I’d like to thank everyone for the complements, but most especially for the criticism. Thanks to your critiques, I’ll be able to build a better gun next time. Now I’ll try and address your comments;
Mike – We could probably talk about pitch all day long. The pitch of NE 40 is about 74 degrees, while my gun is about 85 degrees. Looking through Grinslade, pitch runs from near 90 to about 70 degrees or so. I would agree with your observation that NE 40 has a typical pitch, and mine is closer to the extreme end of the range. But, a typical NE fowler is also about 20 gauge. Considering the recoil of a 10 gauge, and the shape of the person I built the gun for, I thought the 85 degree pitch would make a better shooting gun for him, so that’s how it ended up like that. Now that I think about it though, I don’t know why I care if the gun kicks hard or not. If he doesn’t like the recoil, he could just put in less powder. I don’t know why I should have to build an ugly gun just to keep his shoulder from getting sore.
Don and Jim – Both of you mentioned the muzzle treatment. Looking back at my reference photos, I see that they have more radius than I have on mine. I think the greater radius would look better than what I did. My forend approaches more of a sawed off look, and a bigger radius would look more finished. As to the thickness of the fore stock, I think it looks better than what the photos show. The maximum thickness is about 1/16”, and it is well rounded with the centerline being about 1/3 of the way down from the top. I should apologize for the quality of the pictures. I think it’s time for a new camera.
Since some of you folks aren’t familiar with NE fowlers, I thought you might enjoy a brief introduction to them. NE fowlers are unusual guns. While most schools will have a dozen or so characteristic styles of architecture, furniture, carving and so forth, Grinslade lists only two for NE Fowlers. They are a curved top and bottom line of the stock. That’s it. Locks, barrels and furniture could be anything.
The NE gunsmiths were fiscal conservatives even in the way back times. It seems that if they could build the part easily, they usually did. Furniture was recycled if possible, without consideration to origin or style. You’ll see guns with perhaps a French civilian trigger guard, and English military side plate and a homemade butt plate and pipes. These guns were build to shoot, not to look at.
The utilitarian nature of these guns is also reflected in the carving. About all they usually did was a simple carving at the tang. They often didn’t even bother with beavertails, much less elaborate carving on the cheek piece or fore stock.
My gun was built in this tradition. The butt plate is a cheap imitation of an English fowler butt plate, nailed on because screws were expensive and nails were cheap. Since the curved top and bottom lines of the stock were derived from French lines, I suppose it’s fair to say that this stock has a French profile and an English cross section. The trigger guard is a French Type D trade fusil. They quit making this trigger guard in 1763. Since my gun is 1790’s vintage, the trigger guard would have been 30 years old or so by the time the NE gunsmith recycled it. The lock is a common inexpensive English trade lock. My side plate is folk art, which you do see occasionally, but more often the side plate is English, French or possibly even Dutch.
NE fowlers also tended toward smaller calibers that some of the other types of fowlers. I think the smaller calibers had two advantages for them. First, a smaller caliber gun is a better dual purpose gun if you want to shoot both shot and ball. Secondly, the smaller calibers use less shot and powder than a larger caliber, but were still big enough to get the job done. Here’s a breakdown of calibers from Grinslade:
.50-.55 5
.56-.60 13
.61-.65 17
.66-.70 14
.71-.75 2
.76-.80 3
