1888 “Possible “trials rod bayonet

[carlsr]

Today I purchase an 1888 rod bayonet rifle that I believe may be one of the trials rifles produced in 1888/89.
The rifle has the two piece trigger guard, 1873 dated breech block, two circle P marks but has an 1892 cartouche under the rear lock bolt. Someone replaced the Buffington sight with a buckhorn sight along with adding a standard butt plate so a couple parts to correct.
The rifle also had the experimental rod but unfortunately it is not all there, only about half of it
Also another issue is that the finish had been removed many years ago, why?? Who knows but it looks now like an in the white rifle but with patina. The stock is excellent along with a minty bore.
Serial # is 320706 which is listed in SRS as being issued to company D 6th Infantry on 09/06/92 which is the cartouche date and listed as an 84B. It would be great if the person it was issued to was also listed but it’s great to have a rifle that is documented!! This makes two documented rifles in my collection.
I do have another M88 experimental rifle which is cartouched 1889 in the same manner as this rifle along with the 2 circle P marks. These rifles are described in Al’s news letters but not with this latter date. Could this rifle have sat in storage until being re issued in 1892?
I paid 500.00 for this rifle in this condition only because of it being documented, all incorrect parts can be changed along with possibly rust blueing the barrel??
Should anyone here have any additional information on these M88 trials rifles I’d greatly appreciate your input!!
I’d post pictures but I have a new phone and cannot find where to change the screen resolution

[John S.]

Photos?
Many, likely most of the M1884 trials rifles were updated to M1888 configuration, with the bayonet attachments replaced (actually more likely the whole barrel assemblies were replaced). This would account for the double Ps.
Unmodified 1884 trials rifles would not have the second P.

I am not sure how Frank Mallory came up with the 84B designation for that entry. It may have been based on serial number alone, or perhaps (but I think unlikely) from something in the archival document he sourced. I'd love to know for sure.

In any case, any documented trapdoor is a real treasure, in my opinion.

[carlsr]

Photos?
Many, likely most of the M1884 trials rifles were updated to M1888 configuration, with the bayonet attachments replaced (actually more likely the whole barrel assemblies were replaced). This would account for the double Ps.
Unmodified 1884 trials rifles would not have the second P.

I am not sure how Frank Mallory came up with the 84B designation for that entry. It may have been based on serial number alone, or perhaps (but I think unlikely) from something in the archival document he sourced. I'd love to know for sure.

In any case, any documented trapdoor is a real treasure, in my opinion.

A treasure in my opinion also John S.
I did a search on the documented history and found that there are many States with a Co. D 6th Infantry??
Is there a way to determine which is correct?

[carlsr]

Dick, that serial number is listed in your book More 45 70 Springfield 1873-1893.
This rifle makes two I have from your list.

[Dick Hosmer]

Pictures will be great when you can. Even with the new phone you can still download them to your computer and reduce them there. I'd wonder why, as there seems to be an 1888 latch housing, which (partial) experimental bayonet are you speaking of - an 1884, or the bastard 1888/89, which looks to be really hard to differentiate from normal?

I'm very interested as to why John wonders about that number. It is right in the heart of the 1884XRB range, and I very much doubt that Frank would have done any guessing at all. He noted what he found. Remember, this was a man who steadfastly listed a couple of 8xxxxx Krags until we finally browbeat him into agreeing (though never in print) that they actually had to have been 3xxxxx numbers which had been mis-read at some point.

[carlsr]

It is the bastard 1888/89 Dick but with an 1892 cartouche.
I'm working on the pictures but did realize that the partial cleaning rod was in fact the standard 1888 rod. I do have an experimental 1888 rod which I compared it to.

[carlsr]

Here is a link, I think
https://photos.app.goo.gl/MpXsty5oMyc9ytXd6

[Dick Hosmer]

So, then it really is simply one of the standard/normal 84XRB conversions to 88RB, albeit with the added cachet of the extra cartouche(s)?

Is the rod groove widened out or left as it was (which, of course, works with any of the rods - they did not have to enlarge it, other than to try and reduce chipping at the thin edges).

[carlsr]

So, then it really is simply one of the standard/normal 84XRB conversions to 88RB, albeit with the added cachet of the extra cartouche(s)?

Is the rod groove widened out or left as it was (which, of course, works with any of the rods - they did not have to enlarge it, other than to try and reduce chipping at the thin edges).

The rod channel had been widened out Dick.
I'm just curious as to why this one has an 1892 dated cartouche?? In Al's news letters there is information and photos of RB rifles with 1888/89 cartouches but nothing on possible latter cartouches.
I do have another, which is in excellent condition with an 1889 cartouche and also documented.
That rifle was issued as an 84 RB issued 08/1886.

[carlsr]

I completely disassembled my 1892 cartouched rod bayonet. Found that the previous owner completely stripped the blueing off the entire barrel
I'm trying to return the finish to some sort of respectable color so I purchased some true brown from Track of the wolf. Turns out that this finish does turn the barrel brown, not a plumb brown. Any ideas on what to use to get a light plumb color would be greatly appreciated. I did order one Wahkon Bay true blue but won't be delivered for some time.
I did however find some numbers and letters stamped under the barrel and breech.
There is an 01 on both barrel and breech , I suppose to keep both parts together?? There is also an H stamped on the barrel and tang end of breech, both are the same front so I believe these stampings were done at the same time.
This rifle was "possibly" at one time an 1884 rod bayonet transformed into a model 1888 RB. According to the cartouche of 1892 could it be possible that this rifle sat in the arsenal in its original configuration until 1892 when it was changed to its current configuration?? I believe, and I'm sure someone here with more knowledge may conclude that these stampings may have been done to keep the original barrel and breech together??
Some pictures.

IMG_20241223_154553188.jpg (241.95 KiB) Viewed 116 times

IMG_20241223_154541431.jpg (112.02 KiB) Viewed 116 times