Non shimmel guns

[flintriflesmith]

...?  and iron, while legally forbidden in the colonies pre Rev War.......was made........

I don't know where you got the information that iron making was forbidden in the colonies but it is absolutely wrong. Take a few minutes to read the first five paragraphs of this summary.

http://www.flintriflesmith.com/WritingandResearch/WebArticles/ironandsteel.htm

The abundance of iron in pre-revolutionary America makes the lack of iron mounted guns even more of a mystery.

Gary 

[Dr. Tim-Boone]

...?  and iron, while legally forbidden in the colonies pre Rev War.......was made........

I don't know where you got the information that iron making was forbidden in the colonies but it is absolutely wrong. Take a few minutes to read the first five paragraphs of this summary.

http://www.flintriflesmith.com/WritingandResearch/WebArticles/ironandsteel.htm

The abundance of iron in pre-revolutionary America makes the lack of iron mounted guns even more of a mystery.

Gary  

Yeah I misstated it. I knew we weren't supposed to use the iron, but ship it to England. Prior to the revolution North and S. Carolina were shipping large volumes to England...... And I had read your site before. I keep finding your information more accurate than many articles I have found from the 19th century.... Thanks

Maybe the iron furniture all rusted away.........

[northmn]

When I was in IA training to become a teacher we had a pattren and foundary class that probably was close to the level of production they would have had in the early days.  Buttplates and triggerguards were sand cast back then as compared to todays sales of wax cast products.  Iron was not as adaptable to that form of production nor is cast iron as desirable for triggerguards and buttplates.  The stuff you have today is cast steel, not cast iron.  They used to sell cast iron parts and they were lousy.  The triggerguards would break at a hint of bending to fit.  As to forged parts, compare a Tennessee rifle's forged hardware to that of any of the top makers brass harware.  Also due to the lower melting point, brass is much more economical to use, and would have a higher production level and be easier on the casting sands and require less fuel for melting.  I do not know how many brass casting could be turned out as compared to the time it would take to make one set of forged iron, but it would be considerable once set up.  If the gunsmith did his own casting, he likely turned out quite a few rough cast mounts in a day. Also brass finishes up better.  We are thinking of today's technologies when we look at iron mounted rifles.  Yesteryear's technology would not adapt to them as easy.  The current use of investment cast hardware is not technically PC  as they admit the alloys are different to adapt to the process, where they are using bronze instead of brass.


DP

[dannybb55]

I have talked back and forth with Ben Coogle of Oglethorpe GA about early guns in his region, on the Historical Trekking site, He says that you will have to look at the archeological record to see what was used. I have yet to see anyone mention dug gun parts in this discussion but that is where the early guns will be found
                                                Danny

[rich pierce]

I doubt that there was any necessity involved in using iron for furniture where that was done.  Note that they used new locks, often relatively high quality ones.  If they could purchase locks, they could purchase furniture.  I think it was more economy (I could forge that my own self) and pride in smithing skills that led to regional preferences for forged iron furniture.

[Mike Brooks]

I have talked back and forth with Ben Coogle of Oglethorpe GA about early guns in his region, on the Historical Trekking site, He says that you will have to look at the archeological record to see what was used. I have yet to see anyone mention dug gun parts in this discussion but that is where the early guns will be found
                                                Danny

Smoothbores or rifles? Mostly what is dug up are trade gun parts, either French or English depending on where you're digging. Rifle parts turn up less often, but they do turn up. Contact some of the archeologists and universities that do the digs for info. I'm sure they would share info with a serious student.

[Dphariss]

I have talked back and forth with Ben Coogle of Oglethorpe GA about early guns in his region, on the Historical Trekking site, He says that you will have to look at the archeological record to see what was used. I have yet to see anyone mention dug gun parts in this discussion but that is where the early guns will be found
                                                Danny

Smoothbores or rifles? Mostly what is dug up are trade gun parts, either French or English depending on where you're digging. Rifle parts turn up less often, but they do turn up. Contact some of the archeologists and universities that do the digs for info. I'm sure they would share info with a serious student.

One must remember that trade gun was a pretty disposable item. A barrel from a broken rifle was likely worth more than a new trade gun. Since it could be and they were, recycled and put back into use. Trade gun barrels became tent pegs and hide scrapers.

Dan

[Acer Saccharum]

I do have RCA volume I but, bills before books.

May I take that quote a step farther, in a different direction?

How about  "Books before Builds"?
Here is my opinion on books:
The books are a tool for shaping ideas and design as much as bandsaw and rasp are for shaping the wood. If you really mean to make your gun seriously founded in tradition, you must reference the original guns, using books and actual hands on experience. Many of us, self included, have infrequent chances to handle the originals, so books are the next best thing.

If you are dedicated to making work as close to original as possible, you must see original work. I think Ian Pratt may have summed it up once to a tee, and I can only paraphrase what he said.

'One must sacrifice family and friends, steady income and food, in pursuit of the longrifle. Personal hygiene and shaving shall not obstruct the following of the true path.'

Tom

[Stophel]

Working solely on memory here, so take it for what it's worth:  I remember reading a quote by the Royal Governor of Georgia writing to someone else lamenting the fact that his colony had a complete dearth of people knowledgeable in the mechanical arts.

[J.D.]

I have talked back and forth with Ben Coogle of Oglethorpe GA about early guns in his region, on the Historical Trekking site, He says that you will have to look at the archeological record to see what was used. I have yet to see anyone mention dug gun parts in this discussion but that is where the early guns will be found
                                                Danny

Smoothbores or rifles? Mostly what is dug up are trade gun parts, either French or English depending on where you're digging. Rifle parts turn up less often, but they do turn up. Contact some of the archeologists and universities that do the digs for info. I'm sure they would share info with a serious student.

I seem to remember reading about components of an iron mounted rifle recovered from a NDN grave dating to the 1750's, if my memory is correct. So that would suggest there were at least a few early iron mounted rifle guns. While early iron mounted rifles obviously were not common, at least a few seem to have been available.

The question  is, what did that iron furniture look like? More importantly, what was the architecture like?

So many questions, so few answers.

God bless

[G-Man]

Acer - on the forging vs casting, I think we are describing the same thing - not really "necessity", but perhaps "practicality and efficiency" would be better terms. 

I get the impression the early backcountry gunmakers in the southern Appalachians in the 1770s-90s did not have the output, or demand, of their cohorts in more populated areas during that era.  So they would probably tend to keep a minimal amount of things on hand as "inventory" - locks would usually be a necessity (not always though - that big iron mounted rifle in RCA 2 has what looks like a regionally made lock).  If someone came to you and needed a gun, they probably needed it now, and you were not going to send out east and wait 6 months for gun parts, and if you had iron for a barrel, why not use a little of the skelp for some hardware too?

I would also not be surprised if some of the easrliest of those old German and Scotch Irish gunsmiths in Virginia had at least seen a few European guns with iron mounts, so had at least an inkling of how to do it from the start. 

Just a thought

Guy

[Acer Saccharum]

I went to a blacksmithing gathering this weekend, and there was a guy making blooms of iron from ore in a charcoal fire. These crude lumps would then be hammered out on a forge to work out the impurities and improve ductility.

At one demo he took a stack of pallets, ct them up, made charcoal out of them, and then screened out all the nails. Then started up his furnace, fueled with the charcoal, and made a bloom out of all the nails.

It is entirely possible that backcountry smiths would be able to produce iron mounts with limited equipment. This demo was a real eye-opener for me.

[dannybb55]

I remember seeing photos online, awhile back, of recovered Leman and Deringer parts from Bent's fort and further north. They were part of a cache of spare parts along with back action locks and screws. Grave goods will have all manner of things in them including datable pottery and trade knives. The value of the object does not prevent it from being buried. What has more value, the tool or the lost friend? There is an Occaneechee burial from Sara Town in the NC Piedmont that has caught my attention. The "Trade Gun" has a Jacobite flint lock with the normal spall flint in the jaws and the barrel is about 28 ga and 4-5 feet long. The musket was broken at the wrist to make it fit in the grave, (this would not prevent it's function in the afterlife). The musket is nearly identical to the series 607 at TRS. The Occaneechee traded with the Virginians and had trouble with the Tuscarora. These guns were pushing the limit of British state if the art, meaning they were roughly made but elegantly formed, kind of a poorboy musket. Maybe Clay Smith, Mike Brooks or even me will attempt one. This is my idea of an early trade gun. I feel that I am slowly drifting off the topic.
                                                 Danny

[flintriflesmith]

I seem to remember reading about components of an iron mounted rifle recovered from a NDN grave dating to the 1750's, if my memory is correct. So that would suggest there were at least a few early iron mounted rifle guns. While early iron mounted rifles obviously were not common, at least a few seem to have been available.
The question  is, what did that iron furniture look like? More importantly, what was the architecture like?
So many questions, so few answers.
God bless

As far as I know that reference is too a few parts, including a butt piece cut for a wood box, from a site destroyed by about 1755 or so. What is not usually mentioned is that in exactly the same period iron mounted trade rifles with 4 foot barrels show up in the Ohio Company inventory of trade goods at one of their storehouses. Almost certainly imported English or German guns. Here is a short version of the citation:

Lists of Indian Goods at Rock Creek— John Nash, December 1756
[Rock Creek is a little to the north of Centerville, Fairfax Co. VA on the direct road to Williams Gap]
...
abt. 1 dozn. 4. ft. square barrell'd Guns very small Bores best Iron mounted & stock'd like Rippells [rifles] , a Bullet Mould to each. @ 27\6

abt. 1 dozn. Rippells [rifles] 4. ft. Barrells, best Iron _ Bullet Mould to each @ 41\6

[Acer Saccharum]

Gary, when they say 'stocked like rippels' does that mean they have rifle architecture, but could be smoothbores?
The next items are positively identified as ripples.

And square barrels means barrels with corners? As in octagon, not round barrels.

[J.D.]

As far as I know that reference is too a few parts, including a butt piece cut for a wood box, from a site destroyed by about 1755 or so. What is not usually mentioned is that in exactly the same period iron mounted trade rifles with 4 foot barrels show up in the Ohio Company inventory of trade goods at one of their storehouses. Almost certainly imported English or German guns. Here is a short version of the citation:

Lists of Indian Goods at Rock Creek— John Nash, December 1756
[Rock Creek is a little to the north of Centerville, Fairfax Co. VA on the direct road to Williams Gap]
...
abt. 1 dozn. 4. ft. square barrell'd Guns very small Bores best Iron mounted & stock'd like Rippells [rifles] , a Bullet Mould to each. @ 27\6

abt. 1 dozn. Rippells [rifles] 4. ft. Barrells, best Iron _ Bullet Mould to each @ 41\6

I have seen that quote and I have to wonder how that would read if modern punctuation were used, for example;

abt. 1 dozn. 4. ft. square barrell'd Guns, very small Bores, best Iron, mounted & stock'd like Rippells [rifles] , a Bullet Mould to each. @ 27\6

abt. 1 dozn. Rippells [rifles] 4. ft. Barrells, best Iron _ Bullet Mould to each @ 41\6

I have to wonder about the mention of "best iron" in the second sentence too. Are the barrels made of the "best iron", or does it suggest iron mounted smooth rifles and iron mounted rifles?

While I certainly would like to think that the mountings of those rifles were made of the "best iron", this quote doesn't really lead me to that conclusion.

I'm not trying to be combative, 'cause I would like to see some conclusive documentation for iron mounted rifles in the 1750s, but  while those quotes might suggest the possibility of iron mounted rifles, IMHO, the wording and lack of punctuation could be taken to mean several things.

God bless

[flintriflesmith]

I think the punctuation is a bit different from what you have proposed. I think there is a dash or underscore after Bores and it reads "...very small bores _ best iron mounted & stock'd like Rippells..."

In my opinion, the underscore on the next entry supports that interpretation because hand written records from the period often used underscores to let the reader know an entry was abbreviated OR like the line above. I see this very frequently in store records and I think it was a sort of bookkeeping short hand. Anything to save time and ink when writing with a quill.

___________________________________-
abt. 1 dozn. 4. ft. square barrell'd Guns, very small Bores _ best Iron mounted & stock'd like Rippells [rifles] , a Bullet Mould to each. @ 27\6

abt. 1 dozn. Rippells [rifles] 4. ft. Barrells, best Iron _ Bullet Mould to each @ 41\6
___________________________________

Below is the actual image of the entry so you all can take your own best guess.

Gary

[northmn]

I suppose forged iron furniture could have been used but would it have the fine features of the cast stuff.  A cast iron buttplate woudl likely work, even with the long finials as seen back then, but the triggerguards would have had to ahve been much plainer and simpler.  I am referring to the current availability of cast steel triggerguards and butplates that match the brass ones.  Wrought iron could possibly be forged and with a lot of file work be made into a fairly fine triggerguard, but one sure has not seen anything like that even after the Revolution.  Some of the cast steel stuff available now, I doubt would have been used back then.  European rifles may have had such furniture, but they were far ahead of us at that time in technology.  Did Jaegers have any iron mounting?   Iron furniture on trade guns is far more crude than on a normal rifle.  Has anyone even seen a forged guard worked out to the same degree of detail as in a cast brass guard.

DP

[G-Man]

For iron gun mounts, whether European or American in the period I believe we are talking about forged iron.   "Cast Steel" did exist, but if I understand correctly, that was a process for making steel ingots in crucibles, to be forged into other items, not directly cast into the shape of the finished items.

There are many examples of finely finished, sometimes even chiseled and engraved, forged iron mounts on European guns, going back into the 1600s. And there are examples of American iron mounts that are highly finished out.  Take a look at some of the work by the Honakers.  There was also an early iron mounted gun discussed on here a few months back, shown in one of Dr. Whisker's books and Jerry Noble's book, that appears to be from the 1780-90 period and has a finely finished guard, nice incised carving, and no buttplate.  Some have proposed it to be associated with the Bryan family of gunmakers.  There are others.  

I guess what I am getting at is that once you have the basic shape there, there, you could dress out an iron mount to the same degree as you would a brass mount if you wanted. 
  
Guy
 

[Stophel]

I think the punctuation is a bit different from what you have proposed. I think there is a dash or underscore after Bores and it reads "...very small bores _ best iron mounted & stock'd like Rippells..."

In my opinion, the underscore on the next entry supports that interpretation because hand written records from the period often used underscores to let the reader know an entry was abbreviated OR like the line above. I see this very frequently in store records and I think it was a sort of bookkeeping short hand. Anything to save time and ink when writing with a quill.

___________________________________-
abt. 1 dozn. 4. ft. square barrell'd Guns, very small Bores _ best Iron mounted & stock'd like Rippells [rifles] , a Bullet Mould to each. @ 27\6

abt. 1 dozn. Rippells [rifles] 4. ft. Barrells, best Iron _ Bullet Mould to each @ 41\6
___________________________________

Below is the actual image of the entry so you all can take your own best guess.

Gary

I think you're wanting to see "iron mounted" there.  I can clearly see a comma after "best iron" (partially obscured by the big "J").  Besides, why would one gun be made of the best iron, and the other one "Best iron mounted"?

[J.D.]

I think the punctuation is a bit different from what you have proposed. I think there is a dash or underscore after Bores and it reads "...very small bores _ best iron mounted & stock'd like Rippells..."

In my opinion, the underscore on the next entry supports that interpretation because hand written records from the period often used underscores to let the reader know an entry was abbreviated OR like the line above. I see this very frequently in store records and I think it was a sort of bookkeeping short hand. Anything to save time and ink when writing with a quill.

___________________________________-
abt. 1 dozn. 4. ft. square barrell'd Guns, very small Bores _ best Iron mounted & stock'd like Rippells [rifles] , a Bullet Mould to each. @ 27\6

abt. 1 dozn. Rippells [rifles] 4. ft. Barrells, best Iron _ Bullet Mould to each @ 41\6
___________________________________

I think you're wanting to see "iron mounted" there.  I can clearly see a comma after "best iron" (partially obscured by the big "J").  Besides, why would one gun be made of the best iron, and the other one "Best iron mounted"?

I had to enlarge the page to read it, and it does look like a comma partially obscured by the bracket, "J", or whatever punctuation separator was used to distinguish between the end of the sentence and the price.

Again, while I do think that some iron mounted rifles did exist in the 1750s, I certainly would like to see something that conclusively describes those pieces, however, I don't think this quote is it.

God bless

[northmn]

I guess what I am getting at is that once you have the basic shape there, there, you could dress out an iron mount to the same degree as you would a brass mount if you wanted. 
  
Guy
 

I don't deny that and agree, especially with true wrought iron.  What my point is , is that brass can be cast so much closer to the finished product with far less finishing work.  Also once the patterns are made the smith or whoever could cast several rough castings in one day.  This would make brass a far more popular medium to work with.  Also iron mountings would have no real advantage over brass and possibly at that time not be as attractive.  When most of you say that iron mounted rifles from that time period would be rare, that is one big reason.  The foundary work I had done was almost identical to that in Gusslers film except we used gas to melt the alloy.  Otherwise we used the same basic boxes of sand.  A good fine sand cast does not have to be extremely rough.

DP

[Stophel]

We had a discussion about this reference on the Frontierfolk board recently.  Whatever they were, it was only a dozen of them. 

[flintriflesmith]

I think you're wanting to see "iron mounted" there.  I can clearly see a comma after "best iron" (partially obscured by the big "J").  Besides, why would one gun be made of the best iron, and the other one "Best iron mounted"?

There are others who have seen the mark that resembles a comma as an ink blob on the bracket like the one at the lower end of it or on the bottom of the seven in the price. The writer was clearly having a problem with his quill at that point in the document.

As for the underscore after "best iron" on the second line--I tried to explain that underscores were used in account books to show where text had been left out. Ditto, abbreviated as Do was used the same way.

I have no dog in this fight and was merely trying to point out this document in relation to the mounts of the iron mounted rifle that were dug in an Indian site at about the same time.
Gary

[J.D.]

I think you're wanting to see "iron mounted" there.  I can clearly see a comma after "best iron" (partially obscured by the big "J").  Besides, why would one gun be made of the best iron, and the other one "Best iron mounted"?

There are others who have seen the mark that resembles a comma as an ink blob on the bracket like the one at the lower end of it or on the bottom of the seven in the price. The writer was clearly having a problem with his quill at that point in the document.

As for the underscore after "best iron" on the second line--I tried to explain that underscores were used in account books to show where text had been left out. Ditto, abbreviated as Do was used the same way.

I have no dog in this fight and was merely trying to point out this document in relation to the mounts of the iron mounted rifle that were dug in an Indian site at about the same time.
Gary

I do appreciate your comments in relation to the iron mounted rifle recovered from the burial. I also appreciate your posting the photos of that document.

This reference to "best iron" may, indeed, be in reference to iron mounts, but, IMHO, the way it is worded can suggest either Best iron barrels or best iron mounts, depending on one's interpretation.

Personally, I dunno. I do wish the wording was less ambiguous.

God bless