The Monster Enfield Defarbing Thread

[LibertyHallVols]

Re: Firearm Authenticity Views?

Also, aside from custom makers, is there even a source for a ground up authentic weapon? I do mean no offense to any of the vendors who offer defarbed weapons, but there are limitations to all of them to keep the cost down, coming from the fact that they all come from the Italian repros.

Phil,

I asked a question about a possible vendor a little while back.

http://www.authentic-campaigner.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2226

No one has voiced their experience with the "Custom Built" line. If they are "as advertised", then they would appear to fit the bill. Cost (as always) is the limiting factor. At ~$1249, a few will think it is worth the cost to have an "ideal" weapon out-of-the-box, and most will think the cost is out-of-sight.

[JimKindred]

Re: Firearm Authenticity Views?

The problem with many of the custom builds for the Civil War period is that they are built with the competitive shooter in mind and not the individual looking for a historically accurate firearm. Historical accuracy of the firearm will take a distant backseat to competitive requirements. Both customers are interested in accuracy but of two different sorts.

$1250 for a custom build? Those in the 18th century trekking group I ran with would have jumped on that price. Most of us were hunting with $2000 plus flintlocks which fit the bill for historic accuracy. Even those lacked certain items such as hand forged barrels for historic accuracy but they were about the best you could do. Rev War guys are paying much more for their production firearms than Civil War. Guys in WWII run around carrying fully autos beginning at $5000. When I do WWII, I carry an MP44 which now a days runs between $8000 to $10000 each. Of course with those there is no problem with historical accuracy because they are originals. I'm glad I bought mine twenty years ago when no one wanted them. Why do I mention this? To show that in relative terms Civil War production guns are cheap when compared to other reenacting periods.

Before custom builds or historically accurate firearms take hold of a chunk of the market two things will have to happen. Reenactors will have to put as much emphasis on their firearms as they do their clothing and other equipment and the makers will have to realize a loss in their market of current productions before improvements are made.

Neither of these two factors do I anticipate happening in the foreseeable future.

[Yellowhammer]

Re: Firearm Authenticity Views?

"Reenactors will have to put as much emphasis on their firearms as they do their clothing and other equipment and the makers will have to realize a loss in their market of current productions before improvements are made."

Here here!

When we willingly buy a "base model" Enfield and then happily drop another fat chunk of change to buy aftermarket upgrades and "defarbing" services, why should the makers incur the cost of making changes to their production.

[Pvt. Burrows]

Defarbing advice wanted!

I just picked up my Euroarms Enfield musket. It is much more complicated and expensive to require a repro gun in Sweden than in the US. Originals are no problem. Anyhow, for several economical and safety reasons it is impossible for me to send it to Mr. Zimmerman for defarbing. What are the major things
required for defarbing it myself? I can´t get all of the markings made over here
but the overall and basic look I suppose I can fix. Mr. Zimmerman was polite to offer to send me some information, but the basic things I am sure the experienced campaigners can tell me for now.
All advice gladly taken!

Thanks!

Martin Midander, Sweden

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Defarbing advice wanted!

Hallo Herr Martin!

I have just e-mailed you 12-some pages of materials on "de-farbing" Enfields, plus I believe the topic is still able to be pulled up through the SEARCH feature on this as well as Szabo's Forum.

Curt-Heinrich Schmidt

[csa_by_choice]

Re: Looking for P-53 Markings of 1st model?

When you find that image, could you post it here?
__________________
Robert Johnson


I found some images on a website purported to offer a reproduction of the 1st model enfield. Here's the link. Does anyone have an opinion on the acceptability of this firearm for reenacting? It looks like the stock needs defarbing. I emailed the company and they described the finish as follows.
"The early Enfield has the stock made of rosewood. It is much denser than walnut. It is finished with Laurel Mountain Forge walnut stain and waxed"
I'm still a fresh fish to authentic so I'd love to learn something new. Thanks!

http://www.loyalistarms.freeservers.com/enfield3band1853firstmodel.html

Nathan Welton

[tmdreb]

Re: Looking for P-53 Markings of 1st model?

Without needing to go into anything else, it comes with a smoothbore barrel as a "cost saving" measure. Sorry, man.

[csa_by_choice]

Re: Looking for P-53 Markings of 1st model?

I found this picture of a smoothbore 1853 enfield online. I don't know much, but did the enfield come in both rifled and smoothbore versions? It seems like it? Oddly, though, this picture show the musket having a later version of the jag rammer, not the button head rammer found on the 1853 crimean war muskets.

http://www.rememuseum.org.uk/arms/early/armpl.htm

2nd picture down

[DonSmithnotTMD]

Re: Looking for P-53 Markings of 1st model?

Considering that I don't know what I'm talking about, the lockplate stamps look kinda crappy too.

BTW -- didn't somebody on here say that the rifle Shoppe was difficult to deal with?

When you find that image, could you post it here?
__________________
Robert Johnson


I found some images on a website purported to offer a reproduction of the 1st model enfield. Here's the link. Does anyone have an opinion on the acceptability of this firearm for reenacting? It looks like the stock needs defarbing. I emailed the company and they described the finish as follows.
"The early Enfield has the stock made of rosewood. It is much denser than walnut. It is finished with Laurel Mountain Forge walnut stain and waxed"
I'm still a fresh fish to authentic so I'd love to learn something new. Thanks!

http://www.loyalistarms.freeservers.com/enfield3band1853firstmodel.html

Nathan Welton

[rogue]

Re: Looking for P-53 Markings of 1st model?

Only from my own experience, yes, the Rifle Shoppe is difficult to deal with. Their telephone is seldom answered, e-mails are lost in cyber-space (at least answers to questions), and service was VERY slow. I was told to only order parts that were in stock, tried, but it still took nearly six months to get what I needed. The parts arrive as cast from a mold which require a great deal of finishing. They are about the only source for many parts however.
Steve Sullivan
46th Illinois
Co. Mil. Hist.
I don't sew much either.

[LibertyHallVols]

Re: Looking for P-53 Markings of 1st model?

Jim,

I found some on-line recently (within the last month or so... can't recall where at the moment). I am away from my PC for the next few days (using a friend's now while I'm on vacation!). Shoot me an e-mail at jwickett@prodigy.net and I'll e-mail you the pics I found.

[Enfield]

Re: Looking for P-53 Markings of 1st model?

I found this picture of a smoothbore 1853 enfield online. I don't know much, but did the enfield come in both rifled and smoothbore versions? It seems like it? Oddly, though, this picture show the musket having a later version of the jag rammer, not the button head rammer found on the 1853 crimean war muskets.

http://www.rememuseum.org.uk/arms/early/armpl.htm

2nd picture down

Weapon No 24 on the REME page appears to be a normal P53 Third Model (1858-1866). There *were* smoothbore versions, for use by native infantry following the Indian Mutiny, but they didn't have the P53 long range rear sight - only a simple fixed notch rear sight (and the front sight was also slightly different).

Weapon No 25 is a First Model P53 (with the wrong rammer) - someone was looking for photos of this type. The characteristic 1st Model hammer can be seen well in this photo.

Weapon No 26 is a strange-looking Kerr rifle ... or the hammer is, anyway (must be a replacement). But this gun does have the Kerr rifle rammer. But the barrel doesn't have seven grooves - it is hexagonal ratchet rifling. And the front sight looks to be missing the blade and the hood. Of course, these are rare in any condition, as there were fewer than 1000 made.

Geoff Walden

[Makoski4141]

Re: Linseed Oil Stocks/ Defarbing Stocks

What kind of cloth would you use to wipe the excess linseed oil off the stock with out leaving lint behind?

Andrew Birnbaum

[buckandball]

Musket Defarbing

Been away from the hobby for a while. For the past few years I have been planning to piece together a "proper" 1853 Enfield since I have never been happy with Euroarms or Armisport's stock profile (specifically the comb of the stock with is always curved on the repros, where every original I have seen is straight). Additionally, I like to live fire occasionally, and it seems unless you buy a Parker Hale, the point of aim is no where near the point of impact; i.e., the repro sites are there for show, not function.

I am skimming details here, but to the point. I see James River Armory has come a way in the past few years since I last saw their website. What is the general consensus on their Enfields as compared to originals? Are these just defarded Armisport and Euroarms pieces?

[Johan Steele]

Re: James River Armory enfields

I strongly suggest The Civil War Musket: A Handbook for Historical Accuracy-Lock, Stock and Barrel by Craig Barry.

If you want a shooter you will almost certainly have to go w/ Lodgewood. Mr Osborne starts w/ an Armi-Sport and corrects the deficiencies to a Birmingham maker and you can take it as far as you want w/ their good stock of original parts.

While the James Armory rebuild is quite good I have seen some work from them that might be considered questionable... That was several years ago & I was told it was James River Armory work I don't know that for certain. I have recently seen one of their M1861 Springfields and it is nothing short of a beautiful job of correcting ALL the Italian screw ups.

As a note I owned an Armi-Sport and got good results w/ live fire. Compensating for the front site is not that difficult and correcting it wouldn't be that difficult by simply replacing the front sight. I switched to an M1841 and am considerably happier w/ that.