Trapdoor Springfield

[ligonierbill]

An iconic American rifle, but in doing some reading, I have found some disdain. Some even call it the "crapdoor". The original idea was certainly innovative but a make do with Civil War surplus muzzleloaders. Regardless, I am going to buy one. What do all y'all think of these rifles?

 

[mete]

I've seen some fascinating information of the design details of the gun For what it was it was pretty good !
Did it work ? Look at the old John Wayne movie where an Indian attacks a train.[Stage Coach ? ]
At full gallop he fires , reloads , and fires again !! It certainly wasn't a toy !

 

[Model12Win]

"Crapdoor"?

Wow, sounds like a retarded saying you got off the internet. Obviously not a contemporary term, not sure where you heard that but it's ridiculous. Trapdoor are cool and historic for sure.

 

[ligonierbill]

No, actually saw the term on paper recently. Referring to reports that the Springfield had a tendency to jam under heavy use in combat. Some things aren't so obvious.

 

[NoSecondBest]

No, actually saw the term on paper recently. Referring to reports that the Springfield had a tendency to jam under heavy use in combat. Some things aren't so obvious.

Jamming wasn't the guns fault. The US Govn't decided to send Custer into battle with cartridges made out of copper. Upon firing the case body separated from the rim and jammed the gun. Many of those soldiers had to use their knives to try to remove the rim during the heat of battle. Brass cartridges don't do that.

 

[kraigwy]

I have two, a 50-70 Trapdoor and a 45-70 Trapdoor, I love these rifles and shoot them both. I find with correct loads they are accurate, even at distance.

The 45-70 had excellent sights and match my loads as far as you can see to shoot. The older 50-70 sights leave a bit to be desired. There are no yardage markings and the slider slides during firing. But without using the slider part of the sight, it too is fairly accurate.

I use "trapdoor" safe smokeless powder in my 45-70, matching the velocity of the Army's 405 BP loading.

The strength of the 50-70 concerns me so I only use Black Powder with it.

My biggest problem is keeping ammo loaded for my granddaughter.

 

[ligonierbill]

I am seriously looking at an "1884" model that has the improved sights. I will be loading Alliant Black MZ blackpowder substitute. It was recommended to me last year, and it has worked very well for me in 50-70 (Remington Rolling Block) and .41 Long Colt. Going out today to give it a try with 44-40 and 38-55.

 

[DPris]

As No says- the "jamming" problems were entirely ammo-related.
The Trapdoor's action is not one of the strongest, but if you keep loads down to what's commonly referred to as "Trapdoor Levels", it's a perfectly serviceable rifle.

And....VERY cool.
Denis

 

[T. O'Heir]

There were a lot of issues with TD's historically. Grant's administration was notoriously corrupt and the whole adoption of the TD was ripe with fraud. Worse when one remembers the Spencer was a repeater that got replaced with a single shot. All of it happened 10 years before Custer was chasing Indians around too. Mind you, the 1866 TD was still a big surprised to Red Cloud.
"...cartridges made out of copper..." That was mostly a lack of technology thing for the time.

 

[NoSecondBest]

"...cartridges made out of copper..." That was mostly a lack of technology thing for the time.

Not so. After the battle the Army conducted an inquiry about the copper cartridges and determined they'd change to brass to prevent another catastrophe like this one. Brass was available, it just cost more. I guess they wouldn't have bought any six hundred dollar toilet seats back then. Maybe that's when their thinking changed on cost.

 

[Wyosmith]

Ligonierbill, if you have not bought one yet, PM me. I am helping an old friends family with his estate sale after he passed on last year, and he had 5 of them that are going to be sold.
Let me know if you'd be interested and I can probably send you pictures.
I am in Wyoming
Where are you?

 

[ligonierbill]

PM sent - from southern OH-IO.

 

[44 AMP]

"...cartridges made out of copper..."

A note about the copper cases, they weren't just copper.

The bulk of the .45-70 ammo (and used at Little Big Horn) was made from copper FOIL (not drawn copper) layered and wrapped over an iron disc (washer) which formed the case rim.

The iron disc was covered by the copper foil so it wasn't visible as the separate piece that it was.

The bullet was a 420gr RN with a charge of 55gr of black powder.
(the now classic 500gr infantry and 404gr cavalry loads didn't appear until after Little Bighorn)

Drawn brass cases did exist at the time, and so did drawn copper cases. The copper foil & iron base cases were CHEAPER.

And in that time, cheap was a big deal for the Army. Cheap is WHY they chose the Trapdoor Springfield. Not only the money savings using musket parts but also the fellow who designed the Trapdoor action worked at Springfield Arsenal, and so the Govt "owned" the design and paid no royalties to anyone else.

Compared to a muzzle loading rifle, the Trapdoor was a great gun, you could load it, shoot it, and do it again while lying down!!

The jamming problems when it got hot, was entirely ammo caused, The thin copper foil case would stick, and the extractor would tear the iron disc off,. instant jam.

Trapdoors are fun bits of past history. Many disparage the Army's choice to go with the Trapdoor, when lever action repeaters were available. Cost was certainly a factor, but what "firepower over all" advocates mostly overlook is that none of the available repeaters was much good beyond 200yds, and a .45-70 will drop a horse, at much greater range.

 

[Model12Win]

Paderossli (or Umberto) or whatever from Italy makes a repro of the Trapdoor, both rifle and carbine.

Many say they are near as expensive as the real deal and are not very close to the originals. I would avoid them.

 

[DPris]

Pedersoli.
They're good guns & proofed for smokeless powder loads.
Denis

 

[NoSecondBest]

I've owned a number of Pedersoli guns and will attest to their sterling quality. They use modern state of the art CNC equipment to produce their guns and their wood and metal is second to none. I've owned a couple of Sharps in 45-70 that could shoot MOA on the days I could, with several different loads. If you want a testimonial to their quality and customer satisfaction, ask people who actually own them. I'm not sure I'd seriously consider "hear-say" second hand comments in deciding whether or not to buy the gun.

 

[SIGSHR]

I carried an M1888 up San Juan Hill in 1898
Problems with the ammunition-sounds like the M-16 in 1967, no ?
The Spencer-NIH. Also compared to the 45-70 its rounds lacked range and punch. Troops wasting ammunition ? -when you're totally dependent on horses and mule trains traveling over rough and non-existent roads, you're 100 miles or more from the nearest railhead or landing dock....

 

[44 AMP]

Problems with the ammunition-sounds like the M-16 in 1967, no ?

Same root cause, unsuitable ammo. Much different in detail, but same end result, dead troops because of jammed rifles.

The Trapdoor Springfield was not cutting edge technology when adopted, but it matched or over matched its mostly likely opponents at the time. It was a breechloader!!!

There is always someone on the end of the military's upgrade list, and large numbers of Trapdoors were still in service with reserve units when the .30-40 Krag was the standard issue. Unfortunately, sometimes those units that are the last to get new rifles are not the last to be sent into combat.

(this appears to be a repeating thing during the 19th & 20th centuries)

I believe the basic load (carried on the body) for the Trapdoor armed trooper was 40 rnds.

I know that in 1942, we landed Marines on Guadalcanal, armed with 1903 Springfields, NOT M1 Garands (the current cutting edge tech), and their basic load was also 40 rnds. And, I have heard from people who were there, that those 40 rnds were expected to last them 2 weeks in combat!!

(this was, of course BEFORE combat was joined, and many lessons learned.)

Some units fought through the end of WWII combat with the bolt action Springfield, never getting the M1 Garand.

The M1 Garand armed troops carried more ammo as a basic load, 96rnds (again, it I remember right) a bandolier of a dozen 8rnd enbloc clips.

sorry for the drift, I just can't help but think of the people who I hear saying 7.62 NATO is too heavy 5.56mm is better, because of the weight, what would they think if they had to carry "only" 40 rnds of .45-70??

 

[mete]

I worked with a guy who had been BAR Man in the Marines . He had to do all the exercises at 20 ponds that the others did with 10lbs !!

The foil rolled cartridges were there before the 'back extruded ' cases were perfected . during wartime development gets to be fast and sometimes they want to go from concept to full production without proper development .BTDT
In WWII our torpedoes carried by subs were poor . A group of officers ,risking their careers , forced the Navy to finally develop a good torpedo - In Oct 1942 !
My job during VN was solving production problems including rapid development . Lots of fun !!

 

[Mike Irwin]

"A note about the copper cases, they weren't just copper.

The bulk of the .45-70 ammo (and used at Little Big Horn) was made from copper FOIL (not drawn copper) layered and wrapped over an iron disc (washer) which formed the case rim.

The iron disc was covered by the copper foil so it wasn't visible as the separate piece that it was."

Uhm... no.

By the time the .45-70 was adopted as the standard US military cartridge, cartridges manufactured using the Rodman and Crispin composite process had been abandoned.

This is an example of a VERY early Frankford Arsenal .50-70 cartridge made using the Rodman/Crispin patents.

https://thefiringline.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=103228&d=1476097315

Notice that the iron washer rim is perfectly exposed. In this kind of composit cartridge it HAS to be, because, along with the "cup" case head and the primer, it all serves as a rivet assembly to keep the case together.

This is very similar to the early .577 Snider and .577-.450 Martini-Henry cartridges used by the British.

Later Frankford Arsenal .50-70 ammunition was manufactured using drawn copper cases, a practice with continued with the adoption of the .45-70.

The standard priming system used at the time, the Benet, was an internal centerfire, which would have made an iron washer rim unworkable.

The early Benet case inserts, which formed the anvil for the primer, WERE iron.

The US military adopted drawn copper for its .45-70 rounds for a simple reason -- the ability to deep draw brass in the length needed for the cartridge was, at the time, an extremely immature technology and resulted in a significant number of unusable cases.

The military rightfully decided to use copper and allow the US commercial side to develop the technology for deep drawing brass fully. Once the process became mature, in the early 1880s, Frankford Arsenal switched.