Trapdoor Rifles

A couple of years ago, I required another early trapdoor carbine. The serial number has five digits, beginning with one and ending with six, but the middle three digits cannot be read because of rusting. The face of the early hammer has a fairly deep wear mark or dimple from the contact with the spring loaded firing pin. The lock has a two click Tumbler. I wouldn’t think the spring would be strong enough to cause that much wear on that Hammer. Could it be that the firing pin was resting on a loaded cartridge for a long time? If so, I would think that would be very dangerous. Also, was the two click tumbler replaced with the three click tumbler because of problems with accidental discharge? I will try to post a picture to go along with this topic, soon. Thanks, Jim Meredith.

Can't say what caused the dimple, but the tumbler change is clear. With the 2-notch, the only (safe) way to carry the arm loaded, and ready for use, was at half-cock. Fine - except that it held the hammer back far enough so that the latch could slip under it and unload the carbine if riding through brush, etc. Adding the safety notch greatly reduced, if not eliminated, this problem.

Carbines were fixed first, but the change was eventually made to in-service rifles as well as they went through refurb, etc. The tumbler change had probably the largest frequency of application to arms already in the field. Sight changes would be number two. Doubt that anyone ever retrofitted a grooved trigger to an early gun just because it was the new 'standard'

Dick, On second thought, the dimple could’ve just been caused by repeated shooting, but the barrel rifling looks pretty good on this old carbine. I wish I knew what the actual serial number is, but I’ve decided not to try to get it restored, as I think it’s better to just leave it alone. I am going to try to post a picture, but I’m having trouble resizing it down to standards. If I can not get it to work, I’ll send it to your email. Thanks again, Jim.

I have seen in ordnance reports that dimpled firing pin noses were blamed on Berdan primed cartridges. If those primers were hard enough to dimple firing pins, they were probably hard enough to dent hammer faces too. Some denting is common on hammers that have been in the field a while. Look on the left side of the buttstock for a rough area 3 or 4 inches ahead of the buttplate. That's where the carbine sling chafes the stock when carried on horseback. It's a good sign that a carbine has done some campaigning.

Try rubbing chalk over the serial number. Sometimes this will make it readable.

Tony, rubbing white chalk on the serial number was a good idea, but I still only see the first and fifth digits. I’ll try to post a picture of that serial number. Perhaps the best way to restore the serial number would be to take it to a certified lab that does that sort of thing. Also, the stock is actually in pretty good condition. It has a faint, ESA oval, cartouche, and stock at the wrist area is in pretty good shape.
I like the idea that the dimple in the Hammer could be from shooting the early Benet-primed cartridges. Thank you, Jim.

Jim, Berdan, not Benet. The Berdan cartridges were only in use for a very short time (loaded March & April of 1877 then dropped) Perhaps the dimpling issue contributed to their demise? The s/n looks like deliberate localized abuse - and there were two main contemporary causes for this - stolen by a deserter, or defaced by an Indian in fear of retribution. Since the rest of the gun is in decent shape, the former seems more likely. In ANY event, an original carbine with the number 1xxx6 is WELL worth treasuring. Of course, the damage might have been done by Billy Bob Bumf**k when he stole it from Larry Limpd**k's garage in 1923!! That said, were it mine, I think I'd at least consider having it tested if not prohibitively expensive. That's a "hot" range...

There is a "crime lab" process basically smoothing the surface area and applying a specific acid solution which will temporarily reveal numbers stamped there by the different reaction of the stressed metal in the stampings relative to the undisturbed area.

It would be minimal degradation from the current condition, and only affect the small flat where the numbers are. It is the owner's decision if the possible information to be gained is worth the added degradation.

I once did it on a 1873 Winchester where the numbers had been deliberately and almost entirely removed, and was able to reveal them enough to have them recut.

Thank you to both Dick and John for your input. I may have to consider recovering the serial number if at all possible. The guy I got it from lived in Canada but he said he bought it at an auction, so who knows what the history could be on this one. There was quite a bit of pitting throughout all the metal parts, but the stock was in pretty good shape.
Dick, I wasn’t familiar with Berdan primers being used in the early 1877 cartridges, so that was news to me. Thanks, Jim.

JimM wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 3:13 am Thank you to both Dick and John for your input. I may have to consider recovering the serial number if at all possible. The guy I got it from lived in Canada but he said he bought it at an auction, so who knows what the history could be on this one. There was quite a bit of pitting throughout all the metal parts, but the stock was in pretty good shape.
Dick, I wasn’t familiar with Berdan primers being used in the early 1877 cartridges, so that was news to me. Thanks, Jim.

This is a gross over-simplification but it covers the major players. Benet IP was the standard used in the .45-70 after the Martin-primed .50-70s. Berdan was the standard in Europe, so, we tried it out. I do not know if Frankford made both in March/April of 1877, or just the Berdan. They then went back to Benet IP, until 1881 when they switched to Boxer (exactly the same as we use today) and never looked back. Of course Europe stayed with Berdan until recently - I think the world is now nearly 100% Boxer, though I could be mistaken. What do foreign makers like Privi and Lapua use?.