restoration project

[Jim Kibler]

Here's a little project I was working on.  It was part of some restoration I was doing on and English fowling piece.  Really sort of a pain.  Couldn't find photos of an exact match for the finial, but James Rogers provided a photo of something somewhat similar that gave me some ideas.  Then it was just cutting the profile to fit the inlet (not too fun)  and carving it to give it some shape and interest.  It was then silver brazed to the original guard.  Thought it turned out decent.  Good enough for what it was for anyway!





Jim

[Gene Carrell]

Looks good  enough to be  original!!!

[Acer Saccharum]

That's my-tee-fine work, there, Jim.

[James Rogers]

Absolutely perfect on that gun Jim!!

[D. Taylor Sapergia]

Great job Jim.  It is very difficult to make an inlay that will be a convincing fit in an old mortise, especially one with so much character.  When I made my Kuntz effort, I had made a toe plate out of bone to emulate the work of the master, but I overtightened one of the attaching screws, and it split down the middle.  I made another out of horn, and even had the original bone one for a pattern, and still it was a very tricky repair.

So, I commend you on a great job.

[Fullstock longrifle]

Good job.

Frank

[bgf]

Obviously excellent work.  My only question is if it isn't too good, i.e., is there any chance it will be incorrectly used as documentation?  Did you leave any tell-tale marks to show that there was a replacement and that it wasn't based on the original piece?  I imagine with your talent for engraving (along with every thing else), you could have inscribed a paragraph on the backside explaining the process, but if no one can tell it was broken or doesn't think to take it out, I don't think most of us would realize it isn't original.  This isn't criticism, just curiosity, as I've seen things done both ways, i.e. a really good craftsman that makes what looks like a poor or somewhat incomplete repair to highlight the fact, or a repair done so well that it is almost undetectable.

[Jim Kibler]

Here's a little better picture.  You sometimes see restoration shown and it's photographed such that you can't really tell whether it's a quality job or not.  Now you can see all the flaws



This gun is what I would consider a mid grade or perhaps slightly higher fowling piece probably from the 1760's or early 1770's.  It's stocked well, has decent mounts and pretty nice engraving.  It's interesting when looking at English work of this period how you can see the importance of efficiency in construction.  An example is the inletting of metal parts.  Many of them are not really bottomed at all.  That is they really don't make much contact on the bottom surface, but just rather sort of wedge in place on the edges of the inlet.  Not necessarily the greatest practice, but it "is what it is" and it's good to understand things such as this. 

Jim

[Jim Kibler]

Obviously excellent work.  My only question is if it isn't too good, i.e., is there any chance it will be incorrectly used as documentation?  Did you leave any tell-tale marks to show that there was a replacement and that it wasn't based on the original piece?  I imagine with your talent for engraving (along with every thing else), you could have inscribed a paragraph on the backside explaining the process, but if no one can tell it was broken or doesn't think to take it out, I don't think most of us would realize it isn't original.  This isn't criticism, just curiosity, as I've seen things done both ways, i.e. a really good craftsman that makes what looks like a poor or somewhat incomplete repair to highlight the fact, or a repair done so well that it is almost undetectable.

Well, I've just announced it to the world here.   I probably should mark the backside though.

Jim

[D. Taylor Sapergia]

Now, the lock...

[Jim Kibler]

Haven't done anything to the lock yet.  I'll post pictures when it's done.  Thanks everybody.

Jim

[Mark Elliott]

Jim,  if you did any better job, then you really would be running into the problem of restoration work being mistaken as original.   As it is, on casual inspection,  most people would never notice the finial was replaced.   I see lots of things in good photographs that I would never have seen with the naked eye,  particularly,  my naked eyes.