• 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

Tin-plated Enfield two-band naval rifle

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Raedwald said:
The smooth bore for Indian service Pattern 1858 & 1859 had a simple one piece with notch rear sight and were in 0.656" bore. The weapon in question has the standard Enfield rifle rear sight.

Thank you for that information.

I had checked "BRITISH MILITARY LONGARMS 1715-1865" by D. W. Bailey, and it did not show a smoothbore P 1858/9 with the adjustable rear sight, but rather the much simpler and cheaper notched rear sight you mentioned. However, it also did not show the Pattern for India service that you mentioned with the "Carbine Bore." I just guessed at that because I know the barrels of the P 1858/59 "2 Band" Arms were plenty large enough in diameter for Carbine Bore and it made sense they would have issued a smoothbore in that size that originally was pretty well standardized for Carbine Bore around 1756.

I appreciate this information from you and David Minshall that better fills in my interest in British Military Muzzle Loading Arms.

Gus
 
Artificer said:
I don't know as much as I would like about how Government Arms were disposed when the British Government surplus sold excess/out-of-date arms.

As far as I know, the Tower marking and Crown indicated these were originally Government Arms, though "VR" for Victoria Regina under the Crown in the Cypher is missing. Was the "VR" removed to indicate this was no longer a Queen's Arm when "surplus" sold? Then the bayonet lug was removed and the barrel smooth bored to use as a fowler/shotgun?

Bailey mentions British Ordnance selling off broken or excess/out-of-date arms in the 18th century, but does not mention if the King's Cypher was removed to demonstrate such Arms were no longer the King's property.

Or is it possible the Rifle did not have the "VR" on it originally, as it was made to be issued to British Militia Units?

Gus
Thank you all! I joined another site in England to see if I could get a definitive answer. Artificer, you called it! You rock! It is a period correct GAR rifle. They were tinned and smooth bored after the great unpleasantness for use in parades and demonstrations. This explains so much regarding the seemingly disparate features of this rifle. Now, I have to get an idea of fair market value.
 
Whatever happened to the rifle in its later life, I’ve not seen anything that suggests to me it began life as anything other than a commercial Birmingham trade ”˜Enfield’ rifle. I do not believe it was a British Government arm.

David
 
You are most welcome and I'm very glad we all could assist in your question. I would be remiss, though, if I did not also mention that Tac, Dave Person, David Minshall and Raedwald all gave excellent information on the piece as well.

I truly enjoy the fact people on this forum are so generous with their knowledge.

WELCOME to this forum!

Gus
 
FWIW the Indian smooth bore Enfield used a 0.632" ball with 4 drams of powder in the usual style musket paper cartridge in the 0.656" bore. Quite a small windage for a military musket.
 
That is impressive for the period!

By the 1840's, calipers that were accurate to .001 inch were cheap enough to be used by many tradesmen, so that explains in part how they reduced the windage. (For those who don't know what "windage" meant in the period, it was the difference between the diameter of the ball and the diameter of the bore of the barrel.)

Gus

P.S. For those like me who are not used to Drams as a powder measurement, here is a conversion table to convert Drams to Grains. http://www.cherrytreefamily.com/dramconv.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
IF you're good at mental math it's 27.34 times number of drams(drachm)...if not, use the chart! :yakyak: :rotf:
 
Oops you're right...had a senior moment there or a typographical slip of the lip! :shocked2: :wink:
 
David Minshall said:
Whatever happened to the rifle in its later life, I’ve not seen anything that suggests to me it began life as anything other than a commercial Birmingham trade ”˜Enfield’ rifle. I do not believe it was a British Government arm.

David
I would tend to agree, from what little I know, but as far as I have been able to ascertain, both the confederacy and union bought British arms at a prodigious rate, civilian and military. The Whitworth rifles were highly regarded for sniping by both sides, for instance.
 
To all of you who so kindly shared your thoughts and knowledge, thank you. Short of actually being there when the rifle was altered, all we can do is informed speculation. It would appear that sometime in it's life it was re-stocked into a 2 band Snider Enfield stock, hence the poor wood-to-metal fit. So, I would call it a mish-mash.
 
I am not sure if this will be helpful to you, but it may at least be interesting to you and some other members.

Have you ever heard of the differences between "Interchangeable Pattern" (IP) Enfields and "Non Interchangeable Pattern" (NIP) Enfields of this period? To make a very long story somewhat brief, the British Government stipulated that P1853 through P1861 Enfields for Government Service were to be of the IP, once that manufacturing capability became available at Enfield Lock. Of course, these arms were more expensive to make than the same arms that were not manufactured to Interchangeable Parts tolerances. Both British and later American Contractors made the less expensive Non Interchangeable Pattern Enfields for those who did not wish to spend the extra money for Interchangeable Parts Arms. To give an idea of the difference in price, IP Enfields were purchased by the U.S. for around $22.00 - $24.00 while NIP Enfields were purchased for between $17.00 and $19.00 during the WBTS.

OK, so what has this got to do with your Rifle? Well, since your Rifle was almost certainly not a British Ordnance approved/purchased arm, the barrel and lock are probably not (though not certainly) Interchangeable Pattern Parts, so they might or probably not be a "drop in" fit into an original Interchangeable Parts Pattern made Stock.

Back in the 1973 and off and on for many years after when the Marine Corps did not have me stationed too far away, I worked as an Artificer/Armorer/Gunsmith at was then called "The Navy Arms Booth" on Sutlers' Row at the North South Skirmish Association Spring and Fall National Championships.

In the early 1980's when Navy Arms was still importing and selling the REAL UK Parker Hale Enfields that were made on the Interchangeable Parts Pattern, we carried a wide selection of parts, including spare stocks and barrels. One day a Confederate Skirmisher walked up to our booth and asked if we had any original P 1853 barrels that were in good enough condition to shoot in the competition. Much to our surprise, he had an almost complete Original Tower P1853 Enfield including the barrel bands, but missing the barrel. (He had purchased the parts that way and did not know why the barrel had been removed, even though he had asked.) We did not have any original barrels, but we noticed the “Tower” marking on his lock as well as the Queen’s Cypher and Broad Arrow markings. We informed him we did have brand new Parker Hale barrels that might fit with little or no work, though. He decided he wanted to look around for an original barrel, so we wished him the best of luck and off he went further on Sutlers’ Row.

About 2 or 3 hours later, he returned and informed us he had no luck finding an original barrel and inquired about the PH barrel. We informed him we would be happy to see if the barrel fit in his stock and if it did not, there would be no charge. Much to all our surprise, that barrel hand pressed into place as nicely and solidly as if it had been made for this stock 120 years earlier. We also supplied a reproduction PH Tang Screw and in short order we screwed it and the barrel bands in place making it a complete gun. When he asked what the “gunsmithing” charge would be beyond the price of the barrel, we told him there was no extra cost and we were well pleased it fit so nicely. So off he went gleefully to the firing line. He returned the next day and told us the Rifle Musket shot much more accurately than he was able to hold and thanked us again. We thanked him for learning something we only suspected.

Now because your Rifle parts may or probably are not of the Interchangeable Parts pattern, I cannot guarantee they would be a “drop in” fit in either a REAL UK Parker Hale reproduction stock or an Original Stock of the Interchangeable Parts Pattern. However, if you run across either of those stocks, it may work or be able to work in such a stock with not too much fitting. Just something you might be interested in checking in case you ever run across either kind of stock.

Now, I can say that I would not expect an Italian Reproduction stock to work well with your parts, because the shapes of their barrels were different than PH and Original Barrels. However, with some inletting and glass bedding, such a stock probably could be fitted. OR using glass bedding, you could tighten up the fit of your stock to the barrel, in case you would like to fire the Rifle. Now of course I would recommend having a qualified gunsmith inspect your barrel and breech before you would fire it, though.

Gus
 
Gus, thank you ever so much. GREAT information and most enlightening. If my rifle had the original rifled barrel in good shape, I might have been tempted to consider the route you suggest. Given that it's been bored out to a smooth bore, I don't think I'd put any money into it. There's a gun show tomorrow and I'll put it on the table and gauge interest. Should I get someone interested, I'll let it go. There is usually a pretty good selection of very nice antique long and short arms at the local shows and if I ever elect to get a nice shooter, it would not be a problem (excepting maybe budgetary considerations). Once again, thank you.
 
When visiting the MoD Pattern Room in the mod-90s' I happened to be there when the original Enfield Lock 'sealed patterns' and jigs arrived back from Parker-Hale, who were at that time going into receivership/administration. The return was in direct response to a rather acrimonious exchange between Herbie Woodend - curator and saviour of the Pattern Room and its contents, after one particular Home Secretary wanted it shut down and the contents sold off - and Parker-Hale, who had had them 'on loan' since the beginning of the 70's.

To cut a long story short, we tried a selection of components from a handy Parker-Hale P53 against the prototypes - jigs and patterns - and were not overly surprised to find that each and every PH part fit perfectly in those jigs patterns.

Late on, in another visit, we interchanged PH parts for original parts in a selection of original guns - again, every PH part was an identical fit and finish to every original part.

THAT, friends, is what you pay for when you choose to buy a genuine, made in Birmingham PH arm.

tac
 
tac said:
When visiting the MoD Pattern Room in the mod-90s' I happened to be there when the original Enfield Lock 'sealed patterns' and jigs arrived back from Parker-Hale, who were at that time going into receivership/administration. The return was in direct response to a rather acrimonious exchange between Herbie Woodend - curator and saviour of the Pattern Room and its contents, after one particular Home Secretary wanted it shut down and the contents sold off - and Parker-Hale, who had had them 'on loan' since the beginning of the 70's.

To cut a long story short, we tried a selection of components from a handy Parker-Hale P53 against the prototypes - jigs and patterns - and were not overly surprised to find that each and every PH part fit perfectly in those jigs patterns.

Late on, in another visit, we interchanged PH parts for original parts in a selection of original guns - again, every PH part was an identical fit and finish to every original part.

THAT, friends, is what you pay for when you choose to buy a genuine, made in Birmingham PH arm.

tac

Wow, do I envy you having had the opportunity to "play" with the original gauges! What a treat that must have been!

The closest I've ever been to that was seeing the original gauges and parts in some of the gauges for the M1841 "Common" or "Mississippi" Rifle at Harpers Ferry NHS. They were in a HUGE glass case where one could see them pretty well, but I must have left face imprints all over the four sides of the glass trying to see them as well as possible.

The majority of work I did over half of three decades at the North South Skirmish Association Spring and Fall National Championships was doing "trigger jobs" on WBTS era long guns and some revolvers and other work. The possible quality and especially the longevity of getting trigger pull weights down to where they felt good for shooting, had everything to do with the quality of the locks and parts. Original locks and parts were a pure joy to work on compared to the Italian repro locks.

I can't even remember how many REAL UK Parker Hale Parts I used in original Enfields of both Original Interchangeable Pattern and even some Non Interchangeable Pattern Enfields. Like you, I found the Parker Hale parts to fit the original Interchangeable Pattern Locks as well as Original Springfield Parts in Original Springfield Long Arms made on the Interchangeable Parts System. The QUALITY of the Parker Hale Parts was as good, if not better than the original parts as well.

On my first trip to the World Championships held at the Wedgnock Ranges not far from Kenilworth, Midlands, UK in 1996; I put away some extra money hoping to buy all the REAL Parker Hale Tumblers, Sears, Springs and some other parts I could find. Unfortunately, both Peter Dixon and Blackley and Son were out of most of those parts, though I was able to buy some tang screws and lock screws. I wish I had been able to stockpile more PH parts when they were commonly available as well.

Funny how in the 1970's and 80's, we used a whole bunch of PH parts in original Enfields, but in the 1990's and beyond, we had to use Original Enfield parts to repair PH guns.

Gus
 
Back
Top