Springfield 1795 questions

[Lead Snowstorm]

Hi all - recently acquired my first Springfield 1795 and had a couple of questions on it:

1. Did the original ramrods ever have holes drilled near the button heads? Can I assume this is a repro rod? (There’s also a mark that looks like a number on the rod - see pic.)

EDIT to add - I see a very similar stamp on the rod of my 1816-dated M1812, albeit no hole.

2. Is it common to be unable to fix a bayonet with the rod in place? Can I assume this bayonet originally went with a gun with a bottom lug? See picture - the head of the rod blocks the bayonet from seating over the lug.

3. Finally, has anyone encountered either a “C” or a broken die in a date stamp? I have seen capital “I” in place of 1 on occasion. See the “1809” date:

Thanks!

 

[Billy-by-gosh]

If you remove the Rammer first, maybe you can insert and twist-lock the bayonet; THEN re-insert the rammer into the stock. Admittedly awkward, but will that work??

 

[Lead Snowstorm]

Oh yes, that totally works, no problem. The bayonet goes on and off with ease as long as the ramrod is out (and can even be fixed as long as the ramrod is withdrawn enough to allow the curve of the bayonet past the button head).

 

[PathfinderNC]

I have a feeling you have the wrong bayonet for that musket. The ramrod shouldn’t need to be touched when fixing bayonets.

 

[Lead Snowstorm]

Yep - I’m assuming this bayonet would’ve originally gone with a gun with a lug on the bottom of the barrel.

 

[danda0624]

I have a feeling you have the wrong bayonet for that musket. The ramrod shouldn’t need to be touched when fixing bayonets.

IMHO, I think the rammer is a mismatch rather than the bayonet.

 

[Clark Badgett]

IMHO, I think the rammer is a mismatch rather than the bayonet.

The bayonet is definitely a mismatch, its for a bottom lug barrel. The rammer is old and if fully seated is the correct length.

 

[Lead Snowstorm]

The bayonet is definitely a mismatch, its for a bottom lug barrel. The rammer is old and if fully seated is the correct length.

Yes, ramrod is fully seated and is the proper length; the only unusual thing I noticed about it is that hole drilled through it.

Any ideas what the bayonet actually matches? I’ve been trying to do some searching myself and apparently the lugs moved around a bit on the French muskets of the era - could it be a French bayonet (given the major influence of the French muskets of the period on the 1795 pattern)?