Yuku free message boards

Dave:

I am a bit confused by your query - are you trying to identify a specific firearm you have in your possession (or have access to) or are you curious about a carbine in a photo? (I am wondering about the latter because of your statement ".... side nail cups have one ear but in the pic appear to be brass not steel ....")

Also, which book are you referring to - Skennerton's 48 page softcover SAIS No. 20 - ".577 Pattern 1853 Rifle Musket & Snider-Enfield", or his much more detailed hardcover ".577 Snider-Enfield Rifles & Carbines"?

A ramrod channel does not mean that a carbine is not a cavalry carbine, just that it is a Mark II** - i.e. converted from a muzzle-loading cavalry carbine with the captive ramrod, rather than being made from scratch as the Mark III cavalry carbines were. The 1871 lockplate date would jibe with that ..... By rights, however, I understand that such a carbine should have iron side-nail cups. However, is it possible that they just look like they might be brass? Iron can certainly take on a rather yellowish or amber tone when covered by dried oil or varnish ...... If they have only one ear, I'd say that the cups likely are iron, regardless of their tonal appearance.

(Mind you, I seem to recall a past discussion of a similar carbine with one-eared brass side-nail cups. IIRC, the consensus was that "it is what it is" and an example of yet another variant apparently not covered in the books.)

I agree that is not a ramrod/clearing rod hole, which would be well clear of the barrel.

With the exception of the brass sidenail cups - if they are, indeed, brass - it would appear to be a standard Mark III cavalry carbine, with a hole or channel made at the bottom of the barrel recess for some reason .....