New Trapdoor

[milrifle]

I picked up this Trapdoor Springfield from an individual (Not a vendor) at a gun show yesterday for $750. The stock has been sanded/refinished and cartouches are no longer visible. There is also a wood filler repair on the left side just behind the breech. Other than that, it looks to be in pretty good shape. The action is pretty tight. The bore is nice and bright and the previous owner and his son claimed it to still be pretty accurate. The serial number puts the manufacture date at 1886. That and the rear sight would seem to make it a Model 1884, but the breech block says "Model 1873". Not being an expert on these things, I was reading up on them last night and was somewhat disappointed thinking I had bought a parts gun. Then this morning, I find a site that said the breech blocks marked "Model 1884" did not appear until 1887, so maybe it is original? The front site appears to be pretty tall. I'm hoping someone has replaced it and maybe it will not shoot a mile high at 50-100 yards, which is where I do most of my shooting.

So what do you guys think? Could this breech block really be original? Are there other features that are a give away to it being original or not? Do you think I got a pretty good deal?

Thanks,

Milrifle

[jugulater]

i dont think the breech blocks were ever blued, so it's probably been refinished.

a picture of how thick the breech block would tell us if its a '73 block or a later block with '73 markings

either way $750 aint to bad for a refinished trapdoor with a good barrel.

as for shooting high, you csn always reduce the load to shoot to POA.

[Scharfschuetze]

Is it a carbine or a rifle and can you post a photo of the full length of the weapon? I can't tell for sure from the photos that you posted if it is a short or long wrist stock.

The abbreviated photo of the left side indicates it is a rifle, but many rifles were cut down to carbine length, often without the inclusion of a sling bar on the left side of the action. If it is a carbine, what is the outside diameter of the barrel at the muzzle?

Also is the breach block a high arch or low arch unit?

[milrifle]

It's a rifle. It measures right at 36" from rear of breech (where tang begins) and the muzzle. Here are a couple of overall shots. They are not the best, which is why I didn't post originally, but hopefully they will be helpful nonetheless. I'm also including a few shots of the breech block itself.

Thanks!

[GOPHER SLAYER]

A friend of mine has a Trapdoor very much like yours. I think the rifle you have is original. The breechblock is marked 1873 but it is a model 1884.

[Hardcast416taylor]

Can`t tell from your pics. Does it have a standard ramrod under the barrel or a pull out ramrod bayonet that resembles a philips screwdriver? It is worth quite a bit more with the short time produced ramrod bayonet. Either way that is still a nice looking rifle.Robert

[milrifle]

Robert,

It's a standard ramrod/cleaning rod. That was one of the owner's big selling points....that it still had its cleaning rod. According to him, a lot of them are missing their cleaning rod. I don't know if that was just a sales pitch or if there really is a shortage of them. I'm glad it has it, but it wouldn't have been a deal breaker for me.

[Washington1331]

It appears that you have a refinished original. From the pictures you've posed my guess is that it would be a model 1884... My main reason for that classification is the breach block date and the buffington rear sight. Now that being said, a lot of trapdoor rifles were reassembled from parts after the national armories purged their spare parts and stock following the Spanish American War. Companies like Bannerman's were well known from building complete rifles from mismatched parts.

I tried to read your partial serial number to get a date of production for your receiver, but I'm having a hard time reading it. You can go to http://www.trapdoorcollector.com/production.html and you'll find a list of years of manufacture by serial number. Just look it up to get the general manufacture year of your receiver. If I'm reading the serial number right 33693X... looks like an approximately manufacture date of 1886.

You are correct that someone has meddled with the front sight. It is much higher than is armory issue. That's probably due to the person adjusting point of aim for the buffington rear sight. With the sight in the down position, and the original front sight, the rifle is battle zeroed at 265 yards. That way a soldier could aim at the crotch of a man and strike him between the crotch and the throat out to 265 yards. With the sight leaf extended the lowest yardage is 200 yards. I suspect that someone raised the front sight to give you point of aim at 100 yards... but without knowing the height of the sight above the base, I'm only guessing.

The buffington rear sight was calibrated for the 45-70-500 bullet. .459 (20:1 lead boolit weighting 500 grains over 70 grains to 2FG black powder. It gave a muzzle velocity of approximately 1250 FPS. Normally I recommend that only black powder be fired in old war horses such as yours. It's not that the guns themselves are not safe for smokeless use. Its just that when you're dealing with small amounts of smokeless powder is large cases it is really easy to not notice a double charge and quickly exceed the pressure rating of the gun. The trapdoor was designed for the pressure gradients of black powder... using smokeless is kind of like running NOX through a Model T Ford. It's your choice.

If you want to learn more about shooting the trapdoor springfield I highly recommend getting a copy of Spencer Wolf's book. You can find it at www.4570book.com.

Hope that helps. Let me know if you have any more questions.

[Scharfschuetze]

If you want to learn more about shooting the trapdoor springfield I highly recommend getting a copy of Spencer Wolf's book. You can find it at www.4570book.com.

Good suggestion there.

With the sight in the down position, and the original front sight, the rifle is battle zeroed at 265 yards.

Back when the Trapdoor was standard issue, this was called "rolling fire" and there was a rolling fire zero for infantry and one for cavalry. Today it is known as "grazing fire" or the battle sight zero for the rifle. The goal is still the same.

I hope that you enjoy your new Trapdoor as much as I enjoy mine.

[milrifle]

Guys,

You don't know how much I appreciate your responses. Thank you much!

Yes, the serial number corresponds to a 1886 production date. I intend to shoot black powder exclusively. I have a Lee 405 grain mould on order. It's the hollow based one and is supposed to be .459 diameter. Upon reading some reviews these moulds look like they might drop on the small side, which has been my experience also with a lot of Lee moulds. Therefore, I went with the .459 rather than the .457. The previous owner said he had been using 405 grain .459 bullets, although he didn't mention whether they were hollow based or not. I have not slugged the barrel and with the 3 groove rifling, it wouldn't do me much good anyway until I can get a V-block. I figured the hollow based bullet would expand a little better and also satisfy my curiosity, as I've never cast any hollow based or hollow nosed bullets. I'll get to see what that's all about now.

[Scharfschuetze]

I intend to shoot black powder exclusively.

You will draw a crowd for sure if you shoot it at a public range.

[Washington1331]

Milrifle, if the owner was shooting 405 grain boolits that explains the height of the front sight. The 405 grain boolit travels about 150 fps faster than the 500 grain boolit. That would explain the front sight being higher to adjust for the higher point of impact.

You'll like the 405 grain hollow base mold that lee makes. I have one for my 45-70 trapdoor rifles. Once you get it good and hot you'll be making good boolits in no time. Just take care to make sure that the mold closes properly or you'll get seepage out the bottom of the mold or your bullets will be badly out of round. Mine seems to really like a 40:1 alloy, and cast good bullets after 2 to 3 wasters. You'll find that it has no problem bumping up to seal the bore. I don't even bother sizing my cast boolits for the trapdoor any more with the 405HB. I just pan lube them and then load them. Just remember to wipe your bore every now and then. You'll know when it's time when your groups start really opening up.

Here's a picture of my trapdoors. Top Ram Rod Bayonett, Middle 1883, Bottom 1868. Just beware that when you start shooting them you may find they become your new favorite rifle.

[milrifle]

Well, I got a chance to shoot it yesterday for the first time. Lee 405 grain hollow base on top of 55 gr Swiss 1.5F. No sizing. No drop tube. No compression. Just filled it to the bottom of the bullet with the bullet spaced out to just touch the lands. Bullets were hand lubed with 50/50 beeswax and olive oil. I was only shooting at 35 yds, but most groups were an inch or so. I can live with that. Especially given that I was less than consistent in my loading. I was very pleased and feel the groups will only get smaller, the more I mess around with it.

[MtGun44]

You are definitely using the correct boolit in the HB 405. I suggest about 12-13 gr of Unique for a more
accurate load. Still very mild and low pressure for the old girl.

Bill

[StrawHat]

55 grains of powder and the 405 grain boolit was the recipes used by the Army for the carbine load. It went through a couple of changes. At first, a rolled cardboard tube was used to take up 15 grains of space and the case was headstamped with a "C" for carbine. Rifle loads with the full 70 grains were marked "R". After a bit, the tube gave way to card wads over the powder and the "C" remained on the head stamp. Lastly, they did away with the wads and seated the HB boolit down on the powder. This gave a visual difference between the rifle and carbine load so the letters could be dropped from the headstamp.

I have an 1873 and enjoy it. The early trapdoors are weak as they were converted from muskets. By the time yours was built, it was a lot stronger than most give it credit for being.

Kevin