Problems with 1842 Reproductions?

[guad42]

A few years back I got smart (sort of) and put the scary Indian import smoothbore away and picked up an Italian 1842 from a very large, old, and well known mass market provider, who happened to have
42s on sale at the time.

Ordered my new musket and immediately put it in the closet and forgot about it (a long lull in event attendance).

Upon later inspection and use of aforesaid musket, I noticed that the bayonet would not fit on the lug or lock in place; the lug itself was misshapen as in not square. I had to use a dremel to get the lug right.

Later, upon cleaning my shiny musket, I had some trouble pulling the nosecap off and when it did come off it shaved some stock off with it and cracked the bayonet shaft. This vexes me.

Did anyone else notice any sloppyness to some of the Italian 42s that were available in the last two years?

-Sam Dolan

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Problems with 1842 Reproductions?

Hallo!

Short answer: yes.

IMHO, it is the Nature of the Beast. For decades now, the Italian industry has had a inconsistent and spotty record of workmanship, wood to metal fit, finish, heat treating and tempering of parts, machining, etc., "Quality Control" type issues that can vary gun to gun.
It has always been my opinion, albeit never doucumented, that the various American importers contract with the Italians for a range of "QC" so that the iporters can set the selling price at their needed level higher or lower.

Two examples are Colt and Cimarron Firearms that NUG import higher Italian "QC" on their product line than say a Dixie or Cabelas.

Horror stories abound. Once UPon a Time, my pard and I were "unit reps" at Navy Arms and a couple of vendors due to bulk unit purchases of weapons. Sometimes of the guns were fine. Sometimes one had to wonder how one ever left factory in that condition even to the point of actions that would not work.

Others' mileage will vary...

Curt

(You removed the nose cap and in doing so "cracked" the bayonet shaft in the process???)

[fatocat]

Re: Problems with 1842 Reproductions?

Hi Sam,

My Italian 1842 had trouble getting the nose cap off. I had to actually use a brass punch to get it off and on the first few times. However, over time it has loosened up a bit so I don't need to use the punch any more. I was lucky it didn't shave any wood off or cause other damage.

I was also lucky the lug on mine was not misshappen.

[Minieball577]

Re: Problems with 1842 Reproductions?

I have always viewed the Italian products as roughly finished kits. Everyone of them that I have had exposure to, regardless of model, had things that needed to be done to them to make them function correctly, or look right, or whatever.

The problem you describe about your nosecap matches exactly what I experienced in my Armi Sport 1842 Rifled musket. Of course, when we converted it to the Meril system I have to redo the stock anyway, so the tightness of the nose cap was no longer a problem.

[western reb]

Re: Problems with 1842 Reproductions?

Ditto what Brother Andy said. Popping off the nose cap was a slight chore but seems to get better with each attempt and fortunately no shaving of wood or cracking occured. However, this problem doesn't seem to be just isolated to Italian 42s that were available in the last two years as mine dates further back than that.

Sorry to hear about the problem your having but no doubt it's due to the curse we've placed on you for not slumming with us recently. Hope to see you this season pard!

All the best,

[guad42]

Re: Problems with 1842 Reproductions?

Dan,

You are quite right, I have been a terrible bad Texian and deserve a curse I am sure.

Yes, there's now a hairline crack running along the bayonet shaft/groove which I am working to remedy. Made me wonder if there was pressure between the metal and stock and in laboring to remove there was too much friction resulting in crack. It makes me sad. But, the stock needs stripping and refinishing anyways.

Glad to hear that I am not the only one who's experienced this problem(s), though I am not glad that we've all spend many pesos on guns that should be serviceable and solid.

-Sam Dolan

[Pennvolunteer]

Re: Problems with 1842 Reproductions?

I bought an Armi Sport 1842 a year ago, and it was defarbed by one of our "authorized vendors". I too had nose cap problems, and in fact it is still tight. Also the barrel channel in the stock was cut too deep and actually had some gaps opening the area up to the lock channel. It took a little creative use of wood glue and some wood fibers to fill it in and make me comfortable about it. On the other hand, the musket had the sear and tumbler fail after three events, and the nose cap spring break during the second dis-assembly ever. These parts were all parts from the defarb job, and I contacted Armi-Sport to purchase replacements. Armi-Sport sent me all the parts for free, and they have been fine. I've had my 1861 for a few years, did the de-farb work myself, and have never had a problem.

[Justin Runyon]

Re: Problems with 1842 Reproductions?

Bought mine 10 years ago de-farbed from Zimmerman, Low and behold, I had to loosen up the nose cap and file the bayonet lug. Fancy that.

I will say that, other than those two problems, I have been well pleased with the Italian 42 in it's post Zimmerman state, it's been a fine shooting weapon with never a mis-fire on even the foulest of days and compares pretty favorably to the originals.

[OldKingCrow]

Re: Problems with 1842 Reproductions?

I have a Zimmerman 44 Harpers Ferry of about 10 years of age....

After significant use, the trigger would not reset as if it was somehow slipping past the sear....an original 42 trigger fixed that for a bit..until its hardness wore out the sear and it once again does the same thing. I have no need to fix it as it is just a wall hanger now. I would guess those internals are MIM or investment cast and if the final hardening process is not followed it can result in accelerated engagement surface wear.

Or are the Eye-tal-ian internals machined parts at such a low price point ?

CJ Rideout
Tampa, Florida

[James Brenner]

Re: Problems with 1842 Reproductions?

I had the exact same problem with a Zimmerman '42. Fortunately, the first time I used it was at an event he also attended. In fairness, he fixed the problem; it was a matter of altering the sear and I haven't had any trouble since. I also had to replace the cone as its aperture was too small to allow the flame to reach the chamber.

[Craig L Barry]

Re: Problems with 1842 Reproductions?

It has nothing to do with Zimmerman. The machine grade steel (low carbon) used to investment cast the parts for the Armi Sport 1842
is quite soft. What is happening is that the top of the trigger is getting worn down on one side where it hits the sear, and slipping off.
Replace the trigger with an original US 1842 part from Dixie Gun Works for about $20. First thing I'd replace when I used to do
a US 1842 project was the trigger. Next I liked to either harden or replace lock internals with better quality original parts. The
mainspring needs some re-profiling to fit but not too bad. I like strong springs, this is a point that Watts and I differ on in opinion. He thinks
the repro springs are enough to pop a cap and that's all they have to do. For me, when I cock the piece I want to feel the resistance
that was characteristic of an original weapon. It's an important part of the fun. So I will do a lot more fiddling with the lock to get it
just about right.

The soft metal is characteristic of the 42 repros, as is the described top band problem which is easily fixed by reshaping the tip of the stock
to improve the fit. Another common problem is the band spring falling out after you worry the top band off the stock. Look, you have
to strip the stock to refinish it anyways, so a little re-profiling is easily done at that point. While the top band is off the musket have a
brass sight blade brazed on. The ramrod is terrible looking, too. You can make a fine weapon out of one of these, but the newer ones
take some work. The first 42s made in the mid-90s were much better all the way around. I have one of those which used to belong
to Ross Lamoreaux, the draper. It has gotten salty with time and it is virtually indistinguishable from an original. Well, almost...it is a
really strong piece. It has an original ramrod. None of the repro rammers look close to right, though the Dixie Gun Works replacement
ramrod is better than the factory two-piece that comes with it.

[Justin Runyon]

Re: Problems with 1842 Reproductions?

Do not mistake my putting John's name in my post as my thinking the issues had anything to do with John. His work is fine indeed.

[Craig L Barry]

Re: Problems with 1842 Reproductions?

Zimmerman's work varies in quality, as does the work done by most gunsmiths. The point is that the
commonality is not that Zimmerman or anyone else did the de-farbing, but rather than the piece itself
has some characteristic weaknesses based on the materials in use and the design.

And let me hasten to add, the Armi Sport 1842 is probably the best of the lot in terms of repros.
Keep your vintage de-farbed 42. I suspect that one day you will point to it as the high water mark
of reproduction Italian Civil War firearms.

[mboyce]

Re: Problems with 1842 Reproductions?

Along with the extremely tight nose cap, the only other issue I have is the two peice rammer. After having the bell end come off while cleaning, and having to blow the rammer out, I now have a one peice ordered and on the way.

[Benedict]

Re: Problems with 1842 Reproductions?

A couple of guys from my unit purchased 1842s in the last three years. Everybody needed a cone with a bigger vent so that the muskets would go off properly.