A Workmanlike Manner

[Pete G.]

Back in the day, how long did it take to build a rifle in a "workmanlike manner"? One shop could not have taken a significantly longer time to build a rifle than another and remain competitive, but neither could they afford to put out a product that did not meet a minimum of expectations.Taking into account that a rifle was built to sell and to be competitively priced, what are some of the characteristics? All handmade items usually have some small aberrations here and there that add to the charm of handwork instead of a machine made clone. I use a scraper to work down my brass castings, and leave the surface inside the trigger guard bow with the scraped finish, for example. I am curious if there other areas that lend themselves to this sort of thing? I am not looking for something used as a justification for less than perfect work, but instead I am trying to identify some areas that help lend an air of authenticity. Logic tells me that a carved and engraved piece would carry a higher standard of workmanship than a piece built to sell at the lowest possible price, however it also seems plausible that some time/cost saving techniques could migrate up the chain also.

[Blacksmoke]

Pete:    Back in the day - I assume that you mean the average gun maker working in a "one horse' shop maybe with an apprentice but doing most of the work by himself.   If he was not near a major center he would not have a lot of competition.  He would use barrels that were from a barrel mill - his locks came assembled and he also imported his castings for butt plate and trigger guard etc.  His stock blanks came from a timber mill.     Sound familiar?   Today we call that "scratch built".  He did not use a "kit" to make his rifle - but he did not make all of the components either.   He also worked pre- industrial revolution and without the use of a factory production line or electricity.     From what little research I 've done I understand that he could make a respectable rifle in about 4-6 weeks.     Hugh Toenjes

[rich pierce]

Folks have calculated that Christian Oerter turned out about 16 rifles a year if I am recalling correctly.  His surviving signed specimens have all had wire inlay or carving decoration.  Of course gunsmiths did a lot of repair work, so annual output might not extrapolate too well to how long it would take to make one rifle if uninterrupted.  We don't know for sure how often gunsmiths were using barrels that were already rifled, and how often the "rifle barrels" they purchased were "rifle barrel spahed" but not yet rifled.

Guys like Mike Brooks can turn out a rifle in 2 weeks without having everything pre-inlet or pre-shaped.

If someone learns a skill in their formative years, and does it all the time, their proficiency can be amazing.  Musicians are an example of this.  Meanwhile, someone who picks up a guitar a couple times a year might struggle to do scales.

[Mike Brooks]

Guys like Mike Brooks can turn out a rifle in 2 weeks without having everything pre-inlet or pre-shaped.

Actually, with the barrel and RR channel done I can make a plain gun in 20 - 25 hrs from a blank. Of course, I been doing this for a while.

[Ed Wenger]

Mike, 

That is truly a "workmanlike manner"!  Your guns have always struck me as such.  Not crazy, over the top, just well made, nice looking pieces that I think capture very well the essence of an 18th century craftsman plying his trade.

I'm thinking Hugh's response is pretty logical and what I would expect for the period.  4-6 weeks, but closer to four.


               Ed

[bgf]

I don't know anything compared to these guys, but I'm interested in this kind of thing myself.  First thing that comes to mind is round barrel channel -- can't see a reason to do it any other way.  Bottom of barrel itself, as well.  PB inside also -- even in pictures you can see the drill used a lot of times.  I also think the file marks in the BP in line with the toe molding were not style statements originally.  Pits in castings weren't always meticulously filled, either, as far as I can tell.

Alternately, as was said, if you do anything long enough, you will get better and faster, so I don't think sloppy inletting or other obvious shortcuts were common originally, though the wood shrinkage and other factors may make people thing they were, but early rifles probably weren't held to the same standard of perfection as our showpieces. 

[Acer Saccharum]

It takes me about a year to make one gun.......
Yet I manage to keep them ' workmanlike'. It's a challenge, but I do my best. 
tom

[Jim Kibler]

Careful study of original guns will provide an insight as to what was important in terms of fit and finish and what was not.  A general statement is that what didn't show, was not considered important as to finish.  For someone who has developed the nedessary skills to build a good gun, an approach to building in a "workmanlike manner would be to put self imposed time constraints on building process.  Cut the allowable time to half or two thirds of what it might take to ordinarily do a very good job.  With the necessary skills, the result will likely be work that more closely emulates original work.  Without the necessary skills a mess may be created.  I've worked in this manner when performing some carving demonstrations.  Although not as refined as my ordinary work, I found the results did compare to some original work more favorably.

[James]

I'm guessing that money was tight enough that even the guy with just enough for a gun that would kill a deer but had no frills was not turned away, but I'll bet he got what he paid for and was happy to have it. The nicer guns survive, but I'd guess an equal or greater number of "plain" guns were made.

[Jim Kibler]

For those who don't have access to originals for study, a couple of sources that come to mind are the JHAT volume that deals with the study of the Sheets rifle by Wallace Gusler and the article by Eric Kettenburg on his examination of a Jaeger rifle.  I'm not sure if it is still available on his website or not though.  One thing that is lacking in my view are careful exmanition and reporting on original rifles.  Almost everything available looks at guns from a very surface level, focusing little on the details of construction etc.  The sources mentioned above are certainly an exception to this tendency.  One more note...  original longrifles are out of the reach financially for many, but European arms are often fairly affordable.  Although not identical to longrifles, in my view, the tendencies in terms of acceptable workmanship are the same.  Perhaps this might be an option for those who are serious about this stuff.

[Don Getz]

Kibler........As I was reading all of the comments on the forum this morning, I was thinking about the old gunbuilders.   They didn't have one of these electronic gadgets to keep them from their work.............turn this darn thing OFF and get
back to the bench....................Don

[Jim Kibler]

I love it Don   You sure are right about that!  I have a rifle in front of me with carving drawn that is just waiting to be carved!

[James]

I'm hesitant to touch mine today as I managed to not mess anything up yesterday

[eagle24]

It takes me about a year to make one gun.......
Yet I manage to keep them ' workmanlike'. It's a challenge, but I do my best. 
tom

^^^^This^^^^

I'm really challenging myself though.  I'm starting a rifle now and going to try and have it finished by the CLA show.

[rich pierce]

For those interested in working more speedily, I would just add a word of caution from my own experience.  It's impossible for me to become more proficient without working regularly, and I find it difficult to build guns regularly because of time constraints.  I built regularly from 1978-1985, then took off 19 years for career development.  Since coming out of gunbuilding retirement I've only managed to finish 3 guns.  So unlike my early start, now I am not inletting 3-4 locks a year, 3-4 entry pipes a year, making 3-4 nosecaps a year, carving a rifle 3-4 times a year anymore.  And that is a minimum for developing proficiency with my abilities.  So now I have to go more slowly just to do as good a job as I used to do much more quickly when working more regularly.

[omark]

and we're getting older, too, rich.                           mark

[rich pierce]

say it isn't so!   

[gregg]

One more note...  original longrifles are out of the reach financially for many, but European arms are often fairly affordable.  Although not identical to longrifles, in my view, the tendencies in terms of acceptable workmanship are the same.  Perhaps this might be an option for those who are serious about this stuff.

The only things that come to my mind is the millitaey muskets and trade guns from Europe?
I think of the Jaeger as a big money rifle of the time that not many had the money for?
Jim I'm sure your thinking in a broader stroke of the brush. Could you give me or us a place to start a new study?

[Jim Kibler]

Here are a couple practice stocks where I demonstrated carving.  Each was drawn and carved in about 2 hours.  This doesn't give much time for messing around!  Not perfect design or execution, but overall not too bad.  These were part of the carving classes held at the Log Cabin shop.  For me, they were a good experience in learning just a little about how efficiently we can really work.  The finishing was done by Ian as part of another demonstration.  Pay no attention to the color of the second example.  It was finished with some evil acid I had.

[bgf]

Jim,
I wish all carving were done that way -- looks very natural and unforced, whereas so much of the carving I see is stiff and formal, and looks out of place on a long rifle.  Those two pictures look like they jumped out of a book of originals.  Personally, if I could carve that way in two hours (or even 4 , I wouldn't spend any more time on it, but I don't have to sell (and couldn't anyway) to picky customers with modern sensibilities.

I experienced the experience acceleration factor in the course of inletting RR pipes this morning.  First went way to slow for something so simple, the second was just a little faster, but the third happened in a couple of minutes -- and it looked better to me than the first two.  If I get on to another rifle in less than a year, it might stick.

[flintriflesmith]

Jim,
I've had virtually the same experience when demonstrating carving. Throw in the wrist carving, tang carving, and lock tabs and it is about 4 or maybe five hours depending on how gnarly the wood is.

That is one of the many reasons I find these often repeated "real guns were plain" arguments way off track when based on the thought that a carved gun was hugely more expensive than an uncarved one. Engraving a basic box is equally quick

Add to that the 10-12 hour work day and all the art on an average relief carved Rev War longrifle is less than a day's work. Even faster if you, as shop master, have the apprentice in training remove and smooth the background in the carving--somethinghe's got to learn to do anyway!

Gary

[Mike Brooks]

Here are a couple practice stocks where I demonstrated carving.  Each was drawn and carved in about 2 hours.  This doesn't give much time for messing around!  Not perfect design or execution, but overall not too bad.  These were part of the carving classes held at the Log Cabin shop.  For me, they were a good experience in learning just a little about how efficiently we can really work.  The finishing was done by Ian as part of another demonstration.  Pay no attention to the color of the second example.  It was finished with some evil acid I had.

Stunning carving actually, and it does look like the carving from the days of old. Lucky for me I don't have the same problems that you good carvers do, my carving NEVER looks to good for 18th century work!

[Mike Gahagan]

You guys depress the $#*! out of me!!I have been carving for about 35 years and there is noway that I could carve either one of those designs in two hours.For fear of embarrassing myself I won`t even say how long it would take.Kind of puts a damper on the whole experiance thing,at least for me.Jim,do you have any openings in your next carving class?

[satwel]

Before the introduction of the Blanchard lathe for cutting gunstocks and other irregular shapes in the mid 1820's, it took a journeyman stock maker at Springfield Armory approximately 16 hours to make a musket stock.

[Jim Kibler]

You guys depress the $#*! out of me!!I have been carving for about 35 years and there is noway that I could carve either one of those designs in two hours.For fear of embarrassing myself I won`t even say how long it would take.Kind of puts a damper on the whole experiance thing,at least for me.Jim,do you have any openings in your next carving class?

I bet you would be suprised how quickly you could do these if you tried.  If you had shown them, and I had never tried, I would have thought the same as you about the time it would take.  Working in front of others adds a little motivation as well!