Fat Girls need Love Too – A Hudson Valley Fowler

[Joe S]

Gun number 2 is finished.  The stock is a very soft piece of Black Walnut that gave me fits during the whole building process.  I didn’t pay very much for it, and got what I paid for.

The lock was from the Rifle Shoppe, except for the springs and screws, which I made.  I also made the butt plate, RR pipes, side plate, trigger plate and trigger.  The trigger guard was from Reeves Goehring.  I put a Colerain barrel on it because I don’t have anything better to do than file deep machine marks out of barrels.

The stain is black walnut hull extract.  I’m not certain that this is PC, but it seemed reasonable.  They apparently stained Black Walnut with something, and it wasn’t AF.  The finish is 1 lb cut shellac and Kettenburg’s formula for brown varnish. 

Here’s some pictures - I would appreciate a critique:










Rich Pierce supplied the brass for the side plate and much needed advice.  I am very lazy, so I had Dave Rase inlet the barrel and drill the RR hole.  He perfectly reproduced the fine detail of the wedding bands on the barrel, which I expected, but I was surprised to find the barrel maker’s mark in tiny, raised mirror image letters on the bottom barrel flat.  He’s good.  Richard Wheeler, a local journeyman lock maker, gave me invaluable help and advice when I was assembling the lock.  And, of course, the whole project would have been beyond me without the ALR board and archives.






.

[Z. Buck]

well i dont know enough about the originals to comment on accuracy, but to my eye the architecture is very appealing and i cant find any flaws. the only thing that seems a little off is the trigger seems set ever so slightly forward in the trigger guard, although i understand how the lock and architecture of the rest of the gun brought about that relationship. so for whatever my opinion is worth, i think you did an awesome job, very nice piece

[Acer Saccharum]

The only thing it needs is a little dirt and wear from shooting! You hit the style of the stock right on. Good job.

Tom

[rich pierce]

Great job on the transition from tang to wrist- something that I am sure I'll find challenging.  The sideplate came out really nice too- that's a lot of work from solid brass plate!  Fit and finish look terrific.

[Artificer]

You captured the essence of a Hudson Valley Fowler.  Great job.

[Tommy Bruce]

Nice fowler.  I think you did an excellent job and representation.

[Mike Brooks]

Buttstock sides are too flat.

[Don Getz]

While am not an expert on Hudson Valley fowlers, there are a few things that just don't represent good gun building.
I agree with Mike, the buttstock is too flat on the sides, when you look down on the comb, it seems like it should taper
from the butt down to a point on the wrist, rather than being straight then suddenly curving in to the wrist.   The transition of the stock at the left side of the breech is "lumpy", should be a nice curve down and then out along the barrel.
The clam shell carving around the tang is nice, but it ends incorrectly at the front.  Instead of running it straight ahead toward the barrel, I would have curved it down toward the lock bolt and had it just kind of petered out.  I could be all wet
on some of these corrections, they are just some things that I would have done differently......Con

[northmn]

Generally the gun looks good.  Originals had a lot of drop so that is probably correct, that one seems to have a fair amount.  The buttplate is nice and wide to absorb recoil but slants in slightly.  They are best fitted so that they fit flat against the shoulder or the recoil can cause them to shoot low or high, etc.  If it fits you thats great.

DP

[Colonial Riflesmith]

Very nice work Joe. What caliber is it?

[Joe S]

Thanks for the comments and critique – they are much appreciated.  Easiest question first:

Colonial Riflesmith -.72 caliber, but I probably won’t ever shoot a round ball out of it.  I intend to kill turkeys with this thing. 

Northmn - This gun does have a lot of drop in the stock.  It is within the range of drops in the originals, at least as far as I can tell from the photos in Grinslade.  It’s a little bit experimental.  I like to shoot with my head up, and I’ve always wanted a gun with a lot of drop in the stock, so now I have one.  I haven’t shot it yet though, so maybe I’ll like it, and maybe not.

Don - The transition of the stock at the breech on the left side is rather lumpy, but, while it’s not a copy of any particular gun, I think it reflects the Dutch style.  Now you’ve got me wondering if I over did it.  Unfortunately, I’m about 1,000 miles away from my copy of Grinslade.

Mike and Don – I really struggled with trying to understand the stock architecture, and built this stock according to my understanding.  Maybe I got it wrong though.  With most guns, from a top view, the stock will taper from the butt to the wrist.  My understanding is that the early fowlers were made as I made this one, with the stock at nearly 90 degrees until it is very close to the wrist, then the wrist flares a little bit to meet up with the butt stock.  Later fowlers have a more conventional taper.  Is this correct?  Most of the butt photos in Grinslade are so hopelessly distorted that I can’t tell what their shape is, so I relied on some other sources for a description of the correct shape of the stock.

It was a little strange carving the stock this shape.  The effect is rather like a pipe stuck into a box, instead of a graceful taper.  It is a little unwieldy looking, at least to our modern eyes.   Anyway, I would like to get it right.