Having originals to study

[rich pierce]

"Needs to see originals" is a critique that is good advice but a little non-specific.  Howver, it is one criticism I took to heart, and so finally purchased a relatively inexpensive 18th century Germanic smoothbore/boar gun.  I just received it last night and began to learn quite a lot immediately from being able to handle it for more than a minute or two. 

But this post is not about this gun; rather, do any of you find it a good investment to buy originals, even in relic condition, for study?  And what would you recommend to someone who works mainly in the 18th century, as classes of originals that can be purchased without great expense, but would prove valuable for study?  I seem to see Germanic smoothbores from that period going quite reasonably.

What would anyone recommend as "affordable" study pieces for a slightly later period, say, to help understand longrifle architecture around 1800?  The same, fowling pieces, which can often be had for far less than rifles?

[heinz]

Rich, interesting topic

 I have 3 originals or pieces of originals, an 18th century Jaeger, an 1840 Ohio half stock and a busted up Belgian Civil War era musket.  They are all useful references in building.  The Jaeger is the most interesting but it is a very Germanic piece.  The Ohio gun provides an alternate, later approach to the butt architecture which I have used where appropriate, and the musket serves an example of the extremes of military purposed pieces for ruggedness. 
I would really like to have an early 19th century southern mountain gun, even if it was busted up (which is more in my price range).  I think, for the builder, even broken down parts are very useful.

[Pete G.]

Most of the originals I have seen available are either unaffordable or not the type of gun I would want to build (late percussion).

[cmac]

If I had the money I would have been buying them up at the last CLA show. The prices were right. This kinda thing really gives me a headache. I guess it keeps me working though

[Shreckmeister]

I would think forging a relationship with a collector who has some quality guns from various schools
 could accomplish the same goal. Perhaps he would be willing to allow you to handle them In exchange for some of your services. I would think it cost prohibitive to try to acquire a good gun everytime you wanted to make a new build and modeling from an inexpensive guns would get you a bad looking gun

[Roger Fisher]

I would think forging a relationship with a collector who has some quality guns from various schools
 could accomplish the same goal. Perhaps he would be willing to allow you to handle them In exchange for some of your services. I would think it cost prohibitive to try to acquire a good gun everytime you wanted to make a new build and modeling from an inexpensive guns would get you a bad looking gun

I had (among others 2 other shooters buddies both were builders Ron Greene and George Dech that helped me out).  Meaning they allowed me to borrow an original rifle to hang over my bench to guide my efforts.   Both those guys are badly missed by all of us.

[Acer Saccharum]

I agree with forging a relationship with a collector. I got into building because I couldn't afford to the original work that I really liked. So I learned to build instead. So I visit museums and make friends with collectors. Most of these sources have been very generous.

There is nothing better than to have an original to study on your bench, to take apart to study inside and out. But most of us don't have the luxury of that, so we must do the best we can.

[wpalongrifle]

Rich, I found having the opportunity to handle original rifles made a huge difference in my gun building!!!
obviously when i first started studying the longrifle, i did not have the funds to purchase such guns..fortunate for me, i live close to and among most of the noted collectors of American longrifles..I attend every antique gunshow i could and soon became friends with most if not all. Believe me!! there table scraps. were my big investments and i soon learned not even they had the funds to purchase high quality guns. the all worked up buying five or six, selling them all to purchase one good gun. And so on! many years buying, trading,bartering?
I'm just glad these collectors and historians make these guns available couple times a year for everyone to enjoy..

[James Rogers]

There is nothing like being able to handle daily and take apart original work.
I have had that opportunity but I am still a hack builder.

[Dave B]

Rich, I have always been on the hunt for originals for study. I have been lucky enough over the last 15 yrs to find several that are pre1770 but the majority are strung through the early to late 1800's. Some are just butt stocks by them selves. I know that at some point I will need to start to pass on lesser pieces but I have not found any that would qualify as lesser just yet.

[B Shipman]

Rich, I've been a member of the KRA since the early 80's. Iv'e never bought a longrifle to posess it, but rather to study it. AS an example we've seen Lemans advertised for decades and none of them look like a Leman ( except for Jack Brooks who almost certainly had one).

[Jim Kibler]

Without the real thing, you've basically got words and pictures.  Neither is a substitute.  I'm with you Rich on the value of smooth bore Euro guns. Some English guns are a good deal as well.  Can't understand why there isn't more interest in these areas.  Guess scarcity and nostalgia cary a lot of weight.

[Jim Kibler]

And yes, it seems even smooth bore versions of American guns are seen as being much less desirable.  Don't entirely understand this either.  Sure some are less sophisticated in terms of decoration.  Many times they don't have a box etc. but they still offer a lot.  Recall a pretty decent Haines smoothbore a few years ago that could have been had for a pretty decent price.

[Feltwad]

Rich

Has a collector and a restorer of  originals  for the past  five decades  you will learn more doing restoring .Yes in the States you have not got the variety and the quantity has those like myself that live in the UK .Books tell you the basics but hands on tells you  the most.
Feltwad

[gunsports]

So true …

It came to pass that I decided to build myself a long rifle. An Isaac Haines no less. Not having originals to study, I resorted to books. ALR I&II, Kentucky Long Rifles, American Fowlers; you name them, I got them. Then there were the DVD's. Heaps of them. And off course, Peter Alexander's book – a must have if you want to build anything 'American'. Oh, and don't forget the plans ….

These I studied till my eyes hurt and the pages were so worn, I had to resort to making copies of the pages; just to preserve the book!

When I felt I was ready, I ordered myself a kit from the 'States. (For now, the supplier will remain anonymous …) Suffice to say, it was a name brand supplier who 'guaranteed' a 90% inlet and finished stock.

Ok, I reasoned, this should be easy. I'm not stupid about guns; I've been restoring, and building them for some years. But alas, my fixing and making was restricted to the English guns we used here in the colonies. But, as the kit was 90% finished, it would be a simple matter to work the stock down and, following Alexander's excellent guide, I should end up with a fair copy of Mr Haines' famous work.

Oh boy ….

The box arrives. It is with shaking hands that I open it and withdraw the contents. First, like they say in the movies; check the contents. It's all there. Now the stock. Now the fun begins ….

The back of the stock looks vaguely like a long rifle should look – but fat; horribly so. The front? One solid block of wood meandering off in the distance. Ok, it was inlet for the octagonal barrel and the ramrod groove and hole was cut but the rest? Square and solid all the way.

We have a saying down here: “Ma het nie bang kinders grootgemaak nie” (Mother did not raise sissies!) So, we have a challenge.

Now I'm admiring my new stock. Something is wrong. Are my eyes playing up or what? Look more closely. Yep, they gone and inlet the octagonal all cock eyed. Instead of square, it leans over to one side like something with a  bad hangover. More, the ramrod hole now is off centre. Have a closer look. Yep, the @!*% thing is not only off square with the barrel, but it's wondering off to one side going back – the wrong side; towards the lock!

We start 'speaking in tongues …..'

Sending back is not an option. I live on the other side of the planet and returning it via UPS is not an option: not if you live in a country where bureaucracy has gone mad and postage overseas is ridiculous.  Besides, I've got a stock; sort of. No guarantee that they'll send another one – or that it will be any better than this specimen.

Long story short: because of the very fat back stock, I could sort of shift the gun's stock profile to meet up with the barrel channel. The ramrod groove was progressively widened till it ran true. New thimbles had to be made and the entry hole somehow 'doctored' to hide it being off centre.

End of the day, I ended up building a sweet rifle. Looked like the pictures of an Isaac Haines too. And a sweet shooter she was: With a healthy dose of FFg and ball, this 'little' ,58 would give me 'minute' of Kudu out to 150 meters.

Became quite a braggart with that rifle. The locals, who only know long rifles by what is sold by the Italians and the Spanish; were suitably impressed.

Then came along a group of American  hunters. They were hunting with muzzle guns and one was a collector; the other a builder of these fine rifles. Off course, I was eager to show them my 'masterpiece'.

“It's nice” they say. Nice? My masterpiece can just manage nice? Bloody Yanks. No manners ….

Till the builder took me aside and sat me down. He then 'gently' (I'm a big guy ….) explained to me the importance of 'look and feel'; that vital part of building a rifle that you cannot learn from books, nor from videos, nor from a thousand words written here. Thanks Gary.

Took his advice to heart. Returned home and basically, rebuilt the gun. Now it stands in the corner. Ignored because it is not a true rendition of what Mr Haines built.

Basically cured me of long rifles for now....

Why can some enterprising builder/supplier not furnish us 'builders' with decent plans. Not only height and width, but a set of profile templates that will allow us to build a rifle to the proper dimensions. Yes I know that these old guns were hand built to a style, rarely a pattern. But, providing a pattern will allow me, and others who may not have access to originals, a fair chance of also building; what you guys call, a HC and PC rifle.

When I copy a specific gun, I take measurements every inch of the gun's entire length. In addition, I make 'rounding' (shape) templates for every part of the gun where shape is critical. Build the gun to these dimensions, and you are pretty sure of a result that will be pretty close; if then not an exact copy. Off course, the quality of the build is up to you.

For now, I'll stick to English sporting rifles and fowler’s. Of these, I at least have examples that I can study and get the 'look and feel' of.

[Dr. Tim-Boone]

Gunsports..sorry about your frustration.  Recommend that you contact Jack Brooks, Jim Chambers or Jim Klein directly and explain what you want and don't want in a "kit" from them.  I suspect that they will help you a great deal.. There are several others who have fine kits and plans but these three pop to mind first of all.  Things always seem to work best when you build a personal relationship with a supplier rather than just buying from a company..........good luck.... you really can't resist building the next one..its an addiction

[rich pierce]

Sorry you had a crooked kit- most of us know the frustration of trying to fix those things.  Still, you're being a bit rough on yourself.  Nobody who is discerning is satisfied with their first build.  I despise the use of the term "kit" as it sets certain expectations.  I think perhaps "Project" or "Complete Parts Assemblage" (awkward!) would convey things better.  The biggest problem is that folks think, "I could build an Isaac Haines rifle on my first try."  No matter that dear Isaac probably spent the better of 5-7 years full time (at 50 hours a week, about 12,500 hours) in training, the very years when young minds are most malleable and responsive to challenges.  In contrast, todays beginning kit builder sometimes expects to get it right on the first try.

It was proposed by a master (John Bivins) that kits and precarves are the modern day "apprentices".  I concur, for a master, they can serve as apprentices, assuring the majority of work is done.  Yes, the majority!  No rifling a barrel or breeching it, no making of triggers, sideplates, nosecaps and thimbles, no inletting a barrel channel, making the ramrod groove or drilling the hole, no cutting the stock to profile.

However:  having an apprentice does not make sense if one is an apprentice.  Where's the master or where's the journeyman?  Therefore first timers can turn out a serviceable rifle from a kit if they take care and have a modicum of dexterity with hand tools.  But they should not expect more than a serviceable rifle from their first efforts.

[Dave B]

gunsports, Your experience with your kit is regrettable but not unexpected. I have built several from different suppliers and I find there is always one thing or other not ideal or correct that must be dealt with.  Having struggled through to a finished piece is commendable. Going back to make the corrections possible is also commendable. But holding it up as not any thing like Issac Haines is being unrealistic. The fact that no two of Issac Haines  pieces are Identical to one another is a start. He has an architecture that is attractive but subtle differences exist between all of the ones I have seen. I saw a fowling piece at the KRA show a number of years ago That was Attributed to Issac Haines but I was too new to the group at the time to have made that attribution my self.  I have struggled through my first couple of rifles on getting the right look for the style of rifle I was building but only time and seeing the real deal has made the biggest difference in my building with the right look. Most of the guys here can vouch for that process of learing on each one built the learning process on going with each new project finished and an additional original held. I keep a note/sketch book with me when I travel and any new Old Kentuckies I come across I get as much information as I can glean. You must post some pictures for the rest of us.