Turner Slings
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: here is 50-70 Conversion for comment?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    328

    Default here is 50-70 Conversion for comment?

    I know nothing about these, but since you don't see these often, perhaps Dick can give us his insights?

    http://buy.gunauction.com/10614533/u...-no-ffl-needed.

    Certainly looks good!


  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    356

    Default

    Model 1868, 50-70 cal.
    Last edited by JimF; 11-02-2011 at 04:34.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    1,988

    Default

    Sorry, Jim. Not so - the "Second Allin" is the Model 1866, which preceded this one, and actually was a "conversion".

    This is a Model 1868 Rifle, made as a new rifle (not a conversion, though some old parts were used) in its' second year of production, physically complete and totally correct, very fair price. Big problem: someone has cleaned it to within an inch of its' life.
    Last edited by Dick Hosmer; 11-02-2011 at 04:38.
    I never believed there were SO many STUPID people in this country. Start working now to take the Senate in 2014.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    103

    Default

    Whew, I was just about to break out the Ajax and a scrubber so mine could shine like that....

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    356

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dick Hosmer View Post
    Sorry, Jim. Not so - the "Second Allin" is the Model 1866, which preceded this one, and actually was a "conversion".

    This is a Model 1868 Rifle, made as a new rifle (not a conversion, though some old parts were used) in its' second year of production, physically complete and totally correct, very fair price. Big problem: someone has cleaned it to within an inch of its' life.
    Yup, Dick . . . .

    I noticed my mistake almost immediately! . . . then edited/corrected my post.

    I've confused the M66 and M68 before (don't really know just WHY, as the two are very easily distinguised) . . . . guess my 70-yr.-old brain is too slow on the up-take. --Jim

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    328

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    1,988

    Default

    That's a little crisper, and has been cleaned, but not as recently, and not as hard. You see, the block and receiver were oil-hardened, thus originally black, while the hammer and lockplate were color (water) case-hardened. Stock has not been sanded - see how sharp the flats are? The lock colors are the first to go, but a really nice specimen will show a distinct difference in tone between receiver and barrel. The $700 reduction is telling - it actually MIGHT sell at the new price, especially when you figure the bayonet is worth around $150-200. M1855 (yes, they're that old - fitting all muskets from that date to 1870) bayonets are not as common as would be expected, since they were swaged down and blued for use on the .45-70. "Commercial" quantities were exhausted by 1890.
    I never believed there were SO many STUPID people in this country. Start working now to take the Senate in 2014.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts