Trapdoor Rifles

I have an odd-ball trapdoor fencing rifle that I haven't been able to ID. Possibly a put-together, but it looks like arsenal work. The SN falls in 196000 range.
The stock appears to be modified from a standard service rifle stock, no modifications to the wrist area. Where the inspector's mark and date would be, there is only a deep 1/8" rack number "B34". No "P" behind the guard. The barrel bands are 10 1/2" apart, the top band being retained by what appears to be an armory-installed inletted band spring. The nose cap is properly attached and its front curvature exactly matches the barrel contour at that point. The cap ends 3 1/4" ahead of the upper band.
The barrel has been cut to 24". It has also been loosened exactly one-quarter turn, leaving the rear sight holes and the front sight stud at the 3 o'clock position, and has the usual lead in the bore.

The bayonet is an original 45-70 bayonet which has been ground flat, top and bottom, the blade now about 1/8" thick at the US and 1/16" at the tip. The tip has been curled up into the usual loop and the blade is now 16" long. The socket has been opened up and a reinforcing ring added at the rear, and is now so arranged that when fixed using the front sight stud, it hangs at the 6 o'clock position as would a 1903 bayonet. No leather remains.

Screw-in sling swivels have been added at the points where they would be found on an issue 1903, and a one-piece trapdoor Rock Island sling is installed. All parts except the trigger guard and upper band have 90 to 95% original finish. The bayonet is in like condition.

My thoughts are that this could be an early or sample piece, primarily put together to save the expense of manufacturing the double-looped 1906-type bayonet. It would also avoid the "twisting" procedure needed to orient the blade. On this version, the blade and shank are centered at 6 o'clock rather than offset as is the double-looped version.

It's possible, of course, that this piece is just another variation of the many items put together by surplus dealers. If so, the work meets Springfield standards. I would appreciate thoughts on the matter.

To add one other odd fact: The stud used to fix the bayonet socket was never a sight-- it has not been slit for the blade.
So if it was attached purely to orient the blade at 6 o'clock, why was it necessary to turn the barrel 90 degrees to the right? The stud could have been put anywhere and the barrel left in place.

Little questions like that drive me nuts, and everybody who knows the answers is dead!

I have no idea about this one.

Ralph Cobb, an advanced bayonet collector, did a detailed article on U.S. Fencing Bayonets which may be interesting, but it really gets into details and is hard to follow as the sources are scant, and sometimes contradictory, including older works such as Hardin.
https://worldbayonets.com/Library/Artic ... er2020.pdf

Collectors can better figure out this sort of stuff when they have BOTH the fencing bayonet and the fencing musket in their collection.

daneal wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2024 7:00 pm To add one other odd fact: The stud used to fix the bayonet socket was never a sight-- it has not been slit for the blade.
So if it was attached purely to orient the blade at 6 o'clock, why was it necessary to turn the barrel 90 degrees to the right? The stud could have been put anywhere and the barrel left in place.

Little questions like that drive me nuts, and everybody who knows the answers is dead!

Could it have been an early one-piece sight block with the top part ground flush?

Remember, if the barrel has been cut down, there is no front sight left. A new stud was added, probably from fresh material, not making any attempt to salvage old front sights, clean them up and braze them in a new location. The stud was strictly an attachment point for the bayonet, with no sight function. Location of the stud could be different to place the socket in the desired position for the blade orientation (side like trapdoors, or underneath for M1903?). While it would be possible to unscrew the barrel a quarter turn to change the bayonet orientation that seems unlikely in an armory setting. But out on Bubba's militia or youthful battlefield, anything is possible.

I still don't know, just speculating.

The one fact that holds my attention is that everything about the gun screams "Springfield". The work is arsenal quality, to my old eyes-- and, believe me, I have examined a thousand examples of Bannerman, S. H. & G, and other such pieces over the years.
I'm going to endeavor to get the breech open and see what may have been done to the extractor, barrel tenon, etc. Again, checking quality of work.

I (temporarily) replaced the latch spring on mine with one from a ball-point pen. Plenty enough to keep the block closed, but not so strong that you cannot grasp the stub shaft with your fingernails - otherwise it's needle-nosed pliers and ugly scratches.

One more thing to check all arsenal fencing musket barrels I have seen had the bore filled with three lead slugs to add weight to the arm to bring it closer to the weight of the service rifle with bayonet. The slugs we took out of some barrels a local dealer picked up were a snug fit and almost looked like they were cast in place but the ends were nicely trimmed so not sure how they were made?

Yes, this one has the lead.

Tom Trevor wrote: ↑Fri Jul 12, 2024 3:16 pm One more thing to check all arsenal fencing musket barrels I have seen had the bore filled with three lead slugs to add weight to the arm to bring it closer to the weight of the service rifle with bayonet. The slugs we took out of some barrels a local dealer picked up were a snug fit and almost looked like they were cast in place but the ends were nicely trimmed so not sure how they were made?

I'm guessing a combination of oiled bore, soft lead and inertia. I de-milled about 20 fencing muskets in 1970, and that was how I removed the lead, after taking out the breech screw. Only thing that makes sense - they definitely weren't poured. And trying to get one long piece in would have been a fight. Something I've never seen mentioned elsewhere - almost every one of mine had a little (3/4" +/-) hickory plug at the breech end. I assume the rifling marks come from being impressed over years of banging around.