Form Follows Function

[northmn]

There was a saying something like that.  My point is that today when we build, we are most often building to a function that may not have existed 200 years ago.  When I built rifles for target shooting, they were expected to be "correct" as in anything before say 1840, using iron sights, etc.  We rather loosly held to the 1840's thing as Revolutionary stuff was permitted alongside percussions.  The targets were bullseyes where five shots were fired for score.  Offhand shooting.  A common longrifle was a 42", 13/16 ", 45.  I doubt if that configuration existed to any extent 200 years ago.  Actually I even wonder about the B weight 45's or 50's popular in the swamped configurations.  Stocks are straighter and pulls possibly longer.  Whether the plain Tennessee types or the adorned Golden Age rifles, I am wondering if many originals were built to those lines.  One individual mentioned that original Bedford rifles had fairly straight but quite heavy barrels.  As did the Tennessee rifles rifles.

DP 

[Dave B]

Northern,
I think there is a lot of truth in what you are saying. I have been finding that the rifles I come across have heavy barrels some mildly swamped but nothing like what the profiles we see being used today. Obviously you cant say never but you can say mostly. I have a few rifles that have barrels that are 13/16 across and date to the middle to early 19 ca.  One is actually a smooth rifle. It is light to carry and a joy to mount. The rest of the rifles I have collected have heavier barrels being in the range of  .38 cal to 44 cal respectively and being 7/8 to 1" across the flats. They are from 42- 44" in length and are heavy. They don't reflect what you would call golden age rifles but I dont see the barrels being any smaller for the most part though the calibers tend to run larger on earlier pieces and possibly shorter barrels making them more manageable. 

I had the pleasure of holding a early J. Bonowitz rifle and it was obvious to me that you had to be fairly buff to have to pack that rifle up and over the mountain. The barrel had a mild swamp to it and it was slightly over an inch at the breach. I don't remember the caliber but it was between .45 and .54 respectively.

If I was to use one barrel for my building work the JP Beck Profile that Getz produces would best represent the golden age period to my thinking. If one was to stick with the caliber being in the mid to high forties you would have an accurate representation of what they would have carried at the time.

[Dphariss]

There was a saying something like that.  My point is that today when we build, we are most often building to a function that may not have existed 200 years ago.  When I built rifles for target shooting, they were expected to be "correct" as in anything before say 1840, using iron sights, etc.  We rather loosly held to the 1840's thing as Revolutionary stuff was permitted alongside percussions.  The targets were bullseyes where five shots were fired for score.  Offhand shooting.  A common longrifle was a 42", 13/16 ", 45.  I doubt if that configuration existed to any extent 200 years ago.  Actually I even wonder about the B weight 45's or 50's popular in the swamped configurations.  Stocks are straighter and pulls possibly longer.  Whether the plain Tennessee types or the adorned Golden Age rifles, I am wondering if many originals were built to those lines.  One individual mentioned that original Bedford rifles had fairly straight but quite heavy barrels.  As did the Tennessee rifles rifles.

DP 

Depends on the shooter.
A 13/16 45 is too light for me for offhand shooting.
B weight 50, too light.
A 54 with a 1 1/8 at the breech swamp that is not too extreme at 42" or so works really well for me
In fact I suspect that lot the swamps we use today are a little exaggerated. But I am no expert.
I have a 38" x 1" straight 54 that is s good off hand rifle.
I think people need to remember that many, many rifle matches of the past were shot from off a "chunk".

Dan

[northmn]

When I reviewed Hansen's specs. on trade rifles for the fur trade, a 38 inch 1" 50 would have been a light barrel.  Some were 1 1/16X42 by 50.  But the point made that originals were shot of chunks or rests is something expected.  My squirrel rifle has a 3/4 inch barrel, a size getting quite popular for small bores.  I also wonder, are we building rifles for women to use that may not have existed to any extent   Another thing is the patchbox.  Most owners today do not use them, and would not miss them if they did not have one except for decoration,  but as popular as they were they must ahve seen use at one time.

DP

[northmn]

Another item of function is the patchbox.  Almost absent on fowlers and early military muskets.  Very common on rifles.  Early ones were wooden, later ones simple brass and later still very elaborate brass, thne back to simple or absent in the percsercussion days.  Many Hawkens did not have one.  They much have had some function, as I would bet that either Ken Guy or Dennis G. would charge more than a little extra to put a fairly simple banana  patchbox on a rifle and those building the more elaborate brass mounted rifles a little more.  One would think the older gunsmiths would also do so.

DP

[Acer Saccharum]

A patchbox is also a visual sign. A rifle could be identified from 100 yds or more if it had one of those brass boxes on it. Maybe give the bearer of such a gun a little more leeway.

[T*O*F]

A rifle could be identified from 100 yds or more if it had one of those brass boxes on it

Maybe that's why they aged them to look 200 years old.....camoflage.

[Dr. Tim-Boone]

I still say the patchbox was for the Snickers bars.... (or maybe a spare twist?)  hey they hadn't invented Moon Pies yet had they.....now that would have taken a real patchbox!   Talk about form follows function!

[Clowdis]

I still say the patchbox was for the Snickers bars.... (or maybe a spare twist?)  hey they hadn't invented Moon Pies yet had they.....now that would have taken a real patchbox!   Talk about form follows function!

Actually the Moon Pie was much smaller in those days hence the invention of what people still believe to be the capbox 

[northmn]

I take it from the comments that no one really knows for sure if they had any real use.  I never really put anything in one.  Although a Snickers would be the best use.

DP

[Lucky R A]

     I guess I will pitch in on this one; I usually avoid philosophical discussions, preferring to stick to facts.  First off, I have handled and worked on a fair number of originals and just spent last weekend at the KRA show.   Original barrels seem to run from about 42" to about 48" with a few exceptions on either side that range.   Yes, they do seem to have a less extreme swamp than most made today and are slightly heavier.   However, this past weekend I spent a lot of time studying a wonderful original Bucks Co. gun that was as light and petite as anything we make today.  The barrel was 42" long; Getz's standard 42" profile is almost a perfect match for that rifle.  A lot more of the early smooth rifles used octagon to round barrels than we use today.  The octagon to round configuration makes a wonderful handling gun.  If you want a rifle gun, you can easily get such a barrel rifled in something like a 45-54 cal. 
        Now to patchboxes.  At least half the original patchboxes show signs of having a solidified grease/bees wax type patch lube in them.  Some contain original ball pullers or patch jags.   Absolutely none showed any signs of "food items", such would have been in the haversack.    Patchboxes  advertised a maker of the gun or a local where the gun was made.  As Tom said it helped the owner recognize his rifle from a distance.  It served a utilitarian purpose in carrying anything from cleaning equipment to an extra flint or whatever.  It could be a source of bragging rights, or as the Dutchmen say "Chust for nice."  On an average day hunt the original hunter traveled a lot lighter than we do today, they used the space available and that included the patchbox cavity.   

[Pete G.]

I, for one, do use the patchbox extensively. That is where I store the maintenance items for the rifle. Jag, vent pick, spare flint and turnscrew, all padded with a few cleaning patches to keep everything in place. The bag carries only shooting things. This ensures that the specialized items for that particular rifle are always there when needed. I'm sure that I'm not the first guy in 200 years to come up with this scheme of things.

[northmn]

I, for one, do use the patchbox extensively. That is where I store the maintenance items for the rifle. Jag, vent pick, spare flint and turnscrew, all padded with a few cleaning patches to keep everything in place. The bag carries only shooting things. This ensures that the specialized items for that particular rifle are always there when needed. I'm sure that I'm not the first guy in 200 years to come up with this scheme of things.

What you say is how I am sure many were used.  What do you use to keep them shut as some have complained about them popping open and losing the stuff inside them? 
As to barrel weight on originals, I sometimes wonder if that may be part of the reason they survived.  That they may have been something like specialized chunk guns?  Maybe not carried as much and used as hard as some non-survivors? 

DP

[Lucky R A]

        There were a lot of cross over trades 200 years ago.  Lockmakers (not gun locks) were often also employed in gun making etc.  Albrecht, at Christian Springs produced things as varied as door locks, coffee mills, and musical instruments.   I say all this to say that when these men made a latch system for a patchbox it was made to function and to function well.  They forged the springs, designed and adjusted the mechanisms.  Too many times today the patchbox latch is an afterthought that is designed for little more than to hold the door of the box closed.  Springs are improvised from hacksaw blades, metal strapping etc.  Many try to get away with an ill fitted cam action latch mechanism.   Certainly, with wood swelling and drying the latches sometimes need a bit of adjustment, but they can be made quite secure if the time is taken to do so.   
      I really doubt that during the Colonial and Golden Age there were many "chunk guns."  The barrels of these periods are slightly heavier than what we see today. but not markedly so.   Chunk guns etc. belong more to the percussion era into the time of the likes of Alvin York etc.   

[northmn]

I do not necessarily mean chunk guns in the terms as we think of them today but more the afternoon get together match rifle. 

DP

[Pete G.]

A real latch with a button almost flush should be secure from popping open, unless you do the Davy Crockett thing and swing the rifle by the barrel trying to knock Mexicans off the Alamo, but then you would probably break the stock anyway.

[northmn]

The patchbox was still an "expendable"  item.  Curiously, it was not present on smoothbores but more so on rifles.  Some Civil War rifles had them and the English Baker had one.  Even some Sharps had them.  Yet many of the plains rifles did not.  The long barrels of the long rifles were also an evolutionary flop as over time barrels got shorter.  For a while, if you look at some Golden Age rifles, there must have been a certain desire to have a gun with the longest barrel as some were over 50 inches.  But by and large I would bet the more practical users kept them under 4 feet, JF Cooper not withstanding. The Western rifles had shorter barrels where a long sighting plane would have been more beneficial

DP

[Don Getz]

Follow this logic about patchboxes.    I still claim them are put on guns for "other people to open".    If you hand your gun
to someone to look at, what is the one thing they will be sure to do......push that button that opens he patch box.   I have
put them on guns but have never used them...........Don

[starrbow]

On my hunting guns I do use the patch box, I put a small forged screwdiver, extra flints with lead wraps, cleaning jags, vent pick, and jute twine to tie it all in so it will not make noise.

It seems the plains rifles shorter barrels is somewhat of a mystery to me, I would have thought that the Eastern Longhunters would have benefited more with shorter barrels, vs the plains hunters. The saying "Need Dictates Change" comes to mind, I think by the early 1800's they did not see the "need" for longer barrels, in the east the calibers got smaller and the west they got larger. Plus in the west travel was done IMHO more by horseback, and a shorter overall gun would be easier to deal with. The east was way more forested and in some parts not horse friendly. I also believe Cost may have been another "need" as a longer barrel just costs more to produce and uses more Iron. Plus if barrels were shipped west, it stands to reason that for the same shipping weight one could have more barrels arrive in the shorter type VS the longer type for the same cost.

[northmn]

Follow this logic about patchboxes.    I still claim them are put on guns for "other people to open".    If you hand your gun
to someone to look at, what is the one thing they will be sure to do......push that button that opens he patch box.   I have
put them on guns but have never used them...........Don

I remember another individual that held that theory.  He wanted to put in something spring loaded to jump out at them.  Some seem to use them but would they miss them if they did not have one?  Many rifle barrels on military rifles were shortened after WWI when long ones were found unwieldy.  European rifles did not have longer barrels, but to be fair, the American rifles outranged the Jaegers during the Revolution and made them less effective as an adjunct to the British.


DP

[northmn]

Hooked breeches are another creation that I find interesting.  Most today use them to take out a barrel so that they can place the breech in water and pump water through the barrel.  One picture I saw of an early English halfstock showed it in its case, along with the flask and other accessories.   I would be wiling to bet that the primary reason for a hooked breech was for transportation as they likely did not clean in that manner.  A picture I saw of an early fullstock Hawken did not show a hooked breech but a long Tennessee style tang.

DP

[longcruise]

I go with the horsback theory on the western guns.

"Form Follows Function"

[northmn]

Did they get shorter because of horseback or because powders were getting better   D if I know.

DP

[D. Taylor Sapergia]

I believe that barrel length followed fashion more than any other factor, whether east - or west.  I also suspect that horses were used a great deal for travel in eastern North America, so I don't believe that alone contributes to shortening barrels in the west.
I can think of several Pennsylvania longrifles with hooked breeches, the most obvious to me - A. Verner's lovely creation.  The hooked breech and barrel slides or keys makes cleaning THOROUGHLY as easy as pie.  I further think that one reason for the demise of so many original rifles was the fact that they were not cleaned thoroughly.  During the caplock era, I think this was recognized to be a more important activity.  Just read Ned Roberts to see the period thinking on that topic.

[northmn]

Removal of a barrel for cleaning may be a reason as it prevents slop from getting on the stock regardless of method.  When one looks at other countries rifles, you have to wonder what made the long barrel practical enough to have developed.  While a longer barrel is easier to shoot accurately, there is a limit.  Some things do not have to be true as much as believed to be true.

DP