Twigg English Sporting Rifle

[KLMoors]

I have a question on this plan.




I am attempting to build a facsimile of a Twigg rifle. This rifle is pictured on plate 6 of "Great British Gunmakers.... John Twigg and the Packingington Guns". James Rogers has been great in  helping me work out the details, and I have finished this full sized plan.

Using an overhead projector, I was able to expand the picture in the book up to full size to help get my plan made.  The gun is leaning in the picture so I have had to make some assumptions, but I think I am pretty close.   I'm pretty confident in my plan, except for the drop in the butt stock.


On the plan, things look tall from top to bottom due to the fact that I have drawn it a little oversized to allow for shaping, and I have drawn it with a straight tapered barrel for ease of drawing. The actual gun will be built with a 31 inch D-weight barrel. The drawing is done showing a Chambers Early Ketland lock.

At the heel, I am coming up with about 2 inches  (5 cm) of drop from the top of the barrel, or 2 1/4  inches (5.7 cm)  from the sights.   I have about 1 3/8 inches (3.5 cm) of drop at the nose.

I know these guns are very straight stocked. Does anybody know the actual dimensions of any English Sporting Rifles from about the 1770's through 80's? If so, are these dimensions about right?

Thanks!

[T*O*F]

Most of these guns were "bespoke" guns made to fit the owner.  I would not get hung up on trying to duplicate a particular existing gun.  Instead, alter the dimension to fit yourself.  You can still retain the lines.  I have some rough sawn and dried pine planks, and when doing such a gun, I quickly rough out a stock that fits me well and then use it's dimensions for a pattern.

Unless making an exact bench copy of an existing gun, I could never figure out why people get so hung up on exact dimensions.  It seems like folks assume every gun made by a particular maker was identical.  English guns, in particular,  by the same maker vary a great deal based on their intended use.

[eddillon]

A good place to start is RCA #14.  English sporter by Turvey.  Not sure but I think this is maker that is the influence on Jim Chambers great English sporter.

[James Rogers]

Ken,
Those measurements are close to spot on for me
I would need just a little more heel drop.
IIRC you had about 5.5" of height as drawn.
Try leaving the nose as is and dropping the heel to make the BP about 5". After that play with the pitch slightly and see how that fits on your try gun.

[KLMoors]

TOF, I just wanted to be sure it wasn't way off. I know you do some great English stuff, and if you said that they ranged from 2 1/2 to 3 at the heel, then I would know that I've made an error in my plan and I would adjust it. Everything else has made sense when doing my plan, but this 2 inch dimension surprised me.  I usually am not that concerned about this kind of thing, and usually follow a path closer to what you describe. But for some reason, I feel like trying to build this one more as a close facsimile of this particular gun.  Since having the original on my bench is out of the question, I've got to go with what I have to work with.

My try-stock will adjust to these dimensions (although the wrist is a little funky when adjusted to this) and it feels  good for me with these dimensions.

I just wanted to be sure I wasn't making a mistake that would jump out at those of you in the know.

Ed, the Chambers' gun has 2 3/4 inch of drop, and I think the Turvey is about 2 1/2. But, I just don't know enough about whether there were any "standard" dimensions for drop, or a particular range I should be staying in.

Like I said, this one part of the plan surprised me, so I figured I'd run it by the group.

[KLMoors]

James, thanks again for working with me on this!

You were typing while I was typing. I'm going to fiddle with it some more tomorrow. It is an interesting feel on the try-stock. It feels more like a shotgun than a rifle.

I'll try dropping as you suggest and see how that changes things.

[Acer Saccharum]

I think these guns would have a pretty peppy recoil. A straight stock will be a boon.

[smart dog]

Hi KL,
Great project and I wish you best of luck with it.  As a lover and builder of 18th century English sporting guns let me offer some suggestions.  The early Ketland lock is not your best choice for this gun.  You might look at the Davis Twigg lock or the L&R Durs Egg.  I've no experience with the Davis lock but have used the L&R several times.  I also would consider a Twigg lock parts set from Blackley's or TRS to get the styling right.  You might consider cutting back the comb a little to create a longer wrist section.  Most importantly, the barrel tang should start bending downward close to the end of the barrel.  Don't have much of a flat section behind the barrel.  Certainly no more than 3/8 or 1/2 inch.  Finally, think thin.  I mean really thin, particularly along the barrel channel and do not have the stock width at the lock panels flare out toward the butt parallel with the barrel. The width of the stock remains almost the same all the way through the lock panels despite the taper of the barrel.

Take care and good luck,

dave   

[gunmaker]

If you want a REAL sparker talk to Bob Roller he'll make you up a "Twigg lock" that will knock yer eye out & give showers a sparks.

[KLMoors]

Dave, thanks for your input on this. I hadn't considered the L&R lock.  I've never used an L&R lock.


I've been thinking about getting the Davis as it is very close in styling except for the roller on the frizzen. This particular original doesn't have that. Twigg seems to have used those on some guns from these years, but not on others. Not sure why.

I have a Ketland on hand, and although it would take some filing, I think I can get the styling right with it. Filing those molding lines on the cock would be fun, so I may just go with the Davis for convenience sake.

Regarding the wrist length and height/flatness through the breech- I drew those areas big to allow for shaping and possible movement of the barrel once I've got things in hand.

Regarding the lack of wood- You ain't kidding!  There are a couple of  very good pictures of this pair of guns from above and the thinness is really impressive. Twigg must have used a very thin web between the barrel and ramrod channel to get the roundness shown on the forestock with so little wood outboard of the barrel. These two rifles have massive breeches and yet look very graceful through those areas. That's going to require some finesse.

 I wish I had a good picture of the butt area from 90 degrees so I could feel more certain about the drop, that's really the only spot that is not shown with a good, straight on photo. Go figure!

Two other questions while I'm at it:

1) The lock is described as attached with a hook on the front, and one bolt.  Does anybody have any details on this method of installation?


2) The wood patchbox is released by "pushing it down and forward 1/4 inch". Does anybody know how that release works?


Thanks again y'all!

[SuperCracker]

1) The lock is described as attached with a hook on the front, and one bolt.  Does anybody have any details on this method of installation?

a later gun, but you should get the idea.

[Dphariss]

With the comb parallel to the bore or nearly so the drop at the heel and comb can be much less than many Kentuckys would be.
These dimensions and the stock design did not change a lot and Track of the Wolf drawing of an original Purdey in percussion will show its much like your stock which is much like the English guns and rifles all through the 18th and 19th c.
There is a Twigg circa 1780 in George's "English Guns and Rifles" Plate XI. It looks much like your drawing.

Dan

[Bob Roller]

A beautiful gun for sure and never have I seen such a lock mechanism.
Wave crest pan also.The only reason I can think of and it is only a
speculation is that when the lock is in place on the gun,and being held by only one screw,
this little hook is a stabilizer that over a long period of use would prevent the lock from moving
in the mortise due to the sudden opening of the frizzen and the equally sudden stop at the end of its
travel plus a possible rebound against the frizzen spring. If the lock is really precisely inletted and it appears
this one is,one screw pulled up tight and that wedge or hook should stabilize the lock.
Lynton Mckenzie showed me a similar lock years ago that was made by a female lock filer whose name
I think was Anne(Ann)Patrick. Superb work no matter who did it.Is your lock marked as to maker inside?

Bob Roller

[SuperCracker]

A beautiful gun for sure and never have I seen such a lock mechanism.
Wave crest pan also.The only reason I can think of and it is only a
speculation is that when the lock is in place on the gun,and being held by only one screw,
this little hook is a stabilizer that over a long period of use would prevent the lock from moving
in the mortise due to the sudden opening of the frizzen and the equally sudden stop at the end of its
travel plus a possible rebound against the frizzen spring. If the lock is really precisely inletted and it appears
this one is,one screw pulled up tight and that wedge or hook should stabilize the lock.
Lynton Mckenzie showed me a similar lock years ago that was made by a female lock filer whose name
I think was Anne(Ann)Patrick. Superb work no matter who did it.Is your lock marked as to maker inside?

Bob Roller

Sorry, not my gun. (I sincerely wish it was though, lol). Those are pictures I saved for reference.

I've only ever seen these locks on guns intended for wingshooting. I think some of the thinking was that when the gun is elevated the pan will be more level. But that's just a personal theory. I really like the way the tumbler is relieved to clear the third screw for the bridle. Very interesting.  I have a set of castings for a L&R set of these locks (no internals) that will be made into an English double one day and the plates have the same notch for a hook.

[KLMoors]

Wow, that's not at all what I was expecting regarding the hook on the front. Very interesting indeed!

Thanks for the pictures.

[Bob Roller]

You have castings from L&R for a wave crest flintlock?
I'd like to see some pictures of them if that's possible.

Bob Roller

[James Rogers]

Wow, that's not at all what I was expecting regarding the hook on the front. Very interesting indeed!

Thanks for the pictures.

Ken,

Have a look at plates 108 and 188 in your GBM Twigg book.

I also agree with Dave on the Davis Twigg. I realize your choice of the Chambers for out of the bag reliability comparison and having it on hand.
I am a big fan of shortening the comb to expose the wrist look so I like Dave's comment there as well.

[smart dog]

Hi KL,
The lock shown by Supercracker is one way it was done.  Another would be as follows:
1. Drill a blind hole on the inside of the lockplate just in front of the mainspring. You could also drill the hole all the way through, counter sink the outside of the hole and then peen over the end of the bolt that gets inserted, and then file it flush with the outside of the lockplate.  It will be hidden under the feather spring.
2. Tap the hole for a 10-32 or perhaps larger bolt.
3. Make a bolt that threads tightly into the hole such that the shoulder where the threads begin is tight against the inside of the lockplate.
4. Cut the bolt off about 3/16" or so above the inside of the lockplate and file it square in cross section.
5.  Cut a horizontal slot in the side of the bolt facing forward and a short way into the bolt or lug and slightly (1/16") above the lockplate.
6.  Thread a flat-headed woodscrew into the lock inlet at a point where the head will catch the slot in the lug on the lock.  Inlet the lug and then inlet the screw so it can thread far enough into the wood to catch the lug and hold it tightly in the inlet.

Personally, I would case harden the screw head and also the lockplate to withstand wear and tear although that may not be necessary.

dave

[KLMoors]

Ahh, very good description. I understand exactly what you are describing.

Is there an advantage to going with this detail over using two lockbolts?  I am wondering if this is one of those "improvements" that was done to something that was fine to begin with, and didn't need improvement.  The whole detail feels a little gimmicky to me.

As much as I want to stay close to the original. I don't want to do something that was discovered to be less effective.

[Cody Tetachuk]

1) The lock is described as attached with a hook on the front, and one bolt.  Does anybody have any details on this method of installation?

a later gun, but you should get the idea.

This is a Samuel & Charles Smith gun that was for sale by Lewis Drake years ago. I too, am of the opinion that the "wave" pan is intended to keep the pan level when the gun is elevated for "shooting flying". This is mere speculation on my part based on the fact that, of the MANY William Smith and S&C Smith guns I have seen, all of the shotguns have this unusual pan configuration and all of the pistols and rifles (save one pistol) have sported the more traditional level pan. Years ago, I bought the plate, frizzen and hammer castings from a William Smith SXS from Peter Dyson to fashion int a sxs shotgun. I have yet to finish them. I still need to make 1 main spring, both scear springs and finish the scears. I did, however, get bored with the internal fabrications and engraved them already. The frizzen springs were an interesting project. This is where I'm at (and have been for about 6 years)





P.S. The hammer I chose are NOT Smith Hammers, I just liked them better than the original Smith design and the throw was the same.

[Bob Roller]

Good looking locks and that frizzen spring is art in its own right.
A lot of people don't realize the time it takes to make such a spring
and making it look right as well as work.

Bob Roller

[Acer Saccharum]

Reminds me of Corb Lund and the Hurtin' Albertans somehow.

[hen]

I used to own a .52 cal flintlock target pistol by William Smith of London; this had a "crest of the wave" pan, forward tilting, as shown above. I sold it to a descendant of the gunsmith who was researching in order to produce a book on the Smiths; the book never appeared!.

[SuperCracker]

You have castings from L&R for a wave crest flintlock?
I'd like to see some pictures of them if that's possible.

Bob Roller

Oh, sorry. I have castings from Dysons for Left and Right hand locks. The same ones Cody has. I will eventually use them to make a double. Or maybe use the right one to build a gun based on that Smith gun and sell the left lock. Who knows

  It didn't hit me right away that the original post was misleading, sorry. lol


Cody, how was the porosity in your castings? Mine are, to me, a bit porous. Being the first castings I've bought, I don't know if that's typical or not.

[Cody Tetachuk]

Good looking locks and that frizzen spring is art in its own right.
A lot of people don't realize the time it takes to make such a spring
and making it look right as well as work.

Bob Roller

Thanks Bob. The frizzen springs were the first springs I ever attempted to make. I don't recall how many unsatisfactory attempts I made before arriving at the these two. The biggest challenge for me was that, since these will be for a sxs, Both springs had to be EXACT mirror images of one another and mounted to the locks EXACTLY right so the frizzens were perfectly aligned when open. Same challenge with the tumblers but getting the hammers to match exactly in the half cock and full cock positions was way easier than matching the frizzens.