Snider Enfields and U.S. service

[lawrence_n]

Good day all. I've picked up an early Snider Enfield conversion that has me a little puzzled. It has no unit or Canadian markings but it has what appears to be a U.S. style inspector's stamp in the wood on the left side of the butt. It's hard to make out, but it seems to be a decorative lozenge with some initials or numbers. Does anyone know if Snider Enfields saw civil war service due to the scarcity of domestic arms? Can anyone recognize the stamp? Thank you all.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[#1oilman]

That's a Dominion of Canada Cartouche, DC Snider Enfields were post civil war

[lawrence_n]

That's a Dominion of Canada Cartouche, DC Snider Enfields were post civil war

It's not a DC stamp. I've seen lots of them and this isn't it. It could be an EE or a 33, I'm just not sure. If you look at the pic, poor as it is, there's almost a double lozenge.

[Ridolpho]

Lawrence n: Looks like "DC" to me but possibly stamped over something (or overstamped by something)? The Snider, as #1oilman says, was certainly never used in the Civil War or by the USA at any time. Many ex-Canadian Sniders have no surviving unit markings- just the DC on the wood. What version is it and have you had it apart to see if there is a conversion date stamped on the underside of the barrel? I believe the very earliest examples are dated 09/66 and some of the earliest conversions were sent directly to Canada.

Ridolpho

[Sunray]

Put a piece of paper on it and lightly and gently rub it with a soft pencil.
There's a really good picture of the DC stamp here. Doesn't look like that one.
Snider Enfield MKII ** Canadian Issue
The one here, also a good picture, does though. The 1860 date is wrong. The Snider wasn't issued in 1860.
Snider Enfield MK III 577 snider

[lawrence_n]

Thanks all but another guy nailed it (I think). It is indeed the DC stamp but it was double struck! Given the fading and age, it was hard to make out, as you see in the pics. When a tracing was done of the rhomboids, it became more clear. With the D overlapping the D and the C doing the same, you can see where it would get confusing. I'll probably put it up on the table at Jerseyville on the 13th. I picked up the socket bayonet for it at an estate sale, sadly with no scabbard, but it does look nice on the rifle. Once again, thanks all.

[browningautorifle]

Thanks all but another guy nailed it

Which 'Nother guy? #2 or #4 post?

[Patrick Chadwick]

...The 1860 date is wrong.... [/url]

No it's not. Read the original text carefully - it does not claim that the rifle was manufactured in 1860.

It states:
"The lock is correct and original dated 1860 with muted color."

1860 is the version date of the lock, NOT the date of manufacture of the rifle. The locks were originally manufactured for the Enfield muzzleloader rifles. Many of those rifles were later converted to Snider pattern, and the same components were used for new Sniders. I have one such P53 3-band Enfield converted to a Snider III,

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread....ghlight=Snider

which had me just as puzzled at first, and I recommend the booklet "Small Arms Identification Series No. 20" by Ian Skennerton if you require further clarification.

The booklet shows, in condensed form, that there were many more variants of the "2-band" and "3-band" Enfields than most people realize. The Sniders were in effect mostly "bitsas".

Unlike the purist collector's idealized world, where all rifles of date X:X:X have a unique, so-called "correct" configuration with all components being of date X:X:X, real factories - especially where products are being modified - simply use up remaining stocks of component version N before using new stocks of version N+1, and thus one sees a large number of what might be termed transitional models. Or "mixmasters" or "bitsas".

I have several 2- and 3-band Enfields. In general, the tolerance of Enfield lockwork is so good that you can often swap the locks about without being able to detect a mismatch in the result.

[Ridolpho]

Off topic of the thread but to my knowledge all Mk III Long and Short rifles were new manufacture- including the locks which will generally have dates from 1869 to 1872. East India Govt and Portugese contract rifles will have even later dates. Locks do get switched around, of course, as the guns are repaired in service.

Ridolpho

[Patrick Chadwick]

Off topic of the thread but to my knowledge all Mk III Long and Short rifles were new manufacture- including the locks which will generally have dates from 1869 to 1872. ...

Ridolpho

I beg to disagree with you Ridolpho. Please read this thread, especially the comments by Bill Curtis, who is truly expert on 19th. c. British firearms.

Untouched Snider III - British Militaria Forums

I have learnt over the years that in such matters it is advisable to avoid using extreme words like "always" or "never".

---------- Post added at 08:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:53 PM ----------

Lawrence - as you can see from the thread linked above, if you remove the barrelled action from the stock, you will probably find a lot of informative stamps on the barrel and shoe of your rifle