The trapdoor hinges at the front and the breech block lifts up and swings forward and over to open. They also make the Infantry and Officer’s models and a Long Range target version (Infantry Model with improved sighting and butt grip). H&R no longer makes them but I’m glad to say that Pedersoli does and on test is their standard Cavalry Carbine. As the name suggest this was made for private purchase by officers that gave them a similar rifle of the same calibre that could also be used for hunting. Back in the 1970s Harrington & Richardson (H&R) offered it - the standard with a modern, fold-down rear sight, an 1873 and the Officers Model with better sights and longer 26” barrel. The Trapdoor, mainly the Cavalry Carbine, is an iconic gun and one that has been reproduced more than once. However the Trapdoor saw service in the Spanish/American war in Cuba by reservists. The Trapdoor was further modified in 1884 with a new (Buffington) rear sight that gave windage correction and the rifle soldiered on until replaced by the bolt-action 30/40 Krag-Jørgensen in 1892, which was the US’ first smokeless cartridge. A reduced (Carbine) load was issued using 55-grains of Blackpowder, which gave a velocity of 1100 fps. Given the lighter weight of the carbine the standard cartridge proved unpleasant to shoot. Carbines were carried in a socket when on the saddle, though still attached by the sling. This allowed the empty gun to be dropped without losing it and access to sabre or pistol. The Cavalry Carbine showed a shorter 22” barrel and half-length forend with a bar and ring on the left that was supported by a cross body leather sling.
#1873 springfield trapdoor front sight base full
The 1873 was issued as an Infantry Rifle with full forend and 32 ½” barrel firing a 405-grain lead bullet at 1350 fps using 70-grains of Blackpowder hence the calibre name 45-70 Government. It’s interesting to note that Custer’s 7th Cavalry were one of the first units to be issued with the 1873 Carbine when they rode into history in 1876 at the Little Bighorn! That is not to say the 1873 was a bad rifle, but it initially had problems with its ammunition as the original cartridges were copper, which could swell in the breech and cause extraction problems.
I believe it was always a one horse race and as the gun and ammunition had already been developed, so why waste it? After all the decision makers would not be the ones to use it!
Unsurprisingly the 1873 Trapdoor Springfield was picked as the board decided that reliability was preferable to capacity. Some were single shot, others were magazine-fed. Called the 1866 it saw limited service on the frontier and was gradually modified with the fifth variation showing the new 45-70 chambering.īetween 1872-1873 the US Ordnance held trails to determine a new rifle with the Springfield, Sharps, Peabody, Whitney, Spencer, Remington, and Winchester all being tested. 50” cal cartridge and a simple, flip-up breech system (trapdoor) was engineered for the rear, though still using a side-hammer. 58” and it was decided to turn them to breechloaders using a conversion by Erskine S. After the war the Union still had the 1863 Springfield rifled musket in. The majority of the fighting was done with rifled muskets like the Springfield and British Enfield. The Henry lever-action, Spencer and Sharps are good examples. In the American Civil War there were many repeaters and breech-loaders used on both sides in small amounts. As risible as it might seem this is one of the reasons we British waited for so long to adopt a self-loading rifle after WW11 to replace our No 4 Enfields - the troops would doubtless shoot a lot more ammo and waste money.Īnother prime example was the US military’s evolution from muzzle-loading to breech-loading rifles. Ease of manufacture and economy probably being truer motives. Bean counters or bureaucrats call them what you will but providing soldiers with the right kit has never been high on their list of priorities. The procurement of military weapons has usually been done by those who don’t use them.
0 kommentar(er)
