Bedford County rifle

[okawbow]

I recently bought this rifle from 490roundball on this site. He is an excellent seller and really packed this gun well for shipping. I always wanted a Bedford rifle. This one I believe was made about 1840 in Hopewell township, by George Fay and possibly also by Jacob Snyder, who was Fays apprentice. It seems to have more in common with Snyders rifles than with George Fays. It is marked G*F on the top flat of the barrel. Tobias Snyder, Jacobs brother, was also an apprentice to Fay later on.

The bore is 38 caliber, and the 39” barrel has been shortened at the breech by about 4”. There is still good enough rifling to determine that the twist is 1-48”. The bore feels smooth and does not tear a tight patch. The gun weighs 8 1/2#. LOP is 12 1/2”. There are 4 silver inlays and the Bedford Q style 4 piece patch box. All inlays, patch box, toe plate and side plate are nicely engraved. The patch box lid is missing and someone in the past replaced it. I will replace that with a more appropriate engraved reproduction. The entry pipe is also missing. The curly maple stock is in good shape except for one spot in front of the lock. I believe the lock is original to the rifle. The internals are nicely made, with a stirrup on the tumbler/mainspring, but without a half-cock. The set triggers are also very nicely made and work well. The front trigger almost looks like it was turned in a lathe.

I am considering restoring the barrel and stock to the original length. What do you think? Should I?

[mr. no gold]

Nice rifle and certainly within the Bedford school of rifle making. Condition looks good with some rather common minor problems associated with its 150 years of use and maintenance. Given that the barrel was cut back by several inches, it was likely done to lighten the gun for an aging owner. My Bedford was shortened by five inches at one cut; probably for that reason. That is a part of the history of the gun and I will never have it restored. If I owned the one you have, I would attend to things like the missing rear pipe and anything else that can detract from its overall appearance, but relengthening the barrel is not one of them. Great gun with a nice pedigree. Thank you for posting it here for the admiration of the members.
Dick

[120RIR]

To restore or not to restore...always a good question and one I am intimately and recently familiar with  .  Although some might decry restoration as an egregious abomination (in particular reconversion to flint) as it can alter signs of the original rifle (or musket's) story, it all depends on what that story is or is not.  If, just for example, there is clear evidence of Confederate alteration of a firearm for use during the Civil War, yeah, that's a great story and "restoration" of it would be a disservice to the piece.  However, if there is no specific tale to be told, what "history" are we losing?  On the other hand, there is certainly a lot of grey area here and I think your nice Bedford rifle is in that category.  While the shortening of your rifle was almost certainly not the result of some definable and significant historical event or trend, in this case I'm with Dick and think anything other than fixing up the patchbox, replacing the ramrod pipe and giving them a little age to better match the rest of the brass would be a mistake, not worth the effort, and just might detract from the piece.  It's a fine rifle regardless so why fix what ain't broke?   

[mr. no gold]

On further study of your rifle/photos, it would not surprise me if the patch box lid has not been replaced.The color is slightly off, it appears, and the engraving on it is not quite in keeping with that on the side plate. Also, many Bedford box lids have engraving on them, (somewhat matching that on the side plate), and yours well could have had that. You can find photos of pieces by this maker and determine whether, or not, he did engrave the lids on the guns he made. 120RIR has given a good road map toward making your rifle look as it should given equal circumstances and has given excellent reasons for pursuing only limited work on it.
Dick

[okawbow]

The patch-box lid was definitely and recently replaced. The hinges are soldered on. I will make a new lid using a flat hinge like the original had. I will send it to someone else to engrave.

[Tanselman]

You will probably learn quickly, if you don't already know, that restoration usually boils down to individual choice, and you'll get both sides providing reasons for why you should, or should not, do restoration. I agree the small items, lid and rear pipe, are a no-brainer to replace/restore, since they both detract significantly from the rifle's appearance. When barrel stretching enters the conversation, it's really up to you on how you want your rifle, and your investment, to look.

At times when a gun has had other restoration done to it, it becomes viewed as a "restored gun" in the collecting community. The value is dinged somewhat, so it partially becomes a financial issue: if you want to invest a good chunk more in a proper barrel stretching and forestock addition... will you get your full investment back out of the rifle? Probably not on a mid-range gun, particularly if it has other restoration that can be picked up by a good collector. So the real question is how you feel about your gun as it presently looks.

Since this is a personal decision, I'll offer a consideration I use for barrel stretching. Consider how the rifle looks presently; does it look snubbed off and awkward to you, or does it look "reasonable" even with a few inches missing on the barrel? If a rifle looks clubby or awkward, it probably will look that way to a future buyer, too, so it may be worth your investment to stretch the barrel, for both your satisfaction while you own it [which is a key part of its value to you] as well as for an easier sell down the road. If the gun looks reasonably OK to you with a few inches of barrel missing, it probably will look that way to future buyers, and it's probably a better decision to leave it as-is.

Shelby Gallien

[mr. no gold]

Glad that Shelby came in on this discussion. He is one of the most knowledgable experts that I know and his analysis of rifles and peripheral matters is astounding; and you will find that he is worth listening to. A separate thought hit me that I will post here. One of the major features of a good Bedford rifle is the unique hand made 'rat tailed' lock plate and unique hammer. However, some makers chose to use a hardware store lock over the traditional style mentioned earlier. The maker of your piece obviously chose the English lock. If your gun was up on my wall, and it had the Bedford style lock, I would very likely have the whole rifle put right. As it is now, I probably would not do so, unless I could do it myself. This is very subjective on my part I realize, and I am not denigrating your rifle, or your tastes, but this is an approach that makes sense to me. You have a nice gun and there are not too many of his pieces to be found. Do let us know how you progress with it.
Dick

[okawbow]

Thanks to all for their comments and advice. I will think hard on the matter. I have built many rifles, some from scratch, making all the parts and even the barrel on one. I am a machinist and wood worker by trade, so if I decide to do any barrel “stretching”, I would do the work myself. I like the looks of the rifle ok as is, but would also like it to look as it was intended to look.

Chuck

[JV Puleo]

I generally have a very conservative attitude regarding restoration. I would never re-convert (in fact, I will not have a re-conversion in my collection) and I can't think of the situation where I'd want to stretch a barrel that was shortened during the guns period of actual use. That, to me is the key element. If it was altered by someone in the past, when it was still in use, I'd leave it alone. Damage...like that poorly repaired patch box lid is another issue entirely. I've no problem with repairing outright damage and, on some occasions I'd even replace a missing part. Oddly enough, I was just thinking about that because on my bench is as really fantastic militia musket, with a birds eye maple stock, made with mostly British mounts in the style of the Land Pattern muskets but missing it's lock. I paid $35 for it when I was in High School and I'd love to find a lock that would fit the mortise. It obviously had been converted and I'd leave it that way but I don't feel putting a converted lock into it would be too objectionable. I even though of making a lock to fit the mortise but, at the moment, I haven't the time.

[Dphariss]

Leave it alone. Unless in really bad shape there is no reason to “restore” old rifles. And  only then if the restorer is REALLY good at this work. But I do agree then repairs done for PRESERVATION are acceptable. Otherwise it/the part might be further damaged.

[120RIR]

Restoration of fine early furniture seems to commonplace and widely accepted in that field, and I don't recall encountering any controversy regarding the practice (other than poorly done work).  In long rifle world, however, there seem to be two fairly distinct camps.  There is some grey area but in general there are pretty clear lines.  I wonder how that came to be?

[AZshot]

Actually, colonial furniture, Tiffany lampshades, old coins, vintage centerfire guns, almost ALL antiques you don't touch them to "refinish" ever.  Much of a long rifle is primitive handcrafted work, early decorative art really.  And each gunsmith did things a particular way, including finishing.  So you can't go look at 5 more of them to make sure you're doing it right.  It's one craftsman in 1825 building it, 200 years of people damaging and altering it, then another craftsman trying to get in the head of the original builder to bring it back.  Now if one is broken at the wrist or has the wrong lock crudely put in that was obviously never usable, that's another thing.  A missing entry pipe or even nose cap, maybe.

Automobiles are restored and repainted frequently.  Because they spend their lives outdoors, in rain and snow and pollution. A lot of people try to apply industrial age mass produced restoration theory to pre-industrial handicrafts. 

I know a few rare museum pieces are restored by world-class craftsmen, in rifles and in most arenas.  Paintings by Leonardo di Vinci are touched up.  But it should be pretty uncommon for most rifles.

[okawbow]

I did replace the missing patch box lid and lower thimble. I took pains to make sure I did no damage to any original wood or brass, and the pieces can be removed easily. The rifle will look better on display now. I will age the brass after I find someone to engrave the lid.

[Robert Wolfe]

Nicely done.

[Shreckmeister]

Great workmanship.  It's ready for it's next 100 years.  I really like what you did to it.

[mr. no gold]

Chuck, looks to me like you did a mighty fine job on your gun. And, you did it right quickly, too. I like it and when you finish with engraving and aging, no one will really know that any work was done. It will look great in its place of honor up on your wall!
Dick

[120RIR]

Indeed...a little engraving, a little ageing, some passage of time, and only a trained eye might be able to spot the work.  I'm diving into my first restoration adventure on a nice John Parks rifle...broken at the wrist with some wood missing around the tang and lock, part of the forestock missing, the usual.  The metal work will be the easy part for me, having been 'smithing and engraving for the reenacting set for decades but the wood?  Hmm...I'm now learning how much I don't know!

[far55]

That lid looks good. I have a rifle that just had a piece of brass nailed over the missing door. I have tried to remove the screws in the head, but they wont move and I would like to save them. I have heard of heating a copper wire while holding it against the head or using the point of a large soldering iron. Has anyone tried this ? I dont mean to hijack the thread, but it seemed like a good place to ask this question. Thanks, Roland

[JTR]

Roland, some good heat from a soldering iron on the head of the old screw will help to loosen it from the wood. You need to get the screw hot enough to get it to expand just a little. Then let it cool or cool it with a damp rag. Take your Good Fitting screwdriver and with firm pressure give it a small turn to loosen. If it turns a bit and tightens up again, give it a little turn to tighten, then back to loosen again. Sometimes takes a little back and forth to get it loose enough to agree to come out. While the screw is still hot, a drop of light oil right at the screw/brass junction can help.
Be careful, heat a couple times if needed. The old iron is not the toughest stuff, and you can twist the screw head off if you're not careful.
John   

[okawbow]

The three screws on the finial were already a little messed up by a previous owner who made a soldered together lid. One was still very tight and barely had any slot left. I loosened it by tapping a good fitting screw driver with a tiny hammer while I turned the screw. I repaired the slots somewhat by putting the screws in a hole and lightly peening the metal back flat and truing the slot up a little with a very fine hacksaw blade.

[okawbow]

I sent the new patchbox lid to Grackle to be engraved. I think he did a great job of matching the style and quality of the original.

[Shreckmeister]

Very nice work.  Looks like it's been there since the day it was made.  Great job on the engraving and matching brass.  Impressed.

[Bob Gerard]

It’s being reborn! Very beautiful gun and piece of American history. You should be rightly proud.