Enfields by L.A. Co. 1862 (and defarbs)

[Craig L Barry]

Re: Enfields by L.A. Co. 1862 (and defarbs)

One other thing worth noting about that LAC on the antique arms website...
check out how the "2" in 1862 is slightly higher than the 1,8 and 6 on the
stock roundel. This is because LAC had an interchangeable last digit
in some of their date stamps. It is very clear on this particular specimen.

To quote a dear friend and colleague of mine who has a large collection
of LACs and Confederate material culture in general, the London Armoury
P53s are not under-researched as much as the research is "under published."
It would be great to have the ability to compel the top professional
researchers to share their knowledge, but lacking those powers over time
and space we students of the Enfield still fumble around in the dark, or base our
conclusions on too few specimens. I know I have been criticized for that, and
justifiably so.

Point being of course, none of us knows as much as we would like on
this subject (as well as many others). Socrates said that the wise man
knows that which he does not know. And if that is true, I know just enough
to understand how much I still don't know yet. Like Herr Kammeraden
said, it is always good to copy an original whenever possible...as long
as you don't assume all P53s by the same maker were identical to that one.

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Enfields by L.A. Co. 1862 (and defarbs)

Hallo!

Yes, it would GREAT if the Resting Point of Our Collective Knowledge could get a boost by the publishing of new information!
It is sad for us that especially in an Economic Downturn, that publishers would not likely think they could sell enough of such books to see them published were a write or collector/writer come forward to share thier knowledge or collections.
(Shoot, on a jaded and cynical day, I would say that except for a very small fragment of the Civil War Commuity, who cares? A rhetorical question not intended to launch another discussion of the sad state of firearms in our Community.)

Curt

Who is fond of the saying: "Everybody knows something. Nobody knows everything."

[Todd Watts]

Re: Enfields by L.A. Co. 1862 (and defarbs)

Sorry Blair, but for some reason I can't load pics here. Some other guys load pics from time to time of my defarbs, but my computer has a "Thou Shalt Not Post Pictures" feature or something. I can post on other forums, but not here. This copy/repro is being completed this weekend and maybe its owner will post pics in a week or two.

I also seldom stop to take pics of my work. I am backlogged so badly that I don't need to waste minutes setting up guns for pictures unless there is some reason. Plus, for me, an Enfield defarb is fast becoming just another dern Enfield defarb. Get the thing done, and start the next one in the pile.

[Blair]

Re: Enfields by L.A. Co. 1862 (and defarbs)

Todd,

Yes, I fully understand.
I have not tried posting photos through this forum, but I have done a "copy and past" of images here from other sites. I did this solely for the educational benefit they might or could provide on a specific subject.
I also understand your time restraints.
Still...A photographic study can prove to be quite valuable, perhaps, not so much for this particular project but for similar types of project in the future where the same photos would also serve equally well. There would be no reason for duplicating photos like there might be for duplicating the firearm.

[Todd Watts]

Re: Enfields by L.A. Co. 1862 (and defarbs)

OK, I am trying to attach pics of it and it appears to have worked. Pressing "Submit" will tell the tale.;) On this particular one, there is a hairline crack in the left of the stock on the lock saddle but it has not yet opened enough to get epoxy into it. At some later date that repair will probably be needed, but I did not see any need for it at this time. It is a Euroclub and so had Baddely bands. I had to "Palmerize" them which leaves a smaller tab than real Palmers have, but it siffices. I copied the original posted in the link above as closely as I could and think it came out pretty cool.

Now for the submit reply click...

[David Fox]

Re: Enfields by L.A. Co. 1862 (and defarbs)

Observation, not criticism (Lord knows): On the lockplate of Todd's illustrated defarb directly above, it appears the lettering strikes leave "bumped up" metal bordering the lettering. I've not handled any minty originals. Do they evidence this phenomenon? Would dressing the plate down with a file not eliminate this? ...Anal Retentative in Carolina

[Blair]

Re: Enfields by L.A. Co. 1862 (and defarbs)

Todd,

Thanks, these are good photos!
I think such photos can go a long ways toward helping people better see and understand some of the differences that can be found in various firearms types.
Who could be better at providing detailed photos of the areas of greatest interest than those that build such firearms? You are one of a few people providing such alterations to the reenactment community and one of the even fewer offering photos of what is available.
Such imagery can only better serve the overall knowledge of the hobby as a whole.
This is just my opinion.

[Blair]

Re: Enfields by L.A. Co. 1862 (and defarbs)

David,

My experience with examining these indicate they were indeed faced off, on the barrel as well, before finished. Usually the proof and provisional stamping are quit small and deeply stamped into the barrels. This gives me reason to believe the barrels may have been hot when stamped. These deeply marked stamps would hold up under several cleaning/facing operations while the barrel was being finished during different stages of completion.
I can't speak for how the Brits did this but in the US the lock plates were not marked until they meant quality standards and were accepted. They would then be faced off and the locks would be hardened. Not for color, in most cases, but to give better wear capabilities of the moving/bearing parts.
The reason for marking them before hardening was to avoid injury/damage to the stamps. Marking hardened metal surfaces would cause damage to the stamp itself.

[Todd Watts]

Re: Enfields by L.A. Co. 1862 (and defarbs)

Hadn't thought about facing the stampings off. Yes, anytime you strike metal you displace some and my stamps do raise a bit around them. I heat the plates before striking them because those stamps are quite large and thus hard to get good imprints unless I soften the plates. I do not know that they faced the stampings off back then or not. Some may have and some may not. What may have happend to the barrel at least was to have completed polishing after the final proof stamp which would make sense since until that last proof was struck the assembly process was still under weigh. I am coming at the process bass-ackwards from them. On many originals, what little raised metal there was may have just worn away with cleanings and handling over the years, and on others it may have been purposefully removed during the polishing. Unless there is some legitimate reason to go back after stamping and re-face and re-polish them to remove that displaced metal, I don't see the need in it. It'd slow me down further and I am already hopelessly backed up.