Loyalist Arms Type 1 Enfield

[militiaman1835]

Has anyone had a chance to examine one of Loyalist Arms type 1 enfields? JIM HENSLEY

[Johan Steele]

Re: Loyalist Arms Type 1 Enfield

Yes, I was impressed w/ the balance and weight... umm I was impressed w/ the weight & balance.

Smoothbore, poor mainspring, poorly fitted. Workmanship in comparison to an Armi-Sport... I have seen a couple really bad EA Springfields over the years. Worse than an EA or AS Italian job? I think opinions still vary.

I would go w/ a Regt QM or Lodgewood defarb to name just two. Pay more? Yes, but you do get what you pay for.

[Craig L Barry]

Re: Loyalist Arms Type 1 Enfield

Camp Chase Gazette will be running a review of the Loyalist Arms P-53 type 1 in The Watchdog section soon. Our comrade Johan Steele is offering very sound advice regarding their quality. The P-53 type 1 repro musket is assembled by Loyalist Arms in Canada from parts made in India. The hardware is actually the best part, but overall it is not really an acceptable choice for a serious US Civil War impression. The barrel is a non-standard .62 cal smoothbore (good luck finding a bayonet). The Loyalist Arms P-53 Enfield is primarily intended for UK enactors who must all use smoothbore muskets.

Historically speaking the main provenance for the P-53 type 1 was the Crimean War and only 25,000 were produced. Some type 1s may have been sold off as surplus in the gun trade and exported, so they may or may not be anachronistic for US Civil War usage. However, the type 1 would have been very rare.

If you are primarily interested in an "early war" P-53, the James River Armory Enfields (available through Regt QM) are a much better choice. You might consider their reproduction "J.E. Barnett" Enfield for a good early war P-53 or their Robbins & Lawrence (Windsor) type II. "Tower" marked Barnetts were among the very first P-53 Enfields to reach American soil in 1861.

[Knapsack Matt]

Re: Loyalist Arms Type 1 Enfield

I agree with Craig the rifles are smoothbore and that just turned me off. If you want to get a good Efield I would go to Zimmerman or James River Armory.

Matt

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Loyalist Arms Type 1 Enfield

Hallo!

Without putting on the Broken Record, or looking in SEARCH to see if previous discussions and examples of Mr. Zimmerman's work is still available...

IMHO, while John Zimmerman produces some really nice and fine work, there are examples of less than fine work. I have owned, and seen both , numerous times.
My advice is, it is safer to buy Mr. Zimmerman's work when one can examine it- such as off his table or off his shop rack.

Curt

[dave81276]

Re: Loyalist Arms Type 1 Enfield

I just received my Armisport back from Lodgewood. There is no comparison between Lodgewood's work and what I've owned by Zimmerman. The dies they use are more detailed, sized the same as the originals, and struck evenly, which is more than can be said for Mr. Zimmerman. I highly recommend Lodgewood.

[ney]

Re: Loyalist Arms Type 1 Enfield

I have heard is difficult to find replacement part for India guns. It will be interesting to see what the Watchdog says about Loyalist Arms.

We have many in our group with various James River Armory guns. They are all excellent. I am most impressed with the stock profiling. Personally I prefer their work.

[Bob 125th NYSVI]

Re: Loyalist Arms Type 1 Enfield

Has anyone had a chance to examine one of Loyalist Arms type 1 enfields? JIM HENSLEY

Does anybody know if this model is based on the "type 4" Enfield or one of the versions that actually made it to America for the CW? Caliber not withstanding.

[militiaman1835]

Re: Loyalist Arms Type 1 Enfield

Its supposed to be a type one. Different ramrod, narrow channel, different nose cap, dated 1854 and 1855. Whether it is???? Thats what I wanted to know. JIM HENSLEY

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Loyalist Arms Type 1 Enfield

Hallo!

The Pattern 1853 Rifle-musket, First Model is kinda/sorta similar to the 3rd Models which are (in theory) an improvement upon the First):

Screw clamped barrel bands (no band springs)
Slightly convex sides of the rear sight
A button headed ramrod in a rather narrow stock channel mortise
A narrow or thin hammer with a curled hammer spur
Riveted on nose cap
First to use the new small bore .577 caliber

IMHO, I would "prefer" that it would have been a Second Model as those are a wee bit more ACWish than the First Models (but even Seconds are rare compared to the common Thirds). "Crimean War" reenactors, anyone/anywhere?
Curt

[militiaman1835]

Re: Loyalist Arms Type 1 Enfield

You see more type 2's in original photos than you might think. Type 1 is hard to recognize because they do look like type 3 unless you can clearly see ramrod tip...but even they were updated sometimes. JIM HENSLEY

[Charles Heath]

Re: Loyalist Arms Type 1 Enfield

After enough complaints about this thread, it is past time for the lock to go on.

Thanks to all of you who pulled out your hair, gnashed your teeth, gesticulated vigorously, emulated the sound of fingernails on a chalkboard, and described such in your alert-o-grams.