Swivel Breech No. 3

[Tonyhd98]

Just finished Swivel Breech Rifle No. 3 for a customer in IL. Critiques welcome.

Specifications
Swivel Breech Rifle Ser.# 3, Manufactured June, 2016 by Anthony P. Ceccofiglio Jr., Ponce de Leon, FL.
Caliber; .45, both barrels
Action; Flintlock, Modified L&R from front action to back action. Swivel Breech Action designed by Dave Waters, built by tonyhd98
Overall Length; 56”
Trigger Pull Length; 14.5”
Butt Plate drop; 3.5”
Barrel Length; 38 13/16”
Weight; 10.1 lbs.
Wood Type; Curly/Tiger Maple, harvested in 1976 by James Garner, Corinth, MS
Color; Russet Amber Maple
Finish; Lacquer
Sight Radius; 29.25”
Swivel Release; Shot pin type, hardened steel pin on cam type actuator designed by Dave Waters.
Cast on; 1/4”
Sight Elevation; Theoretical, set for on target at 25 yards and 100 yards
Windage; Not adjusted
Condition; Never fired.

[Cory Joe Stewart]

My hats off to that.  Well done

[bob in the woods]

 Nice job.  Front sight seems to be "backwards".  Might want to reverse it.

[Tonyhd98]

You saved the day Bob! I was on my way out the door to ship it, many thanks!

[Mike Brooks]

Here, I'll re-write my critique so nobody gets upset.

Excellent job. I really like the high polish on the brass and the super glossy finish. Your architecture is also outstanding. Superb job overall.

[Rolf]

Very impressiv rifle. But the beavertails and Lock panels look high/proud. If you look at rifles made by some of the masters like Shipman, Taylor, Kibler and smart dog (many others of course), the panels and beavertails flow from the Stock. These look a bit stuck on.

Best regards
Rolf

[Tonyhd98]

Thank you Mike and Rolf (and every one) for taking the time to further my knowledge and building experience. I own and operate Precision Machinery, a for profit business since 2001. I've learned early on that my customers are the only reason I'm in business and I'm very grateful for their continued support and confidence that I'll always deliver beyond their satisfaction. This means providing them what they want.

Last August (2015) I was gifted the book by Dave Waters, Building a Swivel Breech. Since that time I've built 3 Swivel Breech rifles and 5 swivel breech actions. As you can see, I'm new to building rifles and have a long way to go. In order to continue my success, it's paramount that I give my customers what they want, gloss finishes, brass screws, relief carvings, the brass treatments they want and so on. Consider that my customers are probably not the Purists you'll find on the forum but they're happy and I'm able to keep my shop air conditioned and the lights on.

Again, my sincere thanks to all who have provided steady advice and guidance. There's no other source for freely offered critiques and I'm very appreciative. You are the go to guys for solid guidance. Thank you, Tony

[smylee grouch]

As a business man you have to make the customer happy. But I would bet that if you had a rifle built that was more traditional for your customers to see, you would still get plenty of customers.

[D. Taylor Sapergia]

You would benefit immensely from a variety of gun building books such as those listed in the heading of this site, as well as examining original work.  You obviously have the skill to do it authentically, but seem bent on a more contemporary approach which to those of us striving for historical tribute, approaches what I can only call , an amateurish outcome.  I have to hand it to you for your dedication and for your talent, but selfish I would love to see you channel it better. 

[Mike Brooks]

Thank you Mike and Rolf (and every one) for taking the time to further my knowledge and building experience. I own and operate Precision Machinery, a for profit business since 2001. I've learned early on that my customers are the only reason I'm in business and I'm very grateful for their continued support and confidence that I'll always deliver beyond their satisfaction. This means providing them what they want.

Last August (2015) I was gifted the book by Dave Waters, Building a Swivel Breech. Since that time I've built 3 Swivel Breech rifles and 5 swivel breech actions. As you can see, I'm new to building rifles and have a long way to go. In order to continue my success, it's paramount that I give my customers what they want, gloss finishes, brass screws, relief carvings, the brass treatments they want and so on. Consider that my customers are probably not the Purists you'll find on the forum but they're happy and I'm able to keep my shop air conditioned and the lights on.

Again, my sincere thanks to all who have provided steady advice and guidance. There's no other source for freely offered critiques and I'm very appreciative. You are the go to guys for solid guidance. Thank you, Tony

Well then you're spot on where you should be. Carry on.....

[Goose]

         I have been following the AL site for many years and a member for not nearly as long. I've learned much from just looking and listening over the years, but I must tell you that some of the comments are just pitiful. Most of the comments are about authenticity,  or lack of it. We have people offering kits that are being made on cnc machines producing drop in parts accuracy,  we have people doing great engraving with power engravers, butt plates, triggerguards and sideplates that are investment cast, and some carving designs that look nothing like an original,  all of which produce beautiful results, but not authentic by any stretch. I've seen guns here that are exact copies of an original. But what part of a builders talent is in a copy? The only thing I see is the builders talent for building the gun (fit and finish). The style and creatively has already been established by the original builder 150 years ago. Why don't we just look at a build, accept it as the builders idea and creatively. It can still be critiqued,  but we can do so without being condescending, or that the person will have to sacrifice his first born because he did something you wouldn't. We shouldn't be trying to get everyone to build the same type of gun. Would you want someone to pick up your gun 150 years from now and say, wow an original Dickert, no wait it's just a copy, or would you want them to say wow this gun was built by 0000000, I recognize his style. Just my opinion.

[Swab]

Well said goose.  My only critique from a purely cosmetic point of view would be that the brass and stock look highly polished and steel looks more freshly cast and machined. 

[KentSmith]

A lot of people on this site build guns.  A few are masters.  Some put their work up for critique and that comes from a variety of viewpoints and with a variety of "deliveries".  This case I think the critique is well meant and seems fairly spot on.  I admire your workmanship and ability to take on a very complex project and carry it off to your customer's satisfaction.  Having just a few projects under your belt, it is hard to know much less address the finer points.  As time goes by and more attention paid to the finer details already mentioned the value of your work will increase and as will customer satisfaction.  I always felt this work was as much art as function.

A copy is done partly because you may find an original particularly compelling and/or to learn the master's technique.  Artists copy the Mona Lisa for the same reason.  Being able to make a bench copy speaks to a person's ability to research and e working skills, ie, workmanship.  Learning correct form and architecture principles furthers your ability to produce projects that are aesthetically pleasing for a reason - they adhere to principles already defined and accepted because they describe characteristics that are not readily discernible to the untrained eye, thus the purpose for studying and copying a masters work, to see those principles in action.  Taking those learned skills and applying them to an original work is the ultimate proof of the mastery of the craft.  Mist of us are at best journeymen.  A couple masters have spoken, I'll not question their advice.

[D. Taylor Sapergia]

I agree that it is important to applaud folks for their work.  It is no small feat to build a muzzle loading rifle/gun, and we all need to acknowledge that accomplishment.  There is always a lot we can admire in each build, and often, aspects that we would have done differently, and not necessarily better.  In this rifle, I see super potential in the builder's capabilities  and craftsmanship.  And there are aspects about the build that frankly, make me grit my teeth.  But I am a traditionalist.  I do my best, and always fall short, of exemplifying historic rifles that appeal to me.  I suspect that when I mature into a credible builder, I will attempt a contemporary piece of my own design, but it will be cased on what I have seen before.  That is all any of us can do.  There is nothing new under the sun. 
Good on ya' Tony for posting your work, and for asking for input.  If you listen to the advice, your work will only become better, and the satisfaction level that much more.

[Tonyhd98]

Gentlemen, once again I appreciate your comments and opinions. I may have come off as being whiney in my previous response and I assure you that wasn't my intent. I wanted to offer the how and why the rifle appears as it does. I did in fact request honest helpful critiques. Some were to the point and clear while others were a bit nebulous, I'm grateful for all comments.

I've made and use a moveable/adjustable measuring device to fit the rifle to a customer. Drop, cast on, cast off, length of pull, balance point, sight radius, cheek piece location etc. When building a rifle for a customer, the rifle should adapt to the customer, not the customer adapting to the rifle. There are a plethora of kits available to accomplish a Walmart approach to provide what some may consider a "custom" product although traditionally correct. Every one's anatomical build is different ie. eye spacing, distance from the sight line to the cheek bone, shoulder width, arm length, height and weight and so on.

When I build a "custom" fit rifle, I consider all and more of the aforementioned variables and produce a comfortable to shoot, accurate rifle. Humans do not move in a linear motion, we move in arcs and the rifle's we build should adapt to how we move and position ourselves to fire a weapon.

I am not a thin skined individual and my feelings are intact. I honestly wanted to know where I came up short so I can improve on the next build. I do not infer a tone when reading the critiques, it's just text. I may consider more than others when fitting a rifle to a customer or, by other measures, I may not be considering enough. You don't know, what you don't know. This is why I ask for the opinions and guidance from other builders.

My customers are involved in every phase of a build, I offer options and they make their choices. My customers may not be as knowledgeable or informed as others but they know what they like and want in a custom built rifle and they're willing to pay for it.

So, once again I thank you all for taking the time to offer your opinions and guidance. Tony

[Goose]

         Sorry boys, didn't intend to ruffle feathers. Critiques and criticism of a project is always a good thing, and having some masters here to draw on is an invaluable resource no doubt.  I just don't see the need for the sarcastic almost snoby tone given in those critiques. When one asks for a critique,  it doesn't necessarily need to come with a slap in the snoot.

[bob in the woods]

As I see it, there are basically to camps. Holding to the spirit of the originals, and the "contemporary" side.  This absolutely falls in the 2nd category, so I didn't say anything except to comment on the front sights being reversed. I suppose a " needs to see originals " as per Dixons could be tacked on, but in this case, it doesn't really apply.
Not to my taste, but then TC didn't sell all those Hawkens by accident.