What a beautiful piece of work! Made by Falisse & Trapmann for Brazilian cavalry in 1873 and converted by unknown, possibly the factory, to centerfire in 1877 according to what I have read.. Serial numbers matching breach block, carrier block, cocking handle, forend ring, barrel on bottom, receiver on front, butt plate, forend wood, tubular magazine and handle with both Belgian and Brazilian proof marks. Looks all original. Sorry about the photos.
(https://up.picr.de/48795324xx.jpeg)
(https://up.picr.de/48795336jm.jpeg)
(https://up.picr.de/48795332lb.jpeg)
(https://up.picr.de/48795329jw.jpeg)
(https://up.picr.de/48795335pv.jpeg)
(https://up.picr.de/48795323ww.jpeg)
There re many more photos so if there is something that you want to see please let me know. As far as the barrel twist, I have misplace my rifle cleaning rod and cannot provide that at this time. The bore looks pretty clean but I haven't given it a good
(https://up.picr.de/48795330yp.jpeg)
Thank you for looking.
Thanks, John:
Lucky you.
More photo's please.
Will standby on twist.
What related stuff are you seeking, please?
Smiles,
El Supremo/Kevin Tinny
Kevin, Thanks! The only thing that I would love to find is a Brazilian, Belgian or other period made 56-50 center fire cartridge but they appear to be rare as hen's teeth.
(https://up.picr.de/48795334pg.jpeg)
(https://up.picr.de/48795333ww.jpeg)
(https://up.picr.de/48795326tj.jpeg)
(https://up.picr.de/48795331ac.jpeg)
(https://up.picr.de/48795327gv.jpeg)
(https://up.picr.de/48795325kl.jpeg)
Used a 6-inch pistol cleaning rod with a bearing in the handle and a jag with patch to measure twist and it made a 1/4 turn in 6-inches. Did this 5 times and it was a 1/4-turn each time. Does this equal 24:1 twist or are my complete lack of math skills coming back to haunt me.
Thanks, John:
Your 4X6 twist at 24" helps.
"HERBERT" a SSS Member, posted a while ago that he owned a Belgian Spencer with 24" twist, and that it shot well with 350-380gr. bullets.
Marcot shows a French rimfire Spencer cartridge, but not a center-fire cartridge. I will ask a friend in Maine who sees Spencer cartridges at gun shows to help. If you have a photo of one, please add it to your Thread. Smiles.
El Supremo/Kevin Tinny
Hello, John:
More on cartridge:
Searched the Internet for Belgian and Brazilian 56-50 cartridges. A website popped: WWW.Munitions.org.
Using its search box, two vintage centerfire cartridge photo's are presented. I emailed them, since I cannot Post here via my DROID cell. Perhaps, please, you can add them to this Thread. Maybe someone will share more about them and IF any might be available.
Also, your much appreciated photo's do not show a blade extractor. Maybe the Lane version is used.
The photo's appear to show cases that might be duplicated with modern ones. I can send you some 56-50 centerfire cases to test fit.
El Supremo/Kevin Tinny
Thanks for the information Kevin! I'd love to get ahold of a fresh 56-50 centerfire case. I am happy to pay for one.
As far as the extractor, see the photos below. I don't know Spencer's that well yet but there is a blade that slides along the inside of the receiver. It is smaller/shorter than the one in my 1860.
(https://up.picr.de/48797957na.jpeg)
(https://up.picr.de/48798002hc.jpeg)
Big help, John:
I noticed a dark line on the inside of the action in a photo. Your latest photo seems to show the shorter blade, spring assisted version, not the Lane that rests at 6:00 relative to the chamber.
Thanks for your PM'd contact info. I sent some cases, etc for test fitting. They have a lightly wider rim OD and should extract better vs. STARLINE's with narrower rim OD. I can supply cast bullets to simplify your process.
My next pkg will include some bullets to use for measuring the bore's groove and land diameters. I see .516" groove and .500" land OD's in 1865 Models, but have no info on the Belgian ones. It's simple to gently drive a slightly oversized slug into the muzzle for preliminary dimensions. If you have no measuring tools, I can do it if you return the slugs to me.
Your Belgian Spencer presents a great opportunity to gather more
Info that is not in Marcot. Perhaps you can share:
1. Is the firing pin spring loaded so it retracts below the block face before the block is lowered?
2. What are the thicknesses of the receiver at the top, front and above the lever? These vary with other Spencer 56-50 models.
3. Please try to post a close-up, sharp photo through the buttplate opening that shows the butt end of the outer magazine tube.
4. Oh, what is the approx. length of the chamber? Another Belgian Spencer seems, from.an Internet Auction site, to be converted to 50-90. I am not sure how a much longer 50-90 could be even single loaed. Maybe the auction house is mistaken.
Many thanks, John.
El Supremo/Kevin Tinny
1. Is the firing pin spring loaded so it retracts below the block face before the block is lowered?
I don't think so but I don't know how to check this?
2. What are the thicknesses of the receiver at the top, front and above the lever? These vary with other Spencer 56-50 models.
Top of receiver 1.159"
Front of receiver 1.173"
Above the lever 1.013"
- Please note these were taken with a dial caliper - i have had so-so accuracy with these -I have a digital in a box somewhere that I will try to find
3. Please try to post a close-up, sharp photo through the buttplate opening that shows the butt end of the outer magazine tube.
See photo
(https://up.picr.de/48806477qn.jpeg)
4. Oh, what is the approx. length of the chamber?
1.16" but it is very approximate - see photo below
(https://up.picr.de/48806476nn.jpeg)
Another Belgian Spencer seems, from.an Internet Auction site, to be converted to 50-90. I am not sure how a much longer 50-90 could be even single loaed. Maybe the auction house is mistaken.
See photo above. I don't see how a 50-90 fits
I'm also curious about the firing pin. It doesn't appear to have a retaining screw on the side, and from the rear it appears to be dovetailed into the block. Does it just slide back a little and then lift out?
As for whether it is spring-loaded, if there's a working spring, when the action is open, you should be able to slide the firing pin forward, and it would slide back when you release it. From photo #4 (top of open action) it appears that the firing pin is in the forward position, which suggests no spring, or at least a spring that isn't working.
Liking the detailed photos.
--DJ
Please excuse my terminology. I haven't learned to speak Spencer fluently yet. You are correct that the there is no retaining screw on the flat firing pin on the side of the breach block but I don't know how you remove it? It does not just lift out unless this one is stuck. The rest of the round pin that is within the block and strikes the centerfire cartridge does not appear to have a spring associate with it. If you lever the action vigorously the pin falls back into the block. If you lever it slowly it stays protruding until it is fully open. That is the best I can describe it. If you have additional questions, I will try to answer them.
Were these manufactured from scratch, or did they start with Spencers imported into Belgium. All the serial #'s tell me they were hand-fitted.
Matt, Good question! Hopefully others with more knowledge will reply. What little I know is that Marcot 1983:157-158 calls them copies but admits little is known. I think that I read somewhere that someone has argued they were made with old Spencer machinery but I cannot find the reference at the moment. Howsoever they were manufactured, these Spencers are very well made. Thanks for the reply.
Thanks to Kevin/El Supremo, I was able to place a dummy round into the chamber (it fit like glove) and eject it. Smooth as silk. I also put 3 dummy rounds in the mag tube and cycled the action. Again, wonderfully smooth with ejections that tossed the round out of the breach. And was able to drive a lead fish weight through the bore and got average of 0.5155 groove and 0.496 land. Reading about taking it apart to clean now.
;D Like button!
Thanks Deacon!
I don't know anything about Spencer rifles, but I am enjoying the posts. Thanks.
Thanks Lucky!
More. I finally took the lock plate off - the internals look different from the other Belgian that I have seen. The buggered screws are not my doing.
(https://up.picr.de/48838066nq.jpeg)
(https://up.picr.de/48838065tn.jpeg)
(https://up.picr.de/48838073cs.jpeg)
Wonderfully done close shots of the action. My wonderment is the interesting 'plate' addition to the magazine retainer bar. My exposure to original Spenser's is limited. Is that plate common to the original rifles and carbines? I can see the plate addition as a dandy way to load and eject cartridges loaded singly over the top. A sort of ramp for positive loading and ejection. Was there ever a magazine 'cut-off' option? The 'ramp' it seems would work well for single shot work while holding the magazine rounds in reserve. Just a thought.
Johnson Barr,
Thank you for the reply. Lookup "Stabler cutoff." It was an early attempt to make the Spencer a single shot, either before or after the magazine was put into play. Apparently Spencer made a cutoff as well.
Best,
John
These are not mine but show the Stabler well.
(https://up.picr.de/48848635or.jpeg)
(https://up.picr.de/48848636xn.jpeg)
Hello:
There are two common types of magazine cutoffs on Spencer's.
One is the type shown on the Belgian one here and some U.S. ones, which takes the form of a wider cartridge feed guide that pivots slightly to one side, but also acts as a ctg. guide.
The other is the Stabler, that John shows. The lever on the bottom of the trigger bar pivots to limit the lower block travel. The rear profile of the block assembly used with a Stabler is usually a bit different than the non Stabler one. Smiles.
El Supremo/Kevin Tinny
Thanks for the 'cut-off' pics. Probably not a retro fit for my early Armi-Sport Chiappa carbine. But I do like the retainer bar plate add on. Might be just the trick for simpler single shot work. Believe I'll order a spare bar from Liz in Columbus for possible modification.
Here are a couple photos of the Spencer cutoff (as opposed to the Stabler cutoff).
The little "fork" pivots about an eighth of an inch on the cartridge guide to block the "tooth" on the lower breechblock and keep it from opening all the way.
Spencer cutoff disengaged.
Cutoff off mdm.jpg
Spencer cutoff engaged.
Cutoff on mdm.jpg
It seems kind of fragile for a military gun--I have seen cartridge guides missing the little fork, and I suspect that dinky little screw is prone to failure.
I dunno why it posted the photos twice--sorry 'bout that. But the bottom set zooms real big.
Sad on the screws, but at least they look like they can be hammered and dressed.
This gun came to me with some "issues." In addition to buggered screws, it had some wood problems and someone had filed off the serial numbers on both barrel and receiver. It's an 1865 Navy model--I suspect someone at some point was trying to mimic an M1860 Navy. I managed to recover the serial number with one of those forensic acid kits and --horrors--stamped the correct number next to the vague images of the originals. At the same show where I bought the rifle, my better half spotted an "interesting, but I don't know what it fits" bayonet that I believe is the correct bayonet for this rifle--it fits nicely. All in all it's a nice shooter at an appropriate price point.
Getting back to the Belgian Spencer, I would be interested to see details of the front and bottom of the breechblock. The half-moon cutout below the firing pin looks like it was for the retaining screw found on an original, but there is no corresponding cutout on the pin itself. The slot for your firing pin also doesn't go all the way to the front of the block. I wonder if yours was made from a partially completed block, or if it had a piece added to fill in the front portion of the firing pin slot.
Please forgive me but I am foggy this morning. I'm not sure what you need to see. The 3 yr old has been up sick since 3 this morning and is home today ruining a planned day at the range shooting the Belgian. I'm barely hanging on with a coffee IV.
This is firing pin retracted
(https://up.picr.de/48855410ul.jpeg)
(https://up.picr.de/48855408jk.jpeg)
This is firing pin extended
(https://up.picr.de/48855409qy.jpeg)
(https://up.picr.de/48855407on.jpeg)
And a shot of the block from the rear
(https://up.picr.de/48855412ow.jpeg)
Thanks for the photos. It looks like an original upper rimfire breechblock was used--that would account for the half-moon screw cutout on the right side. For conversion to center fire, it looks like they dovetailed in a chunk of steel at the front of the breechblock to fill the rimfire channel and provide a breech face with the central hole.
Since it apparently doesn't just lift out, I wonder if there is a screw on the underside that somehow retains the firing pin.
If you ever decide to disassemble the breechblock, please post photos, as there are a number of people who would be curious about how the center fire conversion was done. However, I am not suggesting that you remove the dovetailed piece at the front of the breechblock--that looks to be permanently in place and you wouldn't want to drive it out.
DJ,
Thank you for your response. I won't be taking it apart for awhile.
I was able to get out and fire the Belgian for the first time on Thursday. Ben Avery Range, 58 degrees with wind gusts up to 20mph - "cold" by Phoenix standards. I can hear you Northern, Midwestern and Eastern guys cussing from here. This was more a function test than accuracy etc. so distance was 25 yards. Fired 14 cartridges - seven from Kevin/El Supremo and 7 that I acquired. Kevin's were composed of RMC brass, Swiss 3F powder and 350gr cast bullet. The others were Starline brass, FFFG powder, and 450gr cast bullet. All the cartridges fired. The Starline brass would not eject but the RMC brass ejected every time (larger rim). The two flyers that don't show up on target were completely my fault. The trigger pull was insane - I have never felt one this heavy. Recoil was greater than I expected but chalk that up to my inexperience with the cartridge. The Belgian got a lot of attention from other shooters and Rangemasters.
Six shots with RMC brass - sent the first shot really high sighting on bullseye- with the other six I had to aim at lower target bullseye to get hits on upper target.
(https://up.picr.de/48898924ji.jpeg)
Six shots with Starline brass - lost a seventh shot way to the left - not sure what happened - I had to aim at 6 o'clock to get any strikes on same target
(https://up.picr.de/48898925gc.jpeg)
Fired cartridges - Starline on left and RMC on right - Starline was dirtier - RMC appeared to have a very slight bulge at center - don't have the experience to interpret this. El Supremo gave his opinion from photos and, as usual, it was very informative. I will not repeat it here in case he wants to post it to SSS.
(https://up.picr.de/48898926rm.jpeg)
(https://up.picr.de/48898927ts.jpeg)
The good news is the carbine functions just fine even after 151 years.
John