1855 Tower

[Kharn]

My grandpa found this Muzzleloader at a garage sale, logically he bought it but asked me if there was anything I could find out about it after he got it.
Does anybody have one of these rifles? Thoughts & opinions greatly appreciated!

 

[Sarg]

Cool old ML he has there, been used in modern times & someone up graded the sights with a Parker Hale foresight Id say, probably the guy who had it in a vise, the bane of all gunsmiths ?

 

[Kharn]

Cool old ML he has there, been used in modern times & someone up graded the sights with a Parker Hale foresight Id say, probably the guy who had it in a vise, the bane of all gunsmiths ?

Vise Jaw Marks?

 

[Sarg]

Yes Sir, I’d say so, easy to put in hard to fix !

 

[Kharn]

Yes Sir, I’d say so, easy to put in hard to fix !

Why would it be hard to fix?

 

[Sarg]

Oh just the time & work, most times you need to refinish the firearm & it only took the Dick that damaged it a few seconds !

Some Wood, Leather, Lead, Plastic sheet over the jaws or over the item would save it & retain the original finish !

 

[Kharn]

Oh just the time & work, most times you need to refinish the firearm & it only took the Dick that damaged it a few seconds !

Some Wood, Leather, Lead, Plastic sheet over the jaws or over the item would save it & retain the original finish !

Oh I was just curious about your answer, I'm a machinist by trade.

But you're right, I mean today I was running one of the machines and went to do a quick and dirty set of my OD threading tool and I came in to fast on the hand wheel and the tip of the carbide insert smashed off leaving a tiny dent in the OD of the face of the part, luckily the location was a none critical open dimension so I just dropped the OD finisher to take off more material on that tiny dent area making it look good as new but YES!!!.... It all took time that wasn't necessary!

 

[Sarg]

Haha yes know the feeling !

 

[BeeMaa]

Are there any other markings on the rifle? Maybe on the barrel? Possibly under the stock?

 

[Major Bonkers]

I think that you will find that that is a Victorian-era Brown Bess musket.

I am by no means an expert, but if you get really stuck take lots of photographs and e-mail them off to Holts - they are very knowledgable.

 

[fourfive8]

More pics would help but the lock plate and percussion parts look correct for a British P1853 Enfield Tower rifle musket made in 1855. It should have a .577 cal rifled barrel. The front part of the stock doesn’t look correct to that model though.

Forward end of P1853 should look like this

 

[fourfive8]

The barrel length, from the snail to the muzzle, for a three band P1853 should be about 38”. Your rifle almost looks like it has a shortened barrel with newer sight added. That would account for the odd configuration of the front part of the stock including the ramrod entry pipe which appears to be from an older model.

 

[fourfive8]

As an aside to this thread and because it was pointed out earlier, a word about the vice jaw marks may be in order. A few reasons possible for those marks. Guns brought back into armory and refurbed for reissue. After service use and in civilian market, taken down to clean, inspect and replace damaged barrel for resale. Amateur DIY gunsmith disassembly for whatever reason.

When inspecting old, original muzzleloaders I always drop a light down the bore to better see condition of the bore. I always inspect internals and function of the lock. I always look for vice jaw marks on the bolster (breech plug) and usually the flats on breech end of barrel. Those marks indicate disassembly or attempted disassembly. It isn’t automatically a deal killer if I’m looking to acquire but it is one of the red flags.

 

[fourfive8]

Here is the breech area of an original 1856 P1853 Tower rifle-musket. Note no vice jaw marks on bolster/breech plug or barrel.

 

[fourfive8]

Details of some parts of British P1853 Enfield Rifle Musket. The 1856 Tower pictured above removed from stock


Tang and breech plug (tang) at bolster end of barrel- no signs of removal, no vice marks

Witness mark on top of seam between plug and barrel. Seam is nearly invisible- no indication of plug removal

Close up of jag end of correct ramrod

Split barrel band held in place by tension of captive screw. The bands on these rifles don't have band spring clips

 

[fourfive8]

While this thread is still on the Q, a few of my thoughts about these mid-1800s military percussion muzzleloaders.... comparing the British to American versions. I enjoy shooting them and studying their design and operation. Both the British P1953 Enfield rifle-musket and the US M1861/1863 rifle-musket are of the same basic design and function. The Brits used a hollow-based Minie' with smooth shank called the Pritchett. The standard US issue bullet was also a hollow-based Minie' but with a shank with grease grooves. Both shot standard loads of approx 60 grains of black powder. The bores were rifled, with shallow, three groove rifling of very slow twist in the range of +/- 70-78". The British bore was approx .577" and the US bore was approx .580". The ammunition was more or less interchangeable.

The overall workmanship, fit and finish for both is outstanding. The quality and robust nature of these primary military arms always impresses me when I take them apart for study. The quality is comparable between the British and American models. The only design fault I can find with the P1853 is the split barrel band where these bands tend to shift forward upon firing due to recoil inertia. The tension provided by the screw through the split part of the band is not enough to hold the band securely in place during recoil. This shifting forward does not affect firing function to any great extent but can affect POI and accuracy as the band moves unpredictably forward. The flat, one piece barrel bands on the US M1861 are held in place by barrel band spring retainers which hold the barrel bands securely in place under recoil. Then, as unexplainable as it may be, the Union/ US Military powers that be, in charge of the rifle-musket design during the Civil War, did away with the barrel band spring and began using the British P1853 sprit ring tension design on the US M1863 Type I. Sure enough, fire these and the barrel bands will sooner or later start moving forward due to recoil inertia. Then, realizing their error I guess , began using a barrel band spring retainer for the US M1863 Type II design. I still scratch my head when studying those design decisions