Printable View
Hey All,
I recently picked up an 1873 TD, and am having trouble making out the S/N. I have not seen enough of them to make out all of it, and thought I'd ask an experienced forum. Please see the photos below.
To me it looks like X42437, where X also looks like a 3. I have also provided a photo of the inspectors stamp, but cannot make out the year.
Thanks for having a look. I have included other photos too. Time has not been kind to the old girl.
1873 Rifle - Google Drive
Looks like a "3" to me, I'm just going by the way the bottom portion of the numeral dips below the others and how it relates to the "4"
Please refer to Frasca & Hill "The 45-70 Springfield" Appendix F2 to confirm the following:
1) A six-figure number ending in 42xxx was not produced until 1880. End of year S/N was 144471.
2) A number 342xxx would not have been reached until late 1886. End of year S/N was 346727.
3) Sight ramp with steps was changed to continuous, without steps, change date given as May 7, 1878.
Given the inevitable time lapse for implementation of a change as stocks of components were used up, it is just about conceivable that a first-version backsight ramp was used in 1880. But difficult to believe for 1886.
1st. conclusion: either it is not 3xxxxx, or the rifle is a "bitsa". Of which there were many, as sold-as-surplus component parts were used by Bannerman and the like to assemble "new" Trapdoors.
But that first "figure" cannot be a 1 - there is no trace of a straight vertical line.
Neither am I convinced that it is a 3 - the loop is too tight.
2nd. conclusion: that is not a first figure, but a scratch/corrosion mark that happens to look similar to a figure.
So the number would be 42437. Which is firmly within the range for 1875 (35224 to 60327).
That fits.
No, I'm sorry, Patrick, it does NOT "fit".
The three points noted are basically correct.
The first conclusion is valid, but, I DO see a "3" and I have looked at a great many TD Springfield receivers.
The second conclusion is where the problem lies - the receiver exhibits a machining characteristic (the "deep" gas escape cut) which did not occur until 96300, so, the number cannot be 42437, and has nothing to do with the Custer time frame. A barrel in the Custer range has no proofmarks. A lockplate from the Custer period bears an 1873 date. A breechblock from the Custer period bears a different marking from that shown. The rear sight is an 1879 model, and looks to be as originally fitted - due to the heavily patinated slotless screws.
In short, 342437 "fits" perfectly, with the exception that the cartouche appears to be a crude imitation (i.e. a fake). The border is "close" but the interior stamping - which should be SWP/1886 - is not there, only a bunch of random marks.
Thanks for the clarification - the gas escape cut is definitive.
P.S: I think I've got it now - i misinterpreted the info on the backsight ramps.
Must confess that I mispoke a bit, for which I humbly apologize, though it does NOT alter the facts in THIS case. The gas escape change occurred earlier (in the mid 75K) range as it was not a part of the major width and profile modifications made in October 1878 at 96300. Just wanted to set the record straight. Happy New Year to all!!!