A comparison of two early trapdoors

[Fred]

Here is a similar humped band spring on a Remington made Rolling Block rifle.
DA0CF14D-E58D-47EE-8734-2B088F25E2E9.jpg

Here is a conventional band spring on a Springfield Armory made Rolling Block rifle.
CBCD8329-3A49-47A8-AD2A-3B0FA06B3ECB.jpg

[Dick Hosmer]

Well, I've seen similar bands on TDs as well. And, perhaps most of all, WHY, would SA (who had to have had barrels of springs at hand) source one from a Remington? Sorry, just not convinced so far. Maybe they used a 'reject' by accident? We'll never know. Will keep thinking about it though.

[Fred]

Oh that spring wasn’t made by Remington Dick. Remington springs had rounded ends instead of squared.
The spring on my rifle was I believe made by Springfield, replicating the basic design on the Remington made rifles.

[Dick Hosmer]

Oh that spring wasn’t made by Remington Dick. Remington springs had rounded ends instead of squared.
The spring on my rifle was I believe made by Springfield, replicating the basic design on the Remington made rifles.

How then, other than pattern of curvature, does the spring differ? Over the years, I've seen springs with pronounced humps, shallow humps, and even some that seemed almost concave. I still maintain that was a non-gauged surface, on a part not not subject to control beyond fitting into the stock mortise (including pin location) and allowing a band to snap tight and stay in place. I just do not think it is a design matter.

[Fred]

First time I’ve had them out of the stock.

3938A37F-EB45-43F3-859E-4022B3308088.jpg

[Fred]

Here is a sharper photo...

https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/c72/Whitedog333/127114A0-1F64-41E2-8DE9-C700D6F669FA.jpeg?width=450&height=278&crop=fill

[Fred]

I think that design of band spring was used by Springfield Armory on their Model 1861 rifle Musket’s and 1865 breech loaders. That would make it an 1855 design.
Maybe it was thought to be easier to use the 1864 type springs on the 1868’s and when necessary grind down the high hump 1855 springs to conform to the later 1864 design than to use and eventually exhaust the supply of the 1855 type and then have to begin producing them?

[Fred]

Maybe the change in 1855 to 1864 band spring design was not thought to be of enough significance to’ve been listed as an important change., but the decision was made in 1868 to adhere strictly to one type of spring and that one to be the type of spring that had been used on the 1864 and 1866 long arms and to alter, if needed, the shape of existing 1855 band springs still in inventory to the 1864 shape.

[Kragrifle]

Guys, I love this discussion. I have seen and used both types of band springs and did not think twice. If younger collectors out there miss this discussion, shame on them!

[Fred]

It appears to me that this 1868 rifle, serial number 6, along with probably the other nine or ten first 1868’s made, were each assembled one at a time and then submitted with variations of proposed features that were to be studied and tested preparatory to adopting a final design for production.
I would like to see rifles number 5 and 7.