Old muzzleloader shotgun - Need info

[DCMatt]

Old muzzleloader rifle - Additional pictures

I got this old shotgun from the wife of a buddy of mine who passed away suddenly about a year ago. About all I can see on the markings are a crown, a few numbers and letters, and a small crown over V. No markings on the barrel are visible. The letters _could_ be R 1845.

Any of you gun guys recognize? Any info is appreciated.







Happy New Year!

DCMatt

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[Jason in Enid]

I can't help with exact details, but it's definitely British military.

 

[Gunrunner61]

Damn! what a Bore!!!..........................................HH

 

[TheCannonballGuy]

The marking is "Tower 1945" ...and the small crown has the British Broad-Arrow mark under it, not a V. The Broad-Arrow mark was used to denote "Property of His/Her Majesty's Government" on items which had been inspected and approved for service in the British miltary forces.

Your photos don't show us quite enough key characteristics of the gun for certainty of identification. But based on the presence of the Broad-Arrow mark and "Tower 1845" markings, it is probably the primary rifle of the British army at that time ...a .704-caliber Brunswick rifle. You can view photos and info about it, here: British military rifles - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Let us know if it's a match. Note, there were four models (1836, 1840, 1841, and 1848), so there may be some variation between yours and the model in the photo.

 

[l.cutler]

It looks more like a British pattern 1842 musket that has been converted to a shotgun. Could have been an early Civil War import converted post war.

 

[NOLA_Ken]

It looks to me to be possibly a Volunteer Pattern 1839 Carbine.

 

[DCMatt]

Gentlemen - Thanks for all the info. It does appear to be a Brunswick Rifle. The little bit of research I did this morning is inconclusive as to model.

In my opinion, it is in poor condition. I was going to clean it up a little to use in my living history presentations.

I want to make a fair offer on this gun. Any thoughts?

DCMatt

 

[NOLA_Ken]

IMA is selling them in rough condition with the bayonet for around 400$ but those are unmodified guns, and they are FILTHY!

 

[TheCannonballGuy]

As you probably already know, after the civil war ended a great many "war surplus" army rifles were bought by civilians, who modified those rifles' shape according to personal preference, such as shortening the long barrel and the forestock's length. Those modifications significantly diminish a historical rifle's collector-value.

As I mentioned previously, you didn't post enough photos showing the gun's distinctive characteristics. Examples: You didn't show whether the stock has a patchbox, or not, and how many ramrod guide pipe/thimbles it has. For certainty about its ID as either a Brunswick Rifle or a Model-1839 Musket (and whether it has been modified or not), you'll need to check details like its barrel length, forestock length, etc. If the barrel got cut down, the forestock's cap was probably also removed.

Also, I notice that the trigger-guard's rear end does not have a finger-grip flange, which most of the Brunswick rifles had.

Please let us know the result after you've checked those details.

 

[DCMatt]

As you probably already know, after the civil war ended a great many "war surplus" army rifles were bought by civilians, who modified those rifles' shape according to personal preference, such as shortening the long barrel and the forestock's length. Those modifications significantly diminish a historical rifle's collector-value.

As I mentioned previously, you didn't post enough photos showing the gun's distinctive characteristics. Examples: You didn't show whether the stock has a patchbox, or not, and how many ramrod guide pipe/thimbles it has. For certainty about its ID as either a Brunswick Rifle or a Model-1842 Musket (and whether it has been modified or not), you'll need to check details like its barrel length, forestock length, etc. If the barrel got cut down, the forestock's cap was probably also removed.

Also, I notice that the trigger-guard's rear end does not have a finger-grip flange, which most of the Brunswick rifles had.

Please let us know the result after you've checked those details.

I'll try to post more pics this evening.

I can say that there is no patchbox. The forestock has been shortened significantly. Possibly broken off then reshaped (poorly) and refinished. There are no ramrod thimbles and no ramrod. The barrel has NOT been cut down. It is over 30 inches long. The rear sight is missing.

More later.

DCMatt

 

[DCMatt]

OK I took a few more pics. Now that I know a little bit about this gun I believe it is a frankenrifle. Here it is compared to my repro 1853 Enfield.





It is similar to the reproduction gun in many ways.

DCMatt

 

[BosnMate]

Everybody is saying rifle. You state that it's a shotgun, that would be a smooth bore. Does the barrel have rifling's? If not it's a musket.

 

[DCMatt]

Everybody is saying rifle. You state that it's a shotgun, that would be a smooth bore. Does the barrel have rifling's? If not it's a musket.

Bosnmate - You are correct. It has a smooth bore so that makes it a musket. The previous owner always thought it was a shotgun because of the huge bore and the short fore stock. I made the same assumption when I posted the thread. Now I can't change the original title. That said, I think it was used as a shotgun.

DCMatt