1816/22 Nose Cap Question....

[Archie R. Lib]

Here is a question for those musket gurus we have out there....I did a search and could not find an answer.....

Will the nose cap from an 1816/22 fit as a replacement on an Italian M1842 smoothie? I know that the 1842 was a continuation or a variant of the basic 1816/22/35/40 design line, but I believe the barrel was thickened on the 42 during production in anticipation of eventual rifling.

I need to replace the nosecap on my 42, and I prefer the design of the original nosecap as opposed to the scalloped open design of the 42. Either cap I use will be an original, but before I pull the trigger on it I thought I would see if anyone had any input. If it is just a matter of some woodwork and a replacement button head ramrod, that would not be a problem...

Thanks for any response, and keep your powder dry.

Rich

[Rhinevalleylad]

Re: 1816/22 Nose Cap Question....

Hi Rich,

well I do not know if the 1816 nose cap fit a 1842 never ever tried this. BUT why do you want to replace a "modern" weapons nose cap with an antic (30 years old).
Never seen this as a substitute, probably there is a 1816 musket with a replacement barrel band from a 1842 somewhere in the orbit.
But as long as I do not see one....
By replacing things they allways (my 2 cent) used the newest article available; look at the replacement blades for the 1816 and/or the 1842 musket bayonets - it is the 1855 blade!.

If there is a substitute needed for a 1842 musket I would replace it with the same one and won´t take an older one, cause it looks cooler or for any other reason - but that is my opinion.

OR do you want to "convert" a 1842 into a 1816/1822 ???

Regards

Ingo


I.Rolletter
5th Va Vol Inf (GER)

https://www.hdgm.de

[Archie R. Lib]

Re: 1816/22 Nose Cap Question....

Thanks Ingo. Yes, actually I am trying to slowly refit this 42 into the appearance of a 16/22 conversion. I do not like the Pedersoli Colt conversion repop (and it would not work well for my impression), and an original is not something I want to tote into the field for anything except a living history event.

I have handled an original H&P conversion that uses the 42 bolster system, and they are strikingly similar in nearly all respects. In fact, they are basically identical with the exception of the nosecap and ramrod, and some variation in barrel thickness and contour at the breech. Though there are some things that just cannot be changed, I would like to get as close as possible to the appearance of a conversion with what I have available.

Thanks,
Rich

[LibertyHallVols]

Re: 1816/22 Nose Cap Question....

In a word: No.

The US M1835 was a complete redesign from the US M1816/22. Yes, both were 69 cal smoothbore muskets, but that is where the commonality ends. Additionally, while there are always exceptions, I don't think you would have a musket that was historically representative of an original piece if you were to mix parts like that. Remember: If they used it, they'd have had it... not the other way around.

My advice would be to use an Armi Sport replacement.

[Archie R. Lib]

Re: 1816/22 Nose Cap Question....

Actually the specifications and measurements I've seen seem to indicate they are much more similar than that, though I'm no expert. The main difference seems to be mortise thickness (laterally and ventrally) and barrel configuration - the rock locks had a thicker breech with a more distinct barrel taper.

Interestingly, the H&P original I handled had a 42 bolster retrofitted to the 16/22 lockplate, and it basically looked exactly alike, as I said, with the exception of the nosecap and ramrod. In fact it was often mistaken for a '42 until the nosecap was noticed, simply because of the bolster system. Of course there are differences in stock design, particularly the buttstock and wrist, but it looks like those could be made through reforming.

I'm not trying to invent a musket to be a kewl kid or anything like that. What I'd like to do is get as close as possible to a conversion using what I have, without having to drop a mortgage payment for a Pedersoli that I don't like, or an original that I wouldn't want to use in the field...

Thanks,
Rich

[David Fox]

Re: 1816/22 Nose Cap Question....

This question sent me to my gun room. Front barrel band for a Remington/Maynard conversion M.1816/22 will not fit a Palmetto (demensionally interchangable w/ an M.1842). Palmetto band won't go onto the M.1816. Wood appears to be the problem, not barrel thickness. Thus either might be made to fit, if the stud on the band spring lines up w/ its hole on the band. This on originals. Pretty much everything on a '42 is different than on a '16, from buttplate through lockplate, to bayonet stud.

Am going to a car show tonight. One can drop a 350 Chevy V8 mill into a Model T Ford. Many do, and it makes functional sense. Why one would want to create a Frankenmusket, which would be neither fish (1816) nor fowl (1842) alludes me. Just sayin'.

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: 1816/22 Nose Cap Question....

Hallo!

M1822:



M1842 (repro above, original below):



I am fuzzy on the question, even though I have read it three times (jet lag). IF, I read it correctly, it is whether an Italian "1816" nose cap/upper band can be used/fit on a Italian M1842 so that a M1842 can be made to look like a breech altered M1822?

As shared, historically, they are two different beasties. And one cannot be made into the other unless one is blind in one eye and cannot see out of the other.

:) :)

Dunno, never played with the parts to see.

The Italian "M1816" is essentially a flim-flamed rework of their M1777 "Charleville" and not really a true M1822 (comb height, length, and barrel band issues... in brief).
The U.S. M1840 revamped the M1822 stock, particularly the comb area).

Someone with an Italian "M1816" and a M1842 might could pull the upper bands and see how they relate on the repro's- and report back?

There might be some "wiggle room" in taking a M1842 and retroverting it into a rare percussion altered M1840 musket but the hassle and expense would not be worth the effort.
But a M1842 into an M1822.. IMHO.. no.

Others' mileage on the poor result, will vary...

Curt

[GPM]

Re: 1816/22 Nose Cap Question....

As David mentioned, the stock is the problem. The thickness of the wood between the barrel and ramrod channel is thinner on a M42. You can make a M42 upper band fit a M1816 by removing wood but not the other way around. Ramrod channel alignment issues would probably be a problem also.

[Archie R. Lib]

Re: 1816/22 Nose Cap Question....

Ok. Thanks gents. I think that answers it....

My next step will be to start fitting 42 original or replacement parts and keeping an eye out for an original 16 conversion that I am comfortable using in the field....

Thanks for the information.

Rich