If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Kurt could probably attest to this but, it looks as though the hammer would be for a drum-in-barrel conversion not a cone-in-barrel conversion. Not sure how common that would have been as all of the records I have seen from Harper's Ferry simply denotes converted. One thing I can attest to is that fitting the real McCoy onto an Italian repro is a work of art. On occassion, a disaster.
Ley Watson
POC'R Boys Mess of the Columbia Rifles
[B][I]"The man who complains about the way the ball bounces is likely the one who dropped it."[/I][/B]
The lockplate looks at least pretty close to real, though it could use some TLC for the inner workings. It's for an M1840 flintlock, though, that's been converted to percussion by the Arsenal's cone-in-barrel method. The parts on these weapons aren't interchangeable with other M1840s without a fair bit of gunsmithing; it won't fit on a Pedersoli M1816 repro or the Armisport M1842 without remodeling all the inletting for your current lockplate.
It's a sweet looking lockplate, though...
When I was on eBay last weekend, some dude was selling a Mississippi Rifle by removing the lock from the weapon, then auctioning the two parts separately as a lock and "parts." Maybe he's got the rest of the gun on auction as well?
The lock is righteous. Mr. Wickett is quite right, that is a cone-in-barrel (Belgian Conversion) hammer. Although it is marked 1840, it is in fact a M-1816 (yes the collector term Curt, not the more accurate M-1822) lock and not a M-1835/40 lock. The easiest way to tell quickly is to look at the brass pan (or what is left of it). The M-1835/40 has a fence on the rear of the pan, while the M-1816 does not. I have attached a picture of the lock area of a Pomeroy contract M-1835/40 conversion musket to illustrate the difference in the appearnace of the pan. If I remember correctly, Harpers Ferry never made the 1835/40. It was produced by Springfield and a handful of contractors. Harpers Ferry made 1816's and rolled right into M-1842's. The lock is good looking (especially with the amount of case colors still on the lock parts) and would retail in the $150-$200 range if I had it in inventory.
Attached Files
[SIZE=1]Your most humble and obedient servant,[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]Tim Prince[/SIZE]
[I]Member CWDCA (The Civil War Dealers & Collectors Association)
Member CWPT (Civil War Preservation Trust)
Member The Company of Military Historians
Member SABC (Society of American Bayonet Collectors)
Hiram Lodge #7 F&AM
[/I][URL=http://www.collegehillarsenal.com]collegehillarsenal.com[/URL]
You are correct. I had thought about fitting it to my '42. I may just add it to my displayed relic collection instead. I think a lockplate alone goes for $150.00 and this one is complete.
I too have noticed many 'gun parts' on ebay. I think the intent is to get around ebays 'no firearms' clause. The seller will list all the parts to put the gun back together separately.
Jerry Holmes
28th GA. Inf
65th GA. Inf (GGG-Grandfather)
Yes, it is an "M1816" lockplate. They were made into 1844
(The M1840 lockplate has a "pointier" tail, and measures 6 5/16th's X 1 1/4 inches versus the M1822's 6 5/16th's X 1 5/16th's inches.
Yes, the brass pan's rear fence is different on the two models, but when ground flush with the lockplate.....
And yes, selling gun parts is the way to get around the EBAD "gun ban." However, IMHO, cannibalizing a gun into parts doubles, triples, or quadruples the profits versus selling it intact.
Curt
Curt Schmidt
In gleichem Schritt und Tritt, Curt Schmidt
-Hard and sharp as flint...secret, and self-contained, and solitary as an oyster.
-Haplogroup R1b M343 (Subclade R1b1a2 M269)
-Pointless Folksy Wisdom Mess, Oblio Lodge #1
-Vastly Ignorant
-Often incorrect, technically, historically, factually.
Comment