PDA

View Full Version : Odd Enfield



David K. Fox
09-18-2008, 12:07 PM
I recently acquired an attic queen three band 1862-date noninterchangable Enfield three bander. The stock is a tad beaten up but the metal (the ironwork is national armour bright, by the way) is superb and the bore near perfect.
It boasts a feature I've never noticed on an Enfield rifle-musket. The original cone protector (a tiny inspector's stamp is still discernable on the leather face) has the chain afixed by its split ring to a tiny iron stud let into the front tang of the brass triggerguard. This little stud, with a hole drilled in it to accept the chain's split ring, is what I'm used to seeing on some Enfield carbines with no rear sling swivel to which to affix the cone protector's chain or on two-banders where the rear sling swivel is found in the buttstock's belly. The triggerguard appears in all respects original to the piece and appears undisturbed. Every other three-bander I can recall which has a cone protector has the chain afixed to the rear sling swivel.
Any thoughts?

R. McAuley 3014V
09-20-2008, 11:42 PM
CENSORED

David K. Fox
09-21-2008, 06:04 AM
Thanks for the information. I'll read the attachment later in the day. Though I know a tad about 19th Century American military production, I'm thin on things British.
This weapon is English-assembled, little doubt. No foreign markings, the English assembler's name ("C. Maybury"?) is stamped in the stock belly. I see no stocker's name in the ramrod channel, but there do appear to be a set of crude series marks. It's rifled and not British military accepted (no "VR", unit stampings, nor broad arrows).
I'd wager the brass trigger guard has been in it for the duration. It fits perfectly, the stock has shrunk around it as it has, Enfield fashion, around all the metal. No signs in the wood nor on the guard of tampering. And there's that iron stud standing proud in the trigger guard's forward tang, as out of place on a plain vanilla three-bander as a prostitute in church.
My notion, transposed from some American practice, is this: this is an export Birmingham Enfield. Quality varied in these and interchangability was not an issue with buyers. It's the end of a work day. In the parts bin the stocker finds he's down to two-bander trigger guards w/ cone protector studs. He either halt assembly of this run of rifle-muskets pending delivery of plain trigger guards or go w/ what he's got and make his quota for the day. He makes his quota.

David K. Fox
09-21-2008, 03:22 PM
Sitting in church, the sermon on Nehemiah being a tad long in the middle, I reflected that my post/response just above was really dumb. No, a harried assembler did NOT fish a 2-bander trigger guard (w/ a cone-protector chain stud afixed to the forward tang) out of a parts bin and slap it onto a three-bander Enfield. THIS triggerguard has BOTH the protector chain stud AND the rear sling swivel, a swivel which would normally make the stud redundant. Duh.

R. McAuley 3014V
09-22-2008, 12:16 AM
CENSORED

David K. Fox
09-22-2008, 08:06 PM
Richard: I lean toward your most recent observation: one suspects some purchaser, perhaps a Northern state, ordered a lot of so many 3-banders equipped w/ the chain stud. It's unlikely anyone post-production added this option: the weapon is near unfired w/ the stock, however, badly beaten up a long time ago. Rear sight was also knocked off, ramrod (as usual) was missing, as were both sling swivels. Metal is otherwise near mint w/ traces of case hardening on the lockplate. I should have added I know the family and have known the piece since 1970. It came out of the upper midwest in the 1940s or '50s. Was hoping someone was aware of such a contract or specification, if any there be.