H&R Officers vs original

[LIMPINGJ]

I am wanting a Trapdoor I would not feel bad about taking hunting. I have a Model 84 but would not take it out in the field because of it’s high state of preservation. I was looking at the H&R Officers because any original Trapdoors with good barrels have been so nice overall I would not alter them to a sporting configuration plus the cost involved. The only negatives I have ever heard of with the H&R is with the breechblock opening and the need to install a barrel mounted rear sight. Was the breechblock problem inherent to all the H&R production or just a certain period in their production run? I remember Larry Gibson posting about modifying his H&R so if any of y’all have taken on making a Trapdoor to hunt with please share which route did you take.
Thanks

[Der Gebirgsjager]

I hunted for a couple of seasons with a very well done Mod. 84 sporter that had been altered prior to my purchase for a state senator's use. I have examined, but never fired, the H&R carbines. It is my understanding that their breech locking mechanism is just fine as long as you use reasonable loads, but that some will pop open with hot loads. I wouldn't pass one up at a good price. There were, as I recall, two versions of the carbine made by H&R, regular and officers. Not much practical difference, but the officers model was cosmetically enhanced and not something one would want to scratch up.

[M-Tecs]

The issue with the H&R is they used a roll pin for simpler production. The originals used one piece. Various easy solutions. This issue is not related to hot loads.

http://www.assra.com/cgi-bin/yabb/Ya...num=1278855505

http://www.trapdoorcollector.com/cgi....pl?read=38347

[Der Gebirgsjager]

Let's see if we can compromise here -- they popped open with hot loads due to roll pins. ? . I can't remember that they popped open with normal loads.

[M-Tecs]

No, the roll pin failed from the rotational torque of opening and closing. Once failed the cam didn't engage into the tang mortise so the breech was not locked. I have read light loads did not open the breech block even if the cam was removed. If I remember correctly this was published in the high pressure testing for the TD when they tried converting them to 30/40 Krag round.

http://www.assra.com/cgi-bin/yabb/Ya...num=1278855505

What H & R did was to make the locking cam a separate and distinct piece from the cam latch shaft. The H & R cam piece has a round hole through it and the cam latch shaft is also made round in order to accept the cam.

Upon assembly of these two pieces, ( *which in the original gov't. arm it was one forged piece* ), the cam piece was place unto the cam latch shaft and the two pieces were held together with a small roll pin inserted through corresponding pre-drills holes in both the cam and it's cam latch shaft.

For those knowledgeable about the Springfield trapdoor engineering, you know that the cam fits into it's corresponding recess in the breech plug/tang piece and there is much stress at that juncture point. The stress point is the same in the H & R reproduction, however the rotary stress on the cam piece wanting to rotate the cam latch over time first weakens the one small roll pin holding the two piece together, until finally there is a failure of the roll pin in it's entirety. That is the point the breech door will come open on ignition.

[tdoor4570]

I have an original 1884 trapdoor built in 1890 that I load black powder loads in. It has accounted for lots of deer and elk. Not afraid to take an original in to the woods with me .

[StrawHat]

I have a 50-70 and an 1873. I have hunted with the 50 but not the small bore.

It is an easy fix for the H&R if you are handy with tools. Getting the parts realigned is the hardest part and many have done it.

Also, keep your eyes open, sporterized and convertible trapdoors are out there.

Kevin

[smithnframe]

I think the H & R is a very good choice as opposed to an original in good condition!

[junkbug]

I have an original 1873 that I intend to get relined. The bore is lightly pitted, but the chamber has a slight bulge. It is solid, but far from pristine.

[13Echo]

The H&R had a set screw on the thumb piece. If it backed out or did not make solid contact with the locking cam’s shaft the block might not lock when closed. This was often fixed by drilling a small recess in the shaft for the tip of the screw to solidly engage and some loctite.

[badgeredd]

I have a H&R that started releasing with standard trap door loads that I repaired. After reading about others having the same problem, I searched for a fix. Well the "fix" wasn't really a fix but more a stop-gap repair that wouldn't really last long (at least mine had problems). I decided to see if an original trap door could be used to permanently fix the problem. A local fellow had many parts so I purchased a breech block from him and hand fit it (it took a couple hours) and have never had any more problems.

[Larry Gibson]

Let's see if we can compromise here -- they popped open with hot loads due to roll pins. ? . I can't remember that they popped open with normal loads.

Both my Officer Model and LBH Carbine popped open with all loads from plinkers with 270 gr bullets at 1050 fps to 45-55 and 45-70 loads replicating original velocities using both smokeless and black powder. It had nothing to do with any roll pins. I tried all the suggested "solutions" of the day, which included installing a roll pin, but none worked. It was mentioned that there was a slight angle design change of the cam and lock recess. Nothing I have been able to confirm except the BBs of my two later production H&Rs were not fitted nearly as well as earlier production H&R TDs. Quality of fitting the BBS definitely waned in the last period of the H&R company life. I solved the problem in both of my H&R TDs by replacing the breach blocks with originals. Took some fitting but was not that difficult.

There are other TDs out there that would be or are good "shooters". However, if one wants an affordable Officers Model the H&R is an excellent starting point. I have, in addition to replacing the BB, added a Beech front sight, a M1879 type III "R" rear sight and a pistol grip adaptor. These additions bring the H&R OM as close to, in configuration, an original Springfield OM at a fraction of the cost as original OM in any condition are very spendy. Additionally the H&R OM has a .458 barrel, unlike original .460 - .465+ barrels, so it is better suited to most of the 457/458 cal moulds available today along with commercial cast and jacketed 45 cal rifle bullets.

I shoot my H&R OM and the carbine quite often in my scouting forays into the SW desert......never know when the command "hostiles to the front" will be given.......

Attachment 249035

[KCSO]

For the price of an H and R Officers around here you can get an original with a shooter bore for the same or less money. I also had problem with the cam on mine and modified it to work, put on the beech sight and an original carbine rear sight and replaced the flimsy ramrod with a good one with a pinned jag. Then I sold it to a buddy who HAD to have it and still hunt with my original rolling block.

Just remember that the H and R is no stronger than the original design and load accordingly.

[StrawHat]

Actually, the latter models were plenty strong.

Kevin

[13Echo]

The trapdoor was strong enough to use when developing the .30-40 Krag. The block is massive. The action walls amply thick. It’s the metal used that is most suspect. In many ways its superior to the Rolling block. Gas venting is much better. Cam action for extraction and seating is far better (almost non-existent in the RB). It actually ejects, not just extract, the fired case.

[StrawHat]

The trapdoor was strong enough to use when developing the .30-40 Krag. The block is massive. The action walls amply thick. It’s the metal used that is most suspect. In many ways its superior to the Rolling block. Gas venting is much better. Cam action for extraction and seating is far better (almost non-existent in the RB). It actually ejects, not just extract, the fired case.

All correct.

Even if you fired it without the hinge pin, the block would stay in place.

The “weak” trapdoor actions are actually the Models 1865 and 1866. These were made by machine the breech end of musket barrels and then attaching the swinging breech lock to the cut barrel with solder and screws. On those models, the 58 caliber bore was reduced to 50 by using a stepped liner. The liner resembled later Mauser barrels with 3 progressively smaller diameters. The existing barrel was drilled and the liner soldered into place. Quite a bit of accurate work, all performed with belt riven machinery.

By the time the 1868 came along, a separate reciever was used with a barrel screwed into it. By the end of the 1868s, the barrel was no longer a surplus barrel with a reduced bore but like the reciever, it was purpose built for the job at hand.

The actions used for testing the 30 Government cartridge were used hard. I think they used about 1/2 dozen actions and kept swapping barrels to determine dimensions and twist. Something over 100 barrels tested.

In the late 80s or early 90s, Springfield was developing smokeless loads for the 45-70. The new war stopped that experiment and all resources were poured into the Krag.

Kevin

[Buckshot]

........... Just to add to the conversation, I bought a H&R Little Big Horn, TD Carbine at the big Los Angeles Gunshow years before Maxine Waters was able to shut it down. I don't even recall what I paid for it.









It is a superb shooting rifle, although at first I thought the case colors were a bit garish, but I got over it! In any event, I never had an issue with the breechblock popping open, or any other problem. I was truly amazed as to it's accuracy. I never fired any loads though it that were not Trapdoor compliant.

I pretty much hung with a 353gr 6 cavity Lee Group buy mould for boolits, as the carbine backed off the slug smartly upon firing, regardless it's less then official weight!

..................Buckshot