Difference in Farmingdale Sharps?

[Joe Burr]

Is there any real difference between the early Farmingdale and the current built Shiloh Sharps? What improvements/modifications have been done if any? Thanks.

[Brent]

[quote="Joe Burr"]Is there any real difference between the early Farmingdale and the current built Shiloh Sharps? What improvements/modifications have been done if any? Thanks. 8)[/quote]

I like the wood and finish on most Farmingdales better. BUT it's a pretty minor difference and one that may be entirely in my head (I own a Farmingdale).

The one thing that is really improved is the barrel/chambering. The Farmindales typically had a 0.6" long and over-groove diameter freebore. This was a SERIOUS problem. Ernie Stallman gives that Farmingdale barrel credit for his founding of Badger Barrels.

Brent

[Joe Burr]

I've heard/read about this freebore before, is it really a problem? What was the purpose behind it? Does it have an effect on accuracy performance wise, in other words, does a rifle typically shoot better without the freebore?

[Brent]

[quote="Joe Burr"]I've heard/read about this freebore before, is it really a problem? What was the purpose behind it? Does it have an effect on accuracy performance wise, in other words, does a rifle typically shoot better without the freebore? :?[/quote]

With this excessive amount of freebore, yes it does affect accuracy. A lot.
Brent

[TYRVR]

Well......the title of this posting is the MOST important difference .....the breech block was modeled after the original 1800s rifles and the wood was not as high in quality in the examples I have seen, especially the fit, firing pin was one piece and bigger than present models, the locks were also kind of crude in the interiour fit, the hammer springs were NOT uniform, as some required the use of bad language to cock the hammer, the barrels were furnished with the so called "paper patch" throat. The quality on the first Shiloh I had was not all that great....if I had not examined a later model from Montana in later years.....and seen the improvement.....I would have never owned a Shiloh again.

[Marathonman]

I've owned both. Most notable difference that I can recall is the firing pin and also the tumbler. The tumber had the high safety notch like the early original rifles did. I believe that there was also a difference in the triggers but I can't recall the particulars.

The large firing pin gave me trouble on a rechambered rifle as the primer would flow back into the breechblock on firing. Keep in mind though that this rifle did not leave the factory that way.

[Trigger Dr]

I have a farmingdale that I obtained some 20 + years back. The external appearance is to my way of thinking, nearly as good as current production. The very early guns (the actino was marked "SHILOH PRODUCTS") had the wood fitted by a furniture company and were not nearly as nice. The big difference that I see in mine is the firing pin issue. I have preyyt much retired the gun, but will bring is out again in November when I go after the WILEY BUFFLER critter.
Trigger Dr jim milner

[topgun]

I have a farmingdale military rifle. Mine was made in the 80's and let me tell you it shoots just fine. I put a marbles tang site on it and haven't shot it a lot but am completely satisfied. We talked about this gun before Joe and for the money I paid I am very happy. Kevin

[arnie]

Not all Farmindale Shiloh's had the freebore .I have one that doesnt and the barrel was made by Hall Sharon for Shiloh .Arnie

[Todd Birch]

I own two Farmingdales - one '74 Business Rifle in .45-70, the other a '63 Military in .50 calibre.
A friend owns a Farmingdale with the paper patch throat and he shoots naked 405 gr bullets (only mould he owns) getting the accuracy he wants.
I have to check on the throat in my .45-70. I know that rounds that chamber in my C.Sharps '75 won't chamber in the Shiloh '74.

I had a long talk with someone at Shiloh (Kirk Bryan?) a while back re: the high half cock on the hammer. I had read that this was a safety issue in that if the hammer slipped while being cocked, the rifle would fire.

I was told that this was historic both on the original '74s as well as the first Farmingdale '74s as tumblers made for the percussion '63s were used up for economy.

One of my pals has an original Sharps '74 converted from a '63. My Farmingdales are not embarrassed by the comparison.

I've heard that the that the large diameter firing pin is historically correct and is really only a problem with primer flow if you hot load with smokeless rounds. I once saw an article in a digest on how to bush it down to prevent this.

The obvious solution is to shoot black powder in what was designed as a black powder rifle.

Todd

[gmartin]

Well
Iv'e not much experience with '74's, but my 1978 '63 carbine with std. wood is a beautiful dark walnut that is the same butt and fore. I've also not much experience with current '63's, but I sure would like to own the rifle.
Gregg

[KHR]

Todd
My original '74 45/ 2 7/8 (made in 1876) has the large firing pin and I get primer flow with black powder, so at least in this caliber you can get firing pin flow with black. But this might be just a problem of this chambering. I'm getting it rechambered in 40/70 and hope to not have any of the primer pin problems.

keith

[Crash Landing]

If my memory serves me correctly, the rifles being described in this thread are probably from the first couple of year's production. I have two late production '74 straight grip sporting rifles (made just before the move to Montana) and they have low half-cock notches, two-piece firing pins with small firing pin holes. Both came with the long free-bore chambers. The 50-70 Gov't has always shot just fine but recently I had the 40 2 5/8" BN re-barreled as I never could get it to shoot well with paper patched bullets. I rate both of them right up there with the current production rifles.