Trapdoor Rifles

.


You don't normally see this gap between the thumb piece and lockplate on Trapdoors.




From what I remember (and it's been a long time since I've shot a Trapdoor Springfield), while the breech block should not be slammed shut you should exert a little extra downward pressure to make sure the cam latch/thumb piece are fully secured.

Since the breech block in the photo looks to be completely closed, it is possible the thumb piece has not completely seated into place? If it makes any difference it's a Type I OM, so it has the early receiver and high arch breech block.

Thanks.

The radial orientation of the arm indicates full closure, and - since it's not a POS H&R - that can be trusted; so the cam IS seated. That said, my thought would be excessive wear on the shaft, or the cap plate, or both. I've seen that same condition. While probably "safe", I certainly would NOT want it in a daily shooter, which likely doesn't apply here.

The camera angle, looking up at the latch probably exaggerates the appearance of a gap.

If it bothers you, send it to me. I would be proud to give that gun a good home, even with that defect!

John S. wrote: ↑Thu Jun 15, 2023 5:42 pm The camera angle, looking up at the latch probably exaggerates the appearance of a gap.

If it bothers you, send it to me. I would be proud to give that gun a good home, even with that defect!

No, me, me, I saw it first!!!!! What a lot of work on said latch - gorgeous. . .

Thank you, gentleman. Do these two additional images from straight on and not angled (albeit from further away) make the gap appear more correct? (The gap looks more normal to me. The angle of the first photo I posted above didn't occur to me).

Of course I don't plan on shooting it, nor do I believe this gap means it's a fraud or put-together. I'm just used to seeing well fitted parts on Trapdoors in respectable condition.

Thanks again.

I see you found some sight parts??

I see you found some sight parts??

No, this is a different one I'm considering. It's in a bit better condition and no parts missing.

Looks better. Block to receiver joint looks tight.
I would not be surprised if the breech plug is torqued in just a bit tight, causing the receiver to sit in the stock cocked just a bit to the left, raising the latch up from the lockplate.
Even so, I'd still take it...

johngross wrote: ↑Thu Jun 15, 2023 10:31 pm

I see you found some sight parts??

No, this is a different one I'm considering. It's in a bit better condition and no parts missing.

But are those parts right? That was why I asked, thinking you had found something close. Those look a little on the coarse side like something reworked from a Pedersoli. Just something to ask about.

John, I found the sale add for the one in question here and please note the tang sight staff is original but the eye cup is modern junk. Also the rod is modern and style of visible end is wrong. I see this one has no engraving on the trigger plate and guard it is possible at some point this was replaced with a set from a regular rifle be sure to have the seller push the trigger forward to be sure the set trigger mechanism is still there and guarantee such in writing. Overall well worn and my opinion, which is honestly not worth much, they are asking double the actual value.