Thoughts?
https://reatapassauctions.proxibid.com/ ... n/78923084
Model 1870 with number 29 on bbl and receiver?
Moderator: 45govt
-
Dick Hosmer
- Posts: 544
- Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2023 7:05 pm
- Location: Northern CA
Re: Model 1870 with number 29 on bbl and receiver?
Can you say the three "B"s, boys and girls? Bogus, Bannerman, & Bubba . . .
1868 block and latch - totally inappropriate - and, it's NOT a trials rifle. Not the SA numbering font of the period. Funky hammer screw.
NOT a rare transitional variation (believe you addressed that very point not long ago).
But, Carl, there is a (possibly, unless it takes off) cheap way into making your wanted type 1. Block/latch/hammer screw/rod/keeper is all you'd need.
1868 block and latch - totally inappropriate - and, it's NOT a trials rifle. Not the SA numbering font of the period. Funky hammer screw.
NOT a rare transitional variation (believe you addressed that very point not long ago).
But, Carl, there is a (possibly, unless it takes off) cheap way into making your wanted type 1. Block/latch/hammer screw/rod/keeper is all you'd need.
Re: Model 1870 with number 29 on bbl and receiver?
Completely incorrect John S. As Dick stated, Bogus, Bannerman & Bubba.
Dick, that rifle will never be a type I as the rear sight is not up against the receiver. Stock is from an M68 as it is squared around the tang area rather than, as Al states “ski sloped” which is typical of the model 1870.
I have seen many 1870 type II and type III with an 1868 stock. Most have had the single shoulder rod but a few have had the double shoulder rod. The rod lock on those must have been changed and inletting added for the second shoulder.
I often wonder, since there are quite a few M70’s with 1868 stocks if they may have been used in the field as replacement stocks?? Other than not having the ski slope it is basically the same stock.
Dick, that rifle will never be a type I as the rear sight is not up against the receiver. Stock is from an M68 as it is squared around the tang area rather than, as Al states “ski sloped” which is typical of the model 1870.
I have seen many 1870 type II and type III with an 1868 stock. Most have had the single shoulder rod but a few have had the double shoulder rod. The rod lock on those must have been changed and inletting added for the second shoulder.
I often wonder, since there are quite a few M70’s with 1868 stocks if they may have been used in the field as replacement stocks?? Other than not having the ski slope it is basically the same stock.
-
Tom Trevor
- Posts: 150
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2023 9:14 pm
Re: Model 1870 with number 29 on bbl and receiver?
Just a reminder Reata pass auctions Is operated by the "famous" John Gangle and his daughter.
-
Dick Hosmer
- Posts: 544
- Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2023 7:05 pm
- Location: Northern CA
Re: Model 1870 with number 29 on bbl and receiver?
Carl, I have always recognized three short-receiver .50-70s:
(1) The Allin trials rifle, which has the sight tight to the receiver (NOT really a "Model 1870", as that was the purpose of the (basically rigged) trials.
(2) The early-production Model 1870, sight moved ahead, still with SS rod and w/o "Model" on block.
(3) Later production, identical to (2) except with "Model" and the DS rod.
There may be no clear cut-off between 2 and 3, as the block and rod may not have been changed at the same date. I understand the difference in stock profile, but do not know how widely it was adhered to - I'd guess it wasn't a big deal. The rod was clearly perceived as an improvement, but it would be interesting to know why they felt it important to "formalize" the model marking. Then there is the receiver inletting - AFAIK, nearly all are M68 length, but there are a few short, M70 specific. At one time it was thought the trials rifles had thick M68 blocks - my take is that the carbines don't, so why would the rifles?
In short, an interesting period. I suppose one could come up with a lot more than three "variations".
(1) The Allin trials rifle, which has the sight tight to the receiver (NOT really a "Model 1870", as that was the purpose of the (basically rigged) trials.
(2) The early-production Model 1870, sight moved ahead, still with SS rod and w/o "Model" on block.
(3) Later production, identical to (2) except with "Model" and the DS rod.
There may be no clear cut-off between 2 and 3, as the block and rod may not have been changed at the same date. I understand the difference in stock profile, but do not know how widely it was adhered to - I'd guess it wasn't a big deal. The rod was clearly perceived as an improvement, but it would be interesting to know why they felt it important to "formalize" the model marking. Then there is the receiver inletting - AFAIK, nearly all are M68 length, but there are a few short, M70 specific. At one time it was thought the trials rifles had thick M68 blocks - my take is that the carbines don't, so why would the rifles?
In short, an interesting period. I suppose one could come up with a lot more than three "variations".
Re: Model 1870 with number 29 on bbl and receiver?
True Dick as I have a 4th type or variation I guess you could say.
Here is a tool to go along with the 1870's trial period. Don't know the exact amount of these tools produced but they are rather scarce.
Here is a tool to go along with the 1870's trial period. Don't know the exact amount of these tools produced but they are rather scarce.
- IMG_20230815_114708.jpg (87.12 KiB) Viewed 2111 times
- IMG_20230815_114653.jpg (91.06 KiB) Viewed 2111 times
-
Dick Hosmer
- Posts: 544
- Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2023 7:05 pm
- Location: Northern CA
Re: Model 1870 with number 29 on bbl and receiver?
Yes, and I think they come in two slightly different sizes, one basically same as the 1879, and the other larger - which I believe is the scarcer of the two, but you are correct, neither is common. Isn't the larger one supposed to be associated with the Ward-Burton?
Re: Model 1870 with number 29 on bbl and receiver?
I believe the smaller one was for the Ward Burton.Dick Hosmer wrote: ↑Wed Aug 30, 2023 8:27 pm Yes, and I think they come in two slightly different sizes, one basically same as the 1879, and the other larger - which I believe is the scarcer of the two, but you are correct, neither is common. Isn't the larger one supposed to be associated with the Ward-Burton?
Correction, the larger tool is associated with the Ward Burton. Here is a page from the news letters.
- IMG_20230831_082358.jpg (153.54 KiB) Viewed 2081 times