WTS : Burnside style Remington Navy carbine BARREL only

[Story]

.50 three groove bore with a mirror finish.
@ 22" OAL, with an exterior now a nice brown-plum finish. Only markings are a '56' on the underside and a four digit serial on the side.
Replace that rotted barrel of yours for $300 + shipping USPS MO.
http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l128/Storyforu/CARBINE_5.jpg
http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l128/Storyforu/CARBINE_4.jpg
http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l128/Storyforu/CARBINE_3.jpg
http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l128/Storyforu/CARBINE_2.jpg

[Fox Creek Kid]

...with a mirror finish...

No offense, but in the second photo I see at 9 o'clock what appears to be a large divot just a bit into the barrel or am I mistaken? 

[DJ]

Your barrel looks like a rolling block carbine barrel rather than a Spencer.  It doesn't have the extractor slot at the 9 o'clock position one would expect for a Burnside Spencer.  I suppose it could have been adapted for a Lane extractor, but I didn't think Burnside made any of those, so this would be some kind of post-production modification.  The front sight looks more Remington than a Spencer.  A Spencer carbine barrel should have the serial number on the bottom, not the side (although there were some full-length rifles with the serial number on the side).  A photo of the rear sight mounting area would probably help confirm the identity of this barrel.  

[Advertising]

[Arizona Trooper]

That is a model 1868 Remington Rolling Block Navy carbine barrel. There should be an anchor stamp on top just ahead of where it screws into the receiver. The chamber is for 50 carbine ammo. It is now a very rare cartridge, only these carbines and some cadet rifles were chambered for it. It is a center fire round about 0.1" longer than a 56-50. The front sight fits a Burnside perfectly by hte way.

The barrels were condemned by the Navy because the groove diameter was 0.515" rather than the specified 0.509". Remington rebarreled the whole lot and sold the old barrels to E.B.White, where they languished in storage until Dixie Gunworks bought out White in the 1950s. I bought several barrels from Dixie for about $35 each back in the 70s. These are great project barrels. Three went on M-1868 Trapdoor carbine reproductions after some remachining. They turned out to be excellent shooters.

[Herbert]

That is a model 1868 Remington Rolling Block Navy carbine barrel. There should be an anchor stamp on top just ahead of where it screws into the receiver. The chamber is for 50 carbine ammo. It is now a very rare cartridge, only these carbines and some cadet rifles were chambered for it. It is a center fire round about 0.1" longer than a 56-50. The front sight fits a Burnside perfectly by hte way.

The barrels were condemned by the Navy because the groove diameter was 0.515" rather than the specified 0.509". Remington rebarreled the whole lot and sold the old barrels to E.B.White, where they languished in storage until Dixie Gunworks bought out White in the 1950s. I bought several barrels from Dixie for about $35 each back in the 70s. These are great project barrels. Three went on M-1868 Trapdoor carbine reproductions after some remachining. They turned out to be excellent shooters.

Well spoted,I have a Egyptian rolling block that the barrel profile is almost identical but the extractor cut is on the left hand side,did the US ones youse a Lane type extractor

[DJ]

The Remington carbines used a square stud set into the breechblock as an extractor.  I've never disassembled one, but I suspect they were just a square-headed screw threaded into the block.  As the breechblock is rotated to open the breech, the extractor pulls (or pushes) the case back.  As I recall, the Remington .50 cal Navy pistols (Models 1865, 1867) have the same arrangement.  The function is similar to a Lane extractor in that it pivots on a rotating block set beneath the barrel, and the extractor passes along a slot in the barrel shank at the bottom of the barrel, but the two types of extractors are otherwise very different in design.

[Story]

Howdy, all - I just circled back to this post after doing a bit of research and after much back-n-forth, came to the same conclusions - yes, it's an 1868 Remington Navy carbine barrel. Should have checked back here sooner and saved myself the education.

Question is - could it be in .56 Spencer ('56' on the barrel), of the type cobbled up by Remington and sold to the French during their tiff with Bismarck?

Only a chamber cast will tell for sure - searching for some cerrosafe locally.

Stay tuned, and thanks for all the input.

[Story]

There should be an anchor stamp on top just ahead of where it screws into the receiver. The chamber is for 50 carbine ammo. y.

There is, btw.

[DJ]

Anything's possible, but I have never heard of the 1868 Navy barrels being rechambered for the Spencer cartridge or used on French (or any other nation's) rolling blocks.  However, I have heard of rolling blocks chambered for a Spencer cartridge.  And I suspect Spencer cartridges would fit in the Navy chamber without alteration, so it would be merely a matter of swapping in a rimfire breechblock.  

A sidenote:  I recently read about a Canadian militia practice of which I was unaware:  in order to simplify ammo supply in the 1860's-70's timeframe they reportedly used Spencer ammo (would have been .56-.52 or .56-.50, for the 1865 models) in both their Spencers and their Peabody rifles.  Both the Spencer and Peabody cartridges were rimfires, and both nominally .50 caliber, but the Peabody cartridge was significantly longer and held 50% more powder than the Spencer.  Kind of a precursor to shooting .38 Special in a .357 Mag, although on a much larger scale.  The Canadians also apparently complained to the Providence Tool Company (manufacturer of the Peabody) about the inaccuracy of the Peabody rifles when used with Spencer ammo, which was, of course, not the ammo intended for use in their Peabodys.

[Story]

Anything's possible, but I have never heard of the 1868 Navy barrels being rechambered for the Spencer cartridge or used on French (or any other nation's) rolling blocks.  However, I have heard of rolling blocks chambered for a Spencer cartridge.  And I suspect Spencer cartridges would fit in the Navy chamber without alteration, so it would be merely a matter of swapping in a rimfire breechblock.    

Threads like this are a learning opportunity for all.

Remington also took the opportunity to rid itself of Rolling Block carbines in .56-50 Spencer rimfire that had been built in hopes of a government contract that had never materialized.

The rifles of the Franco-Prussian War 1870-1871: the French were caught in transition from muzzleloaders to the Chassepot bolt-action. They scrambled to find substitutes, many of them from the USA.
SHOTGUN NEWS, 20 August 2010
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+rifles+of+the+Franco-Prussian+War+1870-1871%3A+the+French+were...-a0236643363

[Story]

No offense, but in the second photo I see at 9 o'clock what appears to be a large divot just a bit into the barrel or am I mistaken? 

No offense, but you are mistaken.

Was a glob of *something* that brushed out.

[Arizona Trooper]

56-50 Spencer CF does shoot just fine in 50 carbine chambers. At short ranges I haven't seen a big difference in accuracy. Also, you can load 50 carbine ammo in 56-50 cases by just seating the bullet out a little father.