Three 1868's

[Dick Hosmer]

Wasn't there one for sale a year ago?
Also, it Might be that the original rear site leaf used to be one of the earlier experimental sight leafs that Dick has identified and that might've been mounted on rifles # 10 thru at least # 127.

Dick, I'll bet you've got some insight on that. What do you think?

To which post are you referring?

The strange leaf was either not installed uniformly, or, has been replaced on some specimens, because they do not all still have it.

[Fred]

Interesting! Thanks.

[Fred]

Dick, I guess if the rifles were indeed issued after the tests were over, the company Armorers would've changed them out as the issue of the different graduations came up. Otherwise, as I witnessed while an Armored Cavalry officer, nothing was fixed or changed unless there was a complaint.

[Dick Hosmer]

One could speculate endlessly on that, I guess. #6 is an odd duck and I'd think issue was highly unlikely, but the others could have been. We are dealing with such a small sample of a very small population that simple breakage could have accounted for the mixture found today. Numbers 36, 62 and 86 have the odd leaf, others are either "standard" or unknown. I don't have #127's type listed - which is it?

[Fred]

Oh! I thought you knew. Here's a photo of both #127 and #86...

1868 2.jpg

#127 is on the left and #86 is on the right.

[Dick Hosmer]

Sorry, my fault, I'd seen that photo but had not added the sight data to my spreadsheet. Done.

[Fred]

Here's another interesting feature on rifle #6...
The trigger guard sling swivel isn't held onto the trigger guard with a Screw. It is held on with a rivet.
Here are photos of both sides of the swivel.
Note how the trigger guard on rifle #6 is Armory Blued and not Armory Bright.

image.jpg

image.jpg

[Edatbeach]

Here's another interesting feature on rifle #6...
The trigger guard sling swivel isn't held onto the trigger guard with a Screw. It is held on with a rivet.
Here are photos of both sides of the swivel.
Note how the trigger guard on rifle #6 is Armory Blued and not Armory Bright.

image.jpg

image.jpg

That's a M1855/61/63 trigger bow and swivel, according the the "Table Showing Changes...Rifle-Musket From 1855 to 1873," (Fuller, p295). A blued one is M1863. A "standard" M1868 would have had a M1864 bow, with screw-held swivel.

[Fred]

Thank you Edatbeach.

[Dick Hosmer]

I'd think that one of the reasons we see more 1863 parts on TDs may have to do with the inertia of certain fuddy-duddies within the OD. Not everyone was on board with the breechloader, and the "latest" arms - the 1864s - were held back in reserve. Case in point - the M1865s were built on "obsolete" 1861s. I doubt they were 100% rigid about which trigger guard was (re)used, especially on experimental pieces. Of course the lack of a middle band cutout made the M1863 wood attractive, but it's funny that no one EVER mentions the fact that not having band-springs meant that one had to be ADDED for the lower - but, cutting is cheaper than filling, when you figure costs to the mill, as they usually did. Upper doesn't count because that work was inevitable whatever wood you chose.