What's honest marketing ?

[Tom Currie]

I have only build from blanks for myself ,family and friends. However I am currently taking on my first paid building job, a Chambers Fowler kit. One thing that is obvious to me is that this kit is a huge time saver if you were to try and do building as a money making hobby or side business. I was recently at an Antique Arms show in MI and noticed 2 Chambers Fowler kit's finished being sold and asked the sellers about the fowlers.. Both were advertised as "hand built unique" guns.

I didn't mention that I could tell they were kit built. So I suppose this question goes for just about any pre-shaped, parts kit builds out there.

Is this accepted practice out there ? Is there any dishonesty in this practice ? Not sure how many responses I'll get but was personnally disappointed in the marketing.  Maybe I'm just naive ( my wife tells me this all time ).

[Pete G.]

Well they are hand built. Unique may be a different category, depending  primarily on engraving and carving. I suppose that there is not much difference between a kit of components and a bunch of components purchased separately and assembled. I find myself building some parts and modifying bought parts so that they don't look like the pictures in the catalogs. The catalogs offer the most commonly used styles. The problem occurs when you build a fairly common style like a Lancaster. It is hard to have a unique gun when all of the hardware is standard production parts, especially investment castings. The flip side is that a pre carved stock is usually somewhat correct architecturally, where some builds from a plank can sometimes have some weird stuff show up.

I think the real answer to the question depends on the kit and how it is built. If the kit is used as only a starting place, then perhaps you could have a unique hand built gun. If the kit is used as a gun in the white and just sanded and finished, then maybe not.

[54Bucks]

 Those who build from a blank as well as most here, who are well versed in a blank built longrifle would not consider any kit or component set with a precarved stock "hand built". However it can boil down to a @#$$%&* contest over exactly what was handmade. And in a sense most blank built guns have had the barrel and channel machined. So it may not be dishonest to say a gun from a Chambers kit was handmade.

[rich pierce]

I'd prefer to have builders state whether they built from a blank, a precarved stock, whether they selected and hand made some of the parts or whether it was a kit.  There's a lot involved in designing and planning a build and almost none of that work is done by the builder of a kit.  The briefest descriptions are probably that way on purpose.

[Don Getz]

What would you call it if you made the pattern for the gun, and had someone else who owned the duplicating machine
copy it for you?   Have you ever looked at one of Jim Chambers rifles (made from a preshaped stock), or one of the late
John Bivins guns, made the same way?   You can buy a Chambers kit, but, it's what you do with it from that point forward
that turns it into a great gun...........Don

[Tom Currie]

Don, Just for the record, I have no doubt at all that a fantastic build can be done from a pre carve stock if the effort and skill of the builder can produce it.

[James Wilson Everett]

Guys,

This is a sensitive issue.  Actually, on almost all of the guns we are talking about, 90% - 95% of the work in building has been done by others, like Chambers, Getz, Track of the Wolf.  But, I certainly do not feel slighted when a builder says a gun built from parts is "hand built".  Did you ever think that so very much of the work on a gun is metal work, that time wise the gun stocking is relatively minor.  Check out Andy Thomas' work on the Martin Station gun to see a really "hand built" gun.

Jim

[FL-Flintlock]

What would you call it if you made the pattern for the gun, and had someone else who owned the duplicating machine copy it for you?

That would be "your build".

Let's look at it a different way ...

One buys a "glider kit" (truck frame and cab already assembled) just because the owner/worker bolts the drivetrain from another truck onto it, it wasn't "built" it was "assembled".

Contractor purchases blueprints for a house and assembles the house according to the blueprint - just because he painted the walls a different color or used front door with different panels does not change the fact that the house was merely "assembled" to someone else's design.  On the other hand, said contractor takes on the task of laying out everything from the sewer pipe to the chimney cap according to his own design, then "builds" the home according to his design, even though said contractor did not cast and fire the toilets, weave the carpets or mill the lumber the home is still his own build.

[ken]

There are advantages and disadvantages to both! They both have a lot of work annd issues to fix. Just because some wood has been removed doesnot make the gun done. I have done both and each has its own challenges. Both are still handmade and one of a kind.

[Dennis Glazener]

What would you call it if you made the pattern for the gun, and had someone else who owned the duplicating machine
copy it for you? 

I make my own patterns then have my stock man duplicate them but he also machine inlets the barrel and drills the rr hole. In my my mind I can not claim the finished rifle is "hand made". To me the old time makers had similiar problems, they had the apprentice do a lot of the "grunt" work in order turn out more work. I can hand inlet barrels and drill rr holes but my customers would never buy the completed rifle at the prices I would charge if I did all of this by hand, I am slow! I tell them that I made the patterns and had someone duplicate my pattern and machine inlet the barrels to help keep the price down. I could never in good conscious tell them it was a hand made rifle.
Dennis

[Jim Kibler]

Marketing should be honest and not intend to deceive.  With that said, when I look at a gun I really don't care a great deal about how it was made.  Yes, if the lock, barrel etc. was made by hand I appreciate the work and skill that went into it, but more than anything I like to judge ia gun for what it is and not how it was accomplished.  This is just my personal viewpoint, however.  If a gun is good enough, people won't really care too much about the "how" in my opinion.  

[Dr. Tim-Boone]

I agree with Jim.  Show me a gun that the builder made the barrel and the lock as well as everything else and I call it handmade.  The parts that the uninitiated are amazed at and always ask is who made the barrel and lock.... cause that just looks like something very challenging to do.......... Very few make handmade guns and they are wonderful pieces of historical art!!

Even masters of the 18th century sometimes bought barrels and locks..sometimes imported...... Some foundries probably also sold them furniture??

Otherwise the key is what does the finished product look like and how does it shoot...even a kit can be ruined............ The last point would be: what did the builder/assembler/gunstocker do to make the gun unique???  Did he add value?

[Cody Tetachuk]

I'm in the same camp as Jim. in the end, it's all just semantics. The finished product is all that matters. People often use words like "hand made" or "made from scratch" when referring to building from a blank when in fact the STOCK was made by hand or from scratch, not the rifle. While I prefer building from a blank, I see no difference in the value or "WOW" factor in guns built from a blank or kit. It takes just as much SKILL to turn out an outstanding kit gun as it does from a blank, just less work.

[Dogshirt]

"Contractor purchases blueprints for a house and assembles the house according to the blueprint - just because he painted the walls a different color or used front door with different panels does not change the fact that the house was merely "assembled" to someone else's design.  On the other hand, said contractor takes on the task of laying out everything from the sewer pipe to the chimney cap according to his own design, then "builds" the home according to his design, even though said contractor did not cast and fire the toilets, weave the carpets or mill the lumber the home is still his own build."

Your logic is skewed. Most Architects have no clue wheter the lines they draw can even be built.
Blueprints are only lines on paper. I cut each board to the dimesions that WILL work, we don't get pre cut
pieces to "assemble". I and my crew BUILD the house, the other guy just drew some lines.

[P.W.Berkuta]

"Contractor purchases blueprints for a house and assembles the house according to the blueprint - just because he painted the walls a different color or used front door with different panels does not change the fact that the house was merely "assembled" to someone else's design.  On the other hand, said contractor takes on the task of laying out everything from the sewer pipe to the chimney cap according to his own design, then "builds" the home according to his design, even though said contractor did not cast and fire the toilets, weave the carpets or mill the lumber the home is still his own build."

Your logic is skewed. Most Architects have no clue wheter the lines they draw can even be built.
Blueprints are only lines on paper. I cut each board to the dimesions that WILL work, we don't get pre cut
pieces to "assemble". I and my crew BUILD the house, the other guy just drew some line.

Very nicely put Dogshirt

[JDK]

And somehow this string has gone from "hand built" to "hand made".....semantics?

In my mind "hand made" rifle indicates lock, stock and barrel.  "hand built" assembled and crafted to one extreme or the other.  After all you can hand build a kit but you won't hand make one.  j.m.2.c.  J.D.K.

[T.C.Albert]

Didnt we used to call it "Scratch Built" too? And a guy would say, "yep, its all scratch built except the lock and barrel which I got from...." 
tc

[Dphariss]

What would you call it if you made the pattern for the gun, and had someone else who owned the duplicating machine
copy it for you?   Have you ever looked at one of Jim Chambers rifles (made from a preshaped stock), or one of the late
John Bivins guns, made the same way?   You can buy a Chambers kit, but, it's what you do with it from that point forward
that turns it into a great gun...........Don

Having made some pattern stocks ....
I would call it made from a precarved stock.

All the squirming and dodging and excuses can't change this.
Its possible to make from a blank and create near identical rifles.
But 10 different guys can't.
But 10 guys can take a precarve and make cookie cutter rifles.
Precarves are excellent for some things, beginning builders who are intimidated by trying to build from a blank for example. Mass production like Bivins and the Bi-Centennial guns. To me they are only worth 1/2 to 3/4 what a gun made from a blank is.
There are key elements missing. For one thing it takes FAR less knowledge of the process of stock making to build from a precarve.

Dan

[Martin_G]

I've never built a gun or rifle from scratch and because I'm fairly new to muzzleloaders I might not be able to tell a kit build from a completely "scratch built" rifle that even has a "handmade" lock & barrel!

From a personal standpoint I would probably like either one.

Now, my take on building on a precarved stock is a little different than a gunsmith building a rifle from a stock that while he may not have carved it 100%, it was carved per his instructions to the letter. He may even have had the carver leave extra wood so he could dial it in precisely with inletting the lock and maybe the barrel!

I would consider "part" of the rifle handmade because of the time involved finishing the stock to where its part of something and not a strange looking piece of firewood even though this is probably splitting hairs.

Many of the parts today are bought because they are a timesaver even if the "smith has to doctor the part. I do think that if guns & rifles were built 100% "handmade" I believe that it would put the finished price out of reach for many of us.

Another thing, suppose you buy a precarved stock only to find out when it arrives that its not even close to the type firearm that you're building. Or worse case scenario you find out just before or right when you're finished that its wrong because of the stock.

The other makes like CVA & Traditions shouldn't even enter into this thread, and although better than some,  Pedersoli is IMO not 100% correct either, same with Lyman. The GPR is a good rifle for its price and intended market but the original stock design needs help just for a start.

I was brought up to believe that if its worth doing, then its worth doing properly! It usually takes the same amount time or sometimes less to do it RIGHT!

Talking about architects, many times on the jobsite we found out that their plans didn't work out properly. Just because it works on paper doesn't mean that it works out in the field!

One last thing which is an observation on my part, has to do with myself looking to buy a correct Hawken stock. While contacting a number of people about this I did find the stock I'm going to use, however, it was recommended to me to steer away from a couple of companies who make Hawken stocks because they are not correct. This was from  people who have been there before.

I guess that this gives alot of added incentive to making your own stocks!


Well,that my .02 cents !


Martin

[Don Getz]

Did you ever make a rifle from a "good" kit, such as Jim's, and have a guy just love it.............until you told him it was made
from a "kit", and then he said, sorry, I don't want it.....you cheated.    You all are overlooking the fact that when you buy
a good kit, being done by an excellent gunbuilder, you are getting a gun that is architecturally correct, and has the proper
hardware, lock and barrel to go with it.   I have built guns, and gun patterns, from scratch, but I have reached the point
where I don't need all that extra work, and it is work.   Just because your gun is "scratch built" doesn't mean it is better
than one I have built from a kit.   The J.P.Beck rifle that I made for Ed Dillon, Rich is trying to sell it on the for sale section,
was built from a pre shaped stock.   I'm going to beat you to it...."wow, nice wood"...ha.......................Don

[Dphariss]

Its a choice.
I have built a few guns from precarves, probably will again.
But I like shaping stocks. I don't see it as work.
I have never assembled a Chambers Kit but I have handled three and they are what I tell people to buy if they are looking at kits.

Dan

[Dphariss]

And somehow this string has gone from "hand built" to "hand made".....semantics?

In my mind "hand made" rifle indicates lock, stock and barrel.  "hand built" assembled and crafted to one extreme or the other.  After all you can hand build a kit but you won't hand make one.  j.m.2.c.  J.D.K.

By the lock stock and barrel criteria most originals would not be hand made.
Most barrels and locks were purchased even before the Rev-War.
Dan

[JTR]

 Most barrels and locks were purchased even before the Rev-War.
Dan
[/quote]

And your evidence for this statement is ,,,,, what??

John

[mjm46@bellsouth.net]

I've built all my rifles from pre-carved stocks. For the most part the only thing really pre-carved is the rough, really rough form of the rifle and the barrel inlet and RR channel and drill. In general by the time the rifle is done the stock has lost about half of it's original pre-carve weight. Forestock dimensions are reduced from square to about 1/16" from the barrel, Buttstocks have lost 1/4" in places.
In my mind machine made means parts will interchange. Like your pedersoli and CVA, I have yet been able to interchange any parts from any of my rifles. even parts like barrels and locks once assembled into the rifle are unique to that rifle. Each is unique. If you don't like the term Hand made, Call it hand built or hand crafted, or even craftsman assembled. They're all just words that indicate the final assembly from rough parts was done with care and pride by an American individual, and each is entirely and distinctly unique.

[JDK]

Most barrels and locks were purchased even before the Rev-War.
Dan

And your evidence for this statement is ,,,,, what??

John
[/quote]

It is a documented fact that there were barrel mills through out the known gun building areas of Pennsylvania supplying the trade (probably in other states too) and the use of imported locks is also obvious.  Nobody will deny that some built there own locks and sometimes smithed their own barrels but they appear to be the exception.  While visiting the gun builders at Colonial Williamsburg the smith there told me that barrels and locks were the one thing they could buy from outside sources because of the historical documentation to support the fact that early gunsmiths often bought these parts.  J.D.K.