early rifle

[lowcsp]

This is not a copy but I based it on the faber rifle It has a .62 Cal,38" swamped colerain barrel, chambers early virgina lock,davis set triggers in a curly maple stock any comments would be great as I would like to improve my work.

[KLMoors]

Hard to tell from just a few pictures but I'll give it a go.

Your overall shaping, inletting and colors look OK to my half blind and half educated eyes. 

In terms of things I would have done differently: Your patchbox lid looks too angular to my eye and the differences on the reveal along its edges really jumps out at me. Try for softer curves.  Also, notice how the rear brass plate on the patchbox doesn't align with the edge of the buttplate? I would try to change that if you think you can without damaging something.

 I would have inlet the trigger guard in a little deeper, or filed it a little thinner so that edge in front of the bow would be a little less pronounced. 

I don't have the pics of the original in front of me, but I think that the cheekpiece is a little long at its rear?

I also would have put more of a sweep on the carving at the rear of the wrist. I always try to avoid any long straight (or even straight"ish" lines) in my carving.

I'll bet she feels real nice with that 38 inch barrel.

These are nit picky issues, but when you get down to it, being nit picky is what separates an OK gun from a good gun, and a good gun from a great gun.

[Elnathan]

Since you asked for a critique:

I agree that the box lid is a bit too angular and would look better with a less abrupt curve, and in addition the carving is off-center and the design is not particularly attractive to my eye. Remember that the box lid currently on the Faber rifle is a modern replacement - the shape probably follows the flat on the butt and is therefore probably the same as the original, but the carving is a modern guess that Shumway thinks is probably too ornate - ergo, no need to copy it. I suggest that you consider replacing it - it doesn’t look up to the same standards as the rest of the gun, and unfortunately is something of a focal point for that side of the stock.

The cheekpiece is a bit long, but I think it also tilts up too at the front and would look better if it was at the same angle as the lower line of the butt, or, even better, was tilted slightly down at the front as the original was.

To be really nitpicky, the edge of the sideplate panel right above the front lockbolt would look better if it came back just a hair further, and I think that the top edge behind the barrel could come down a bit, but that might just be the camera angle.

I am not too thrilled with the trigger guard, since the finals are octagonal and don't match the rest of the furniture, but that may be just a matter of personal taste. I concur that it would benefit from filing down the finals a bit.

The tang carving is a little short and wide for my taste, and the lines running along the barrel tang don't flow very well. Likewise, the carving around the nose of the comb could use a little more sweep in its curves, if that makes sense.

Having said all that, I think it is a very nice gun-  the overall proportions are pleasing, which is very important, I think, and in general (apart from the cheekpiece) the lines are nice. Inletting is nice and tight, which must have been difficult with the side plate and butt plate! I also see that it has been engraved, though the pictures don’t show much of it, I am afraid.

BTW, welcome to ALR! You might want to fill out your profile a bit, as a lot of folks here like to know something about who they are talking to and might be more forthcoming if you do.

[Acer Saccharum]

I like the overall look of the rifle. It has nice color, great lines. I think you've done a good job with the 'early rifle look'.

A few small things bother me.
1) patchbox cover design does not look early or traditional. It's an awkward shape, and too thick, with a large flat face. It should be thinner, and more domed.
2) the guard extensions should not show such pronounced metal above the wood. You may be able to file the bevels down a bit more. Or inlet more, solder the holes up and re-drill.
3) your carving looks tentative, like your not totally confident. It takes practice. Lots of carving over many years to 'get it just right', in my opinion. But you have a good eye, and your work will improve tremendously as you strive to improve your skills.

Overall, this is a very nice rifle, one that you should be proud of.

Tom

[Keb]

I'm not an expert but the biggest thing I see is the cheek piece. Yeah, the patchbox door needs something too but that's minor.
I think the cheek piece is just too long and tipped a bit.
See?


Again, I'm no expert, just a casual observer.

[Acer Saccharum]

Wow, Keb, nice photo-shopping!

[B Shipman]

I agree with all of the above. But this rifle has some charm to it and I think you're going to get better quickly.

[t.caster]

There is a lot of charm to it, and overall a good feel I am sure.
A lot of comments about the PB lid.....You can always make another one if it bothers you.....I know, I have in the past. The next one will be easier than the first!
It's not out of the question to shorten the cheek piece as well.
But it's your gun, do what you want! Looks like a fun rifle to shoot!!!!

[Mike Brooks]

Cheek piece position is a deal killer for me. But, that's always tough to get right.. I don't know what you're using for tools, but traditional methods and tools will generally eliminate these types of problems. That and tons of study....

[lowcsp]

I want to thank every one who commented this has helped me to see my flaws in my work and most of all my lack of studying. I went back and looked at some of my rifles and found that Mikes comment on my cheek piece size and position is one of my biggest flaws in my work ( not the only one )  as for this rifle I guess I will keep it for now and beat the $#*! out of it for the next two weeks in our deer gun season.