The Monster Enfield Defarbing Thread

[27VA]

I know this is was in the archives but i cant seem to find it. Long discussions and opinions on who performed the defarb and to what extent it was done. where can I find that old post or does anyone have any new input?


Shawn Stern
27VA
ssterndo@netscape.net

[major]

Re: enfield defarb

Post is being discussed between the moderators - Mike Chapman

[Bill Cross]

Re: enfield defarb

I was overall very happy with the job that Lodgewood does, despite a lingering problem with the front site/bayonet lug that took several months to get solved. The folks at Lodgewood were certainly patient and pleasant throughtout it all, and the product is outstanding.

One problem in the past with the Company Quartermaster was the arm was issued bright. While there is some argument about whether these arms were bright or blued, the evidence I've seen cited points to a preponderance of blued Enfields.

Bluing is more of a hassle than anything serious, and having tried both the Brownell's and Laurel Mountain methods, I will say the latter wins hands down, both for evenness of quality and ease of application (the Laurel Mountain is self-degreasing, which means even if your hands touch the barrel, the resultant skin oil won't affect the finish results). Curt Heinrich has a method for doing this process than even I could follow with good results. ;)

[27VA]

Re: enfield defarb

I agree that I think 90% (someone will say they know of one shipment) of Enfields were blued with a case hardened lockplate. So.. are the "bright" Enfields a representation of soilders who wanted their Enfield to resemble springfields and did their own "field modifications" of de-blueing? I know these questions may seem crazy but before I buy I would like to get some opinions.


27VA
Shawn Stern

[bforney]

Re: enfield defarb

Shawn,

If you haven't already done so, you should read the following article:

http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/Quarters/1864/enf/enfblue.htm

Brent Forney

[Johan Steele]

Re: enfield defarb

All of the Enfields shipped to the US and in fact all of the Enfields made in England were Blued... The US Army had a real bur up their saddle for striking every long arm bright and many Enfields were struck bright after they were issued to US & CSA troops as well. I have seen quite a few pictures of Enfields in the hands of Union troops that are obviously bright. If checked w/ the Royal Ordanance museum it is apparent that no Enfields were ever manufactured in England struck bright. However, there is some evidence to suggest that a factory on the Continent that were making Enfield clones were struck bright. I have also seen referenece to Colt Enfields as bright... this is incorrect all those made by Colt were blued. The confusion appears to be w/ the "Special Contract Rifle" made by Colt, these were all issued bright and I have seen confusion between Special Contracts and Enfields...

As to quality defarbing.... I've seen Lodgewoods work and am impressed as all get out w/ it. I've also seen some of Zimmermans work, though I admit the work was done several years ago, and it was outstanding.

There are also "kits" existing out there somewhere where a completely unfinished Euro Arms is sold unassembled and it is the responsabillity of the poor sap who buys it to properly put it together and defarb it themselves. The one I've seen was absolutely beautiful and the owner was quite content w/ it. IIRC he had sent it off to Lodgewood for the correct inspection stamps but other than that was able to do all of the work himself.

I've been told that Dixie Gun Works sells a Springfield that way but I haven't been able to track down an unassembled Enfield kit.

[Clark Badgett]

Re: enfield defarb

I've seen both Feds and Cornfeds with obviously blue Enfields, and same with the bright Enfields. Now this may be nit picking, but I've seen more blued Enfields in western troops hands of both sides. But granted it is very hard to get a definate answer from old photos at times. And then again I do pay more attention to western troops. ;)

[LibertyHallVols]

Re: enfield defarb

Blued vs Bright: This discussion has been done ad nauseum on various forums over the years. However, I think that Mr. Walden's article states that case as clearly as can be done. Reletive proportions viewed from extant photos, etc., is only the barest scant of a sampling and probably does not reflect true variability here.

"De-Farbing": Armi-Sport, Euroarms, and Parker-Hale all started off with the wrong model of weapon as their repro. Add to that the divergence from the original articles, and you have what may be compared to a photocopy of a photocopy of a photocopy of the wrong derned gun. From this point of view, defarbing will only get you about half-way there, if even that far. In a nut, any Italian repro Enfield is a compromise, at best.

Viewing Originals: This is the best way to judge any repro, etc. There are quite a few available at Shiloh Relics at the moment, including a Type 2 with barrel bands retained by springs and one supposedly owned by Bocefus hisself. Check it out at www.shilohrelics.com , then click "Firearms" and "Additional Longarms".

My Two Cents...

[Clark Badgett]

Re: enfield defarb

[In a nut, any Italian repro Enfield is a compromise, at best. ]

I wouldn't quite go so far as to say that. I've viewed some originals that looked every bit identical to the Italian offerings, and some that looked nothing like them. Remember these rifles were made by well over a dozen different makers, by hand, so no two will look the exact same. The Italian repros can indeed be defarbed to very closely resemble the original item. But that does usually take some key original parts. I sure miss Ole Geoff Walden, I've not known anyone else that possesed as much ready info on the subject of Brit equipment. Good Luck trying to defarb a 2 bander.

[LibertyHallVols]

Re: enfield defarb

I'll stick by my statement for a couple of reasons.
1) What constitutes an acceptable reproduction is rather subjective. For many, replacing modern markings with authentic period markings and adding a linseed oil finish is acceptable. For others, it is not. As with any reproduction we use (uniforms, leather gear, socks, whatever) what is acceptable for some is inadequate for others, even in the context "authentic" living history.

2) Consider the arm that you start with when you "defarb". As I stated earlier, none of the current reproductions were intended to be reproductions of the type of Enfield used in the ACW. So, to me, you are starting with a compromise whenever you begin with one of the Italian reproductions.

Let me say this, "The Hobby" has made quantum leaps in the last 15 or so years in the areas of clothing, equipment, footwear, etc. However, when it comes to the weapons we use in our portrayals, by comparison we have made only half-steps forward ... and in some cases, backward steps have been taken!

Re: 2-Bander
Not sure where that came from. In my post, I was referring to a Type-2 (a three-bander). Is that what you were referring to?

Best Regards,

[LibertyHallVols]

Re: enfield defarb

Here is a link to some GREAT photos of an original CS Enfield:

http://www.oldsouthantiques.com/os565p1.htm

Note:
1) Engraved number on the tang of the butt plate. This is one item you don't see on "Debarbed" repros. It is my understanding that this number was used to ID the number (e.g. "count") in the shipment and is primarily associated with CS Enfields. It would go 0001A - 9999A, then 0001B - 9999B, and so on. You can also see that the rammer and bayonet are numbered to match the musket. One might surmise that these items were shipped together as a "stand of arms"???

2) "Strike" where the barrel tang meets barrel at the breech (about the 8th pic down, or so). Yet another item you DON'T see on "Debarbed" repros! I have a friend with an "E.P. Bond" contract Enfield and this strike mark is topped by a crown stamp on the barrel end of the strike. I would presume that this mark is intended to show the alignment between breech plug and barrell. Typically on US arms (and repros of US arms), you see this mark on the bottom of the barrel (hidden under the stock).

3) Note the distinct transition from octagonal to round at the breech of the barrel. This is more distinct than I have seen on other originals or repros. Interesting.

4) Look at the brass (Triggerguard and buttplate): NONE of the Italian reproductions do a good job at replicating this. For Example: The cross-sectional profile (if that makes sense) of the guard is a convex shape with rounded "points". Reproduction guards have near-rectangular profile (look at a repro and you will see the "flat" sides of the triggerguard).

Finally, when it comes to "Defarbing" reproduction Enfields, there are soooo many variations that it is difficult to have a "generic recipe" for markings to be present/absent. On the previously mentioned EP Bond, every time I look at that rifle-musket, I find more markings! Therefore, the best thing to do is to find a good condition original (such as the one in the pics in the link) and replicate that.

Once again: Enfields are VERY difficult to truly replicate, and therefore, to defarb. You can get all the "latest" stamps from the "vendor du jour", and there might not be a single original Enfield in existence that has the markings that you've paid good money to have stamped on your reproduction. It is not an exact science. The best advice I can give is to read Geoff Walden's article, view as many originals as possible, then read the article again, then view more originals, and so on.

[Clark Badgett]

Re: enfield defarb

Re: 2-Bander
Not sure where that came from. In my post, I was referring to a Type-2 (a three-bander). Is that what you were referring to?

Best Regards,

Oh I know all too well the different types. And I also realize that your were refering to the second version of the P53. My last statement was simply a little tounge in cheek attemp to state that it would be almost nearly impossible to correct the 2 bander, since the repros have far more wrong than incorrect rear sights, lower and upper slingswivels, barrel bands, crappy makings and so forth. And just so you know, my idea of authentic is...well many here know my stance on the subject, and it is very high. :)

[major]

Re: enfield defarb

John
I have been looking at the pictures of the CS Musket you provided and I have some questions. Is it just a trick of the photography or is there only one line around the outside edge of the lock plate? I know that some later muskets had a single line but I thought that all 1860s era ones that had lines had a double line.

Also on the proof marks on the barrel there is a large diamond in the middle of the proofs. I have looked in my book “the Standard Directory of Proof Marks” and can’t find any exactly like this one. The closest one I can find had a 12 and a C inside the diamond. But my book says that this mark was used on guns made from 1875 to 1887. Do you have any information on what this proof mark is? And do you have any idea why there is both a 24 and a 25 gauge mark on the breach? And speaking of the breach it doesn't have the shape of your typical P53 breach. Any ideas?

Lastly do you know if the sling is original to the gun or could it have been a replacement. After all 140 years have passed and I would think that it is possible that the original sling might have been replaced during all that time. I bring this up because recently I have been researching the British military sling and found that the one for a rifle company would have been black rough-out leather without a brass hook.

If it works you can click on the link here to see a copy of the British sling I am refering to. http://members.verizon.net/%7Evze3jhwa/Sling2.jpg
Terry

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: enfield defarb

Hallo Kameraden!

I have been trying to follow this discussion, and try to answer the questions, but I cannot seem to locate the rifle referred to on the SHILOH pages:

"I have been looking at the pictures of the CS Musket you provided and I have some questions. Is it just a trick of the photography or is there only one line around the outside edge of the lock plate? I know that some later muskets had a single line but I thought that all 1860s era ones that had lines had a double line.

Also on the proof marks on the barrel there is a large diamond in the middle of the proofs. I have looked in my book “the Standard Directory of Proof Marks” and can’t find any exactly like this one. The closest one I can find had a 12 and a C inside the diamond. But my book says that this mark was used on guns made from 1875 to 1887. Do you have any information on what this proof mark is? And do you have any idea why there is both a 24 and a 25 gauge mark on the breach? And speaking of the breach it doesn't have the shape of your typical P53 breach. Any ideas?"

Is it: http://www.shilohrelics.com/shop/cus...sp?SKU=SR10411

Curt-Heinrich Schmidt

[major]

Re: enfield defarb

Curt
No, that is not it, John Wicket posted it a few posts back. You can click on this link to see the musket in question.

http://www.oldsouthantiques.com/os565p1.htm

Terry