Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: found trapdoor marked 1878?

  1. #1

    Default found trapdoor marked 1878?

    I guess my main question is, is this exactly the same as a 1873?
    Thing has the base for a Buffington rear sight. That seems odd to me for an early gun? But what do I know? Can I build on that?
    Needs a firing pin, are they all the same? Do I need a FP spring?
    Needs an extractor spring. Do I need a plunger also?

    The drawings, pictures I have found so far just are not all that clear?
    This thing is pretty rough, but it has a good bore. Just want to make it a shooter.
    Thanks

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    San Fernando valley, Ca.
    Posts
    560

    Default

    Simple answer it is NOT an 8 just a three stamped deeply found on rifles around 1883 on. This subject has been covered for years now. May look like it but is not. Google " 1873 trapdoor Springfield with 1878 dated block" Pages of replied there.
    The firing pin you want would not have a spring. It would have a oval hole for the retainer screw to ride in. The extractor has to have the spring and plunger to operate and throw out shell. Hope this helps.
    Last edited by Tom Trevor; 03-03-2019 at 07:52.

  3. #3

    Default

    Sir, It helps immensely, just the answers I needed.
    Thanks ever so much.

  4. #4

    Default

    All that said, I've received a photo of a 'minty' block where NONE of the caveats are in the least bit evident, and it certainly appears to be a virgin 1878.

    And THAT said, we live in the day of Photoshop where anything is possible. So, I'll believe it when I hold it in my hands. Never forget that, FWIW, the records found to date do NOT support such a marking, at all.

  5. #5

    Default

    So just to be sure I understand and have this correct.
    There is no such thing as an 1878?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    San Fernando valley, Ca.
    Posts
    560

    Default

    No there is NO such thing. Obtain a copy of the trapdoor Springfield book by Frasca and Hill. Then read it from cover to cover you will find nothing, nada .

  7. #7

    Default

    20181104_162337 - Copy.jpg Here 'tis. Practically new. I'm sure the pic has been diddled, but at least they didn't just clone the other "8"
    Last edited by Dick Hosmer; 03-04-2019 at 09:31.

  8. #8

    Default

    In Dick's photo, the two "8"s are not the same. At best it appears to be an over struck 3; at worst, it could be a doctored 3, but a 3 none the less. I'd accept Dick's opinion as offered.

  9. #9

    Default

    WOW!! How could that happen?
    No wonder some are confused, as am I??
    Thanks to all

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •