Author Topic: Please help me ID this D Sheets Rifle (Read 11079 times)

Dennis Glazener · « **on:** October 26, 2011, 02:20:40 AM »

This rifle is signed in script on the top barrel flat, D Sheets then it has a long vine like engraving following the signature.

The barrel measures 43 3/16 inches. It is approximately 38 caliber and is swamped. It measures approximately .965" at the breech, .869" at the smallest mid point, and the muzzle is .950" The lock appears to have originally flint and has 2 lock bolts.

To me its a NC rifle in appearance. It was sold as a consignment in a Greensboro NC gun shop.

I assumed it was made by Daniel Sheets the Ohio gunmaker but he was born in 1820 in Ohio which would, in my opinion, make him too young to have made this rifle.

An article in the 1992 Association of Ohio Gun Collectors on the Ohio Sheets family, mentions a David Sheets born 1788 in NC and died 1837 in NC. He reportedly was the son of Martin Sheets of Rowan County NC who later moved to Ohio and made guns there.

I can not help but wonder if this rifle was made by the David Sheets in NC.
I would like any input that anyone might have.
Thanks
Dennis

Nate McKenzie · « **Reply #1 on:** October 26, 2011, 02:53:26 AM »

Boy! You're coming up with some nice old southern rifles, Dennis.

msmith · « **Reply #2 on:** October 26, 2011, 03:09:40 AM »

Dennis, they was a David Sheets in Ohio also. David, William & Martin Sheets Migrated to Ohio, from NC in 1806..See page 236 Volume III "Ohio Gunsmiths & Allied Tradesmen".. Your rifle does look more Southern though. But awhile back I had a H Sheets signed in script Ohio Gun for sure, and seen another with the exact signature on a Southern style rifle "Poorboy" no butt plate.

longrifle · « **Reply #3 on:** October 26, 2011, 03:12:03 AM »

OOOh I like it !!! you can see it has been lots of miles, one of those if it could talk I bet it could tell a few tails.

Curt J · « **Reply #4 on:** October 26, 2011, 06:27:53 AM »

Rifles like this can very well be Ohio, made in the Mad River area. There were other gunsmiths in that area besides the Sheets family who also made these "Southern looking" rifles, but the influence probably came from the Sheets family. Jerry Noble refers to this as the "Mad River School".

Majorjoel · « **Reply #5 on:** October 26, 2011, 09:55:05 AM »

A nice honest barn gun Dennis! I would like to see what the barrel tang looks like. Is it elongated with 2 screws?

Dennis Glazener · « **Reply #6 on:** October 26, 2011, 04:56:19 PM »

I will photo the tang later on, no time now. I am sure it has been replaced, can see the crude chisel marks around it.
Dennis

bgf · « **Reply #7 on:** October 26, 2011, 05:22:59 PM »

Dennis,
I'm probably all wrong, but the lock raises a red flag for me: it has two bolts now, but it looks like they don't match precisely (not too odd by itself) and the rear lockbolt looks like it had relatively late style inlay around it, but there is no sign of one on the forward lockbolt that I can see. Is it possible this one was "restored" or at least repaired with a conversion lock, and the second bolt added at that time? The curve of the plate in front of drum and empty holes in lockplate indicates the lock was flint but the inlet at that place (curve) looks like it could be a little sloppy and later work. Also, the low close rail on the triggerguard just looks later to me rather than earlier. Finally, it appears the wood around the rear of the lock panels is missing a lot of finish compared to the rest of the rifle, especially the cutout you would find on a flintlock -- possibly a reconversion of an improper conversion?

louieparker · « **Reply #8 on:** October 26, 2011, 06:57:45 PM »

A very nice untouched gun .. Rifles in this condition are a pleasure to see . As for the rear screw having an enlay , what that could be, the screw was loosened using something besides a screwdriver and scratched the wood . LP

Dan'l 1946 · « **Reply #9 on:** October 26, 2011, 07:12:10 PM »

It strikes me that as an original flint gun it very likely would have had two lock nails. A really neat little rifle. Thanks Dennis.
Dan

Howard · « **Reply #10 on:** October 27, 2011, 03:15:32 AM »

Dennis, this is a neat old gal. Hope you leave it as is. I like to see them in this condition.

Dennis Glazener · « **Reply #11 on:** October 27, 2011, 04:14:02 AM »

Quote

Dennis,
I'm probably all wrong, but the lock raises a red flag for me: it has two bolts now, but it looks like they don't match precisely (not too odd by itself) and the rear lockbolt looks like it had relatively late style inlay around it, but there is no sign of one on the forward lockbolt that I can see. Is it possible this one was "restored" or at least repaired with a conversion lock, and the second bolt added at that time? The curve of the plate in front of drum and empty holes in lockplate indicates the lock was flint but the inlet at that place (curve) looks like it could be a little sloppy and later work. Also, the low close rail on the triggerguard just looks later to me rather than earlier. Finally, it appears the wood around the rear of the lock panels is missing a lot of finish compared to the rest of the rifle, especially the cutout you would find on a flintlock -- possibly a reconversion of an improper conversion?

I don't think it was "restored", but I am not sure what caused the "ring" around the rear lock bolt. Possibly someone had a washer around it. There is no evidence that any wood has bee replaced. There is no question that the wood behind the hammer shows where it was gouged to allow a flint cock to clear.

I am too tired to take any photos tonight, tomorrow sometime I will photo the tang which I believe may have been an old replacement.
Dennis

Glenn · « **Reply #12 on:** October 27, 2011, 05:01:08 AM »

I like the stock design and contour. Nice find. Thanks for sharing / posting.

longrifle · « **Reply #13 on:** October 27, 2011, 01:52:29 PM »

I really like the look's of that old rifle, the stock design and the grease hole. You just don't find anything in Texas like it.

jdm · « **Reply #14 on:** October 27, 2011, 11:38:49 PM »

Dennis, I sure like to see them like this. It's got history written all over it. Nice lines, in the black .Interesting rifle. JIM

Dennis Glazener · « **Reply #15 on:** October 28, 2011, 02:51:18 AM »

Tang photos as requested:

Note the chisel marks around the tang. I believe it was replaced at some point.

Note where the wood over the lock mortise was cut to clear the flint cock.

Glenn · « **Reply #16 on:** October 28, 2011, 04:34:33 AM »

Quote from: longrifle on October 27, 2011, 01:52:29 PM

I really like the look's of that old rifle, the stock design and the grease hole. You just don't find anything in Texas like it.

True ... it is very, very hard to find guns such as this in Texas. They are all either packed away in the closet of a house or in the storage of a museum, if not already on display. BUMMER !!!

Majorjoel · « **Reply #17 on:** October 28, 2011, 09:34:10 AM »

Thank you Dennis for taking the time to show the details of the tang area. If the breech plug and tang were replaced during the rifles conversion to percussion, I wonder if any of the barrel was cut in the process? Also, I find it interesting that the hammer cock is held to the tumbler\plate by either a washer or perhaps peened?? You run across this on occasion and it seems that this method is unique to just certain gun builders. With all of the nice patina built up over the washer, you may never know for sure. It is of coarse best to leave everything just as it is. Especially on this wonderful piece.

Dennis Glazener · « **Reply #18 on:** October 28, 2011, 01:56:06 PM »

Quote

Thank you Dennis for taking the time to show the details of the tang area. If the breech plug and tang were replaced during the rifles conversion to percussion, I wonder if any of the barrel was cut in the process? Also, I find it interesting that the hammer cock is held to the tumbler\plate by either a washer or perhaps peened?? You run across this on occasion and it seems that this method is unique to just certain gun builders. With all of the nice patina built up over the washer, you may never know for sure. It is of coarse best to leave everything just as it is. Especially on this wonderful piece.

I am going to pull the barrel/lock as soon as I get time. There are a couple of splinters of wood on the barrel channel that I want to stabilize, I am afraid if I don't they will come off. I don't see any evidence that the barrel has been set back but should know for sure when I pull it.
Dennis

longrifle · « **Reply #19 on:** October 28, 2011, 04:20:39 PM »

That is really a interesting old rifle. I have really enjoyed seeing it. Thanks for posting the photo's. Like I said earlier we just don't find things like that in Texas. Thank's Again.

timM · « **Reply #20 on:** March 30, 2012, 05:36:18 AM »

Dennis,

Did you ever pull the barrel on this piece? I really like this rifle and am curious if you have pushed any rocks over or have arrived at any conclusions? Thx tim

mr. no gold · « **Reply #21 on:** March 30, 2012, 07:37:45 AM »

Dennis, you did it again! Grand old rifle and a pleasure to look at. Thank you for showing it around. As to where, I lean toward a southen origin. I have never seen a Mad River gun with a grease hole in the butt and no buttplate. They are iron mounted and look southern as all get out, but are not. Now, I don't claim to have see all of the Ohio iron guns, but the one I have, and those actually seen have buttplates and no grease hole, or patch box. It does appear as though it was built as a flint gun maybe as early as 1815. The lock falls in between the earlier rat tail back end, and the round tailed plate which pretty much came on line around 1820. What a great find! Thanks again.
Dick

Dennis Glazener · « **Reply #22 on:** March 30, 2012, 05:00:51 PM »

Quote

Dennis, you did it again! Grand old rifle and a pleasure to look at. Thank you for showing it around. As to where, I lean toward a southen origin. I have never seen a Mad River gun with a grease hole in the butt and no buttplate. They are iron mounted and look southern as all get out, but are not. Now, I don't claim to have see all of the Ohio iron guns, but the one I have, and those actually seen have buttplates and no grease hole, or patch box. It does appear as though it was built as a flint gun maybe as early as 1815. The lock falls in between the earlier rat tail back end, and the round tailed plate which pretty much came on line around 1820. What a great find! Thanks again.
Dick

Right now I believe that this rifle may be by David Sheets son of Martin Sheets, NC gunmaker that relocated to Ohio circa 1812. David (1788-1837) remained in NC and died there in 1837.

I am taking it to our Williamsburg show this weekend and plan to have Gerald Neaves take a look at it. Gerald is very knowledgeable about NC rifles.
Dennis

G-Man · « **Reply #23 on:** March 30, 2012, 05:23:44 PM »

Dennis - I agree - I think it is a product of the Sheets family in Rowan County NC. I think it is a great example and an important link to the family's work in Ohio. There is a presumption that anything Sheets ties back to the Virgnia branches of the family but given this groups' penchant for plain iron mounted guns in Ohio, I think their work represents a different gunsmithing tradition and culture separate from the more well known Virginia Sheets gunsmiths. The Rowan NC ties fit a lot better. There sure were a lot of different style of guns made in Rowan County - a real crossroads of trade, culture and gunsmiths.

Guy

News:

Author Topic: Please help me ID this D Sheets Rifle (Read 11079 times)

msmith

longrifle

longrifle

longrifle

timM