"Cues" that would suggest a rifle is from the early/mid 18th century?

[bark-eater]

I'm pondering the next project before really  starting the first..  Assuming there's a natural progression to such things, I'll be ordering a  Woodsrunner kit at some point.

From what I've read that this is a pretty safe bet for representing a 1760-1770 rifle.  The very superficial research I've done suggests that there certainly were rifles in service a decade or more prior, but there are very few remaining examples with any kind of providence.

 Kibler's Woodsrunner is based on a original that is considered to be a 1760's Virginia gun, and what I'm wondering is what kind of details can be added that would suggest an earlier origin.

I asked the same question elsewhere about the back dating the appearance of a Fowler into the French and Indian period, and the basic recipe was bright metal and walnut.

So I'd appreciate any suggestions on tweaking the Woodsrunner, even if only to gain a momentary suspension of disbelief..

Thanks, Woody

[rich pierce]

I think you’re simplifying the advice given on what would make a fowler look earlier.

There will be lots of viewpoints on your current question. There are very few existing rifles made in the colonies that appear like what some of us think rifles made here in the 1750s should look like. Usually it boils down to 3 or 4 categories of features.

First is architecture. Does it look like a slim Golden Age longrifle? Then it doesn’t fit the 1750s period if it has Germanic styling. The Woodsrunner does not typify strong Germanic styling.  We typically want a wide, tall buttplate with almost zero curvature on a very early colonial rifle. Often a wide toe. If Germanic in styling we want a bold cheekpiece that may protrude almost as much at the front as at the rear. Reference these guns which fit my conceptions, though not necessarily dating to the 1750s: the Marshall rifle, the Tulip rifle, the Musician’s rifle, RCA19, and the Natty Bumpo or James Fennimore Cooper rifle. If English in styling, it’s hard to say. Look up the Turvey flintlock English rifle. Obviously you can’t change the architecture on a pre-shaped kit gun to make it more robust.

Second is furniture. The buttplate is mentioned above. Some early Germanic style rifle guards have the grip rail well off the wrist, and some have front and rear extensions with interesting finials instead of being squared off. On a gun with English influences, it’s harder (for me) to point to an English guard for a rifle and say, “that one sure looks early to mid 1700s!”

Third is parts. The barrel and lock should be readily similar to documented barrels and locks from the period - or EARLIER as many guns in the early days appear to have recycled parts. Those cannot be changed on a kit gun.

Lastly one could theoretically employ carving that is off an earlier colonial-made gun - and there are zero to one rifles surely made here with reliable dates placing them in the 1750s.

I’d advise being happy with your gun as it is, and getting or building an earlier gun if that’s what you really want.

Hoping others will chime in on how they would approach your situation. Feel free to PM me.

[bark-eater]

Thank you for taking the time to answer. I'll be looking all that up.
To continue in the vein of not knowing what I don't know, how would the Woodsrunner compare with the "Mark Silver - Virginia Rifle"?
Jim Chambers description suggests that the original might date back to 1740.

[rich pierce]

Hopefully others will chime in. The Marshall rifle and the Mark Silver rifle are among some  very good choices for an early rifle. The Marshall rifle is one that looks undeniably early. It looks a lot like rifles of the 1750s and 1760s made in Germanic countries. The Mark Silver rifle is more “Virginia” in design as I understand it. Both would require lot more work and more skill to fit and finish everything than the Woodsrunner.

[bark-eater]

I did a little reading, and and there are a number of well tread paths of very technical discussion and  interpretation of what an "early virginia" rifle would look like.

  Sticking and starting with the Kibler Woodsrunner and very much not trying to make it something else,  the Kibler is described as being influenced by an original rifle called  the "Woodsrunner" 

Assuming that the original "Woodsrunner rifle" didn't spring forth from the aether, the original gunbuilder had built guns before and had learned the craft from someone, somewhere and been influenced by prior built rifles.

So I'll focus in and restate my question as "what details I can use to suggest that a gun is an earlier example of a Woodrunner "type"?"   

The biggest choice is the type of wood for the stock.  The little bit of reading I've done suggests a plain maple, but I saw mention of the "Natty Bumpo" perhaps being cherry? I'm also assuming that the metal work would all be bright finished originally.  I wont want to attempt  doing my own carving or engraving, but I assume that's the kind of work that helps date a rifle and the Kibler "factory" carving likely has an associated time frame for the style.  Would a plain gun or different carving push the gun back a decade? 

Again, thank you for the responses. I know more than I did yesterday.  Woody

[rich pierce]

The rifle most closely related to the Woodsrunner is called the Feather rifle. Wallace Gusler dated it later because the guard is smaller. But its architecture may be a “throwback” to a slightly earlier style. Or, this blank allowed this, and that blank allowed that. It has a wider, flatter buttplate than the Woodsrunner if I recall. If you look at your PMs and respond I could send you an article on guns related to the Woodsrunner.

I don’t think plain or fancy wood or cherry or maple or walnut help define a rifle as early or not. The sample size is so small. I’m guessing they used what was cured at the moment.

[rich pierce]

Good discussion here: https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=49261.0

[whetrock]

Here's another thread you may want to look at. More photos of old guns!

https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=49297.0


Be sure to see photos at the bottom of the thread that show the patch box of the original.
(Thanks to "bama" for posting those photos.)