Looking for defarbed Enfield

[German Volunteer]

Hello, I am looking to a defarbed musket, Enfield prefered

[Eggman]

Perhaps you will get more responses if you clarify what you mean by "defarb." In the normal civilized world "defarb" is not a word. Whenever it appears on the Forum there are myriad shooters confused and discomforted because they don't know what the contributer is talking about. When you say "defarbed" do you mean the "farbs" have been removed? What then is a "farb?" I can't find either word in my standard dictionary. They also aren't in my nonstandard dictionary, the one I use for Forum quotes, either.
My leader, Kommander Kowdoc, says it has something to do with barrel multilation. How exactly is the barrel mutilated? I heard of one fellow who left his barrel in a manure pile for six months. Would that be "defarbed" enough? I've also heard that "defarbing" means leaving the nipple and breach area corrupted with fouling for at least a year. Is a year enough? I hope you do well. N-SSA folks have a notorious habit of not filing stuff off their guns, and also keeping their guns clean.

[Dave Fox]

After you've digested the lecture, try www.authentic-campaigner.com (http://www.authentic-campaigner.com). "Defarb" is spoken there. Todd Watts, among others, does the work. He seems to operate out of Blockade Runner Sutlery ( www.blockaderunner.com (http://www.blockaderunner.com) ). I was in Gettysburg last month and, as I recall, the Regimental Quartermaster (1-800-929-1863) had at least one defarbed Enfield on the wall.

[David Disher 12143]

In re-enacting circles. "defarb" is a term to denote the removal of modern markings from a reproduction firearm. The re-enacting community at large wants to make an authentic "impression", and therefore the markings on Italian (or other) reproductions are relocated to areas of the gun where they are not noticed, yet still required. One in particular is the barrel stamping. Usually this is relocated from the top side of the barrel to the underside.

"Farby" is a term used to describe something that is not period-correct. The wrong buttons, the incorrect placement of unit letters or numbers on a hat, the wrong thread used to attach acoutrements, etc. There are those who care about how a gun looks, and those who care about how a gun shoots.

Ddisher
110th OVI

[Eggman]

And nare the twain shall meet.

[Ron/The Old Reb]

Anything to make the hobby more flustering.:(

[Eggman]

Well here's the thing. Now that I've eaten a biscuit I can be more civil.
We want the reenactors among our ranks. I have a good friend who is a former reenactor (no correlation with the "former" part - he's a good guy period). He's been to a skirmish - loved it - fabulous shot. But now the transition to skirmisher is dead in the water. His musket - a beautiful Euroarms Mississippi, has a terrible pitted barrel from years of not cleaning -- while reenacting. To become a skirmisher he now needs a new gun, or a new barrel at a minimum. I've seen other instances like this.
Now, when I see a "defarbed" musket show up on on our for sale site, I cringe. We know the inside of the barrel has not been part of the "impression." And when I see a new musket, primed for good shooting, seemingly headed in that same direction, I cringe again.
An old Army ordnance and artillery guy like myself naturally has a fetish about taking care of this interesting and historical equipment. I would hate to see the N-SSA through its website become complicit in its abuse.

[John Holland]

Can you explain how you feel the N-SSA would be "complicit" in the abuse of interesting and historic equipment? We have already been accused of that very thing because we permit the use of original Civil War arms.

As for your friend with the Mississippi, the cheapest way out is to have it sleeved.

JDH

[Eggman]

In my mind (an acknowledged scary place) when you "defarb" a gun you mu
tilate it. You are also placing it in a position of questionable ancestry, and creating the possibility of eventual fraud. You are putting it in the "what is this?" category in the N-SSA, and everywhere else for that matter.
When a freshly made Civil War replica is produced, the identification and testing stamps are put there for a purpose. When you defeat that purpose you are creating significant uncertainty about the piece -- of both provinance and safety. Folks are reduced to relying on the word of the seller, or maybe somebody else's opinion on a piece of paper. Putting disclaimers on the underside of the barrel doesn't cut it for me. Nobody pulls the barrel when these guns are bought and sold.
To me, creating situations like this puts you on some ethically shakey ground. For the N-SSA, when someone requests to buy or sell a "defarb" gun on our website, we are caught in the middle of the transaction, a transaction surrounded by uncertainty. Does allowing "defarb" gun transactions on our website connotate approval, or at least acquiescence, toward such trades? That is the question to be answered. To me the N-SSA represents some pretty high moral ground.

There are collector grade, museum grade guns that in my mind should never be fired. I compete with an original Spencer and original Maynard. They are not collector grade, not even close. In fact the Spencer was pretty much resurrected from the scrap yard. Using guns like this keeps them trim and oiled and smiling, and operating like a well tuned Chevy. It's my other antiques, the ones that don't get picked up for five years that are the problem (where did that rust come from?). I'm one of those guys that thinks using a gun (moderately) is good for it.

[John Holland]

Eggman -

Thank you for the sincere reply.

The question of "Defarbed Arms", and their use in the N-SSA, is an old one which caused the following addition to "Rule Section 14.7.1 Arms To Be Submitted For Approval: f. Any arm that has the original manufacturer’s identification removed or in any way altered." So, by our very own rules the SAC is required to issue a SAC Individual Approval card to any approved arm that has been "Defarbed".

That someone has "relocated" the manufacturer's marks to the bottom of the barrel and thinks they have done a wonderful thing, in reality it means nothing whatsoever. Once the original factory marks are removed you can stamp anything you want under the barrel. Here is something else they don't think about, once the orignal manufacturer's markings are removed, the manufacturer no longer holds any liability for said arm!

As for fraudulent arms, unfortunately that's nothing new.

The use of original arms in the N-SSA will always be a split decision, with ardent supporters on either side of the question.

JDH

[Dave Fox]

"Defarbing" a weapon is what a person of modest means can do to approximate what the more affluent do when they order the superb replicas of the likes of John Zimmerman, Romano, and James River. There appears a great deal less chance of a defarbed mass-produced musket being fraudulantly represented as real than the product of the custom builders. Mass produced, overweight muskets have profoundly too-thick barrels and mystery wood stocks which are clunky to match, for instance. Defarbing does not address the two or more extra pounds these carry.

Removing or moving barrel markings are just part of defarbing, and have been addressed by previous threads in this forum. Erasing "FOR BLACK POWDER ONLY", one might argue, mutilates a musket less than erecting high foresights, glass bedding, and drilling holes in rear sights. As to the legality of the thing, I'm not particularly aggressive in being concerned what Big Brother's attitude is toward a Bunkie's replica muzzleloader. If not exhibiting "Made in Italy" or whatever is important on a defarb job, why is it all right to drop a Whitacre, Yeck, or Hoyt barrel in a skirmish weapon, one wonders. I'm happy with both.

Taking German Volunteer's initial query in this exchange, in the case of an Enfield replica, defarbing often also includes striping the plastic coating from the stock, reshaping the awkward grip, applying proper stampings and a wood finish which approximates that of the 1860s, replacing the Baddeley barrel bands and two-piece rammer, removing the black barrel finish and applying a more accurate bluing to screw heads, barrel bands, and barrel, and providing the proper side nail escutions. The N-SSA has costume competions: if one would wince at a Tommy Hilfiger logo on a forage cap; why fulminate over someone who doesn't want an Italian logo on his replica of a Birmingham Trade rifle-musket? Perhaps it's significant that the longest thread in this forum, with which I'm familiar, deals with current improvements in appearance an Italian musket maker is assaying in its products.


Man and boy, I've skirmished (1950s), reenacted (participated in the 1961 anniversary event at Bull Run), and do living history (come by my Civil War museum in the old Hendersonville, N.C. court house). I've always used original weapons or weapons made up of original parts. I do it because I can: they were acquired, for the most part, when these were relatively cheap. If I were in my middle years today, I'd probably be carrying a Zimmerman piece. If, now, I was young and starting out new, I'd likely have the best I could afford: a defarbed musket.


This is all, (skirmishing, reenacting, living history), for fun. It's not the Mekong in '68. It's not for real. Tolerance, Comrades, and help the other fellow upward when you're able.

[Muley Gil]

Ya know, when we start generalizing like this:

"Now, when I see a "defarbed" musket show up on on our for sale site, I cringe. We know the inside of the barrel has not been part of the "impression." And when I see a new musket, primed for good shooting, seemingly headed in that same direction, I cringe again.",

we do ourselves a disfavor.

I started shooting with a .22 at age 15. At that same age, I was given a Zoli Zouave and started skirmishing the following year (1970). Twenty some years later, I started reenacting. Coming from a shooter's background, I cleaned my weapons at every reenactment event, as did all of the members of my outfit. I still do living history events. If I fire my musket, I clean it. Period.

I have sold defarbed weapons, even advertised them on our forum.

Not all reenactors have uncleaned muskets, just like not all skirmishers wear polyester postal pants.

[Maillemaker]

I have no problem with "defarbing" guns to make them look, feel, and function more historically accurately. There are probably liability issues lurking but I'm not terribly worried about it. The nice thing about buying a replacement barrel, such as a Whitacre, is, aside from being an awesome target weapon, there are no external markings above the stock to worry over. The heck with grinding off all the details - just replace the entire barrel! :)

[David Disher 12143]

I kinda have to agree with the Eggman on this....I don't think that "defarbed" weapons have a place on this site. The act of changing or relocating the markings on a gun is simply unnecessary...and I cast no aspersion on the re-enacting community whatsoever...their contributions to the preservation of the History of this war are unchallenged.

To put a finer point on it, if you are truly that concerned about your "impression", then buy an original gun! I really don't think any spectator of a re-enactment would seriously question what the markings on the gun are...they are looking to learn about the history of the conflict.

There are skirmishers in our ranks who would consider shooting nothing other than original guns, and there are those who have other preference. I doubt whether any skirmisher has ever criticized another for having a gun that made less than a historical impression. If the guy or gal is breaking targets, then the point would be moot anyway.

As John mentions, the act of removing or relocating markings has many consequences. An original arm is a duck...walks like one, quacks like one. A reproduction is just that...a true representation of an original arm. They should be left as the manufacturer made them for the most part (sight work and trigger adjustment aside)

David Disher
110th OVI

[Jim Mayo]

"Defarbing" a weapon is what a person of modest means can do to approximate what the more affluent do when they order the superb replicas of the likes of John Zimmerman, Romano, and James River. There appears a great deal less chance of a defarbed mass-produced musket being fraudulantly represented as real than the product of the custom builders. Mass produced, overweight muskets have profoundly too-thick barrels and mystery wood stocks which are clunky to match, for instance. Defarbing does not address the two or more extra pounds these carry.

Removing or moving barrel markings are just part of defarbing, and have been addressed by previous threads in this forum. Erasing "FOR BLACK POWDER ONLY", one might argue, mutilates a musket less than erecting high foresights, glass bedding, and drilling holes in rear sights. As to the legality of the thing, I'm not particularly aggressive in being concerned what Big Brother's attitude is toward a Bunkie's replica muzzleloader. If not exhibiting "Made in Italy" or whatever is important on a defarb job, why is it all right to drop a Whitacre, Yeck, or Hoyt barrel in a skirmish weapon, one wonders. I'm happy with both.

Taking German Volunteer's initial query in this exchange, in the case of an Enfield replica, defarbing often also includes striping the plastic coating from the stock, reshaping the awkward grip, applying proper stampings and a wood finish which approximates that of the 1860s, replacing the Baddeley barrel bands and two-piece rammer, removing the black barrel finish and applying a more accurate bluing to screw heads, barrel bands, and barrel, and providing the proper side nail escutions. The N-SSA has costume competions: if one would wince at a Tommy Hilfiger logo on a forage cap; why fulminate over someone who doesn't want an Italian logo on his replica of a Birmingham Trade rifle-musket? Perhaps it's significant that the longest thread in this forum, with which I'm familiar, deals with current improvements in appearance an Italian musket maker is assaying in its products.


Man and boy, I've skirmished (1950s), reenacted (participated in the 1961 anniversary event at Bull Run), and do living history (come by my Civil War museum in the old Hendersonville, N.C. court house). I've always used original weapons or weapons made up of original parts. I do it because I can: they were acquired, for the most part, when these were relatively cheap. If I were in my middle years today, I'd probably be carrying a Zimmerman piece. If, now, I was young and starting out new, I'd likely have the best I could afford: a defarbed musket.


This is all, (skirmishing, reenacting, living history), for fun. It's not the Mekong in '68. It's not for real. Tolerance, Comrades, and help the other fellow upward when you're able.

Very good post. I would like to add a couple of comments though.

First I am not a skirmisher but have many friends who are. I have the upmost respect for their shooting ability and what the NSSA stands for. Many years ago I had to pick between reenacting and NSSA and I picked reenacting. Doesn't mean I don't enjoy going to the Nationals and watching the shooting.

1.) I have seen very few original CW rifles sold at the Nationals that are not modified in some way which detracts from their desirability as a collectable. Adding raised sights, new barrels, working the lock are all modifications which have the same effect on an arm as some defarbing practices. I have seen parts taken off one rifle and switched to another in an effort to increase the value of an arm. Is this worse than removing someone's logo from a reproduction gun barrel?

2.) While there seems to be far more yahoos in reenacting than in the NSSA, I would put the cleanliness of the bore of my Parker Hale P-53 up against any of those in the NSSA. While some re-enactors pee on our buttons I know of know one who intentionally places manure on his barrel to make it look old. Now being lazy and not cleaning the gun until the next event, unfortunally I do know re-enactors who do that. Most do not live fire anything or do not have previous military experience. However most reputable re-enacting units will not let a dirty gun play with clean ones.

Just my .02


To Dave: Thanks for your service.
From a REMF in CanTho (1969).

[John Holland]

Jim -

You have touched upon something about the re-enacting community that has always confused me. Why in the world do so many of them think their equipment should look like it is 150 years old? It baffles me that they don't realize the equipment of the period was issued new. Looking old, and being old are two different things. If a soldier was issued old muskets in the early days of the Civil War, then the re-enactor portraying said soldier should have an OLD musket. But instead,what I see are re-enactors aging repro 1861 Springfields and P-53 rifle muskets, and that is just plain wrong! The soldiers they want to portray so authentically had to stand inspection on a regular basis and if they stood inspection with an arm that looks like what I've seen at re-enactments today their 1st Sgt. would have had a field day with them!

Yes, I had participated in re-enactments during the Centennial, with the last one being the Battle of Nashville in 1964. At that time most of the arms looked old because they were old!

JDH

[David Disher 12143]

Very good post. I would like to add a couple of comments though.

First I am not a skirmisher but have many friends who are. I have the upmost respect for their shooting ability and what the NSSA stands for. Many years ago I had to pick between reenacting and NSSA and I picked reenacting. Doesn't mean I don't enjoy going to the Nationals and watching the shooting.

1.) I have seen very few original CW rifles sold at the Nationals that are not modified in some way which detracts from their desirability as a collectable. Adding raised sights, new barrels, working the lock are all modifications which have the same effect on an arm as some defarbing practices. I have seen parts taken off one rifle and switched to another in an effort to increase the value of an arm. Is this worse than removing someone's logo from a reproduction gun barrel?

2.) While there seems to be far more yahoos in reenacting than in the NSSA, I would put the cleanliness of the bore of my Parker Hale P-53 up against any of those in the NSSA. While some re-enactors pee on our buttons I know of know one who intentionally places manure on his barrel to make it look old. Now being lazy and not cleaning the gun until the next event, unfortunally I do know re-enactors who do that. Most do not live fire anything or do not have previous military experience. However most reputable re-enacting units will not let a dirty gun play with clean ones.

Just my .02


To Dave: Thanks for your service.
From a REMF in CanTho (1969).

Jim:

You make a very salient point. There are views from both side of the aisle. I'm sure there are skirmishers who don't take very good care of their weapons as well. As far as the modifications made to original arms, yes, they are modified, so they can shoot more accurately. Many have tried shooting and original '61 with the original sight and come up way short of acceptable results. As a skirmisher, I am not terribly concerned about the impression my gun makes...I only care about how it shoots. And the most important thing I can do to my gun to keep it consistent is the keep it clean and functional. A guy wants to put manure on his barrel to make it look old? Sure, why not. Its HIS gun, and HIS concern how it looks :)

Where it becomes rather onerous is when someone looks at YOUR gun, and judges both it and you as "farby", because it doesn't measure up to their idea of what a musket should look like. This happened to some of us at a function last year. We had the slouch hats/kepis, wool pants, cartridge boxes and bayonets...yet our "look" was not "period"...because some were wearing cavalry boots with an infantry uniform. We LOVE watching re-enactments, because many groups are quite good, and put on a helluva show. I am glad that the N-SSA is a shooting sport primarily; even though we do it for fun, its also a way of keeping the history alive for generations to come. Our competition muskets are seldom purchased for their collectible value. I know that I like an original arm over a repro because back then, guns were made well because a soldiers life depended on it. There are good reproductions out there, but give me an original gun any day.

Ddisher
110th OVI

[Jim Brady Knap's Battery]

I always like to say that while some reenactors go to great pains and expense to achieve a perception of authenticity the fact still remanins the N-SSA members do with our firearms what the soldiers of the Civil War did with theirs, stop the action as quickly as possible with rapid, accurate, aimed fire.



Jim Brady
2249V
Knap's Battery

[Dave Fox]

Hopefully not to make too fine a point, but there are no currently mass produced reproductions out there, just more or (mostly) less approximate replicas. "Reproduction" and "replica" have significantly different meanings. Once, some replicas were a deal better than others: the Parker Hale models of the 1970s, the Colt assembled special models of the '80s, and the dearly departed Miroko M.1861s come to mind. These are arguably collectable in their own right. I submit, however, modifying the current Italian offerings is no crime against nature. And other than vaguely stated concerns, I've never heard of a defarbed musket being prosecuted as a crime against the State. Not being my brother's keeper, when person defarbs a musket, I'm not horrified.

I confess I've never seen anyone in the Skirmish, reenacting, or living history community artificially age a weapon. Not sure who would do this and under what theory. "TAs" (Truly Authentics) would spurn such, one suspects: they want to approximate what gun and gear would look like on campaign, not after a century of knocking about.

If a Skirmisher wears off-the-rack sutler specials, India-made leather traps, and wants to centre targets with a musket proudly boasting "For Black Powder Only" on the barrel, it's his option. If another counts threads, buys a top-dollar cartridge box, and wants his weapon to be less anacronistic than came out of the box, more power to him. Can't see life is long enough to get particularly grumpy about either. There are reenactments for TAs and Skirmish shoots for pure fun. I guess a lesson is: in whichever venue, don't drive a Yugo to a concours d'elegance.

[Old Hickory]

Well stated, Mr. Fox!

[Ron/The Old Reb]

It all boils down to. What ever makes your boat float.

[John Holland]

That is why the N-SSA is a blend of all things Civil War!

Old Hickory....you really need to come back! OK, blatant attempt to recruit you back into the fold!

Seriously, the N-SSA is making an attempt to incorporate everyone.

John