Serial number 77199 for this trapdoor is from the 1873 early range and it’s block is 1873, but it has a Buffington rear site, and an 1888 or 1889 stock so I’m trying to figure out if this is an 1873 model that the military added the Buffington site to and put it in a 1889 stock, or would someone other than the military have done this as a put together gun?
Thanks!
1873 or 1884 ?
Moderator: 45govt
1873 or 1884 ?
- Attachments
-
- IMG_4074.jpeg (112.26 KiB) Viewed 1709 times
-
- IMG_4077.jpeg (181.61 KiB) Viewed 1711 times
-
- IMG_4076.jpeg (151.1 KiB) Viewed 1713 times
Last edited by Hammer on Wed Mar 19, 2025 9:46 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Re: 1873 or 1884 ?
Buffington
- Attachments
-
- IMG_4078.jpeg (156.07 KiB) Viewed 1701 times
-
- IMG_4075.jpeg (121.3 KiB) Viewed 1706 times
-
- IMG_4073.jpeg (54.04 KiB) Viewed 1706 times
-
Dick Hosmer
- Posts: 627
- Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2023 7:05 pm
- Location: Northern CA
Re: 1873 or 1884 ?
The Buffington might be legit. SA added them to many older arms still in service, since they were deemed to be a great improvement.
The stock is either wrong, or a DIRE (as in smoke-covered battlefield!!) emergency. SA would not have put a wide-cut stock on a narrow-receiver rifle.
However, B&B (better known as Bannerman & Bubba) would do so in a heartbeat...
The stock is either wrong, or a DIRE (as in smoke-covered battlefield!!) emergency. SA would not have put a wide-cut stock on a narrow-receiver rifle.
However, B&B (better known as Bannerman & Bubba) would do so in a heartbeat...
Re: 1873 or 1884 ?
Dick I really appreciate your knowledge. How do I visually tell what the interface looks like for the wide cut stock and a narrow receiver? Thank you.Dick Hosmer wrote: ↑Wed Mar 19, 2025 11:04 pm The Buffington might be legit. SA added them to many older arms still in service, since they were deemed to be a great improvement.
The stock is either wrong, or a DIRE (as in smoke-covered battlefield!!) emergency. SA would not have put a wide-cut stock on a narrow-receiver rifle.
However, B&B (better known as Bannerman & Bubba) would do so in a heartbeat...
-
Dick Hosmer
- Posts: 627
- Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2023 7:05 pm
- Location: Northern CA
Re: 1873 or 1884 ?
The receiver was widened by about 1/16" at 96300, so the inletting had to be widened to suit.It can be difficult to see, but a wide-cut stock will show a slight step at the barrel receiver joint, about enough to easily slip in a thick business card either side, when a narrow receiver is installed. SA changed their milling, but, over the years wood has dried out, and people have sanded the little flat surfaces, so mismatches are possible. Wide receivers CAN be forced into narrow stocks as they do not always split.
Another guide is the comb length. Early, narrow-cut stocks can have either 9.5" or 10.25", while wide-cut stocks are 10.25" only.
The period around 1877/78 (70-80,000) produces some interesting "transition" arms. In GROSS terms an "early" rifle is thought of with a short comb stock, high-arch crossed-arrows block, narrow receiver, and a "late" rifle with the long-comb stock, low-arch block, wide receiver and Buffington sight. But, all changes did not take place simultaneously, yielding a relatively few rifles with long comb stocks, narrow receivers and filled arch blocks, to say nothing of the rare M1877 (a cross between M1873 and M1879) rear sight. These arms are seldom seen, and appreciated mainly by nerds.
Another guide is the comb length. Early, narrow-cut stocks can have either 9.5" or 10.25", while wide-cut stocks are 10.25" only.
The period around 1877/78 (70-80,000) produces some interesting "transition" arms. In GROSS terms an "early" rifle is thought of with a short comb stock, high-arch crossed-arrows block, narrow receiver, and a "late" rifle with the long-comb stock, low-arch block, wide receiver and Buffington sight. But, all changes did not take place simultaneously, yielding a relatively few rifles with long comb stocks, narrow receivers and filled arch blocks, to say nothing of the rare M1877 (a cross between M1873 and M1879) rear sight. These arms are seldom seen, and appreciated mainly by nerds.
Re: 1873 or 1884 ?
Certainly not an Army approved combination of stock and action, but "good enough" match of parts for someone to use as a shooter. Of course the collector value is greatly diminished, but for a shooter it still has some value.
Why? Lot of loose parts on the market over the last 125 years so maybe assembled stricly as a parts gun. Maybe Bubba's wife knocked it over and the stock broke and this was the only stock he could find. 50 years ago few people realized there were thick and thin receivers, or long and short wrists. Trapdoor parts were trapdoor parts, and complete like new trapdoors were only $25 or $35 and you could buy all you wanted, so no one cared mucha bout the details.
At least until Al Frasca started doing research and writing books.
Why? Lot of loose parts on the market over the last 125 years so maybe assembled stricly as a parts gun. Maybe Bubba's wife knocked it over and the stock broke and this was the only stock he could find. 50 years ago few people realized there were thick and thin receivers, or long and short wrists. Trapdoor parts were trapdoor parts, and complete like new trapdoors were only $25 or $35 and you could buy all you wanted, so no one cared mucha bout the details.
At least until Al Frasca started doing research and writing books.