web thickness - how bad is thick?

[nchunter]

I'm building a Lancaster rifle from a precarve kit.  The web thickness between the ramrod channel and the barrel is 3/16" at the muzzle, but 3/8" at the breech. 
I searched this forum and read that it should be much thinner than 3/8" at the breech.  How big of a deal is it if this web thickness is this thick? 
I've already drilled the barrel lugs and the touchhole, so I really don't see how I could inlet the barrel channel deeper than what was done on the precarve.

Also, is there a good resource to learn about proper longrifle architecture?  I have the "Gunsmith of Grenville County" book, which has good information on the topic, but it's scattered helter-skelter throughout the book and it's difficult to find, at least it is for me.

[Tom Currie]

A web thickness of 3/8 at the breech will result in a very thick stock, top to bottom, in the forestock and then through the lock area. This will also complicate the trigger needed to reach high to get to the lock sear. The web thickness at breech I try for is about a 1/8 inch, just enough enough to get a front lock bolt through.

Assuming the RR was already drilled I would talk to the pre-carve supplier about this. 

As for books I think Chuck Dixon's is a great book for beginning builder, with a copy of Rifles of Colonial America on the side so you know what you are trying to achieve without just relying on drawings.

[Don Getz]

That thick web at the breech is a problem.  This is one of the problems you run into when the guy doing the stock carving is
not a good gun builder.   I've been there, I failed to check this out before I had the breech and tang inlet.   I then was finishing
the lock inlet and had to check on the front lock bolt and found that I had a lot of room for the bolt, actually way too much
room   I went ahead and finished the gun, but, was not happy with it.  ...Don

[KLMoors]

Bummer.

 Have you checked to see how much wood you have below the ramrod? You are going to need to get that area as thin as possible to help things look OK. When you inlet the trigger guard, drill a small hole down into the ramrod hole to see how much wood is between the bottom of the rr hole and the outside.  Try to get the bottom of the stock in that area to 1/8 inch thick or so.  (be careful!) The thinner you can get that area, without getting too thin, the better things will look.

The first thing I do when I get a stock back from having the barrel inlet and the ramrod hole drilled it to drill a hole right at the breech down into the ramrod hole to see how thick the web is in this area. If it is too thick I carve out the barrel channel accordingly.

[Dphariss]

3/16 is not a problem. 3/8 is too much and the rifle will be to thick at the breech.

This is a rifle with a 3/16 web muzzle to breeeh and a 1 1/4" straight barrel. 3/8" rod hole.




It came out just as drawn, so far as the web, rod hole etc.



In a lighter rifle the web could have been thinner but a rifle this heavy the thicker web is a good idea and I left a little more wood in the forend but less than 1/8" once the carving was done.
But a 3/8 web could make a lighter barreled rifle as large as this through the lock.

Dan

[nchunter]

Thanks everyone for the advice.  This is my second build, and while I haven't repeated any mistakes of my first build, I can see I was optimistic in thinking I wouldn't have any problems this time!

Merry Christmas

[Bentflint]

Is the lock inlet yet? If not the barrel needs to go deeper, close to a 1/4" more.

Dan, with 1 1/4" barrel that rifle looks real good. It's hard to get good lines when you are working around that meat.

[Birddog6]

I think with what you are dealing with, should be considered in what you are trying to actually accomplish.

If you are trying to please people of it being HC/PC, then you will need to thin it down.  

However, I doubt that 95% of the people that will actually see it will ever know the dif.  The everyday person seeing the rifle either way is not going to know it is thick or thin......  they just see a longrifle.

People on here will see it, as they are looking for correct reproductions & want to keep things as historically correct as possible.  And one being too thick anyplace will be noticed on here.  Nothing wrong with that, that is what keeps Lancasters Lancasters, and Lehighs  Lehighs.....  etc.

I am not saying you should or should not go on with it as is, I am saying you must decide How Correct  you want it to be, and proceed from there.

Keith Lisle

PS:  Most the guys I have seen cutting Precarves, are just running machines, not building rifles. They cut the patterns the vender supplies them, and wear the patterns out from then on.  Some of them don't have a clue what is correct, incorrect,  worn, or whatever. They are paid to cut the pattern.

[RAT]

I'm surprised nobody has suggested plugging the hole by gluing in a dowel, then re-drilling the hole. If the hole (or the plug and/or remains of the hole) still break through the bottom when shaping, you can cover it with a wear plate. Many originals have the ramrod break through the bottom of the stock. Wear plates were a common method to cover this.

[Jim Kibler]

It's not just what has been suggested as historical or political correctness, it's a matter of what looks good as well.  Someone with little or no knowledge of the longrifle might not be aware of shortcomings like this, but it will be obvious to others.  I will agree that it depends on what is trying to be accomplished and what is important to the builder.  I'll also agree that it seems too many parts are made by people that aren't good builders and don't know the difference between good and bad. The results speak for themselves.  That and consistent quality is a real issue.  But with all this said, most people who buy these parts are not professional builders, are not aware of how things ideally should be and most times accept lower quality levels.  Just the nature of the business.  But on the other hand, there are plenty that think $150 is too much money for a lock. 

[D. Taylor Sapergia]

...because they've never filed one out themselves!

[J.D.]

Also, is there a good resource to learn about proper longrifle architecture?  I have the "Gunsmith of Grenville County" book, which has good information on the topic, but it's scattered helter-skelter throughout the book and it's difficult to find, at least it is for me.

Read through the virual museum and collecting sections. Some of the members have posted their thoughts on the architecture of the various longrifles illustrated there. You may have to read quite a few posts, but the antique section is a wealth of information on what makes a fine longrifle.

[Dphariss]

...because they've never filed one out themselves!

Caution breechloaders mentioned below.

Nobody wants to pay for hand work, or at least few will. As a result we all work too cheap, well most of us anyway.
Its possible to sell bolt action rifles that take, to be frank, relatively little skill or time to make for more $ than a 19 c SS with more hand work and skill required to make it. I had a conversation with a friend who does both and makes a ML now and then about 2 weeks ago. The profit margin for the bolt gun is far higher than the 19c SS since it has FAR LESS WORK IN IT. And the 19th c single shot is far easier to make than a Kentucky or Hawken  or etc.
There are many in the ML "world" who will recoil in horror at paying $2000 for a good Kentucky but will buy a sloppily assembled handgun for 1200-1500 because the maker claims it was done by the Custom Shop and it has variant plastic grips on it. Never mind the parts don't fit right and were not even contoured to match each other so one might tear skin on them. Some DUFUS will buy it since its "one of 300" from the "Custom Shop".   It has to be wonderful right?
But then the ML rifles made by folks here never get glowing reports in the slick paper gun rags....

Dan

[Bob Roller]

In my long career of guns and weird cars,I have never made anything for a bolt action rifle.
I have made a few muzzle loaders including 3 or 4 pistols.These muzzle loaders were NOT high art
guns but were good match rifles and hunting guns.I THINK I made about 10 altogether.They are labor
intensive and it's doubtful if I ever find time to make another.The bteech loaders were rolling blocks
and the last one was a pretty good representation of a Carlos Gove in 40-85-420 caliber.I styled it
like a muzzle loader with an octagon GM barrel and cleaning rod in thimbles under the barrel as well
as an open and close lever for the block.I was too lazy to make double set triggers for it and the last
of these was in 1999.Making money on them  was not really a factor because I had automobile work to
do and still could if I wanted it but at almost 78,I have no interest anymore.
 Bob Roller

[FL-Flintlock]

I had automobile work to
do and still could if I wanted it but at almost 78,I have no interest anymore.
 Bob Roller

C'mon Bob, my neighbor is pushing 89 in May and he's still working on Mustangs (the kind with the chrome knee caps) 

[Bob Roller]

FL-Flintlock,
I didn't say I COULDN'T do it anymore only that I don't want to.
A Dr.with more than a few dollars asked me to come to his home
in the Midwest to do a valve job on his Duesenberg but I turned
him down and referred him to a man that does those cars frequently.
I am also giving strong consideration to cutting back on the lock and trigger
work,perhaps  four to six orders a month.I haven't worked a full eight hour day
in a long time and rarely start before 10AM anymore.I light the shop stove at
7AM in cold weather so it will be comfortable enough to work in.Tomorrow,I plan
to get the shop vac out and get a lot of shavings cleaned up and then finish a lock
for a Hawken squirrel rifle.

Bob Roller

[flehto]

Whether it's a precarve or a bbl inlet on a blank {sent out}, the first thing I check  are the webs.  My usual spec thickness is 5/32" at the muzzle and 3/32 or slightly less at the breech. At this time, only Bucks County and Lancaster LRs are made and these web thicknesses are good for both..

When precarves are used and the webs are w/in  reason  they are used {tolerated}, but when the blanks are sent out for bbl and RR work, Dave Rase meets the above specs. and is the only person who does so.

3/8" web at the breech on a precarve would have been sent back pronto....would  bother me to no end if I proceeded w/ that thick a web. The final LR would just look cumbersome.

Receiving a precarve w/ that thick a web and then even considering a revamp to make it work, is a waste of my time.....Fred