What different builds and rebuilds for the 1842?

[MR. GADGET]

Was just looking into some different guns and on the 1842 smoothbore there are several different builds (rebuild ) battle field changes.... And so on.

You have the normal full length 1842 SB
Next would be the Richmond that was a cut down to 24"
Then you have the Macon's that were done. The Macons that we can use were most common the 30", 34" amd 36" if I remember.

Now thinking back to them and seeing all types of cutdowns in all lengths, I just wonder, is the length a spec that was used for the Richmond and Macon gun?
Were there a blue print to as how the gun should be cut down and the length of the gun?

We have the +- on barrel lenght and list the Richmond and Macons, so was there a true spec or did we (N-SSA) just pick the most common length found or known to be built?

Just looking into more background and history for the 1842 SB and how it was forced over the years to change. Are there any numbers out there to show how many they built in each lenght or info to the number total rebuilt by each Arsenal.

[Curt]

Hallo!

"Now thinking back to them and seeing all types of cutdowns in all lengths, I just wonder, is the length a spec that was used for the Richmond and Macon gun?
Were there a blue print to as how the gun should be cut down and the length of the gun?

We have the +- on barrel lenght and list the Richmond and Macons, so was there a true spec or did we (N-SSA) just pick the most common length found or known to be built?"

IMHO...

For Richmond yes. Richmond Armory apparently made the decision that a 24 inch barrel would be standardized and standard for their .69 caliber Musketoon aka Carbine when they started them in September of 1862. (And stopped with M1842 type work in October 1863)
Richmond made 651 of the musketoon/carbines as part of a charge to make "for the purpose of using all barrels and stocks which were so damaged as to render them unfit for muskets." Which appears to come at the end of Richmond restoring and refurbishing M1842 Muskets intact as muskets most likely by replacing damaged stocks with newly made ones requested from Macon Armory/Arsenal in November 1862.
What is different, I believe, about Macon is that Macon seems to have tasked differently than Richmond Armory/Arsenal as Macon was receiving some pretty bad stuff in miserable condition to restore particularly focusing on salvaging damaged barrels by shortening. Meaning, as being intended as the primary CS armory, Macon was getting "crap" to work on that Richmond was not (largely due to Macon's lack of machinery that Richmond had, so they were used more for repair than manufacture).

Anyways, due to the nature of the damaged guns coming into Macon, Macon appears to have salvaged more barrels by not adopting a standard length. For example, there are surviving Macon repaired M1842 Muskets with barrels shortened down to 34 inches, 35 3/8ths, 33 1/8th, and 32 3/4 inches.
As a result

M1842 Muskets....

Springfield turned out nearly 172,000. Harpers Ferry some 103,000. or a rough total of 275,000.
Benjamin Flagg made a handful as a contract variation before he and William Glaze worked out a transfer of machinery to South Carolina to make the Palmetto Armory contract shortly after 1851 making 6,000.
And another small handful as a contract with A.H. Waters, which includes a few as the contract "Navy Musket' made by him and Eli Whitney, Jr. likely not more than a few thousand.

N1842 spin-offs...

The M1847 Artillery Musketoon, M1847 Cavalry Musketoon, and the M1847 Sappers Musketoon all with 26 inch barrels.

And last but not least.. the 3,200 M1842's altered for Fremont in 1847 being rifled and sighted, shortened down to 48 1/2 inches with 33 inch barrels.


Curt

[John Bly]

I spoke with John Holland about this at spring nationals and he indicated that the original Macon conversions were not standardized. The barrels were salvaged and were cut to be able to re-use them and the lengths varied randomly. In order to have some standardization in the N-SSA it was decided to settle on 30", 34" and 36" barrel lengths as these seemed to be more common. Mr. Holland can answer any other questions you may have on this matter.

[MR. GADGET]

I spoke with John Holland about this at spring nationals and he indicated that the original Macon conversions were not standardized. The barrels were salvaged and were cut to be able to re-use them and the lengths varied randomly. In order to have some standardization in the N-SSA it was decided to settle on 30", 34" and 36" barrel lengths as these seemed to be more common. Mr. Holland can answer any other questions you may have on this matter.

THat was the big thing, I was finding all types if info on cutdowns yet no set length, they did what the gun could take or use is the way it sounded.

So your point is kind of what I was looking, We N-SSA picked the most common to use for our guns to be copied, but I would bet if you had a true Macon from the war it could get a card if the length was off some.

[R. McAuley 3014V]

Benjamin Flagg made a handful as a contract variation before he and William Glaze worked out a transfer of machinery to South Carolina to make the Palmetto Armory contract shortly after 1851 making 6,000.
And another small handful as a contract with A.H. Waters, which includes a few as the contract "Navy Musket' made by him and Eli Whitney, Jr. likely not more than a few thousand.


Curt

Several writers, including Flayderman,have offered opinions speculating on how these early Glaze-Palmetto muskets were made of surplus or condemned parts as if the Waters & Co and Benjamin Flagg were two separate companies, and on paper that may well be correct just as Flagg latterly produced muskets for Glaze & Radcliffe in 1850, as well as latterly entered into partnership with William Glaze at Palmetto Armory (1851-53). But what evidently is not widely known about the maker, A.H. Waters & Co is that Benjamin Flagg was shop foreman and superintendent of the Waters Armory, and while working there as a toolmaker Flagg invented the first milling machine capable of milling curved and irregular forms, which Robbins & Flagg of (Waters Armory at) Millbury is documented as installing at Springfield Armory in 1834. It was this machinery which facilitated manufacture of lock plates and other musket furniture on the interchangeable plan (for the Model 1835/40 flintlock musket).

Indeed, the first engine built to power the milling machinery at Springfield Armory was built by Otis Tufts of Boston under contract in 1843 in preparation for manufacturing the new M1842 percussion musket enabled by Flagg’s machinery. Flagg’s partner, Samuel E. Robbins would later join Richard Smith Lawrence in 1844 in establishing the firm of Robbins, Kendall, and Lawrence (formerly Kendall & Company) which in 1850 was reorganized into Robbins & Lawrence. As you may be aware, Robbins & Lawrence also started the Sharps’ Rifle Manufacturing Company in 1851, and are credited as the first firm to initiate the manufacture offirearms on the interchangeable plan. Ever wonder where they got the idea for this method?

In 1841 following the death of the founder of the Waters Armory, Asa H. Waters Jr. (1769-1841) , his son, Asa H. Waters III (1808-1887) continued operating the armory in partnership with Benjamin Flagg (1807-1864) under the firm name of Flagg & Waters until Thomas J. Harrington joined the partnership when the firm then changed its name to “A. H. Waters & Co.” This firm operated for another 25 years until the partnership was dissolved in 1867. His son, George A. Flagg took over the cotton mill property and continued the business of cotton manufacturing, their mills being known as the Millbury Cotton Mills.

So contrary to the idea that the barrels may have been rejects from Harpers Ferry or Springfield, as a tool maker Flagg was instrumental in developing the necessary machinery to manufacture barrels by the milling process rather than by grinding as was implemented at Springfield Armory in 1838 followed by a milling machine for barrel-making in 1843. Likewise, the parts for the Flagg muskets,had to match precisely with the parts and inletting of the Model 1835/40 stocks he used (from Waters stock) as well as integrating the new parts for the Model 1842 percussion musket. So far from these muskets being made of surplus or condemned parts from the national armories, like the later Maynard conversion of the Model 1816 by Remington, the Flagg and Waters muskets more accurately represent one of the most modern methods of conversion in the transition from flintlock to percussion ignition.

[John Holland]

Jon AKA MR. GADGET,

Remember, the N-SSA is all about uniformity, not what was randomly modified. There was a lengthy study done by two of our DS members for a presentation to the Board to allow shortened M-1842 muskets. They surveyed multiple private collections and hundreds of altered M-1842 muskets to come up with common sizes. What they presented to the SAC and the Board were the three most commonly seen sizes, and that is what the Board adopted.

John Holland
Chairman, SAC

[MR. GADGET]

Jon AKA MR. GADGET,

Remember, the N-SSA is all about uniformity, not what was randomly modified. There was a lengthy study done by two of our DS members for a presentation to the Board to allow shortened M-1842 muskets. They surveyed multiple private collections and hundreds of altered M-1842 muskets to come up with common sizes. What they presented to the SAC and the Board were the three most commonly seen sizes, and that is what the Board adopted.

John Holland
Chairman, SAC

Cool, no problem with that, I was just trying to read up and learn more about it and see what I can find.
I was not finding any set lengths as to a spec or length of barrel for the cut downs and what you are saying is exactly what I was thinking. What I can find is there was not true length it just happened and we picked the most common found.

Thanks you all for the help.
Is there any good books that deal and talk more about just the Smooth bores of the Civil War and more history behind them.

[R. McAuley 3014V]

Benjamin Flagg made a handful as a contract variation before he and William Glaze worked out a transfer of machinery to South Carolina to make the Palmetto Armory contract shortly after 1851 making 6,000.
And another small handful as a contract with A.H. Waters, which includes a few as the contract "Navy Musket' made by him and Eli Whitney, Jr. likely not more than a few thousand.
Curt

Below is a link to one of Flagg's adaptations of the U.S. Model 1835/40 musket to percussion, illustrating that not everything that looks like a U.S. Model 1842 is a U.S. Model 1842:

http://www.damonmills.com/PS%20Pages...ket%203420.htm
(http://www.damonmills.com/PS%20Pages/PS%2040/Flagg%20Musket%203420.htm)

And for those wishing to compare the Flagg to the Palmetto Armory musket:


http://www.damonmills.com/PS%20Pages/PS%2035/WG-PM%203157.htm

[Bruce Cobb 1723V]

N1842 spin-offs...

The M1847 Artillery Musketoon, M1847 Cavalry Musketoon, and the M1847 Sappers Musketoon all with 26 inch barrels.




Curt[/QUOTE]
I don't agree you can include the M1847 Artillery Musketoon, M1847 Cavalry Musketoon, and the M1847 Sappers Musketoon in this category. There isn't one part in any of these that are in an 1842 musket. These are an animal all unto themselves. As a collector, I can assure you the only common part is the caliber. The only weapon that shares any of the identical parts is the diminutive Springfield model 1851 cadets. All of these were manufactured only at Springfield., before the later war. That is why you have the same dimensional parts between them, some models in brass and some in steel.

[Curt]

Hallo!

Thanks, and correct.

I was not thinking so much of "interchangeable parts" but rather in the overall "appearance" or look versus the Arsenals having gone with a totally different beast hence the "spin off" or variation on a theme kind of like how the M1855 Carbine followed that 'M1842" theme but not the new ".58 Maynard primed" M1855 RM and R.

Thanks again.

Curt