1873 Trapdoor Carbine

[Shrapnel]

If possible, could we get photos of the left side of the barrel just in front of the receiver; a detail of the front sight; the muzzle crown; the underside of the stock fore-end; and the buttplate? Those will make a good start in assisting the folks here who know more than I to help with more info.

- - - Updated - - -

More pictures...

[Lead Snowstorm]

Looks like the barrel may be a replacement at least - I don?t believe they applied proof marks at that serial number.

I *think* the muzzle and front sight look ok. The tip of the stock also looks fine to my eyes.

But all of this nit-picking is just from the collector?s perspective. It clearly still gets the job done on varmints!

If you look closely, you can see the letters J C stamped lightly in the stock to the rear of the bottom tang.

Hopeful the true experts will chime in, but those could be subinspection stamps. Given a replacement stock, it wouldn?t necessarily have received proof and inspection cartouches, and a goodly number of the carbines I?ve seen come up for sale on the trapdoor site linked above have similar replacement stocks that have been on the gun since the Spanish-American War.

[Shrapnel]

Looks like the barrel may be a replacement at least - I don?t believe they applied proof marks at that serial number.

I *think* the muzzle and front sight look ok. The tip of the stock also looks fine to my eyes.

But all of this nit-picking is just from the collector?s perspective. It clearly still gets the job done on varmints!



Hopeful the true experts will chime in, but those could be subinspection stamps. Given a replacement stock, it wouldn?t necessarily have received proof and inspection cartouches, and a goodly number of the carbines I?ve seen come up for sale on the trapdoor site linked above have similar replacement stocks that have been on the gun since the Spanish-American War.

I think the J C stands for Jeneral Custer

[alfajim]

If we could get Mr. Hosmer to chime in here he has the serial # records and next to Al is most knowledgeable on these trapdoors

[mr.j]

The barrel was definitely replaced as it should not have the vp proof marks. Breech block may have been replaced also with a correct one of that period. Can you remove the butt plate to check if there is a hole in buttstock? The stock looks like it was possibly sanded and refinished at one point in time. I have seen rifles and carbines with the JC markings behind the trigger bar, It is the inspectors initials and does not stand for General Custer which would be G C . The crown also looks a bit thick and front sight looks a bit off but could just be the pictures.

[Shrapnel]

Here is a picture of the stock with the buttplate removed. I'm not sure you could get a rod in that hole...

[JimF]

Here is a picture of the stock with the buttplate removed. I'm not sure you could get a rod in that hole...

Three piece rod plus a headless shell extractor will slip right in.

[Shrapnel]

Three piece rod plus a headless shell extractor will slip right in.

Slip right in to what?

[Dick Hosmer]

WONDERFUL pictures - far superior to what we are usually asked to work from. Not a well-populated range for carbines, but 10398, 10445, and 10840 have been recorded. Stock and barrel have been replaced - the stock, and furniture, date to 1877 or later, and barrel proofs started around 43000. Of great interest would be whether or not there is a trap in the butt. If there is not, you have a very rare stock. If there is, one must SERIOUSLY question why the plain butt-plate, as that might indicate an intent to deceive. I have to say that the front sight base appears to have sharper than normal corners, and at least appears to be a trifle too tall? The blade should be steel, not brass. But, all-in-all, a very nice-looking gun. Enjoy it!

[Shrapnel]

WONDERFUL pictures - far superior to what we are usually asked to work from. Not a well-populated range for carbines, but 10398, 10445, and 10840 have been recorded. Stock and barrel have been replaced - the stock, and furniture, date to 1877 or later, and barrel proofs started around 43000. Of great interest would be whether or not there is a trap in the butt. If there is not, you have a very rare stock. If there is, one must SERIOUSLY question why the plain butt-plate, as that might indicate an intent to deceive. I have to say that the front sight base appears to have sharper than normal corners, and at least appears to be a trifle too tall? The blade should be steel, not brass. But, all-in-all, a very nice-looking gun. Enjoy it!

Thanks for your information. As far as the holes in the butt stock for a cleaning rod goes, I took those pictures showing the cleaning rod bottomed out in the holes. This picture illustrates how that no cleaning rod would fit in this stock, even with the later buttplate that was designed for a cleaning rod...