Screw head timing

[B.Barker]

I'm asking this question to folks that have seen many more originals than I and have seen more research on the trade. Do think that the smiths of old took time to orientate the screw slots in the same direction on their rifles? I have my thoughts but want to here from more informed minds.

[James Rogers]

I think some for royalty or other extremely high end maybe? I dont think that type of persnikitiness was present on the average American longrifle or standard Euro made guns. That said, its my opinion.
I will say I have seen plenty of photos of old Keith Neal's extensive collection (when he owned them) showing the the slots every which way but Sunday and those same guns photographed for auction catalogs with every screw aligned ; )

[Mattox Forge]

The English made guns I have, an assortment of pistols, shot guns, and rifles of various grades from government contract cheap to fairly high grade, nothing a King or Earl would own though, and the hundreds of ones I have looked at photos of, all have the screws slots oriented in some logical fashion. The lock plate side screws had dealer's choice for horizontal or vertical, but the do stop at one or the other. The barrel tang, guard, and butt plate screw slots always line up with the long axis of the gun on all of them. I have noted that the slot orientation will vary due to stock shrinkage and over tightening.  Even when they  don't at the present time, the original intent is obvious because of the shape of the head and how it fits into the mating part. The hammer screws line up with design lines from the lock layout. Some being horizontal or vertical when the hammer is at half cock generally, sometimes when the hammer is down, or rarely when at full cock.

I haven't seen or studied enough original American made guns to have observations about them, but I suspect they follow the same trend. Getting the slots to line up is fairly easy to do when the screw heads are finish filed after inleting the hardware.

Sometimes even the internal screws  slots on the locks were aligned, but this is on the more expensive guns.

Mike

[James Rogers]

I guess I should have stated that I think in terms of 18th century firearms. Its also mighty hard to find a gun that old that has not gone thru significant temperature and moisture changes as well as having had all its screws loosened, over-tightened and buggered. 

[smart dog]

Hi,
Often you will find that on good quality British (at least) guns that screws are still aligned with the barrel that are not usually removed such as tang screws for standing breeches and even butt plate screws.  I think often lock screws were also aligned but because they get removed a lot, the timing is off from wood shrinkage and over tightening.  However, that was certainly not universal because I have a nice good quality English fowler from the 1760s-1770s on which the forward lock bolt was always aligned perpendicular to the barrel.  I know that because that is the position it must be in to line up the groove filed in the middle of the bolt to clear the ramrod.  I expect most American makers did not worry about aligning the screw slots.  I try to align the slots on the guns I build, Brian.  The reason is it provides way to assure the bolt is tightened the same amount every time it is reinstalled.  I write owner's manuals for every gun I build and sell to someone and I advise them in the manuals to tighten the tang and lock screws only as far as they are snug and the slots aligned with the barrel.  Hopefully, that prevents them from over tightening those bolts. I believe that may be especially useful for the tang bolt on rifles with simple breech plugs and tangs so they are screwed down the same amount every time the barrel is reinstalled.   

dave

[James Rogers]

I'll add that my buddy Jim Hash made his own screws for his guns and didn't cut in the final slot until the rifle was well into its production.  If one is screw plating their fasteners its no harder to line them up with that final cut than it is to have them every which way.

[smylee grouch]

A lot of the Hawken mountain rifles had the screw slots oriented for and aft. Some didn't. A look through Jim Gordon,s book will show both oriented and otherwise.

[Eric Kettenburg]

I'm not going to speak to Euro arms.  American arms?  Well first of all, most American stuff has been so intensely diddled over the years that it's pretty much impossible to determine how the screws may have been 'timed' on the vast majority.  I can only speak from building experience and the few pieces extant - and there aren't many - that do not appear to have been molested.

I had a piece here not long ago that was ca. 1800-1810, and the piece had not been messed with for well over 100 years.  The upper buttplate screw slot was 'timed' to run parallel to the length of the rifle, but it also was clearly installed and then filed down with the upper butt flat and polished or burnished on the gun.  The slot at this point was so shallow that I suspect it would be impossible to actually use a screwdriver to remove the buttplate, which clearly had never been removed.  The rear screw, which nobody ever really looks at, was not timed similarly.  The lock screws were close, but were off a bit.  Were they 'timed' originally?  I suspect so, but after working them a few times between iron/brass wear and wood shrinkage, they would not stay that way for long.

Look at the Peter Resor rifle that was auctioned through Rock Island.  That rifle is 18th century, was not a cheap gun, and was hardly used.  I don't think there's a single screw head on that rifle that is 'timed.'  Were they originally?  I have no idea.  You can time up screw heads one day, work them a few times and next thing you know when the weather changes they're all over the place.

[smart dog]

Hi,
Perhaps this photo essay might help.  The first batch of photos show British guns all with standing breeches and universally, the tang screws are timed.  That is particularly true because they are engraved.  The lock bolts often are close to being timed suggesting they were originally but lost it after time and wear ad some look like they never were timed.  So as I wrote previously, screws that were not usually removed most often were timed on at least good quality British guns.  The second batch of photos show American guns also fitted with standing breeches and they indicate that no effort was made to time the screw slots.

dave

British:




































American:

[Mattox Forge]

Well illustrated!
Thanks,
Mike

[Eric Kettenburg]

Possibly, but you're comparing European arms that display little - if any - use with American arms which clearly were used judging by the breech corrosion and overall wear.

Therein lies the rub; you're not going to find American arms to use as a basis for comparison that sat in storage or in a gun room for the last 200 years.

[smart dog]

Hi Eric,
That is why I choose 2 American guns with standing breeches.  The tang screws in those never need to be removed despite heavy use.  That way I am not comparing apples to oranges.  Moreover, the second fowler down from the top was heavily used.  Does the Verner rifle show evidence of heavy use?

dave

[Eric Kettenburg]

I don't know about heavy use, but it definitely displays quite a bit of use.  Look at all the corrosive wear to the wood at the breech, look at the wear to the screw slots in particular the rear lock bolt slot.  There is enough 'wallowing' of pretty much all the screw slots to indicate they've been used.  Compare that wear to the Euro guns you've illustrated.  I'm not saying that certainties can be put forth - this is my point, actually.  I just have not seen an American gun that can be used as a model to say, "This is what it looked like new."  Conversely, it is very easy to find Euro pieces which have been relatively untouched.  Same with the American fowler you posted; I can't say how the screw head at the tang may have been 'timed' or not, but that screw head displays quite a bit of use wear and obviously has not been left alone since it was installed, so I don't see how any conclusion can be formed as to how it may or may not have been timed.

[smart dog]

Hi Eric,
You are not getting my point.  Why would there be wear on any tang bolt for a standing breech on any gun, American or British?  It never needed to be removed.

dave 

[Eric Kettenburg]

Look at your last picture.  You think that screw head looked like that when it was installed?  I don't.  I don't care about the actual 'timing' of the slot, I'm just looking at the condition of the screw head and slot itself.  I do not believe it looked that poorly when new, and I don't ascribe the condition solely to age.  Someone has hit it up with a screwdriver.

I don't think it matters if any particular component had "need" be removed.  Why remove a buttplate?  Why remove a rammer pipe?  Nevertheless, they get removed.  I can't read past minds!  You know what people say - stuff happens.  It is very, very rare to find any American arm that has not had quite literally every component on it removed, reinstalled, diddled, fiddled, etc. however you want to phrase it.  Whether it needed to be assaulted or not!

[smart dog]

Hi Eric,
Your last statement implies you cannot determine the original orientation of screw slots on American guns.  Fair enough.  That means you don't know if they were timed or not.  So the bottom line is that you cannot make that judgement. But I can about many British guns, even those used heavily and eventually converted to percussion (why do that if the gun was not used?).  None of this contradicts my previous post.

dave

[Eric Kettenburg]

Right, that's what I'm saying.  I don't think it's possible to make any kind of statement re: American guns other than the occasional piece here or there which might *appear* to have been timed (I noted one example above on an upper buttplate screw - coincidence or deliberate?) but it's not possible to make a blanket statement one way or the other.  I don't think we're arguing.  Are we?  I only wanted to mention that (1) it's not very hard to do, but it's purely speculative to apply this philosophy retroactively,  and (2) your statement above "The second batch of photos show American guns also fitted with standing breeches and they indicate that no effort was made to time the screw slots" is also speculative, because IMHO we are viewing arms which clearly (again, imho) display screw slots which have been worn and used otherwise than when installed, unless the installer was ridiculously ham-fisted and lacking in care.  The remainder of the workmanship evident in both arms leads me to think this is not the case!

[B.Barker]

My personal thoughts and that's all they are. Is the higher end rifles here in the states would have had screws timed and the lower quality one would not have. My thinking which is probably wrong but why bother timing screws on rifles going to folks that will use their guns hard and will likely repair them with not so ideal tools. Also I have read many accounts of guys "sighting in a rifle" by removing the barrel to bend it. Some were removed six or eight times before the individual was happy with the point of impact. This would mess up any timed screw on a tang. I know timed screws look nice and make thing flow better but did farmers and market hunters care? I have seen one "trade" rifle I think by Tryon that had the screws timed on the patch box. It was in one of my books and in the photo the rifle looked in very good condition. But it may have had heavy restoration work done on it. I can't say that I have seen any others like that. I was hoping that maybe someone had some old written info about screw timing in the gun making trade of the 18th century.