Enfield Spare Parts Coloring

[J. Donaldson]

All-

I've tried looking through various search engine results and couldn't find what I'm looking for, so I was hoping someone might be able to help.

I recently had to replace the tang screw on my Enfield. I called a reputable dealer and was able to get the part in a timely manner; when the part arrived, the screw was blued. This made me wonder what color any spare parts for Enfields might be when issued in the field. Were spare parts domestically produced along Federal arsenal guidelines? Were spare parts imported from England as part of large lot purchases of rifles? Would a blue screw have been issued and the soldier either field brightened it or lived with it?

I guess, short way around the bush, do I have to take the bluing off the tang screw, or would this be a potentially correct look to a weapon (armory bright with blued spare part)?

Thank you all in advance.

[Mcouioui]

Re: Enfield Spare Parts Coloring

The question also interests me, I have ideas or intuitions but no historic answers with sources.
Thank you all in advance for the answers.
On this subject I look parts for end defarb one Enfield, if you have parts or good addresses... Welcome ;)

[OldKingCrow]

Re: Enfield Spare Parts Coloring

Mr. Welch,

PM sent w/ info from Chambers's Journal, 16 April 1859 entry detailing the Enfield construction process.

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Enfield Spare Parts Coloring

Hallo!

Surviving records indicate that arms, and stands of arms were purchased.
I have never (yet) seen reference to either the practice of stockpiling spare parts or the purchase of parts. Nor reference to parts ever being issued in the field or elsewhere.

The NUG method in the Period was for the Ordnance folks to receive damaged arms and using the Federal example, have "Arsenals of Repair" such as Watertown, Frankford, Fort Monroe, North Carolina, and Baton Rouge make what repairs were possible or recycle parts from guns deemed to damaged to be repaired onto better specimens.

One possible exception I can think of is where the M1855 and M1842 type sights came from that were used on the M1841 and M1842 alterations. My impression, in the lack of documentation, was that these were "surplus" rear and front sights from the armories rather than cannibalized from arms still in service.

My impression or understanding is also that Enfields were imported in their
"as they left the factory" condition so any recycled parts would carry the finish that the Enfields coming into the armories or arsenals had- and that includes any Enfields that were struck bright by the armories or more rarer as a result of action in the field at the regimental or company level.

IMHO, while there may have been such functions in some regiments of "company armorers," NUG, enlistedmen were "not allowed" to disassemble or dismount their weapons.

I guess the question is circular, but would an armory/arsenal "bother" to match the "color" say of a tang screw on a repair, colored or bright, to a gun in unalterered or struck-bright condition?
Dunno.

Curt

[J. Donaldson]

Re: Enfield Spare Parts Coloring

Herr Schmidt,

Your response made me turn my thoughts away from a modern mind-set that has come to rely on ready-made and readily available parts. I didn't take into consideration the logistical process of condemning a rifle or sending the rifle to an armory for repair, rather than keeping supplies on hand. And you're right, I highly doubt that an armorer, be he in the field or in a repair facility, would take the time to color match the finish on parts.

Vielen dank.

[Jimmayo]

Re: Enfield Spare Parts Coloring

If the wagons were with the army then spare guns were also. Can't remember where I read it but a soldier went to the hospital and had his mess mate hold his enfield for him. Said it shot well and he didn't want to turn it in. Also read that the CS Sharpshooter battalions had a wagon with spare enfields at Petersburg. I remember reading it but can't remember where. Should have kept notes. Since extra arms were available I would assume that if a gun was inoperative it could be exchanged for another.

There were sure enough gun parts found in around Petersburg and Cold Harbor to indicate that there was a lot of fixing going on. It was not unusual in the 1980s and even in the 90s to find musket locks, bands, breech plugs etc. anywhere the soldiers were. I was surprised at the number of lock parts found in the rifle pits on McIlwaine Hill in Petersburg. That is where the steel mill is now near Pamplin Park. I can't imagine taking a lock apart in a rifle pit.

[Don Dixon]

Re: Enfield Spare Parts Coloring

The 1863 Federal ordnance instructions, based upon an 1862 general order, recognized the problem of maintaining imported and non-standard small arms. Regiments equipped with any muskets, rifles, or carbines other than the Springfield rifle musket Model 1855-64 were authorized to detail from the ranks a “competent and skillful mechanic” to act as regimental armorer. The armorer was supposed to be equipped with a set of armorer’s tools and spare parts for the weapons with which the regiment was armed. For each day the armorer worked repairing the regiment’s arms, he was entitled to an additional payment of forty cents. In an army that paid its enlisted soldiers $13 per month, this was a significant premium.

Ordnance equipment and supplies were classified in different classes. Arms were in Class VI. Spare parts were in Class X. The ordnance instructions contained lists of small arms spare parts, with the prices for each part. In order to find the spare parts procurement records, you would have to look in separate sets of records from the arms procurement records.

I would agree that the armorer would have been concerned with function rather than color, and would have used whatever spare parts he was given by the Ordnance Department. Presumably the color of the spare parts would have matched the color of the arm (blued/browned or arsenal bright) as it left the factory or arsenal. Arsenal bright Enfields are an American affection, not a British one, so why would the Brits have made their spare parts any way but blued? Since, under Ordnance regulations, blued/browned arms were not supposed to be stripped of the blueing/browning - it made them much more susceptable to rust - why would the armorer have wasted his time stripping the color?

Regards,
Don Dixon