Okay You Remington Rolling Block Lovers, question.....

OFFICE OF THE BOARD FOR SELECTING A BREECH SYSTEM FOR MUSKETS AND CARBINES New York May 5 1873

FINAL TEST WITH .45-CAL. ARMS-CONCLUSION-SELECTION-RECOMMENDATION OF SPRINGFIELD SYSTEM.



These arms having been received, with the exception of the fourth on the list, for which the Remingtons supplied (Remington Ryder Extractor) a substantially similar arm of their own make, No. 86, they were tested for rapidity of firing by the expert, and also by a party of old soldiers and recruits. With out particularizing the special favorable and unfavorable features of each system, fully shown by other portions of the record, the Board has been brought to the conclusion, from their own experiments, as well as from the great mass of confirmatory testimony obtained from the Army in the field that the Springfield gun, No. 99, of all those presented, is the best suited for our military service. They have, therefore, Resolved, That the Board recommend that the Springfield breech loading system be adopted for the military service of the United States, in accordance with the provisions of the act of Congress entitled “An act making appropriations for the support of the Army for the year ending June thirty, eighteen hundred and seventy-three and for other purposes”, approved June 6 1872.


Can you elaborate on this Remington rifle and the specific 45 cal cartridge?

I wonder if it was the .43/77 UMC. I read that it used a .454" bullet, which is actually .45 caliber. Same cartridge as the .43 Spanish.

My 43 Spanish uses a .443 diameter bullet for best accuracy. If I recall correctly, the 44-77 uses a .446” bullet. My trapdoor uses a .460”.

Anyone have or seen a Remington, Ryder Extractor, chambered for a 45 caliber cartridges, charged with 60 to 70 grains of powder and pushing a 360gr lead bullet?

Bob,
I'm not sure what you are asking for, but it all seems to point to this info from Wikipedia:

"The Springfield Model 1873 was the first standard-issue breech-loading rifle adopted by the United States Army (although the Springfield Model 1866 had seen limited issue to troops along the Bozeman Trail in 1867). The rifle, in both full-length and carbine versions, was widely used in subsequent battles against Native Americans.

The Model 1873 was the fifth variation of the Allin trapdoor design, and was named for its hinged breechblock, which opened like a trapdoor. The infantry rifle model featured a 32 5⁄8-inch (829 mm) barrel, while the cavalry carbine used a 22-inch (560 mm) barrel. It was superseded by an improved model, the Springfield Model 1884, also in .45-70 caliber."

So I would think the answer to your last question in the first post, would be = 45-70.

Sorry if this isn't the info you're looking for.

I believe that was regarding the Springfield Trap Door rifle in 45-70.

It was the 45-70. Of course the Springfield was the favorite... it was made at a government arsenal. They had plenty of military personnel there, which meant a faster promotion could be had than if a civilian maker was used.
GA Custer always liked the Remington rolling block. His last was chambered 50-70, the issue cartridge at the time. He carried it into the Greazy Grass Valley, both never to return.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YippyKiYay

It was the 45-70. Of course the Springfield was the favorite... it was made at a government arsenal. They had plenty of military personnel there, which meant a faster promotion could be had than if a civilian maker was used.
GA Custer always liked the Remington rolling block. His last was chambered 50-70, the issue cartridge at the time. He carried it into the Greazy Grass Valley, both never to return.

---

The fix indeed pretty much had to be in.

They would have had to pay Remington more money for rolling blocks, and the original intent was to assemble trapdoors out of leftover muzzle-loading rifle-musket parts that were already paid for - ultimately needing only a .45 caliber barrel and some accessories. I've tried for many years to wrap my brain around how anyone could conclude the trapdoor was the better machine based on it's attributes as a rifle alone, and never could get there.

I think everyone involved in the testing was told by someone with stars on their lapels that if they recommended the Remington, they'd end up digging latrines for the rest of their career. It's the only answer that makes any kind of sense.

There are so many one off test rifles these companies have made for testing that most are not known to have ever existed until they just pop up out of a barn or closet.

With Remington's records having gone up in smoke in one of the fires way back when, we'll never know a lot. We do know there was a lot based on things like the above.
Writings, notes, anything outside the Remington fire.

Springfield Arsenal itself was in a state of constant testing. Bull barrel? Gets that name from the Bull brothers involved in the arsenal. Same Bull brothers who made all sorts of either unique or short run things like custom sights, grips, barrel twists, groove counts ect.

It's impossible to know everything they built and tested on the Trapdoor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brimstone

There are so many one off test rifles these companies have made for testing that most are not known to have ever existed until they just pop up out of a barn or closet.

With Remington's records having gone up in smoke in one of the fires way back when, we'll never know a lot. We do know there was a lot based on things like the above.
Writings, notes, anything outside the Remington fire.

Springfield Arsenal itself was in a state of constant testing. Bull barrel? Gets that name from the Bull brothers involved in the arsenal. Same Bull brothers who made all sorts of either unique or short run things like custom sights, grips, barrel twists, groove counts ect.

It's impossible to know everything they built and tested on the Trapdoor.

---

Ding Ding Ding, we have a winner,

Yes, it is in part with the experimental rifles that may be long gone.

Just like the "Milbank Primed"]Winchester Milbank Primed, .45 cal., Lever-Action Musket tested in 1873. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...WqMsX-oZ4/edit

There was the Springfield 1872 roller, as well.

Attachment 325689

It was mentioned the the .45 cal. cartridge, used in both the Remington (Snyder Ejection) and the Winchester, resembled that of a folded-head Dutch cartridge.

Here is the drawing of the head of the folded-head .45 cal. Dutch cartridge.
Attachment 325691



And the Solid-Head Class 4 .45 cal. Dutch Cartridge
Attachment 325690

The Allin conversion was first used with a fairly stock 58 musket, and used the 58 cal Rimfire bullet.
Then in 1866, I believe, they went to a 50 caliber barrel, lining the 58s to use Surplus parts.
Somehow the military thought being about to hit a target at 500+ yards was important, so many tests were performed. The 45 caliber, v using the same charge of 70grs, proved to more adept at hitting a target at a quarter mile.
Everyone wanted the military contract, but not paying a civilian company or using their patent saved the Govt. Money.
That's all that mattered, the ones wearing Stars didn't have to face an enemy with a lackluster arm.

The Peabody actually won the 1872 trials for functionality, strength, and speed of manipulation. The Trapdoor was adopted as the best one the govt. could afford. The trapdoor was and is great weapon, gave long service, but was not the best design available at the time. They even tested the (Peabody)-Martini-Henry, but the US was still not ready to consider a hammerless design. (Witness the bankruptcy of the Sharps Rifle Company as late as 1881, while offering the superior and very strong Sharps Borchardt action, with one of the fastest lock times of the era, yet Americans still wanted a visible hammer on their rifles!)