period construction question for collectors

[Sean]

A fellow from another board suggested to me that staples as opposed to lugs and tang screws instead of bolts were indicative of lower quality guns these days.  Based on my limited experience with antique guns, I suggested that might not hold true in the 18th and 19th centuries.  So I'd like to ask some of you guys, who likely own more original guns than I've been lucky enough to handle, what your thoughts are on these issues.  Here are a few questions for you all:

1) Would you say that staples or dovetailed lugs are a more common period mode of attaching a barrel?
2) Are there differences in their use between different schools and time periods?  I know that's a big one but please give some generalities if you can.
3) Within school do you think the use of staples or lugs represents any difference in the quality of the gun?
4) I know the use of tang screws instead of a bolt going through to the trigger plate is fairly common in Appalachian and southern rifles.  Do you find that practice elsewhere in American guns?  NC, VA, PA, Ohio, New England, etc.?
5) Ken Guy mentioned looking at a couple of Bull rifles recently, one fairly plain and one fancy.  The plainer one had the tang attached with screws and the fancy one with a bolt and screws.  Do you think builders commonly used tang screws only for 'quick and dirty' guns, or do you think this was generally just a characteristic of the builder and how they learned?

I appreciate any insight on these questions

Sean

[flintriflesmith]

The topic of what construction details are associated with what period, region, and individual maker is, as far as I know, a book waiting to be written.

Years ago my apprentice, Dave Wagner, actually started gathering material for such a book. He was doing a lot of restoration work and knew a lot of collectors that would let him take guns apart. That sort of access is rare and when Dave left the shop his idea sort of died. I wish someone would take it up again. (Some of the construction details will be included in Wallace Gusler's book but this study needs to span all regions and periods to be truly useful.)

We believed then, and I still do, that a maker who was taught a method and had become very efficient at it would be unlikely to change unless the technology changed. I learned, for example, one way to cut dovetails. I have done them that exact same way for 40 years. It is fast, fool proof, and I can get it done without any real thought. I believe that is the essence of "made in a workman-like manner." Save the creativity and experimentation for where it matters.

Of course all the construction details would be considered along with art, architecture, mounts, etc. in attributing a rifle to a particular location or maker.

So, it appears to me that loops or staples, screws or bolts, etc. would be a clue in tracking who a maker was apprenticed to. I have seen elaborate relief carved rifles with a single wood screw in the tang because that's the way that maker did it and so did his apprentices.

Staples become much more popular when flat keys replace simple wire pens so in that case you might make an argument that a rifle with staples, and keys, is a higher grade than the same rifle with pens. But it is the keys that drive the quality, not the staples.

Gary

[JTR]

I think Gary answed this well, and would be the perfect guy to start writing that book!

I might cautiously add that rifles with pins could be considered generally older, say pre1780/90ish, where guns with staples and keys are more likely post that date. Although this certainly isn't a hard and fast rule.
To me, pins or keys is a more stylistic and period thing, as opposed to a quality difference.
John 

[don getz]

I think underlugs were a very personal thing.  I have studied Joe Long rifles, which were built in the 1820-1860 period,
and the most common underlug I have seen is a "hook" type.   It is installed on the barrel by chiseling a trough in the
barrel, raising up both ends, and inserting the underlug, then tappiing down both ends to lock it in.  By "hook" I mean it
is just that...it looks like a staple with  one of the legs missing.  The barrel pins were normally hidden under inlays and
the barrel was removed by removing the tang bolt, then raising the rear of the barrel until it cleared the stock and then
sliding the barrel to the rear, which unhooked all of the barrel pins.  I suppose that is why you see a lot of cracked, or
broken stocks.  The Mose Specht rifle which I just finished working on had real neat underlugs, dovetailed into the barrel
just as we do it today, and he worked in the same time period as Joe Long...........Don

[Sean]

Thank you fine sirs for your responses.  Any takers on the screwed tang questions?  Anyone seen this outside of Appalachian rifles?

Sean

[Majorjoel]

 I have seen the wood screw in the tang of one of the most beautiful contemporary longrifles I've ever had the priviledge to own. It was a very well done replica of a John Armstrong piece with engraved silver inlays that took the place of carving. I was very shocked and dismayed when I took the rifle apart for cleaning to find the screw instead of the much more secure bolt to trigger plate set up. Of coarse there are, and were a limited few builders to do this. I've always considered it a short cut in quality workmanship.

[flintriflesmith]

Thank you fine sirs for your responses.  Any takers on the screwed tang questions?  Anyone seen this outside of Appalachian rifles?      Sean

Sean,
This was the 5th paragraph of my original answer.

So, it appears to me that loops or staples, screws or bolts, etc. would be a clue in tracking who a maker was apprenticed to. I have seen elaborate relief carved rifles with a single wood screw in the tang because that's the way that maker did it and so did his apprentices.

The rifles of Frederick Sheets, pictured in Whisker's books, are an example that comes immediately to mind. They a golden age Valley rifles.

Gary

[don getz]

I have always used a thru bolt in the tang when building a gun, because that is the way I was taught.  I used to go out
to those Conner Prairie workshops, and I noticed that they all followed the John Schippers method of building, that is,
use a wood screw thru the tang...claimed it kept the wrist stronger.  I guess it all boils down to how you learned to build a gun, although most of the original longrifles that I have ever taken apart had a thru bolt............Don

[Pete G.]

I have an old percussion rifle that has a wood screw in the tang. It is a rather plain gun. The barrel had only 5 flats ground and the part in the stock still has the forged finish. It uses a back action Golcher lock and has mixed furniture. The buttplate is iron, and possibly was from another earlier gun as it has a hole that may have been for a screw. The trigger guard and thimbles are brass with the rear thimble being a two piece with th tang soldered on. It uses a deum and nipple. All in all it is well constructed, but it seems that a lot of shortcuts we utilized for the sake of economy. Interestingly enough, it has a .36 caliber gain twist cut into the barrel. It also has a crack that goes rearward from the single lock bolt. I have noticed this in several old rifles that I have handled and believe that it comes from using a wood screw in the tang and since that is not as secure, the barrel sets back a little over time and the srew starts to hit the stock under recoil and splits the wood. Just a theory, but I have seen this on several rifles that I know were attached with a screw instead of a bolt.

[Dennis Glazener]

My Jacob Sheetz rifle has a single wood screw in the tang. I would not consider this a plain mountain rifle.
Dennis

[Sean]

Thanks to all of you for responses.

Sean

[Curt J]

To add a little more food for thought to this topic. I have owned or handled several hundred longrifles, mostly Midwestern. I would have to say that the features you are discussing are peculiar to individual makers, rather than time periods. I would agree that a majority have tang bolts, but screws only, are far from uncommon. I have seen some very handsome and well-made rifles with only screws. I have also seen some fairly crude ones with bolts. I have occasionally seen rifles with two bolts through the tang, rather than a bolt at the front and screw at the rear of the tang.

As far as underlugs, staples were used by many makers right up until the end of the percussion period, but so were dovetailed underlugs. As far as barrel keys vs. round pins, both were common in the Midwest, right up to the end of the percussion period. If a gunsmith used keys, he usually used them on everything he made. Likewise, if he used round pins, he usually used nothing but round pins. Two gunsmiths in the same location, during the same time period, often differed on details like these. I  would be inclined to agree, it was probably a matter of how the gunsmith learned to do it as an apprentice.

[Michael]

I am probably wrong, but somewhere I remember reading or hearing that the 'brass barrel rifle' has a wood screw through the tang. Gary can you confirm this?

Michael

[Stophel]

I believe that is correct.  I THINK it doesn't have a triggerplate.  I've seen the gun, but don't remember for certain.

I have a ca. 1830 German rifle with a wood screw for the tang.  The triggerplate is held in (more or less) by the triggerguard at the front, and a bevel hooked into the wood at the rear.

[Majorjoel]

Chris, I am really surprized to hear about a German made rifle using a wood screw, especially in that era. Is it a high quality piece? Sure would like to see pictures....hint hint...........Joel

[Stophel]

Average grade gun.

I'd have sworn I had photos already available on line, but I don't.  It's a typical gun for the period.  Checkered wrist, no carving.  I believe it was originally made without a box, but one was added later.  Still some very old clearish varnish on the surface (dammar?).  Around .65 cal and short barrel.  16" short. Single-action set triggers.  The lock is much older, and was a flintlock.  Pretty little round faced lock with a border.  No bridle.  Unfortunately, the tumbler was drilled through and ruined by some numnutz.

[Roger Fisher]

Wouldn't it make 'some' sense that a long tang would 'call' for 2 screws and a short tang a bolt down thru the trigger plate?  That may have influenced the old boy when building those two styles (long or short tang)  Hmmm even North or Southern styles?