Pre-Purchase Carbine Assessment

[Oldguns52]

Good morning and glad to be a new member of your community.  I have the opportunity to purchase what appears to be an original Spencer carbine.   I have attached a few preliminary photos without having put my hands on it yet.  That will happen in about another week.  I have viewed many on auction sites, however have been reluctant to purchase since values seem to be all over the board.  My intent would be to convert this rifle to CF for shooting if it passes mechanical inspection.  Any guidance to the following questions would be appreciated. 

-  Having collected and shot Trapdoor rifles, I am familiar with what unscrupulous people have tried to pass off as authentic modifications.  In this regard, is there anything I should know about modifications to Spencer rifles?

- I would like to verify that barrel length to bolt face is original along with muzzle crown profile.  Can anybody provide this information?

- I will check bore with a patch along with action, hammer and magazine functions.  Any weak spots to be aware of?  Does the bolt locking device automatically make it a post civil war production?

-  From the preliminary pictures, it looks like what I would expect a 150+ year old firearm to look like.  Stock look sketchy around the toe and barrel band is loose.  If it's worthy of shooting, what might be a fair ballpark value? 

Thanks.

[Cap'n Redneck]

The "bolt locking device" is called a "Stabler cut-off", and facilitated using the carbine as a single-shot gun while keeping the seven rounds in the magazine as a back-up.

The carbines issued during the civil war had 22" barrels and lacked the Stabler cut-off.
(some 11.000. had the Stabler cut-off fitted after the war.)

The post civil war carbines had 20" barrels and about half of them had the Stabler cut-off fitted.

They were also marked "M1865" / "M1867" or "NM" (New Model) at the breech end of the barrel.

Original Spencer guns had six groove rifling, while Burnside-made Spencers and Springfield Armory re-finished Spencers had three groove rifling.

You should try to get hold of a copy of Roy Marcot's book "Spencer Repeating Firearms".
Either through commercial channels or through your local library.

[El Supremo]

Hello, Oldguns52:

Nice to have you here.
In addition to Cap'n Redneck's comments:

You asked about modifications and mechanical issues.

The photo of the right side shows what appears to be a different surface coloration on the hammer and a bright hammer screw.  If so, the hammer may be a replacement, although hopefully an original. 

To avoid responsibility issues during pre-purchase mechanical tests, from experience, I respectfully suggest that the owner, not you, manipulate it.

Also try to get actionable inspection and return privledges. 

Test the lockwork for holding at full cock and for a functional half-cock notch.

Original trigger pulls are in the 8#  - 10# range. If much lower, in the 4# -5# range, the sear and hammer notch surfaces may have been altered.  A lighter pull below 5#, often allows the hammer, when FINGER RELEASED and still pulling rearward as the hammer rotates, to cause the half-cock notch to bump on the insufficiently moved sear tip, damaging expensive and scarce parts.

Never use a spring or digital trigger pull gauge to test without a hardwood block between the fully cocked hammer and receiver cutout because they release rearward pressure as soon as the sear trips and cause half-cock impact damage.
The block should be held carefully so its dimensions allow the hammer tip to fall only 1/8", so there is no chance of bumping half-cock.

Watch for a loose hammer on the tumbler stud.  If loose, don't rely on the hammer screw to push the hammer tighter. That can break the hammer screw.  If loose, something's wrong, and it is a tricky and expensive repair.  Replacement hammers are often loose from poor fitting or from hasty cob-house repairs that have failed. 

Old guns are like old cars.  Same thinking applies. If mechanically ok, a barrel and chamber can be lined for approx. $550, by respected 'smiths such as Larry Romano in Pennellville, NY.

Joe Salter Antiques handles lots of original Spencers.  Might research his asking prices.  If I was looking and it is mechanically ok, to me it's a $2,000 - $2,400 item.  Repairs are parts plus $150/hr labor.  Parts cost lots today.  A tumbler is around $200, if available.  If  parts are needed, be sure you can get them before you complete the purchase. 

Please let us know what happens. 
Here for you. Smiles.
El Supremo/Kevin Tinny

[DJ]

This looks like an 1865 model based on Stabler cutoff and bevel on hammer nose (could also be N.M. or M1867, but almost certainly a post-CW gun). 

In addition to what others said, check the stock carefully for cracks--they tend to form along the magazine tube and are a difficult, thin wood repair.  As you noted, the toe of this one looks altered, with the lower sling swivel missing (looks like just the base is present).  Sling swivels are ridiculously difficult replacement pieces to find and expensive when you do, although not necessary for shooting.  Repair of the toe of the stock not too difficult, but whether fixed or left as-is, it is a slight (though not uncommon) negative.

Barrel band looks like a different color--this can happen with bands, but a barrel band on a Spencer is usually tight rather than loose, so might be a replacement.  Replacement originals are not too hard to find if this is not the right band.  Also, the profile in the left side view of the tip of the forend doesn't look "right" to me.  Might be the angle of the photo, but might signify damage & repair that would explain a loose band.  Since the band is loose, you should be able to pull the forend to check (don't forget to take out the screw) for damage and verify barrel serial number to receiver.

Check for evidence of excessive dry-firing.  This can cause an outward swell of the receiver where the hammer strikes (sort of like the back end of a heavily used chisel) and often marks the face of the hammer as well.  On the inside this can raise a slight lump in the chamber which could require repair to allow cartridge to chamber.  Repair can be done with careful use of Swiss files and rounded stones, but still a consideration.

Overall impression is a good gun that looks a little "scruffy."  I would not pay $2k for it.  But you rarely find a complete and gun for under $1500.  So somewhere in the high teens would seem right if it all checks out.  Of course, lower would always be better.

I don't know I would convert the original block--I suppose you could do it yourself if you have the skills, but you would be reducing the value of the original.  If you paid someone to alter the block, that would likely cost almost as much as a replacement centerfire block--I think they run about $350 these days.

[Trailrider]

"I don't know I would convert the original block--I suppose you could do it yourself if you have the skills, but you would be reducing the value of the original.  If you paid someone to alter the block, that would likely cost almost as much as a replacement centerfire block--I think they run about $350 these days."

S&S Firearms, Glendale, NY, shows the conversion block on their website for $265. You do not modify the carbine, although you might have to carefully file the front or rear surface of the conversion block if it does not just fit in as it comes. You simply remove the original block and the lever (remove the lever pivot screw, which lets the lever, lower block and the rimfire block to drop down. Then you remove the screw holding the upper block to the lower one, and install the centerfire block. Unless you have to fit the new block, it should take about 15 seconds!

You should check the barrel markings to see which model you have. The M1860 carbines were made by The Spencer Repeating Arms Company and had 22" barrels (measured from the muzzle to the face of the breechblock with the action closed. The M1865 and some later were made by Burnside. They were manufactured in 1865, but were delivered too late for use in the Civil War. Burnside carbines were issued to cavalry troops after the war for use in the Indian Wars campaigns, though a good many M1860's also were. (In 1867, one company of the 7th Cavalry was issued M1860 carbines and another had the later ones. Just depended on what was on hand from Ordnance stores.)

The M1860 carbines I have examined had barrels with the six groove rifling tapering from .545 at the breech to .535 at the muzzle. They were chambered for the #56 cartridge, aka, .56-56., which used a heel bullet and outside lubed bullets. The later ones were chambered in .56-50. rimfire, with an inside-lubed bullet measuring around .515" in diameter.  Spencer also produced a slight variation of the later, designated .56-52, which was simply a slightly bottlenecked version of the .56-50, as he felt the .56-50 had too much crimp. The last two cartridges are interchangeable, and, as a matter of fact, they could be fired in the .56-56 guns, although the accuracy would probably be pretty poor. The base and rim diameters on all three are basically the same. The "fun" part of making ammo for the .56-56 is modifying modern .50-70 brass and finding a bullet that fits, either a heel bullet, or, as I did, casting hollow-base bullets from Lyman .533476AX mould, for an inside lubed bullet. Although I did develop "safe" loads of smokeless powder (the modified .50-70 brass has the same volume and the bullets have the same sectional density (weight in grains divided by the square of the diameter) as .45LC, I would definitely advise sticking with black powder.

Best of luck!

[Oldguns52]

Gentlemen, Thanks for all the great information and your willingness to share.  Your knowledge is impressive.  I will take all of this into account when I get the opportunity to look at this old workhorse.  I will report back on my findings and no doubt have more questions.  Thanks again.