Re: Not a trapdoor but close
Posted: Sat Jul 22, 2023 4:26 pm
Happy to help! I've met Ed a couple of times - nice guy, and extremely knowledgeable.
U.S. Trapdoor Rifles Information Exchange
https://www.armscollectors.com/trapdoor/bb/
https://www.armscollectors.com/trapdoor/bb/viewtopic.php?t=118
Good point, but I'm not sure the 1st Allin was any better, though it certainly looked sleeker - the Miller is kind of ugly, though I suspect it might have been a stronger action. In any event, its' extractor lived on - and the government finally had to pay for the design.throck3 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 23, 2023 1:42 pm Thanks for posting these photos! I never really knew too much about the Miller Conversion. The photos answer a lot of questions, especially to why it was never seriously considered by the Ordnance Board. It appears as if would be very complicated to manufacture.
Rick T
You’re welcome Rick Tthrock3 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 23, 2023 1:42 pm Thanks for posting these photos! I never really knew too much about the Miller Conversion. The photos answer a lot of questions, especially to why it was never seriously considered by the Ordnance Board. It appears as if would be very complicated to manufacture.
Rick T
The extractor the government eventually paid on was on the 2nd variation pictured here.Dick Hosmer wrote: ↑Sun Jul 23, 2023 2:48 pmGood point, but I'm not sure the 1st Allin was any better, though it certainly looked sleeker - the Miller is kind of ugly, though I suspect it might have been a stronger action. In any event, its' extractor lived on - and the government finally had to pay for the design.throck3 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 23, 2023 1:42 pm Thanks for posting these photos! I never really knew too much about the Miller Conversion. The photos answer a lot of questions, especially to why it was never seriously considered by the Ordnance Board. It appears as if would be very complicated to manufacture.
Rick T