1861 Enfield Snider Rifle - Real or Really Good Fake?

[Wally M]

Hello Everyone, I am a newbie to the antique weapon world and need your expertise and advice. During my travels overseas, I came across this beautiful 1861 Enfield Snider MkII** two-band rifle that I couldn't pass up. I have very little information on its history but the character I purchased from stated that it had been in his family for a while and was "obtained" from a cache found underground in a desert in the Middle East long ago by a family member. The family was selling off their possessions for extra money. True? Who knows? From the limited research I have done and from close inspection, I found a few interesting things. This appears to be a legit 1861 Enfield MkII** Short Rifle with a purpose built Snider breach modification. It appears to have all period parts with appropriate markings and I believe this rifle spent some time in an armory before storage. The stock, butt, body and barrel show different levels of use. This rifle has the rare 3 groove rifling in near perfect condition with very few scratches on the barrel surface. I think it was repaired, test fired, and then stored for the long haul. The cleaning rod seems a little odd and has small dimples along the entire length. Like I said, everything seems real but I'm not an expert. I'd love to hear some discussion on this and possibly an idea of what it's worth. Please see the close up pictures below. Thanks guys.

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.

[Patrick Chadwick]

Firstly, it is a carbine, not a short rifle.

A Snider II should have a cupped hammer face. Your example has a flat-faced hammer. Early model Artillery Carbines (Pattern 1853) had 3-groove barrels. Pattern 1861 carbines had 5-groove barrels, and your carbine has an 1861 lock, with the flat hammer face. However, in the process of "Sniderising" there was obviously a fair bit of pragmatic mix-n-match carried out, so all this does not automatically mean that your rifle must be a fake. All the bits seem genuine enough on the photos. It bothers me that the buttplate overhangs the wood quite considerably, but the wood has not obviously been heavily sanded. I doubt that any rifle would have emerged from an arsenal with that buttplate overhang. Furthermore, an arsenal would not have released it with that badly beaten-up block face. I think that this carbine has been put together from genuine components but is not an arsenal product.

For real Enfield-Snider expertise, you need to place your photos on this forum:
http://britishmilitariaforums.yuku.c...rEnfield-Forum

Someone there may be able to define the model more precisely than I can.

[Wally M]

Thank you Patrick for your feedback. I'm learning more and more everyday about this carbine. I noted the same on the butt plate. The odd thing is that the stock has not been sanded and the lip is very uniform like the entire stock has been desicated and shrunk. The channel for the cleaning rod has also opened up a little making the rod a little loose. All the grooves in the stock are very tight against the metal work with great fitment. It is very likely that this weapon was put together from various original pieces. I'll look at the forum you suggested to get additional perspectives. Thank again.