Does anybody else think people build Tennessee rifles too nice?

[Nordnecker]

This is an interresting topic for discussion. I've enjoyed reading some of the comments above. But it's really a broader subject than just rifles and this type of comparison could be applied to any early american object vs a modern reproduction. I have been a serious woodworker for 30 plus years and I know that the tools, environment and attitude of the workman are definately reflected in the finished piece. "When I was a child, I spoke like a child" sort of thing.
Long rifles were new to me about 6 years ago. I was very proud of my first one. But after building others and getting more education on them I wasn't as proud of it as I had been. I remember after that gun, thinking about #2 gun, I was flipping through Muzzleblast and saw one of Roger Sells' rifles that was inspired by Elisha Bull and I thought to myself, Wow! I gotta have one like that! That just lead to more study of Tenn guns.
Personally, I don't really care for over embellished guns. I'm not really all that crazy about carved butt stocks and a lot of the extras that people put on them. I do like a workman-like finish on most things. The OP mentioned a mirror like finish for a trigger guard. Well, One must have the tools to produce a mirror like finish if that is your goal. You could give the tools to produce it to someone who doesn't know how to use them and their work would reflect their lack of skill.
So, it's all pretty subjective. And, yes- you can point out defects or inspiring details to some people and they don't even understand enough about it to make a comment. Kinda like me when some of you explaine explain computer stuff to me. I'm so ignorant that I can't really comprehend what you're even telling me. But I could look at an 18th century piece of furniture and get all excited and bore you to death with what I can read from it.

[Bob Roller]

I have always said that poor workmanship is not the same as workmanlike.  Workmanlike to me means utilitarian, but still of high quality, minus the bells and whistles.  A man back in the early 1800's depended upon his rifle for food, protection as well as occasional recreation so anything less than workmanlike was not acceptable.  A good lock, a straight barrel and a good set of triggers made the rifle.  All the other components were the gingerbread.
David

David's last sentence sums it up. All of us that are working today in the making of muzzle loading guns
have better parts available now than were readily available in 18andwhenver.Some of us make our
own tools and we have available at affordable prices all kinds of steel products and most if not all
have electricity to power basic tools and LIGHTS. In my shop I have uniform quality materials that
I know will work well for the job I bought them for.Forging springs from pitchfork tines or old chisels
is no option to me and the idea of working all day to make a lock component and not knowing if it
will work or not is another worry and aggravation I don't have and I hope nobody else does either.
To me,a long,slim,light weight and well made Southern rifle is as much a work of art as an Alex Henry
or other much more costly European rifle and I am "at home"with both.

Bob Roller

[Dphariss]

Another thing to consider is that in America anyone could be a gunsmith. I am living proof....
In Europe with the guild system only  people of a certain social standing could apply. THEN if they showed no talent they were rejected. Those that got into the guild and survived to Journeyman were very skilled indeed.
I had a friend who was trained as a machinist in Germany in the late 30s and through the war years. One of their first tasks was to take a piece of steel and file it to a PERFECT CUBE. He said some of them got very small. THEN then had to put a prefectly square hole in the center.   

Dan

[hudson]

An excellent discussion, in my case as they say listen and learn. Yes Bob I totally agree.

[timM]

Hey Justin Urbantas,

Here is a rifle that might answer  on your thought of:

 "When I think of a Tennessee rifle I think of a good ol boy sitting under a big oak tree with a couple chisels and  a pocket knife inletting hand forged parts into a stock"






Justin, nice start on a cool topic.  tim

[KenH]

A good topic for sure.  Good comments by all.  BUT - I do think the OP has a very valid point.  There were many very poor folks who lived in those times and had a rifle.  I'm sure if it came to a choice of paying 6 months labor vs 2 or 3 yrs of labor for a rifle, he would choose the 6 months labor rifle, even though it would look rough, but still be serviceable.  I'm sure the reason so many more of the high end rifles survived the years they were MUCH better taken care of than the low end rifle.  As a result we see very few of the "normal" low value rifles still in existence so think they were mostly all high end rifles.

Ken H>

[David Rase]

Hey Justin Urbantas,

Here is a rifle that might answer  on your thought of:

 "When I think of a Tennessee rifle I think of a good ol boy sitting under a big oak tree with a couple chisels and  a pocket knife inletting hand forged parts into a stock"






Justin, nice start on a cool topic.  tim

Tim,
Lovely rifle, do you have any more pictures you can share?
David

[JTR]

Hey Tim,
Does the rifle pictured above happen to have a tiny curl at the tip of the trigger?
I have a similar bare bones rifle with a similar trigger guard, with a neat little curl at the tip of the trigger!
Curious, John

[Clark Badgett]

A good topic for sure.  Good comments by all.  BUT - I do think the OP has a very valid point.  There were many very poor folks who lived in those times and had a rifle.  I'm sure if it came to a choice of paying 6 months labor vs 2 or 3 yrs of labor for a rifle, he would choose the 6 months labor rifle, even though it would look rough, but still be serviceable.  I'm sure the reason so many more of the high end rifles survived the years they were MUCH better taken care of than the low end rifle.  As a result we see very few of the "normal" low value rifles still in existence so think they were mostly all high end rifles.

Ken H>

I think the problem lies in just exactly what plain means in a given era. Muskets and trade guns were pretty plain and utilitarian and many were made with some modest decoration. 1780 plain may have been different than 1820 plain.

[Bob Roller]

Hmmmm....this is akin to asking "Can you have too much money?"

We had a friend in Illinois that said you can NOT have too much money,too many tools,
too many guns or too much powder and other ammunition.
Bob Roller

[D. Taylor Sapergia]

I bought Jerry Nobel's four volume set on Southern rifles just to get a better understanding of these issues.  It is worth the read, when originals are not available for study.  In this work, he has pictured the gamut of quality.  I for one have never been able to deliberately make an ugly or poorly made rifle.

[Bob Roller]

The Hoffman&Campbell rifle in Baird's first book on Hawken Rifles was owned
 by Tom Dawson and in 1968 he asked me if I could copy the Ashmore caplock
that was used.I agreed to make it and the long bar triggers and he INSISTED
on the wretched,as he called it,level of quality on the lock.When he finished the copy
he made of the original rifle it was not possible to tell who had made what or when.
Both had fracture repairs to the grip held together with brass strips and screws.
The fracture was bogus on the copy but who could say for sure? The double flintlock
rifle Mark Brier recently posted was but another example of this man's ability.
I never again tried to make a botched lock but did make 2 more of this style
with my own ideas about a mechanism.

Bob Roller

[timM]

Hi John,

In answer to your question about the trigger having a curl at the tip,.....this guns trigger has about a 20 degree rearward kick at the tip but no curl to it.  tim

[flehto]

Many MLers today are made by beginners, those w/ a few under their belt . skilled amateur builders and then the full time professionals. The quality of guns made by the first 2 categories  could vary a lot and probably are just for the builder's use, but the last two categories produce guns that could or would  be sold  on the open market and competition is keen.

I sell all my MLer builds and even though I'm in the "amateur class of builders", putting a MLer on the market that has shoddy workmanship would surely ruin my reputation and I don't really understand "in a workman like manner" because that could have very different subjective interpretations. It could even be used as an excuse.

Making Mlers as they were made long ago isn't what we do today and the buyers of yore were buying a MLer for very different reasons  compared to the discerning  buyers of  today.

I agree w/ Robby.....do the best work that you're truly capable of.....Fred

[WadePatton]

I think that may be the big difference.

That THEN as well as Now there are:

Guns made by makers of guns.

Guns made by folks who want a gun and can get most of the parts-and care to spare the time to do it, regardless of skill level.

If you think of it, the guy who HAS great skills with metal or wood is likely employed (self or otherwise) making things of metal or wood or both, and would be more likely to BUY a gun from a maker.  But that if the skilled one did make a gun or two-they'd be a "cut above" the ones made by the fellows who was short on skills but long on determination.

And the latter group has a very wide range of pieces parts and skills exhibited, notwithstanding the fact that even the ugly ones worked well-enough. The ones that were truly dismal were likely scrapped, scavenged, or lost in a hole somewhere.

Of course we celebrate all the originals whether Shade-tree'd or proper shoppe-made. But of course a crudely assembled contemporary "work" might be worth less than the pile of parts it was constructed from. 


Oh cool, my stuff will be more valuable in 200 years.  Can't WAIT! 

So personally, while I'm intrigued by the Ugly Originals, I'm much more interested in the ones made by makers of guns, and made well and in regional fashion. Thanks for the discussion.

[conquerordie]

Hey Justin Urbantas,

Here is a rifle that might answer  on your thought of:

 "When I think of a Tennessee rifle I think of a good ol boy sitting under a big oak tree with a couple chisels and  a pocket knife inletting hand forged parts into a stock"






Justin, nice start on a cool topic.  tim

See this rifle speaks to me. To make this rifle you have to make it crudely. If you dont, you haven't made this rifle. This is the type of rifle I pictured when I saw the original post. My question is how many builders professional or hobbiest would recreate this gun without cleaning it up or smoothing the lines. Would a top builder take this job on if I wanted you to build it for me? Its not about doing your best work, it's about recreating this rifle. There is a difference. 50 years down the road someone will see this rifle with your name on it. They might look at it at face value and think you were a poor builder, when in reality you made a bench replica of it. I know I'd do it because my jam is making a historically correct gun no matter what it looks like.
My current project is a blunderbuss. It was going to be a typical gun for its style, but recently I found photos of an original that is nothing like any blunderbuss I've ever seen. And yet it's original. I'm so tempted to make that gun. If I post that build here, I can only imagine the looks and comments I'll get. And that's fine, as I post my build a to learn and hear your opinions. But it's so out of the ordinary most builders would never think of recreating it. But to me it's recreating a piece that wasn't common, probably made for a specific use, and totally forgotten by time. And yet there it is, hanging in a museum ready to copy.
Id love to see someone make this rifle exactly as it is. Won't be me as SMR's do nothing for me.

Greg

[Justin Urbantas]

Hey Justin Urbantas,

Here is a rifle that might answer  on your thought of:

 "When I think of a Tennessee rifle I think of a good ol boy sitting under a big oak tree with a couple chisels and  a pocket knife inletting hand forged parts into a stock"






Justin, nice start on a cool topic.  tim

See this rifle speaks to me. To make this rifle you have to make it crudely. If you dont, you haven't made this rifle. This is the type of rifle I pictured when I saw the original post. My question is how many builders professional or hobbiest would recreate this gun without cleaning it up or smoothing the lines. Would a top builder take this job on if I wanted you to build it for me? Its not about doing your best work, it's about recreating this rifle. There is a difference. 50 years down the road someone will see this rifle with your name on it. They might look at it at face value and think you were a poor builder, when in reality you made a bench replica of it. I know I'd do it because my jam is making a historically correct gun no matter what it looks like.
My current project is a blunderbuss. It was going to be a typical gun for its style, but recently I found photos of an original that is nothing like any blunderbuss I've ever seen. And yet it's original. I'm so tempted to make that gun. If I post that build here, I can only imagine the looks and comments I'll get. And that's fine, as I post my build a to learn and hear your opinions. But it's so out of the ordinary most builders would never think of recreating it. But to me it's recreating a piece that wasn't common, probably made for a specific use, and totally forgotten by time. And yet there it is, hanging in a museum ready to copy.
Id love to see someone make this rifle exactly as it is. Won't be me as SMR's do nothing for me.

Greg

I would make that rifle, but I wouldn't put my name on it. Plausible deniability. haha

[n stephenson]

The answer might lie in ice cream , not skill level . Baskin Robbins famously has 31 flavors , to suit the taste of different folks. Everybody has different likes and dislikes now , just as they did 250 years ago. If I saw a faithful reproduction of the pictured rifle and it was done just as funky as the original , I would find it more appealing than a highly finished "cleaned up" "copy" of a famous old original. It simply comes to personal taste. Just because I find the old rough homemade guns appealing , doesn't mean that I don`t acknowledge the right of others to prefer shiny stuff. This whole thread is based on opinions  there is no right or wrong , do what you like , and let the chips fall where they may. That`s what`s going to happen anyway. You will never please everybody, so please the one that really counts , yourself , or in some cases your customers. Nate

[Scota4570]

"I suspect  that very few American rifles made away from places like Philadelphia had locks costing more than 4-5 shillings each if that."

IF silver is $17/ oz or $272 a pound.  A shilling is 1/12 pound then a Shilling is worth $22.66.  5 Shillings is $113..33. 

Who would have though the common gun lock value would have remained so constant over time.

Interestingly Colt Peacemakers have been worth about ounce of gold all along.   

[Hungry Horse]

I think you will find the hillbilly crude poor boys are second or third generation guns made from broken first generation guns. I say this because my grandfather restocked a SMR back about 1920. Now I’m sure if this gun is still in existence it is homely beyond belief. It was a .40cal. Percussion with a walnut stock originally. My great uncle Roy fell off of his  mule Jasper, with the rifle across the saddle, and broke it. Grandpa restocked it with a piece of Dogwood that had a natural double bend at the wrist. Grandpa had been to a turkey shoot, and saw an Ohio target gun with a stock that had this feature. He told me he had a bunch of old pocket knives with broken blades, that he reshaped into tools to shape the stock. He said he made the triggerguard himself, because the original was broken.

  Hungry Horse

[BOB HILL]

HH, I agree with the second and third generation theory. I have several old gun that are just that. They are quite a study on bodgering. They are a mix of components both professional and homemade. When you had to I guess you just made do with what you had on hand.
 Bob

[whitebear]

This is a question I have often considered myself.  Are modern built southern guns (ie' po boys) too gaudy to reflect a true representation of the originals? 

I see SMRs with silver inlays very fine carvings and fine engravings and super curly maple stocks but to me these don't represent the originals.  These guns don't have to look like they were fashioned with an ax and a crosscut saw.  My idea is plain maple, walnut, or ash & what furniture I use will be iron will make a decent looking rifle.  This is just my opinion your millage may vary.