Author Topic: Debunking underhammer provenance  (Read 6832 times)

Offline Kermit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3099
Debunking underhammer provenance
« on: May 03, 2012, 07:19:40 PM »
Some of us actually kinda sorta like these things, but might be reluctant to admit it. I'll 'fess up. They're the ONLY percussion guns that hold interest for me at all. Sidelocks are flinters.

So. Here's a bit that shows an unusual original, AND goes on to explain the Ethan Allen/Numrich naming fiasco. You may not think so, but you need to know this to set the record straight. Lookee here:

http://underhammers.blogspot.com/
"Anything worth doing is worth doing slowly." Mae West

Offline smokinbuck

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3005
Re: Debunking underhammer provenance
« Reply #1 on: May 04, 2012, 03:24:47 AM »
Kermit,
Tha's pretty interesting. Thanks for posting the site.
Mark
Mark

Offline Frank Barker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 575
Re: Debunking underhammer provenance
« Reply #2 on: May 04, 2012, 03:45:35 AM »
Kermit......I love the web site. Gonna save it to my favorites.

Regards   Frank

Offline KNeilson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 330
Re: Debunking underhammer provenance
« Reply #3 on: May 04, 2012, 03:53:33 AM »
Kermit, thx for the post. I have Herchel Logans book, and drool over some of the longarms of Kendal, Story etc. I look frwds to reading Nicholas Chandlers Version....      Kerry

Offline Dphariss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9920
  • Kill a Commie for your Mommy
Re: Debunking underhammer provenance
« Reply #4 on: May 07, 2012, 02:02:10 AM »
Some of us actually kinda sorta like these things, but might be reluctant to admit it. I'll 'fess up. They're the ONLY percussion guns that hold interest for me at all. Sidelocks are flinters.

So. Here's a bit that shows an unusual original, AND goes on to explain the Ethan Allen/Numrich naming fiasco. You may not think so, but you need to know this to set the record straight. Lookee here:

http://underhammers.blogspot.com/

There is a form of bigotry concerning underhammer guns that I do not understand. They were very, very common, in various forms in the east especially. But the are banned from matches in some areas and it baffles me that this is the case.
Here is one in the Cody Firearms Museum.








Dan
He who dares not offend cannot be honest. Thomas Paine

Offline smokinbuck

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3005
Re: Debunking underhammer provenance
« Reply #5 on: May 07, 2012, 03:30:36 AM »
Dan,
I haven't run into any problems using UH rifles at any of the clubs that I shoot at but I suppose there could be some who take exception to them, although I agree not to know why. The buck and ball gun you pictured is pretty interesting. They are not unusual to find but I have not seen one in UH before.
Mark
Mark

Offline Kermit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3099
Re: Debunking underhammer provenance
« Reply #6 on: May 07, 2012, 06:49:10 PM »
It has always made sense to me that flintlocks are sidelocks, since the mechanism allows for the ignition flash to travel straight to the main charge, while percussion/bolster ignition has to turn some corners to make it go off. The underhammer seems to be a thoughtful engineering solution to simplicity, fast ignition, and good for both righties and southpaws. Yankee ingenuity at work.

I know that some rules (chunk, for example) requires underhammer actions to use exposed trigger guard springs, forbidding such actions that have internal springs. I have to marvel at the simple elegance and utter reliability of bottom slappers. ;)

Someone will be likely to mention mule-ears. Those I just file under the heading of butt-ugly and unfortunate.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2012, 06:54:44 PM by Kermit »
"Anything worth doing is worth doing slowly." Mae West

Offline JDK

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 692
Re: Debunking underhammer provenance
« Reply #7 on: May 07, 2012, 07:46:39 PM »
Someone will be likely to mention mule-ears. Those I just file under the heading of butt-ugly and unfortunate.

"butt-ugly and unfortunate".....that's funny!!! Thanks, I needed that.  :D :D :D  J.D.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2012, 09:36:53 PM by JDK »
J.D. Kerstetter

Offline FL-Flintlock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2176
    • Fire & Iron Mfg.
Re: Debunking underhammer provenance
« Reply #8 on: May 07, 2012, 08:15:31 PM »
Someone will be likely to mention mule-ears. Those I just file under the heading of butt-ugly and unfortunate.

You know what they say about "opinions" ... got something to say about ugly?  Email me:
underhammer@live.com
muleear@live.com
 ;)
The answers you seek are found in the Word, not the world.

Offline Kermit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3099
Re: Debunking underhammer provenance
« Reply #9 on: May 08, 2012, 02:11:15 AM »
Uh-oh.  :-[ ::) :-[
"Anything worth doing is worth doing slowly." Mae West

Offline Dphariss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9920
  • Kill a Commie for your Mommy
Re: Debunking underhammer provenance
« Reply #10 on: May 17, 2012, 05:09:47 PM »
Dan,
I haven't run into any problems using UH rifles at any of the clubs that I shoot at but I suppose there could be some who take exception to them, although I agree not to know why. The buck and ball gun you pictured is pretty interesting. They are not unusual to find but I have not seen one in UH before.
Mark

The Museum in Cody has a LOT of stuff. Makes me wonder what is in storage.

No problems with UHs? Some places, I am told, ban them if they don't use the TG as a mainspring. So a Billinghurst would be legal and a DH Hilliard of the same vintage not.  ???
Apparently someone has shown up with Hilliard UH that shot too well at some point.

Don't bring one to the Wyoming State shoot.
I am told on good authority that UHs are verbotten. Apparently they got whipped by an UH at some point.
Anyway if you travel to matches do your home work.
The folks I shoot with understand history and its shoot what you bring so long as its not too modern.
Dan
He who dares not offend cannot be honest. Thomas Paine

Offline Dphariss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9920
  • Kill a Commie for your Mommy
Re: Debunking underhammer provenance
« Reply #11 on: May 17, 2012, 05:17:34 PM »
The underhammer and the muleear both have advantages in reliability if made properly. But everything is a trade off.
I don't care much for underhammers except for rest shooting.
Neither is ugly if done right. Thought the double barrel I pictured above is a little strange looking.
Dan
He who dares not offend cannot be honest. Thomas Paine