likelihood of a trapdoor used by indians?

[T. O'Heir]

"...the rationale of the day..." Was that the officers didn't trust the men serving under them. Wasn't just in the U.S. Army either. Officers were educated and aristocrats in most armies, the U.S. Army included. And a lot of the troopies chasing Indians were ex-Confederates. With a bunch of black troopies as well. The wealthy didn't trust any of 'em.
And the Generals were still thinking in terms of Napoleonic tactics. Even as late as W.W. I, the PBI's job was to break the enemy's line for the cavalry to rush through and exploit the break through.
"...changing to a new round was deemed excessive..." There was literally billions of M1906 rounds(over 2 billion rounds) left over from W.W. I. Wasn't until 1936 that it began to run out.
"...the likelihood of this actually is..." Possible but impossible to prove. There are no records of stuff like that.

 

[aarondhgraham]

Is this a trap-door?

If it was good enough for Geronimo,,,

Aarond

.

 

[kraigwy]

The army use to give 50-70 & 45-70 ammo to civilians in an attempt to get people to kill off the buffalo, making it easier to get the Indians onto reservations.

Stands to reason there had to be a lot of trapdoors out there. If you were to tour the museums in the west you'd find a lot of pictures of Indians, civilians, and everyone else with the Trap doors.

Most of the rifles (or pictures of rifles) I've seen, owned my Indians were decorated with brass and other items. Civilian, Military Rifles not so much.

I do have a 50-70 Trapdoor that has a series of notches cut in the stock. I first thought they were put there to allow for better grip on the forearm but, the notches are only on one side of the forearm and in the wrong pace for proper sling usage.

Anyway, the trapdoors of 1868 would have been 50-70. Soldiers in 1877 would have been the 45-70. Like now (or pre M14 military rifles), surplus military arms even in the 1800s were sold or given to civilians and like the surplus rifles of the 1900s, it would be near impossible to trace. Or, it would be difficult (with the info we have) to prove or dis-prove the rifle you mentioned was used in the Nez Perce War. If the individual was a soldier, he would have been issued the Model 73 (45-70), not the '68 50-70. If it was an Indian or civilian, its anyone's guess.

Top is the 45-70, bottom is the 50-70

 

[Lohman446]

My understanding has been that in the expansion of the west private individuals were often armed with much better quality equipment then military soldiers.

 

[44 AMP]

My understanding has been that in the expansion of the west private individuals were often armed with much better quality equipment then military soldiers.

Often, yes, when the private individuals could afford it.

 

[Mike Irwin]

"As late as the Spanish American War, many state militia units were still armed with the Trapdoor. They gave a rather poor showing against the Spanish armed with Mauser bolt actions, and even our most modern rifle, the Krag, came off second best, which is why we developed and adopted the 1903 Springfield."

State Guard units in some states were still armed, at least partially, with Trapdoor Springfields into the 1930s, and Trapdoors were issued to troops guarding some domestic facilities into the 1940s.

 

[44 AMP]

Trapdoors were issued to troops guarding some domestic facilities into the 1940s.

There are times when having a rifle, ANY rifle (that still works) is better than not having one...

I look at the pictures of the British Home Guard, waiting for the Nazi invasion, drilling with broomsticks and pitchforks, because that's ALL THEY HAD....

They would have been very pleased to have had Trapdoors and some ammo at that time, I'm thinking...Something that would give them at least ONE shot, anyway...

 

[Tinbucket]

Likelyhood of a trapdoor used by Indians

A lot of them were I supposed.
Uncle had a double barrelflintlock passed down from GGGGfather Cherokee appx 1790s. He decorated it with tacks and paint in red blue and yellow, in Cheverons from buttstock forward. I think he burned it because he though the Indians were the devil never thinking he was part Indian.
It was converted to percussion cap sometime in it's life.

 

[SIGSHR]

Given the difficulties of resupply and transport the Army had in the Indian Wars, I don't concerns about "wasting" ammunition were unrealistic. Of course inadequate marksmanship training doesn't help. IMHO the 45-70 compared favorably to contemporary military rifles such as the Dreyse, the Chassepot, the Snider-Enfield, the Martini. The Army had tight budgets after the Civil War, ceilings on manpower, the Trapdoor was a compromise-and a very good one IMHO.
In Cuba we had the disadvantages that the Spaniards were well dug in, on high ground, knew the ranges etc. A Rough Rider told the 71st New York as the moved up in support "You can't see 'em."

 

[James K]

There was another factor in continuing use of the .30-'06 rather than going to the .276 Pedersen, and that was that the .30 had to be kept for MG use, where anti-aircraft and anti-vehicle capability was needed that the .276 could not supply. IMHO, had the US adopted the .276, and re-equipped its entire army, with .276 caliber rifles and MG's, WWII would have taught us a harsh lesson.

Jim

 

[Buzzard Bait]

it was

WW2 was a harsh lesson