Author Topic: Need help with Beck rifle pattern. (Read 6966 times)

Rolf · « **on:** February 03, 2014, 01:08:48 AM »

I've been reading the tutorial "Measuring for stock fit" http://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=20014.0
and had my wife measure me. The results seem be way off the flintlock patterns I have. I'm wondering if we are doing something wrong.

A. Measure from corner of eye to the corner of your mouth with jaw closed = 7.5cm = 2.95"
B. Measure from corner of eye to hollow of throat=20cm = 7.87"
C. Measure from protrusion of shoulder bone 21 cm = 8.27"
D:Measure from inside of elbow to first joint of trigger finger. 39cm = 15.35"

Cast on (lefty stock) = C-B= 8.27"- 7.87"= 0.4", which seems normal
Drop at heel = B-A = 7.87"-2.95"= 4.9" which seems an awful lot.
Trigger pull = D-0.5" = 15.35"-0.5"= 14.85" which seems alot. This about 1.85"

The Lancaster pattern from TOTW has a drop a little less than 3" and a 13" trigger pull.
Want to get the pattern right before I start band sawing the blank.

Best regards
Rolf

Jim Kibler · « **Reply #1 on:** February 03, 2014, 01:13:12 AM »

If you want it to look like a Beck, you'll have to make the stock reasonably close to the shape he used. Don't think the formula for determining stock dimensions will work. I personally wouldn't put a tremendous amount of emphasis on this procedure. In fact, I've never designed a stock this way and others I know who are good at this stuff don't either.

galamb · « **Reply #2 on:** February 03, 2014, 01:24:44 AM »

I agree with Jim on this one. Those formulae are for building a custom stock for a shooter.

While the cast off and the length of pull (and my personal length of pull is 15 3/4" - I'm tall with long arms) is useful, unless you are really close with the "drop" measurements and could work them in without a noticeable change in the architecture they should be abandoned.

And you would find that the drop at the heel would increase if you simply extended the butt to your length of pull. That 3" drop is relative to a 13" LOP (extending the LOP will result in somewhat less drop at the heel on a Beck as compared with others since his comb line is at less of an angle compared to the barrel bore than many).

In this case I absolutely would extend the pattern to match your LOP (and I would reduce your LOP by a full inch if you will hunt in cold weather with multiple layers or a heavy coat). For me, shooting a "short pull" makes me feel like a grasshopper trying to get my arms tucked in "somewhere".

On the other hand, given your numbers, for your next rifle you may want to look at originals with a comb line that more closely match your numbers - there is almost certainly a historic piece out there that would match "somewhat".

Jim Kibler · « **Reply #3 on:** February 03, 2014, 01:46:33 AM »

A good way to start would be to take photos of a nicely shaped Beck and draw a pattern from them. This can be done by hand or by enlarging a good photo taken square to the butstock. Look at all the Beck examples as you can. There will be some variation. With this said, there's a limit to how much you could change things and still end up with something that looks decent. A Beck pattern should be comfortable and a nice shooter.

Jim

galamb · « **Reply #4 on:** February 03, 2014, 01:59:28 AM »

Eerie - almost like Jim taught me how to create a pattern

One of the many photo's I "doctored" in forming my pattern -
(not a Beck - this is a C Hawken)

James Rogers · « **Reply #5 on:** February 03, 2014, 02:13:40 AM »

Quote from: Jim Kibler on February 03, 2014, 01:13:12 AM

If you want it to look like a Beck, you'll have to make the stock reasonably close to the shape he used. Don't think the formula for determining stock dimensions will work. I personally wouldn't put a tremendous amount of emphasis on this procedure. In fact, I've never designed a stock this way and others I know who are good at this stuff don't either.

I would agree. Stock fitting has since the 18th century been a mixture of art and science. Even for the simplest thing like length of pull, there is no stockfitter I know of who uses the elbow/finger crook thingy because it does not work for everyone. Length of pull can be within a wide range of comfort and not an exact measurement. All the other measurements however are based on the LOP as well as the shooting style. By using the formulas in the link and just changing the LOP within the comfort range ( not too long where mounting is a problem and not too short where you you are busting your nose with your thumb), you can have differing fits keeping all the other formula measurements the same for both LOPs.

If I were to make a Beck, I would follow the dimensions off of Beck guns. There may me slight variances in the examples and one can make his own slight changes. To do much more, one would not have a Beck IMO.

D. Taylor Sapergia · « **Reply #6 on:** February 03, 2014, 03:37:05 AM »

I bought a blueprint plan drawing from Dave Keck. All critical dimensions are done for me. I shall use his drawing to create a Beck 50 smooth rifle .

Acer Saccharum · « **Reply #7 on:** February 03, 2014, 05:19:59 PM »

Dave Keck also sells nice Beck castings.

mjm46@bellsouth.net · « **Reply #8 on:** February 03, 2014, 05:34:42 PM »

As far as length of pull. I'm 6'1" and long armed, but with long rifles I find length of pull for me most comfortable at about 13-1/2". I like to rest my left elbow on my body and my left hand falls slightly ahead of the trigger guard. The barrel hangs best for me with this hold and the relatively average trigger pull length. What I'm trying to say is the way you hold the rifle may have a lot to do with trigger pull than your size. I have another rifle with a 14-1/2" pull and to me it feels nose heavy, but others shoot it and love it. Just another POV.

Don Getz · « **Reply #9 on:** February 03, 2014, 05:37:00 PM »

To follow up on the Dave Keck stuff, he has probably the best Beck hardware out there. He also has a good (oversize) stock
pattern for a Beck. Someone stated above that they need a stock with a 15 3/4" length of pull........when you do this you
will end up with a "strange" looking Beck, and you had better like it because you will have a heck of a time to sell it. I love
a good beck rifle, and if you do a good job of designing it I.m sure you will see what I mean........Don

Rolf · « **Reply #10 on:** February 04, 2014, 12:08:14 AM »

Thank you for your replies. I have the Beck buttpate, triggerguard and blueprint from Keck. My stock blank is inlet for a Rice 44", caliber 54, c weigth swamped barrel. The print shows a 1" straight barrel. I've tried tracing the Beck blue print on the blank. The results don't look right in the area behind the breech. I think it is the angel between the top of the swamped barrel and breech end of the stock thats the problem. When comparing it to the Beck rifles in RCA II, the angel looks to sharp.

I did talk to David Keck asking about buying a precarve as a study aid a couple of years ago. He would not recommend it for this purpose becaused it's oversized.

Best regards
Rolf

Elnathan · « **Reply #11 on:** February 04, 2014, 06:06:15 AM »

Rolf, try tracing the blueprint out on paper first and then redrawing the upper line of the wrist to get the proper curvature, possibly making the wrist both taper a bit more and maybe a bit thicker. You may then need to adjust the comb nose to get that right, and so on.

You probably already know all this:
A few months ago I had to draw up plans for the current build, using a longer pull and significantly smaller barrel, while trying to preserve the overall architecture of a rather short-coupled, big-breeched original. I pretty quickly discovered that trying to use any of the actual dimensions of the original was a mistake. The trick was to look at it in turns of proportion - the wrist tapered this much, the comb was so high compared to the depth of the wrist at the same spot, (importantly) the buttplate was so many times the height of the wrist just behind the breech, and so on. Of course, my final design didn't use exactly the same proportions as the original either, but by looking at proportion and overall shape and adjusting as needed I think I kept something of the overall flavor of the piece.

When I was done, I went ahead and made a kind of half-model (flat on one side, rounded on the other) out of a piece of pine lumber to make sure it worked in 3-D. You might consider doing the same thing.

Dphariss · « **Reply #12 on:** February 04, 2014, 08:37:43 PM »

Quote from: Rolf on February 03, 2014, 01:08:48 AM

I've been reading the tutorial "Measuring for stock fit" http://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=20014.0
and had my wife measure me. The results seem be way off the flintlock patterns I have. I'm wondering if we are doing something wrong.

A. Measure from corner of eye to the corner of your mouth with jaw closed = 7.5cm = 2.95"
B. Measure from corner of eye to hollow of throat=20cm = 7.87"
C. Measure from protrusion of shoulder bone 21 cm = 8.27"
D:Measure from inside of elbow to first joint of trigger finger. 39cm = 15.35"

Cast on (lefty stock) = C-B= 8.27"- 7.87"= 0.4", which seems normal
Drop at heel = B-A = 7.87"-2.95"= 4.9" which seems an awful lot.
Trigger pull = D-0.5" = 15.35"-0.5"= 14.85" which seems alot. This about 1.85"

The Lancaster pattern from TOTW has a drop a little less than 3" and a 13" trigger pull.
Want to get the pattern right before I start band sawing the blank.

Best regards
Rolf

I would not trust catalog stock dimensions.
Its difficult to make a stock to modern dimensions and have it come out looking like an original Kentucky. Just increasing the length of pull an inch can cause visual problems unless carefullu drawn out beforehand to get the look right by changing other dimensions as well to compensate.
We also have to remember that Kentucky rifles are aimed not pointed so shotgun type fits are not needed or even desirable in many cases since it will make the stock "modern" looking. Like a TC "Hawken".

Dan

Dphariss · « **Reply #13 on:** February 04, 2014, 08:44:58 PM »

Quote from: Elnathan on February 04, 2014, 06:06:15 AM

Rolf, try tracing the blueprint out on paper first and then redrawing the upper line of the wrist to get the proper curvature, possibly making the wrist both taper a bit more and maybe a bit thicker. You may then need to adjust the comb nose to get that right, and so on.

You probably already know all this:
A few months ago I had to draw up plans for the current build, using a longer pull and significantly smaller barrel, while trying to preserve the overall architecture of a rather short-coupled, big-breeched original. I pretty quickly discovered that trying to use any of the actual dimensions of the original was a mistake. The trick was to look at it in turns of proportion - the wrist tapered this much, the comb was so high compared to the depth of the wrist at the same spot, (importantly) the buttplate was so many times the height of the wrist just behind the breech, and so on. Of course, my final design didn't use exactly the same proportions as the original either, but by looking at proportion and overall shape and adjusting as needed I think I kept something of the overall flavor of the piece.

When I was done, I went ahead and made a kind of half-model (flat on one side, rounded on the other) out of a piece of pine lumber to make sure it worked in 3-D. You might consider doing the same thing.

Exactly. Should have read this before my post. Make much of a change in one thing and it changes everything.
I made a probably 9 pound original into a 18 pound copy with a little longer pull and changes in the breech area of the barrel. Its not exactly like the original obviously. But it looks like it might have come from the same shop.

Dan

T*O*F · « **Reply #14 on:** February 04, 2014, 10:43:56 PM »

Rolf,
The question I would ask you is:
Are you building a Beck because you want to; or are you building a rifle that you intend to shoot on a regular basis?

If your answer is the latter, I would think about choosing a different style of gun. Given the measurements you provided, I think a different style would suit you better.

I am unable to shoot the straighter stocked rifles like the Lancaster. I have to crawl the stock backwards and then hunch my shoulder up to even see the sights. Civil War military muskets are so bad I can't use them at all. Thus I find a style like a Reading or Bedford with greater drop enable me to shoulder the gun without adjustments.

Vomitus · « **Reply #15 on:** February 04, 2014, 11:51:07 PM »

Taylor built me a sweetheart of a Beck in 2010. 14" pull is perfect for me and it doesn't look off on this rifle.Maybe he will post a pix.I'll ask him. Dave Keck furniture. Rice 44" "B" weight .50. Holds real nice,shoots even better.

Rolf · « **Reply #16 on:** February 05, 2014, 12:40:18 AM »

TOF, you have point there. It is important the rifle is comfortable to shoot. That being said , I think there is something wrong with the measurments my wife took of me. I borrowed a restocked rollingblock rifle from a friend. This a rifle that fits me almost perfect.
It has a 14.25" triggerpull and 2.75" drop at the heel.

Can I use the measurments from the rollingblock to build a long rifle that fits me? If not why?

Best regards
Rolf

Jim Kibler · « **Reply #17 on:** February 05, 2014, 12:58:38 AM »

Sure, you could use these dimensions. As far as looks are concerned, a 14.25" pull is pushing it a bit although isn't out of the question. I would likely be inclined to drop it to around 14" at the most. Study photos of Beck's work and see what dimensions he used. The 2.75" drop seems in the realm of possibilities for this style of gun. Beck, probably used a little less, but the added pull will allow for a bit more drop. Why don't you make a test stock out of some scrap wood to test things. This will help you familiarize yourself with shaping and stock architecture as well. I would suggest staying relatively close to Beck proportions. You may be surprised how good it feels. If not, you can always make some changes when making the real stock. I find that a range of stock shapes shoot fine for me. I sometimes think that people get a little too caught up in this sort of thing. Important? Yes, but there's a limit to it.

Jim

Bob Roller · « **Reply #18 on:** February 05, 2014, 02:08:41 AM »

Rolf,
Many years ago I used the drop and stock length of an 1886 Winchester
to make a muzzle loader and it worked fine.I have also built several rolling blocks
and most had double set triggers.

Bob roller

News:

Author Topic: Need help with Beck rifle pattern. (Read 6966 times)

galamb

galamb

mjm46@bellsouth.net

Vomitus