Mike, I recall a discussion as well. I don't want to put words in someone else's mouth but I think a guy who knows Euro arms well thought it resembled Scandinavian work as late as 1780's. That being said, my impressions are that it's a well-buit early rifle. I think the carving behind the cheekpiece is secondary work done during the working life of the gun. It does not match the quality of the tang carving and wrist carving which are worn but look well-executed. Because it has an octagonal barrel of .51 caliber, I'm inclined to believe it was a rifle, not a smooth rifle. Just working the odds here. The guard, buttplate, lock and architecture all say "early" to me meaning pre-1775 and there is nothing on the gun that precludes it from being made 10 or even 20 years earlier. If it was stocked in birch here in America then that seemingly would have been out of style or favor by the 1770's. Of course it could be a restock of older parts but even then why use the rounded cheekpiece which again is well out of the mainstream by 1770's and maybe earlier here. So the central question seems to be whether it is an American-stocked arm or not. If so then this is one of the "very early" rifles that could easily date to the F&I War period. That guard is just early! The buttstock has great depth and breadth. The cheekpiece is round, etc. If not stocked here then folks who know European work may by consensus say it could have been made during the 1770's or 1780's. I'd ask, "who would buy this gun as a new gun in 1775?" Don't have an answer, but I bet there are plenty who would buy it in 2010. I think it has many characteristics that would serve anyone well today who wants to build a generic early rifle suitable for F&I War period use, recognizing that anything we build to represent that period (save the musician's rifle perhaps) is largely speculative. RCA 110 is on my list of F&I War period candidates.
