Custer range carbine, serial# 36144

I bought this at an auction this weekend and I had to go from these pictures. I think it looks pretty good but I'm excited to get it here and check it out closer. I really want to take the butt-plate off and see if there is any holes. It looks to me to be an honest wear rifle but I don't know for sure what all is original to the rifle. Has the front sight been changed? I really need to stop buying guns I can't look at first.:madsmile:

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...gadmulge-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...b3r0atyr-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...um8ozely-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...cxmncalh-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...evqixwht-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...vr4qp9mt-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...m21zjo6y-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...okahc38k-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...emvshirp-1.jpg

I find these fascinating, can't say about the front sight though. I've been to the battlefield about three or four times and would go again...hope it is what it appears to be. Very neat carbine.

The front sight appears to be an appropriate style and height. The carbines with Buffington sights have taller front sight blades.

It's all conjecture now. Let's see if he got it or comes back to tell us... $1850 USD.
https://www.proxibid.com/Firearms-Mi...ation/52032224

Blimey a nice piece of history if it is what it is!

Yup, that's me. I think I got a very good deal. I just wish they would ship it. #36189 is in the SRS list and #36442 is listed here: http://www.american-firearms.com/ame...rn%20Guns.html as re-captured from the Indians on Oct. 1st 1879. It fits nicely in the correct range but from the condition I would think if it belonged to Reno, Custer, or Benteen's outfits it was probably left back at the fort in the storeroom. It would be nice to be able to check the firing pin imprint anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GUTS

It would be nice to be able to check the firing pin imprint anyway.

---

I understand that part, saw the info on that some time back. That would have been quite a job but they did match some things up and it creates quite a time paradox in one's mind. I saw a pair of sling clips for carbines in the museum at the battlefield, one picked up a couple days later and one after the big fire in mid '80's...one as new and the other rusty. Looking at them knowing they fell the same day but looked so different...the whole display is fascinating.

Guts...Best of luck to you. Hope it turns out to be a winner. Keep us in the loop/

I got the carbine today and I think it looks pretty good. From what I can tell it seems to be mostly original. I'm sure the breech block has been changed, it's the second type I think and it looks to have been blued. The trigger looks to have been replaced also. I took the butt plate off and there is no holes in the stock. The tumbler is a three click and I'm not sure if the hammer is the correct one or not. The bore is not pitted and it's shiny but it has wear. There is some areas on the stock that were that were filled at one time with some kind of plastic wood filler but that doesn't bother me too much, at least it's the long wrist stock. Overall I think it's a nice example of a Custer range carbine.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...s3vkqfnb-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...jzjeslb2-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...6ocelpg3-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...acm1o29b-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...3mv9c4gz-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...lyosb8nu-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...pssbr65j-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ynbusu7d-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...12asxgtx-1.jpg

Very nice, once in a lifetime catch I think.

I think it was kind of neat to find it. Sitting Bull is buried about a mile from my house and I live 100 miles from Ft. Lincoln so at least it's back in it's rightfull territory.

Great find and with correct type stock. Is the stock cartouche still visible? I have #35616, Ray

Nope, it's worn away. Even my great imagination couldn't make it appear at all.

I finally remembered to check the rear sight out a little closer and it is unmarked. I also figured out the hammer is the right one and the thicker breech block face didn't happen until after #30,000 so the breach block is correct. There is nothing on this carbine that isn't correct although like I said I'm sure the breech block is not original. I very happy with this one.

The hammer is earlier via the course cut cross hatching. Mine is the same. Should be finer cut. Maybe arsenal using up old stock in production...

I think the hammers we have are correct. The M66, M68, M68, and M70 all had a stamped pattern on the tip and the Type I course, almost hand filed looking hammer came on the M73 and then the stamped pattern on the Type II and Type III, correct? I think the hammers were filed or cut by hand and that's why the diamond spacing and size varies some. I've seen a couple of early M73 rifles(60,000 t0 70,000)and they had the Type II hammer. I thought the course hammer was because the cavalry wore gloves and the hammer would grip the leather better. That's just my .02.

Nice find... enjoy her!!

I have been checking and I think the saddle ring bar is the newer thicker one.

That carbine was logged (without comment or provenance) in Al Frasca's "Trapdoor Newsletter" from a few years ago - which means it was part of an answer to a survey he sent out regarding letters OTHER than V & P on TD barrels. It also is listed in my book "More .45-70s . . .". While all parts (with the the exception of the sling ring and bar) appear to be period correct, it may be a reassembly, since it shows NO crud in the nooks and crannies. That said, for $1850, you STOLE it!! Great find - enjoy.

Thanks Richard, I appreciate your knowledge. Glad your feeling better. :thup: Oh, the front sight blade is from a rifle and I just ordered your book from Amazon.

Thanks! The front base is correct, but the blade may well be "adapted" - and the pin is clearly later than the base. Someone HAS done some work on the gun, there is no getting away from that, but you still got a GREAT deal (unless, and I have NO, as in ZERO, reason to believe that it did) pass through Trapdoors Galore/Keith Rush, a less than honest firm, now fortunately defunct. IF they ever had it, all bets would be off.