Problems with 1842 Reproductions?

[Craig L Barry]

Re: Problems with 1842 Reproductions?

Todd, look closer. It won't pass a 15 yd rule. The wrist is about two inches too long
and so on...as Wickett said once (about the Loyalist Arms Lorenz) "it only looks like a
Lorenz if I squint at the screen."

Never mind, I still want to know what a M-54 Lorenz type II is supposed to be?
Unless they mean the adjustable rear sight version vs the block sight? I have the translated
Austrian Officers Manual “Osterrichische Infanterie - Feurgewehr, Wien, 1857,” and
I am having trouble finding a reference to a "type II." Is this a modern gun collectors term?

I hope by type II it isn't the 1862 version, which was not believed to have been exported
from Austria to the US and CS during the Civil War. 862 and later marked Austrian
rifles were not M-1862s, but rather they were private contractor produced M-1854s.

[ACo.]

Re: Problems with 1842 Reproductions?

............ I still want to know what a M-54 Lorenz type II is supposed to be?
Unless they mean the adjustable rear sight version vs the block sight? I have the translated
Austrian Officers Manual “Osterrichische Infanterie - Feurgewehr, Wien, 1857,” and
I am having trouble finding a reference to a "type II." Is this a modern gun collectors term?

I hope by type II it isn't the 1862 version, which was not believed to have been exported
from Austria to the US and CS during the Civil War. 862 and later marked Austrian
rifles were not M-1862s, but rather they were private contractor produced M-1854s.

Probably a modern collector's term. I have a feeling that they do mean the so called "1862". Whether they were imported during the war or not I am not sure, however, when I was MUCH younger (ca. 1960) there was what I now know as an 1862 Lorenz in a group of military muzzleloaders owned by an elderly gentleman near me. I was too young to ask at the time but he called it an "Austrian Enfield", probably because of the lock shape? It was complete and well used but where he got it I have no idea, it is long gone now, sold off in his estate when he passed away in the mid-1960s. It was considered a Civil War weapon as were all of the other "worthless army muzzleloaders" (what his daughter and son called them) that he had. It may have been imported post war but he probably got it locally when he was younger. This was at the time of The Civil War Centennial and everyone dragged out Granddaddy's old musket. The area where I grew up was the home of 4 companies of the 27th Virginia and 2 of the 60th - not that this has anything to do with the gun under discussion, just saying.... :) Anyway, there were a lot of antique guns with embellished history, this may have been one.

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Problems with 1842 Reproductions?

Hallo!

As I understand it, rightly or wrongly...

The "M1854" with the block rear sight was for the Austrian standard infantry, while the folding leaf rear sight graduated to 900 Schritt was for the riflemen.

The post was originally problems with the repro M1842 which has been asked and answered.

The thread then drifted off into the "Lorenz," and then drifted into comments about the "15 foot rule" which should not be part of an AC Forum discussion as it violates the No Farbery Rule.

While the "Lorenz" and the Indian-made repro have been covered in past discussions, if someone wants to reopen a discussion of the historical "Lorenz"' please open a new thread.

Curt