Anyone tried out the Uberti trapdoor?

[jon_norstog]

I was surfing and came across these. Probably old news to most people on the list.

http://www.uberti.com/firearms/springfield-trapdoor.php

Good old Uberti! They have a six-groove barrel and unknown twist rate. At the price of the Uberti you can probably pick up a pretty decent trapdoor rifle, and maybe an OK carbine. Just curious as to whether there are any advantages to the replica?

jn

[broom jockey]

The only advantage would maybe these rifles can fire modern 45-70 loads, ie: smokeless powder. But, as you said, a person can buy a really nice original trapdoor with all the cartouches/stampings, etc. for that price. I bought an M1884 rifle in original excellent condition for less.

[Michaelp]

You guys hit it spot on-the prices of many repos rival that of originals-i suppose they are safer.

[sdkrag]

Years ago there were reprodctions (I believe H&R) that were actually less safe to shoot than the originals. They have an extra screw in the breech/firining pin area that would back out and created the possibility of the breech coming open. I would rather shoot my old reliable original. Loading up this weekend for the annual reenactment. I expect to fire 50-150 in this years rifle march. I actually saw an H&R fall apart duing the match a few years ago. Guy lost some of the parts in the grass.

[DocCasualty]

I'm no expert but looked into this a little bit. First, you can get a nice original Trapdoor rifle for less than half the price of one of the repros. Maybe tough to get one with that pristine of a stock but otherwise quite nice and very shootable. I do believe that both the Pedersoli and Uberti are made by Pedersoli and marketed under the different names. Here's Pedersoli's info and they list a max chamber pressure of 18,000 cup. http://www.davide-pedersoli.com/uploads/supporto/15CARTRIDGE_GUNS_MANUAL.pdf You can shoot smokeless powder .45/70 Government/Trapdoor loads in the repro and originals, though I don't believe the repros are designed for, nor is it recommended to shoot higher power loads in them either. I think the limiting factor there remains the trapdoor design, not modern metallurgy. While they may be able to withstand a little more than the originals, not sure that would be a wise choice.

My casual look at true US Springfield Trapdoor carbines suggests that their prices are more in line with the the repros and it may actually be cheaper to buy a repro than an original, though I personally haven't explored that market to any great extent.

[Griff Murphey]

Why make these?? Maybe there is a market for buying a bunch if trapdoors at once... Say, for a movie or cadets or reenactors such as military units. The cavalry reenactor ACDU Army guys at Ft. Hood use H&R carbines, I have been told.

[Bill D]

National Park Service is forbidden by regulation to use original CW/IW weapons for their living history and open display programs. Soooooooo......... They buy replicas. The NPS order by its self makes it worthwhile for Pedersoli to tool up for them and also explains why they are so expensive. The NPS is spending your money so they don't really care what they cost.

[DocCasualty]

National Park Service is forbidden by regulation to use original CW/IW weapons for their living history and open display programs.

Any idea what the story/history behind that is?

[Bill D]

Something about protecting the originals they have. The head ranger at Fort Larned, Kansas told me that story when I used to do living history over there. They had a bunch of .50-70 breach loaders which were kept in the rifle racks in the barracks as they would have been during the 1867-69 time frame that they portray. Several years ago, someone broke into the building and took a number of the rifles during the night when the old post was not occupied. The rifles they got were the replicas so I guess their thinking was sound.

[DocCasualty]

I guess that makes sense looking at it from the perspective of preserving historic artifacts. They'd be subject to quite a bit of abuse too, especially if they were doing multiple demos per day.

[Mark Daiute]

I recently saw one of these at at LL Beans here in Maine. IMHO the quality of the original was vastly VASTLY superior although the color case on the repro at Bean's was very colorful.

I highly doubt that the repro's are any safer than the originals, the limiting factor being the design. Please, if anyone is knowledgeable on this, has the facts, please enlighten us. My opinion on this is just that, my opinion. That being said I don't know why the repro's would be safer if they are the same design.

The cost of the repro at Beans would get you a higher-end original rifle.

All the best,

Mark

[Gatofeo]

It is incorrect to assume that newly made Trapdoors are stronger than the originals (wear being equal, of course).
The limitation isn't metallurgy, it's design.
I have a Harrington & Richardson 1873 Little Bighorn commemorative. I've fired it perhaps 300 times. Until now, I never heard of an extra screw in the H&R that makes it unsafer. Had it since 1977 and this is the first I've heard of it being weaker than the originals.
It's interesting to note that the late gun writer Elmer Keith (1899-1983) believed that the Trapdoor design was too weak for smokeless powder. He urged only the use of black powder. Keith used only original Trapdoors, and was noted for pushing well beyond the limit of other guns (he blew up a few revolvers in his lifetime), so perhaps his warning should be taken with a handful of salt.
I've never hot-rodded my H&R Trapdoor. For that, I have a Marlin 1895, also purchased in 1977.

[AZshooter]

It is incorrect to assume that newly made Trapdoors are stronger than the originals (wear being equal, of course).
The limitation isn't metallurgy, it's design.
I have a Harrington & Richardson 1873 Little Bighorn commemorative. I've fired it perhaps 300 times. Until now, I never heard of an extra screw in the H&R that makes it unsafer. Had it since 1977 and this is the first I've heard of it being weaker than the originals.
It's interesting to note that the late gun writer Elmer Keith (1899-1983) believed that the Trapdoor design was too weak for smokeless powder. He urged only the use of black powder. Keith used only original Trapdoors, and was noted for pushing well beyond the limit of other guns (he blew up a few revolvers in his lifetime), so perhaps his warning should be taken with a handful of salt.
I've never hot-rodded my H&R Trapdoor. For that, I have a Marlin 1895, also purchased in 1977.

I have a Pedersoli TD & read that they used the basic H&R design. That would include the breech lock and locking lever, which is a 2 piece design. There is a tiny set screw in the latch that tightens against a flat on the lever shaft to prevent the 2 pieces from sliding apart. Even if the set screw were loose, the latch cannot rotate out of locked position since it is a square shaft into a square latch hole. The lever could slide out and leave the latch unsecured, but if you're aware of your firearm when you lock the action, you'd notice the lever no longer positioned in the notch in the wood under the hammer. Another clue is if you can hold a separate piece in your hand, best not pull the trigger.

I read about the locking concern & took a look at my brand new Pedersoli - just brought it home this last weekend. It was proofed in 2001 and looks to be unfired - no wear on hammer-to-firing pin finish, no wear in the lock mechanism or between sear lever & trigger. Yep - that set screw was not only loose, allowing the lever/latch to wiggle a little, but looks like they never tightened that setscrew up against the lever shaft flat.

And I installed an original ejector spring and plunger into the Pedersoli, it now ejects with force and authority - just like an original!

Hodgdon and Lee Trapdoor loading data generally corroborate each other for safe pressures using smokeless, and shooter data from some of the Trapdoor sites indicate they load even lighter for accuracy loads. I've fired black powder loads in my Bannerman Conversion, but there are several I'd not hesitate to try; the rest I'll use in my replica.

[Dolt]

I have a Pedersoli TD & read that they used the basic H&R design. That would include the breech lock and locking lever, which is a 2 piece design. There is a tiny set screw in the latch that tightens against a flat on the lever shaft to prevent the 2 pieces from sliding apart. Even if the set screw were loose, the latch cannot rotate out of locked position since it is a square shaft into a square latch hole. The lever could slide out and leave the latch unsecured, but if you're aware of your firearm when you lock the action, you'd notice the lever no longer positioned in the notch in the wood under the hammer. Another clue is if you can hold a separate piece in your hand, best not pull the trigger.

I read about the locking concern & took a look at my brand new Pedersoli - just brought it home this last weekend. It was proofed in 2001 and looks to be unfired - no wear on hammer-to-firing pin finish, no wear in the lock mechanism or between sear lever & trigger. Yep - that set screw was not only loose, allowing the lever/latch to wiggle a little, but looks like they never tightened that setscrew up against the lever shaft flat.

And I installed an original ejector spring and plunger into the Pedersoli, it now ejects with force and authority - just like an original!

Hodgdon and Lee Trapdoor loading data generally corroborate each other for safe pressures using smokeless, and shooter data from some of the Trapdoor sites indicate they load even lighter for accuracy loads. I've fired black powder loads in my Bannerman Conversion, but there are several I'd not hesitate to try; the rest I'll use in my replica.

I had a H&R Officer's Model trapdoor. My concern was that the firing pin had no spring on it and it would not automatically retract when the hammer was cocked. I was worried that a piece of debris might cause the firing pin to stick in the forward position and fire a cartridge as the breech block was closed. I used the spring out of a ball point pen in the breech block that then caused the firing pin to retract when the hammer was lifted from the firing position. Don't really know if this was all necessary, but it made me feel less flinchy when firing the rifle.

[AZshooter]

Just for grins, I clicked on the Uberti company website, in search for a parts diagram - just to csee how different it was from the Pedersoli.

I had to reload it a couple of times, since there was some kind of error - What I found was the Davide Pedersoli instruction manual within the Uberti website to click to download.

My conclusion is that Uberti just markets "their" Trapadoor & that the actual manufacturer is Pedersoli.

Tricky, those rascally Italians ...

Bottom line, if my observation is correct, the Uberti trapdoor will have the same 2 piece firing pin and that controversial 2-piece cam latch (with retaining set screw) and thumb release lever.

[Dick Hosmer]

Apparently, the square shaft was Pedersoli's fix for the the inherent problem found on their "early" guns, and all H&Rs. I know nothing of Ubertis.

The source of the problem was H&R's belief that they could lower the cost of manufacture by eliminating the breechblock cap and the recess for it in the breechblock. This could be accomplished by separating the latch and shaft, which would have been all well and good if done so as to NOT permit relative rotation between the parts. That is where they slipped up, and Pedersoli's fix is effective.

As an aside, H&R purchased original M1873 sights for their limited-production Infantry Rifle commemoratives. Sometimes I wonder if they might not have done well to do the same for the blocks. Ironically, their lawyers would probably have rejected such an idea on liability grounds, little realizing that their own bean-counters were perpetrating a worse sin in-house.

[jon_norstog]

As the OP, I would like to say that I gave up on ANY reproduction and just bought a really nice 1884 model rifle from Al Frasca. The gun had some blems on the exterior but the bore was cherrry and the weapon may have never been fired. Heh-heh. Well it's been fired now. With nothing but BP and 20:1 lead bullets. I can't see how a modern manufacturer could duplicate the Trapdoor at a price competitive with the half-million of them that were made and most of which are still kicking around.

Buy original!

jn

[Dick Hosmer]

Couldn't agree more - see no reason for the replicas at all, period.

[JB White]

When I decided to play with a Trapdoor, I too shied away from the repro's and bought an original 1884. I actually paid less for it than the repro's were selling for. I traded an M1917 and $100 for it.
The repro I do have is the Pietta-Smith Carbine. Now there is a price difference worth taking note of. Barely used and new-looking it was only $550.

[EO1]

I reckon I'll be the one to go against the grain here. I have a Pedersoli infantry trapdoor and love it. The prices you guys are referencing must be suggested retail because I got mine for less than half of that. I've had no problems whatsoever and it is quite accurate. I see nothing wrong with repros.

[JB White]

Nothing wrong at all. Just a different perspective when looking at them with an "antique collector" viewpoint. Good to hear you got a great price on yours too.