My first Sharps

[marlinman93]

I could repair that transfer bar for you. I have some really good high strength alloy that I would TIG weld in.

Beautiful rebuild on your Sharps, and the wood looks great also! Rollstamps look super, and from the pictures they look like originals! My rebarreled Sharps has no rollstamps, and I hope to get them done someday.
Appreciate the offer to tig the transfer bar, but I'm afraid to ship it and take a chance on it disappearing with my luck with all the shippers these days! If it ever got lost I'd be in deep doo doo trying to build one from scratch!

I would highly recommend Al Springer at Snowy Mountain Firearms Restoration for color case! His turn around time, quality of work, and prices beat everyone else I've ever used.

[Rockindaddy]

You are a long way out from SW PA. Still have the roll mark press set up. Rebarreled an 86' Winchester a few weeks ago. Have to restore the address and caliber markings yet. Thanks for the case color info.

[marlinman93]

A little update to the Freund transfer bar repair!
Today I received a package from Dixie Gun Works with a transfer bar for their Dixie 1874 Sharps in it. Theirs is an unknown Italian rifle, but pictures looked similar to my broken transfer bar.
The first test fit is very promising as the transfer bar slid right into the milled recess in my breech block! It is of course not exactly the same as it's thicker on the bar that strikes the firing pin, and shaped a bit thicker on the part the hammer strikes also. But it appears to be a very workable piece that even a caveman like myself could work down with hand tools if I had to!





Called my gunsmith friend to tell him the good news, and once he gets back from his fall elk hunt we'll get together and see what he thinks of reworking this new transfer bar!

[marlinman93]

Finally got the Sharps to my gunsmith friend, and he looked it over. He's going to repair the existing broken transfer bar, and also use the Italian clone transfer bar to rework and fit to the Sharps. So once he's done I'll have a working rifle, plus a spare bar also! He said he'll get it back to me Thanksgiving weekend at our Sunday gun show.
Finally get back to load workup, and testing soon!

[marlinman93]

Got my Sharps back this morning! My gunsmith friend brought it to the gun show, and left it unassembled so I could finish it. He welded the broken transfer bar, and fitted the new bar. He said he had too many hours in fitting to charge me for, and left the welded bar for me to finish up so it would also keep costs down. I made him take more money as I told him his expertise was too valuable to short himself. He was happy and thanked me for doing that.
I also gave him the stocks for my engraved Hepburn in .45-70 that I built new stocks for maybe 20 years ago! I've always felt the stocks looked unfinished without checkering, and Gordy has a friend whose a retired logger and I've seen his checkering. He does amazing work, and I'm sure he'll do the Hepburn well! I told him to let his guy choose the pattern, and to simply tell him it's an engraved gun and he can do whatever he likes. He's always reasonable, so I'm sure I'll like whatever he decides to do. No idea when he'll finish, and I'm in no rush after 20 years of doing nothing to the stock!

[pull the trigger]

Almost every old gun I buy, supposedly "functions perfect" but needs repair of some kind. I enjoy working on them and learning all I can about them, but it would be nice to get what I pay for once in a while!! I really appreciate you taking us through this journey with you.

[JDHasty]

That rifle is so cool.

[pull the trigger]

well, ya got me studying sharps now. What model would this be? would it have been an original cartridge rifle or a conversion? What I read, 1874 was the first manufactured metallic cartridge sharps? I have been scouring GB for Sharps, rollers and hepburns now. And of course always Ballards.

[marlinman93]

well, ya got me studying sharps now. What model would this be? would it have been an original cartridge rifle or a conversion? What I read, 1874 was the first manufactured metallic cartridge sharps? I have been scouring GB for Sharps, rollers and hepburns now. And of course always Ballards.

In the post Civil War era the Army discovered they had 50,000 percussion Sharps left out of a 100,000 rifle order. Those consisted of 1851, 1852, 1855 slant breech models. None considered viable to rework into cartridge rifles. But they also had thousands of 1858 and 1859 Sharps which they knew could be converted. The Army sent back 5,000 of these to Sharps in 1865 and they were returned for testing in 1866. In 1867 another 27,000 converted carbines were sent to the Army after being relined and converted to .50-70 cartridge. By 1869 Sharps realized they were losing money on every rifle they converted, and sent a letter to the Army requesting an increase in pay for the work, and were granted the funds to ensure the company didn't go under doing conversions. At the same time Sporting magnate Schuyler, Hartley, & Graham bought 4780 rifles not converted along with huge quantities of converted rifles also. An order totaling nearly 10,000 including a larger amount being cartridge conversions! At this time Sharps began to develop actions based solely on cartridge use, and those actions are referred to as the 1869. The 1874 evolved from this and it wasn't actually called the Model 1874 until 1874 catalogs came out. So the Model 1869 has the right to be the first cartridge rifle for a short time prior to the Model 1874's arrival.
Technically mine was what the Sharps factory called an "A Rifle" which are rifles built in 1880 from whatever parts Sharps Co. could find around their factory. The receivers used could be new leftover 1874 actions, or any number of leftover older actions after 1858 and later actions. Some were even rifles/carbines returned to the factory from military sales and disassembled to get the actions! My particular Sharps appears to be an 1869 carbine action as you can see where the carbine sling ring was removed and the receiver nicely plugged. So mine was originally a .50-70 cartridge gun, but some were earlier 1858-63 actions converted to cartridge too. All of these A Rifles were sold as 1874's, regardless of what they were built from, and all were sold at half the normal Sharps prices! So of the several hundred built up and sold, all were in the $17-$18 range, and all were very basic wood, and usually plain full octagon barrels. Most were also .45-70 chambers. They all sold in 1980, long after production of the 1874's was over, and Sharps was trying to stop the creditors from forcing the company into bankruptcy. Carlos Gove alone ordered 220 of these rifles, and Sharps sent him 270, which I've read made Gove very unhappy, but he took them and paid Sharps for all of the order. Mine was in one shipment of 16 Sharps sent to Gove in Feb. 1880. Gove was the equivalent of today's ultra rich multimillionaire, and spent a lot of his wealth on the city of Denver. He personally financed the entire Denver Fire Dept. equipment!
Hope this helps. I got the info mainly from Frank Sellers book on Sharps history.

[pull the trigger]

Incredible, thanks so much for taking the time to respond with so much detail.

[marlinman93]

After the last 3-4 hours I realized why I haven't collected or had a Sharps in my single shot collection! What a PITA this Sharps has been today! I got the new transfer bar installed and reassembled. The bar had some drag and was still giving me light strikes, so I pulled it back apart and polished all the contact surfaces on the transfer bar, and rounded any sharp corners on the recess cuts it travels in. Lubed it all up and it still felt a bit heavy, so I pulled the firing pin and replaced the heavy return spring with a lighter one. Reassembled it and tried some primed cases, but ignition was inconsistent. I could feel the front trip trigger giving my finger a light tap each time I tripped the trigger and the hammer dropped. That usually means the hammer notch is striking the sear which also means the fly is dragging, or not moving freely.
So all apart again, but further this time, as the lock plate and trigger needed to come out. Everything looked great, but looking at how the stock inletting supports the lock plate and trigger assembly, it's easy to see how slight differences in the inletting can make a Sharps be out of alignment. What kind of an idiot was Sharps to use the stock to set alignment and clearances for the working parts of a gun?
I found nothing wrong besides poor design, so I reassembled it all and snugged all the screws down tight. Put another case in the chamber, set the trigger, and when I tripped the front trigger the primer went bang! Tried 4 more and it went bang every time. Amazing that it can be fixed with just taking it apart and reassembling. Guess tightening the action and lock plate screws got things aligned. Still a poor design.
Going to build up more ammo now, and shoot the heck out of it. If it proves to be reliable like the name "Old Reliable" I'll keep it. If it gives me problems it's going away and get replaced by a nice Ballard maybe?

[pull the trigger]

That's the stuff I need to hear to get me to quit looking. Thanks!!!

[Bent Ramrod]

The design was patented in 1848, and was a percussion design. It stuck pretty much to the designs of caplock rifles of the day. Equally primitive, except for the breechloading innovation.

When they were converted to cartridges, that offset firing pin design was necessary to transfer the firing pin blow from the percussion nipple to the centers or rims of cartridges. Not an ideal compromise, but one that could be made to work in mass production.

Ten years more of progress in the Industrial Revolution was a quantum leap in the technology available to the aspiring genius firearms designers like Starr, Ballard and Maynard. But the Sharps design managed to hold its own against them for another 20 years, so it must have had something going for it.

The success of the 1874, and that of the Freund and other custom conversions, was totally dependent upon immigrant German master gunsmiths willing to do piecework in factories or concentrate on their own developments in their own shops. When they went out into the world in search of higher wages, that was the end for such designs. A machine-made Borchardt was cheaper to manufacture than the 1874. And, of course, the new, high-tech repeating designs cut into the market as well.

We see the modern iteration of this “design fault” in the complaints that show up about some of the Italian Sharps clones, and occasionally even a few of the US made replicas, when things aren’t done exactly right. The lower the tech, whether making the guns, loading the cartridges or using the iron sights, the higher the skill needed to make it work.

Some of us find this a fascinating challenge. Or maybe we’re just a buncha masochists.

[marlinman93]

The design was patented in 1848, and was a percussion design. It stuck pretty much to the designs of caplock rifles of the day. Equally primitive, except for the breechloading innovation.

When they were converted to cartridges, that offset firing pin design was necessary to transfer the firing pin blow from the percussion nipple to the centers or rims of cartridges. Not an ideal compromise, but one that could be made to work in mass production.

Ten years more of progress in the Industrial Revolution was a quantum leap in the technology available to the aspiring genius firearms designers like Starr, Ballard and Maynard. But the Sharps design managed to hold its own against them for another 20 years, so it must have had something going for it.

The success of the 1874, and that of the Freund and other custom conversions, was totally dependent upon immigrant German master gunsmiths willing to do piecework in factories or concentrate on their own developments in their own shops. When they went out into the world in search of higher wages, that was the end for such designs. A machine-made Borchardt was cheaper to manufacture than the 1874. And, of course, the new, high-tech repeating designs cut into the market as well.

We see the modern iteration of this “design fault” in the complaints that show up about some of the Italian Sharps clones, and occasionally even a few of the US made replicas, when things aren’t done exactly right. The lower the tech, whether making the guns, loading the cartridges or using the iron sights, the higher the skill needed to make it work.

Some of us find this a fascinating challenge. Or maybe we’re just a buncha masochists.

It is antiquated, but I think the Sharps with DST make it more likely to have issues. It looks like a single trigger without fly or tumbler could be off a fair amount and not suffer geometry changes from stock inletting or screw tension.
I also think that steel sleeves set into the stocks would improve things by keeping everything aligned no matter how tight or loose screws were. Steel sleeves would in essence make it all one piece once the screws and pieces were assembled.

[marlinman93]

We had our annual Single Shot show at OAC this morning, and I decided to take a try at putting the Freund Sharps out on my table to sell. It took a whole hour and a friend came by and was surprised to see it for sale. Told me he'd wanted it from the first time he saw it, and told me to take the price tag off and consider it SOLD. No debate on my asking price.
He happened to have a Hepburn rifle for sale, and I had been with him when he bought it, and was envious of his Hepburn also! I asked if he wanted to toss it in on the deal, and I would give him what he'd paid for it? He was tickled to do so, and we closed the deal. I also told him if we got together this week and he had any other single shot rifles I might like I'd be happy to add them to what he owes me also. His Hepburn covered 1/3rd of my Sharps, so might get 1-2 more, or 1 and some cash to boot?
The Hepburn is a very nice half octagon barreled rifle, with some case colors still, good bluing, and is another .32-20 I really love.
A good addition to my collection, and something I appreciate more than the Sharps.

[Jeff Michel]

Congratulations on the Hepburn, great rifles in a great caliber. But that Sharp's isn't on the short end of the stick either.

[marlinman93]

Congratulations on the Hepburn, great rifles in a great caliber. But that Sharp's isn't on the short end of the stick either.

The Sharps is a beautiful rifle, but not something I got attached to. I really like a Hepburn or Ballard far better.

Here's the latest .32-20 Hepburn!

[M-Tecs]

The Sharps is a beautiful rifle, but not something I got attached to. I really like a Hepburn or Ballard far better.

Here's the latest .32-20 Hepburn!

I love the look of the Sharps from the side. From the back not so much. My soft spot is for Trapdoors and Hiighwalls. Yours is beautiful rifle.

[marlinman93]

I love the look of the Sharps from the side. From the back not so much. My soft spot is for Trapdoors and Hiighwalls. Yours is beautiful rifle.

I personally prefer single shots with center hung hammers that are much smaller, like the High Walls you like.

[Montanaguy]

That is a gorgeous rifle but the caliber is a bit daunting. A buddy brought his .50-140 Sharps to my place to show it off. We both shot it from the bench with the bet as to which of us could hold onto the fore end at the shot without losing his grip on it. Neither of us succeeded and it was a rather short bench session. I opted for a smaller Sharps, this one an 1875 made by C. Sharps in Big Timber MT. It's in cal. .32-40 and I can shoot it off the bench all day with the kind of results I never would with a .50-140!