-
Legacy Member
Is This a Civil War Era Austrian Lorenz?
-
-
07-21-2014 09:50 PM
# ADS
Friends and Sponsors
-
Advisory Panel
Sorry, IMHO it's not..
Originally Posted by
TexasCheesehead
Is This a Civil War Era Austrian Lorenz?
In a word, no.
Apologies if this comes across as offensive - but what makes you think that it is a) an Austrian M1854 "Lorenz" rifle? b) that it has anything whatsoever to do with the Civil War?
I think it is a "home-brew" built around a carved-up original stock and trigger guard from a Lorenz M/54 "Jaeger". Considering what is obviously wrong for a Lorenz - lock (unidentifiable), hammer (French style), nipple bolster (village blacksmith), backsight.... someone tell me what's right!
The Lorenz had a 13.9mm (.547) bore. Old ex-service BP rifles were often reamed out to make smoothbores for use as shotguns. In which case, one would expect a smooth-bore of around 0.6". Never 0.75 - that would be an enormous waste of effort, and in most cases the original barrel would not be thick enough to permit reaming to 12-gauge. This was probably always a 12-gauge shotgun barrel - it is indeed marked with a 12.
And the XXXX \ / III marking is typical cold-chisel marking for a set of components, to stop sets getting mixed up, in 19th century small-scale (hand) batch production. These were placed where they would not be visible on the finished gun, and were nothing to do with regiments etc, just in case anybody's thinking that!
Last edited by Patrick Chadwick; 07-22-2014 at 05:19 PM.
-
-
-
Legacy Member
Originally Posted by
Patrick Chadwick
In a word, no.
Apologies if this comes across as offensive - but what makes you think that it is a) an Austrian M1854 "Lorenz" rifle? b) that it has anything whatsoever to do with the Civil War?
I think it is a "home-brew" built around a carved-up original stock and trigger guard from a Lorenz M/54 "Jaeger". Considering what is obviously
wrong for a Lorenz - lock (unidentifiable), hammer (
French style), nipple bolster (village blacksmith), backsight.... someone tell me what's
right!
The Lorenz had a 13.9mm (.547) bore. Old ex-service BP rifles were often reamed out to make smoothbores for use as shotguns. In which case, one would expect a smooth-bore of around 0.6". Never 0.75 - that would be an enormous waste of effort, and in most cases the original barrel would not be thick enough to permit reaming to 12-gauge. This was probably always a 12-gauge shotgun barrel - it is indeed marked with a 12.
And the XXXX \ / III marking is typical cold-chisel marking for a set of components, to stop sets getting mixed up, in 19th century small-scale (hand) batch production. These were placed where they would not be visible on the finished gun, and were nothing to do with regiments etc, just in case anybody's thinking that!
No offense taken, seriously. I have the grand sum of $50 invested in this. But if you did a little research, you'd see that the model or year numbers on Austrian rifles were marked on the underside of the barrel, in Roman Numerals. This was would have been manufactured in 1848. Another point: The number "12" you see in the pictures, is stamped into the breech plug, not the barrel. It is probably not a number "12", as it looks like there is a third number. And thirdly, why would there be a bayonet lug on a shotgun barrel?
Now the rear sight was of my own making. It was missing when I got it, having only a dovetail slot. I'm guessing that the barrel was probably bored out to be used as a shotgun. As for the barrel not being thick enough to ream, look at the bore of a Brown Bess musket: It takes a 0.71" ball, is smoothbore, and the barrel has very thin walls. You're saying they could ream out a barrel in the early 1700's but couldn't do the same thing in the mid 1800's?
-
Thank You to TexasCheesehead For This Useful Post:
-
Contributing Member
-
-
Legacy Member
Originally Posted by
gsimmons
How long is the barrel?
Exactly 32" from the muzzle to where it's connected to the breech plug.
-
-
Advisory Panel
Originally Posted by
TexasCheesehead
But if you did a little research ...
Oh I do! And spend hours presenting the results.
Originally Posted by
TexasCheesehead
..., you'd see that the model or year numbers on Austrian rifles were marked on the underside of the barrel, in Roman Numerals. This was would have been manufactured in 1848.
- Which would prove that it is NOT an 1854 model !
And an arsenal date marking would surely have been stamped, not chisel-cut?
Originally Posted by
TexasCheesehead
You're saying they could ream out a barrel in the early 1700's but couldn't do the same thing in the mid 1800's?
Not at all. I am saying that the barrel on a 13.9mm calibre rifle would hardly have been thick enough at the muzzle end to ream it out for a 0.756" smoothbore. That is 19.2mm.
In the book "Militärgewehre und Pistolen der Deutschen Staaten 1800-1870" from P.255 on there is a complete chapter on the M1854 Lorenz rifles. PP256-258 show drawings of lock, backsight and barrel profile. All completely different to your example, and the barrel profile drawing indicates an external diameter at the muzzle end of 19.95mm. Say 20. Paper-thin if you bore that out to 19.2mm!
I suspect that if you measure the muzzle diameter of your gun it is considerably larger, more like 23.7mm. Say 23.5 to 24 = 0.92 to 0.94. Approx, of course. Please let me know.
A 13.9mm rifle with a muzzle diameter of that size would have been a real "bull barrel". For a target rifle - OK. For a military rifle - too heavy.
The trigger guard looks like the one from the M/54 Jaeger. But the Jaeger had a 71 cm barrel, octagonal, turned down to round for 11 cm from the muzzle, to take the bayonet. Your barrel is 32" long, therefore not a Jaeger barrel.
The full-length M/54 rifle barrel was 36 Viennese inches = 946 mm =37.24". That could have been cut down to 32", but then the foresight and bayonet boss would have been lost.
Originally Posted by
TexasCheesehead
And thirdly, why would there be a bayonet lug on a shotgun barrel?
To make it look like a military rifle?
Finally, all Lorenz rifles had a proper nipple boss on the side. That nipple boss is home-made, and was never an arsenal product.
I could, of course, be wrong in all of this. It would be interesting to hear comments from someone else!
Last edited by Patrick Chadwick; 07-23-2014 at 12:32 PM.
-
The Following 2 Members Say Thank You to Patrick Chadwick For This Useful Post:
-
Legacy Member
Originally Posted by
Patrick Chadwick
Oh I do! And spend hours presenting the results.
- Which would prove that it is NOT an 1854 model !
And an arsenal date marking would surely have been stamped, not chisel-cut?
Not at all. I am saying that the barrel on a 13.9mm calibre rifle would hardly have been thick enough at the muzzle end to ream it out for a 0.756" smoothbore. That is 19.2mm.
In the book "Militärgewehre und Pistolen der Deutschen Staaten 1800-1870" from P.255 on there is a complete chapter on the M1854 Lorenz rifles. PP256-258 show drawings of lock, backsight and barrel profile. All completely different to your example, and the barrel profile drawing indicates an external diameter at the muzzle end of 19.95mm. Say 20. Paper-thin if you bore that out to 19.2mm!
I suspect that if you measure the muzzle diameter of your gun it is considerably larger, more like 23.7mm. Say 23.5 to 24 = 0.92 to 0.94. Approx, of course. Please let me know.
A 13.9mm rifle with a muzzle diameter of that size would have been a real "bull barrel". For a target rifle - OK. For a military rifle - too heavy.
The trigger guard looks like the one from the M/54 Jaeger. But the Jaeger had a 71 cm barrel, octagonal, turned down to round for 11 cm from the muzzle, to take the bayonet. Your barrel is 32" long, therefore not a Jaeger barrel.
The full-length M/54 rifle barrel was 36 Viennese inches = 946 mm =37.24". That could have been cut down to 32", but then the foresight and bayonet boss would have been lost.
To make it look like a military rifle?
Finally, all Lorenz rifles had a proper nipple boss on the side. That nipple boss is home-made, and was never an arsenal product.
I could, of course, be wrong in all of this. It would be interesting to hear comments from someone else!
I am impressed, you certainly sound like you know your 19th century firearms. I measured the bore diameter again and it measures 19.19mm inside diameter, and 23.88 outside diameter. The thing that perplexes me the most, is that if the barrel was originally manufactured to be used on a fowling piece, why the bayonet lug and front and rear sights? I carved a rear sight out of a piece of steel, patterning it after several advertised Lorenz rear sights which were on Ebay. But was it normal for something to hunt ducks and geese to have a bayonet and sights?
As for calling it a "Lorenz", I'm only going by what little information I could glean of the internet. I found several similar to it which were referred to as a "Lorenz", or simply an "Austrian musket".
-
-
Advisory Panel
Originally Posted by
TexasCheesehead
I measured the bore diameter again and it measures 19.19mm inside diameter, and 23.88 outside diameter.
So my 23.7mm, scaled from your photo, was a pretty good estimate!
Originally Posted by
TexasCheesehead
The thing that perplexes me the most, is that if the barrel was originally manufactured to be used on a fowling piece, why the bayonet lug and front and rear sights?
This is getting very speculative (but it's fun!): It may, of course, be a barrel recycled from a musket. Take out the barrel and see if you can find a trace of an ignition hole for a flintlock - if there was, it would have been plugged or welded shut. It is also conceivable that, if there was a flintlock ignition hole which was badly eroded, the person doing the conversion converter simply cut off the breech end of the barrel and recut (lengthened) the screw thread for the breech plug.
-
-
Advisory Panel
Got it !! - Maybe?
More speculation: The barrel "donor" could hardly be a true musket, as musket front-ends had a bayonet boss on the top or bottom, and I can't think of one with a boss on the side. So it has to be a 1st generation percussion rifle (the previous generation being smooth-bore musket conversions).
BUT the Austrian M/49 Kammerbüchse (made by Frühwirth in Vienna) had a foresight/bayonet boss setup that looks just like your gun. The M/49 was a rifle with the Delvigne ridged chamber compression system - forerunner of the "pure obturation" Minie-types - and had a barrel 84.5 cm long. Your barrel is 32" = 81.3cm, and this would correspond to an M/49 barrel that had had the Delvigne-type chamber (=Kammer) cut off. The M749 also had a bore of 18.1mm, and if one of these was reamed out after service use, then the 19.2mm becomes quite plausible.
The M/54 had a rear sling swivel way back on the bottom of the butt. But the M/49 had the swivel exactly as on your gun. The subtle difference in the butt profile also favors the M/49.
I now think that this was an M/49 Frühwirth rifle that was converted by a 19th century Bubba into a shotgun after it had been retired from military service. Foresight retained, backsight remover, and the bayonet boss was simply left in place. Google " M 1849 Frühwirth rifle" and see what you think.
P.S. I would be grateful if you could give me the source for the Roman numeral marking of Austrian barrels. The book I mentioned previously states that from the 1840s on the marking was the last 3 figures of the year - familiar to anyone who has seen Wänzl locks marked 871 (for 1871).
Last edited by Patrick Chadwick; 07-23-2014 at 06:09 PM.
-
-
-
Thank You to Patrick Chadwick For This Useful Post: