rifling was wore out at the muzzle
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So you did buy it. Curious what you paid for it?

350$ and shot it the same day.

 

[Juice Jaws]

Southerners were prohibited from owning rifles during ReConstruction. So they bored out the barrels to remove the rifling.

Not so sure about that, do you have any docs to show that??

 

[Mikekj]

I found an original civil war Enfield​

Who’s civil war?
Not US civil war.

 

[muzzleloadingat18]

I found an original civil war Enfield​

Who’s civil war?
Not US civil war.

What makes you so sure

 

[flntlokr]

I have read that as well but from what I understand those are incredibly rare. Sadly this one dose not have the original lock or lock and the finish is pretty bad. If it did come from India why/ how would it get back here. I can't tell what caliber it is but based on the picture I want to say 60+. What caliber were the ones that got sent to india

As far bas I know, they were the same calibre as the regular issue; .577, so that they would use the same ammunition etc., just lacking the long range accuracy of the rifled guns which the British troops had.

 

[Mikekj]

What makes you so sure

The ones that came here had specific markings, which this has none.

 

[cebusey]

I want to hear what people have to say. Is it real what is going on with it. Why is it a smoothie and not a rifled .577.

It has 3 grove rifling Damascus barrel and the lock isn't original

It looks like the front side is a bead - not an Enfield sight. After the Mutiny until the Brits had switched over to the breech loading Snider, they did make smoothbore Enfield muskets for issue to native troops and civilian colonists as they did not want them to have equivalent weapons. They did not have a normal Enfield rear sight but a non-adjustable tombstone sight. The front if I recollect was similar to the rifle sight and not a bead. I have attached a picture of the Mutiny musket I am restoring that was made by Enfield in 1858. Though you can't see it, the lock is crown over VR indicating military issue as well as native service markings.

 

[muzzleloadingat18]

It looks like the front side is a bead - not an Enfield sight. After the Mutiny until the Brits had switched over to the breech loading Snider, they did make smoothbore Enfield muskets for issue to native troops and civilian colonists as they did not want them to have equivalent weapons. They did not have a normal Enfield rear sight but a non-adjustable tombstone sight. The front if I recollect was similar to the rifle sight and not a bead. I have attached a picture of the Mutiny musket I am restoring that was made by Enfield in 1858. Though you can't see it, the lock is crown over VR indicating military issue as well as native service markings.View attachment 320018

I thought it was a smooth bore but it has rifling.

 

[muzzleloadingat18]

I thought it was a smooth bore but it has rifling.

It's the original sight but it looks like it was ground or worn down

 

[tucosink]

IMA

 

[cebusey]

Now that it is yours - many if not most of the Nepalese locks did not have a pin on the bridle but just attached it with two screws. The Enfield manufactured locks I have seen have a pin on the bridle as well as attaching with 2 screws.

 

[Clark Badgett]

What makes you so sure

Because the US & CS governments bought mostly BSAT (Tower) and a few London (Enfield) muskets that were of the Type 1,2&3 patterns (mostly type 3) as approved by the English government. They had full British markings, all contractor markings, legal proofs etc. Some CS guns had additional markings added when they got here. Your musket IS NOT an American Civil War gun, and anyone that has put more than a 10 minute study into them will tell you that.

Enfield muskets did not have twist steel barrels.

 

[cebusey]

Because the US & CS governments bought mostly BSAT (Tower) and a few London (Enfield) muskets that were of the Type 1,2&3 patterns (mostly type 3) as approved by the English government. They had full British markings, all contractor markings, legal proofs etc. Some CS guns had additional markings added when they got here. Your musket IS NOT an American Civil War gun, and anyone that has put more than a 10 minute study into them will tell you that.

Enfield muskets did not have twist steel barrels.

Actually US & CS purchased Tower and Enfield rifles did not have full British markings. The locks may have had the crown BUT did not have the VR