Richmond Carbine questions

[CS Undertaker]

Does anyone have experience with the Richmond Carbine? There are two available locally, both Armi Sport but they are set up differently. One has the rear sling almost to the bottom (heel) of the stock, the other has the sling just a few inches past the trigger guard. Pictures I have found of originals has it close to the trigger guard. My question is: Is the one with the sling toward the heel incorrect?

Second question is the front sight. The one with the heel sling has a cresent moon shaped front sight that is about 3/8 inch tall, the other is a standard looking sight like on my 1862 Richmond (copy) and on my original 1863 Richmond.

Any thoughts on this rifle would be appreciated.
Thanks

Keith in PA

[Curt-Heinrich Schmidt]

Hallo!

At the obvious risk of using a Universal, of the roughly dozen original Richmond .58 Carbines I have seen and the one I used to own...

"All" of that sample pool had the sling swivel installed at roughly two (2) inches (actual measurpement 1.70) below the end of the trigger guard plate. "All" had Richmond so-called "pinched" style front sights. ( I have not compared/correlated production dates to the slightly varied forms of the pinched front sight, but the ones on originals vary a wee bit on the height of the base versus the "pinched" blade.

Richmond Arsneal reccords show the first made 200 in November of 1862, which corresponds to an armorer named C.P. Cross filling 104 Carbine sights in November. If they made 200, and had only 104 front sights, it is possible the 96 differecne might have had "surplus" M1855 RM front sights. No carbine sights were made in December, but anoterh 200 .58 carbines were.

In January 1863, William Jenkins made 256 carbine sights with only 55 .58 carbines being made.

In February 1863, for the first half of February 313 were assembled, with Cross beng back on sigth duty making 20.

None were made in March of 1863, but in March an estimated 200 carbines were assembled. But Cross was back at it, making 200 front sights.

300 were made in April, with no front sights made.

300 were made in May 1863, with Cross making 315 front sights.

500 were made in June 1863, with Cross making 570 front sights.

60 carbines were made in July with no new front sights being made.

200 in August 1863 with no front sights.

Estimated 100 for September 1863, no front sights made.

Estimated 300 for October 1863, no front sights made.

And so on...

IMHO, looking at the work records, it is possible that a very earlier production carbine duirng the front sight shortage, could have had, likely did have, RM sights until sigfht production caught up. BUT, then, the carbine would reflect that era in all features.

And/or, the numbers rise questions throught production in that the work records may not all be accurate. Maybe. So, that sights were made but did not make it into the work records? Or were they slapping on RM sights (but they should show in the random artifact pool if they did...)

Doubt it, but Dunno. I would have to read each month's records to double check.

Curt