Trapdoor Rifles

Hello everyone! New member here. I recently acquired my first trapdoor Springfield as a critical step to fill my US service rifles collection. It is a model 1884 manufactured in 1888. The rifle is in great mechanical condition from what I can tell. Movement of the hammer and breech block feels very crisp and solid, and the rifling is still very distinct (albeit a little dark)

However, upon reading Joe Poyer's book, I am starting to second guess the proof marks on the rifle barrel. Poyer's book describes the correct barrel proof marks on pages 36 to 40. Here are some brief excerpts on the "2nd P mark below the eagle" and the correct texture of the marking :

A second "P" will be found below the V/P/eagle head, near the receiver-barrel join from circa serial #42,000 on. This reflected the proof testing of the assembled barrel, receiver, and breech block with a special 80-grain cartridge.

All markings including inspector's initials or numbers were applied to the barrel and other metal parts, before polishing and finishing.
If you can detect a slight roll of metal outlining a marking that is lighter in color and different in texture from the rest of the metal, that mark was stamped after the part was polished and finished. The Springfield Armory polishing process removed the roll of metal outlining a marking.

Here's a picture of my rifle (hopefully showing the markings clearly)
I am seeing a few issues:
1) The second P is not directly below the eagle, but offset to the right, and also appears to be in a different font than described in the book.
2) It appears not to be complete? The right side of the letter P is missing.
3) I could see a faint outline around the P which appears to be a different color from the rest of the barrel.

Could this mean this second P mark was not original? Since this is the actual pressure proof mark of the rifle, I want to double check before I take this rifle out and shoot it. Has anyone seen markings like this? Many thanks!

One more picture:

The second P looks correct to me although it’s a tad out of line. Most of mine are in line but there are some slightly off. Could be the guy making the mark was having an “OFF” day
The way he was holding the punch prevented the complete P to mark the barrel.
Just my 2 penny’s.

carlsr wrote: ↑Mon Apr 29, 2024 5:27 pm The second P looks correct to me although it’s a tad out of line. Most of mine are in line but there are some slightly off. Could be the guy making the mark was having an “OFF” day
The way he was holding the punch prevented the complete P to mark the barrel.
Just my 2 penny’s.

Yes I was thinking about that too. Maybe the punch wasn't held correctly.

Then I found these listings, with the exact same "issue" as mine.

https://www.rockislandauction.com/detai ... door-rifle
https://www.rockislandauction.com/detai ... door-rifle
These are really nice rifles. Serial numbers are pretty close too, indicating early to mid 1889 production according to records. My serial is 419xxx, so late 1888.

Hah, perhaps around that time, some guy at the armory just had this unique style of punching?

This does give me some peace of mind. Odds of some random guy stamping fake marks sound a little low now, since we have 3 rifles looking exactly the same.

I've seen them much worse than that - wouldn't worry at all.

Thanks everyone! I ordered some smokeless cowboy load ammo, can't wait to take this rifle out to the range this weekend.

Once you shoot one you’ll want another

My early 1889 built Model 1884 also has its second P slightly out of a line so maybe that was just something that was happening during that timeframe with the inspector who was making the stamp.