While I find the 1874 Sharps to be one of the uglier single shots, I do find the 1877 Sharps to be rather graceful. I just received a copy of Frank Sellers' book on Sharps rifles, and it sounds as if both receivers were made from the same basic forging. Was this the case? Did Sharps turn the ugly duckling into a swan?

It was after studying those pictures that I chose to ask what Sharps had done. In the pictures, it appears the bulge in the receiver side (around the breech block) extends a bit further aft at its bottom in the 77 vs. the 74. However, the raw forging (if a forging was what they started with) may have had enough metal there that simply wasn't removed in cutting the 77. The factory letter of 6/16/1880 quoted on p.250 suggests the 77 receivers are simply a different cut on the 74 receiver.

It's curious that in the 74, the bulge in the receiver is vertical on the left side and slanted on the right, giving the action a bizarre appearance. This is seen on p.233 and other pages. I hadn't noticed that when handling the 74's at gunshows. Perhaps it's just that the 74 is such a big, ungainly, and ugly action that I couldn't bear to look at the thing for long.

The 77s shown in the pictures are graceful indeed, but even more graceful -- to my eye -- are the Mortimer & Kirkwood side hammers shown in one of de Hass's later books.

Finally, why I asked the question: I wondered if one could fashion a Little 77 Sharps from one of those spiffy Little 74 Sharps. The lockwork would be a problem, of course, but perhaps the receiver would be trouble as well.