Author Topic: falling to peer presure  (Read 11872 times)

jamesthomas

  • Guest
Re: falling to peer presure
« Reply #25 on: March 13, 2014, 01:25:32 AM »
 Who are you ordering your parts from? From what I've read I've would never order something from TRS, I'm too old to wait 2 years for parts. Its Track of the Wolf, Muzzleloaders Builders supply, Chambers Flintlocks, or Knob mountain Muzzleloader. And if it says out of stock I would look for it somewhere else. Always ask before you order if anything is on back order, and NEVER pay for a Back Ordered part. JMHO.

Offline frogwalking

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1044
Re: falling to peer presure
« Reply #26 on: March 13, 2014, 02:55:58 AM »
That rifle shown in the url  http://old.bbhc.org/collections/bbhc/CFM_ObjectPage.cfm?museum=CFM&VarObjectKey=32976  is at least three different rifles.  One has a patchbox, one doesn't, one has the lower barrel wedge under the rear sight, another has it further forward.  One appears to have iron furniture, two others have brass.  I wonder how they messed that up?

Quality, schedule, price; Pick any two.

Offline Dan'l 1946

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 628
Re: falling to peer presure
« Reply #27 on: March 13, 2014, 03:04:25 AM »
Doesn't it appear that the lock was originally of flint persuasion?
                                   Dan

galamb

  • Guest
Re: falling to peer presure
« Reply #28 on: March 13, 2014, 04:33:00 AM »
Probably a lot of locks that showed up in the early days of percussion were of the "flint persuasion" whether "re-purposed" or simply had plates built that way because "that's the way they knew how".

If you look at John Armstrong's locks, which he built himself, and his building straddled the flint to percussion transition, the plates look pretty much the same whether flint or percussion. He may (unknowingly) have built the first "interchangeable" locks for swapping flint and percussion

How many were flint "before" they were installed but "converted" for the build, compared to how many were "installed" as flint and later converted is often the point of contention.

The lower pictures that show the trigger guard are almost carbon copies of the trigger guards (made?) used by their father Christian. He wasn't fussy about many things - any lock/trigger was fair game, but his trigger guards were pretty much the same rifle to rifle.

That guard would have been "home" on one of his Maryland rifles. To me that may tend to indicate that at least that lower rifle pictured is the type of rifle I would expect either of the brothers to build until they fully developed their mountain/plains style.

Also looking over the pics (again), the "lower" rifle has an earlier breech than the upper one (or two).

I have a decent article on the early snail where it is suggested that the "early snail", which looks like a comma was used between 1835-43 which may allow you to date the rifle "somewhat".
« Last Edit: March 13, 2014, 04:51:11 AM by galamb »

Offline Dan'l 1946

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 628
Re: falling to peer presure
« Reply #29 on: March 13, 2014, 06:51:30 AM »
You can see the hole for the frizzen screw and for the feather spring on this lock. I think it was originally a late period flintlock.
                                         Dan

Stink Pole

  • Guest
Re: falling to peer presure
« Reply #30 on: March 13, 2014, 07:12:52 AM »
Well, Parts all came via the Brown Truck this eevening after chow. Headed straight to the shop and got busy breached in and shaped up the tang. Reshaped the snail and filed some nice little bevels in some areas I thought needed it. Also leveled out the breach plug flats to barrel. All in all a good start to the project. Tomorrow I will start laying things out and inletting the barrel and tang. Glued my tang to breach with 2 part epoxy. Hope that wont be a problem later down the road. I am used to doing glass bed jobs on modern bolt guns and it seems odd not to be spraying things down with release agent. But with heat applied I think it should be okay when it comes time to seperate parts. Could'nt believe how easy the breaching in went.

mike blair

  • Guest
Re: falling to peer presure
« Reply #31 on: March 13, 2014, 01:35:08 PM »
OK.did anybody see the christian hawken?there's a nick Beyer there too,butt no beck.oh well.cant have everything.

galamb

  • Guest
Re: falling to peer presure
« Reply #32 on: March 13, 2014, 11:16:15 PM »
Yes, that C Hawken is kinda unique.

The carving behind the cheek is quite different from others I have seen and it has a domed lid metal patch box that I had asked about here before (trying to pin down the decade it might have been built in).