Looking for guesstimates on where/when was this made? More pictures added

[gibster]

I recently bought a smooth rifle that looks to be from the Reading area, but since it is from further north than I usually look for, I really don't know.  No markings on the barrel or lock.  The octagon to round barrel is 45-inches long and mikes to .658 caliber.  The octagon portion is 12 1/2-inches with a wedding band.  The forearm has a few cracks that have been stabilized and a small splinter of wood replaced.  It looks like a small piece of wood was replaced at the lock also.  Not sure if the lock is original to the gun or not.  It fits pretty good and lines up well with the touch hole.  If it is a reconversion, they did a pretty good job as I can't really tell.  Some on here with more experience may be able to shed some light on it.  I did remove the lock and side plate and found what appears to be a year stamped under the side plate.  It appears to be 1777, but I don't think that this piece is that old.  Could be wrong and that is why I am showing this to see what others think.  All opinions welcomed.

[Buck]

Gibster,
Looks Bucks or Lehigh. The date looks original, couldn't tell you if its a reconversion unless it was in hand. I like it, looks old. Why do you doubt the date? Looks like the lock plate fits pretty good in the mortise, but the hammer doesn't look to be original.
Buck

[E.vonAschwege]

Wow, what a beautiful piece - love the lines of it.  Something about the style seems later to me than 1777, but it's not impossible.  The wrist and buttstock looks like Eastern Berks, Lehigh-ish, but closer to 1790s.  The ramrod pipe is reminiscent of Bucks co guns.  While the rifle has a bunch of neat features from different areas, the lock has me puzzled.  The shape is odd, and the grooves filed into the tail look secondary - especially to a round-faced lock.  What do the insides look like?  My hunch is a reconversion or maybe a replacement lock sometime.  Sorry I can't tell much more - looks like a great find!!  Congrats to you!
-Eric

[jdm]

I'm going with Lehigh. It has an early trigger that might work with your date. More than likely 1790 though. How thick is the butt?  Eric, you know it's my kind of gun.   JIM

[Buck]

Jim,
That's what I thought, JDM special. The rear ramrod pipe is what made me think Bucks also, but I agree the stock appears Lehigh. In review of the "stamp" from the photos it looks like there are few more "7s" after the initial 1777. Its hard to judge from pictures. Nice rifle
Buck

[Eric Kettenburg]

This is out of the area down south of Allentown where Bucks, Montgomery, Berks and old Northampton (now Lehigh) come together.  Some very neat stuff out of that region, a nice blend.  I have pictures of this one somewhere on disc.  I also think that at one point this was sold through DGW, maybe 10 years ago give or take.  This one or a twin.

[gibster]

Thanks for the input.  I initially thought Le high when I saw it, but there are some things that had me question it.
Buck, not sure why I question the date other than I just didn't think it was that early of a gun.  What looks to be more 7's after the date are scrape marks from the inletting of the sideplate.  There are a few of them before the date stamp also.  
Jim, the butt measures 1.42-inches thick.  I'll do my best to make sure that you have a chance to get a hands on look at it sometime down the road.  I will have it at Knoxville next week if you will be there.
The guy that I bought it from seemed to think 1770's.  I don't know if he ever saw the date stamp under the sideplate or not.  He never mentioned it so I doubt that he did.  My thoughts were in the 1790's.  

[Nate McKenzie]

I never saw wriggle engraving such as on the sideplate and entry thimble on an 18th century rifle before. Was it common or maybe added later?

[Hurricane ( of Virginia)]

Regarding the date. It appears to me that the "1777" looks two "blockish" for a date and to my eye under magnification the number look more like "square" pressure marks rather than a stamped date.
Hurricane

[mr. no gold]

Thank you for bringing this pretty rifle to the Forum. I think that it is a gorgeous piece of work. It does appear that the lock may have been replaced as this one just doesn't quite have the right look to it. Pull it out and see if there are any indications left of a predecessor. Standard for the area would be a Germanic style lock and this is a hybrid English/Germanic style. If it should happen to be an incorrect lock, given the great quality of this gun, it would pay to make the time and effort to find an original lock that would drop into the mortise with perhaps some fill in if necssary. They are out there and can be found on occasion. Thank you, again!
Dick

[eddillon]

Regarding the date. It appears to me that the "1777" looks two "blockish" for a date and to my eye under magnification the number look more like "square" pressure marks rather than a stamped date.
Hurricane

Looks like some sort of marks from the jaws of a vise.

[KLMoors]

I think the marks under the side plate are from the removal of the wood for the inlet. I was taught that method when inletting hinges and it leaves those telltale marks.

After cutting around the perimeter of the object, I take my chisel and stand it almost vertical, with the edge across the grain of the wood. Then I tap the chisel a couple of times, roll my wrist down a bit, move 1/8 inch and repeat all over the area to be removed. make a few cuts of similar depth, with the grain, and the chips pretty much fall out.  

It looks to me like he went a little too deep in the middle of the inlet and left those cut marks. You can see the other remnants of this method in other areas of the inlet under the side plate.

[Majorjoel]

 As everyone has already mentioned your rifle has traits from the Northampton and Bucks Co areas kind of combined which makes a very appealing architectural statement. The trigger looks late 18th century era (could be Rev War) and has been pinned inside through the side plate mortise and under the lock I'm sure. Gibster, would it be possible for you to post pictures of the trigger guard looking down from above? I also find the butt molding lines which are very well pronounced and deeply cut to be of interest. Are these moldings pretty concentric on both sides of the buttstock? By this I mean are they congruent with each other. Does your rifle have a toe plate?  I'm also assuming that the barrel is smooth bore, so a really fine early (to my standards) smooth rifle you have there!

[tallbear]

Gibster
First thank you very much for sharing this with us I hope to see it in person at some point.I agree with KL MOORS about the date and how it got there.The method he describe for removing waste in a inlet is how I was also taught ,and it certainly looks like the marks are from that method rather than a date.One of the most wonderful things about this gun is the barrel profile.I wonder if at some point you would be willing to measure it and photo the oct-round transition so the barrel can be duplicated.

Thanks!!
Mitch Yates

[Bennypapa]

Is there any sign of carving behind the cheekpiece?

[gibster]

Thanks again for the input. 
KLMoors and aka tallbear - You guys may be right about the marks under the sideplate.  I can't say for sure.  Below is another close-up picture of the area for review.
aka tallbear - The octagon portion of the barrel measures 1.133 at the breech and 0.908 at the band.  the round portion measures 0.895 at the band and tapers to 0.820 at the muzzle.  Below is a picture of the transition.
Majorjoel - The moldings are pretty much the same on both sides, and there is no toe plate.  below is a picture of the guard looking down on it.
Bennypapa - No sign of carving behind the cheekpiece.
Here are a few more pictures.

[tallbear]

Gibster
Thanks

Seeing the new pics I really think that KL MOORS is correct that they are marks left from the inletting process rather than the date.Since I also think the style is closer to turn of the century rather than Rev war this would make more sence.

Thanks agian for sharing a great gun!!!!!

Mitch

[Buck]

Gibster,
Great rifle, I would have to agree with Mitch. In my opinion (for what its worth) the rifle is turn of the century probably 1796-1810. A great early rifle in great condition.
Buck

[duca]

Wow! Sweet gun. Enjoy it.