Fowler/trade gun type triggerguards

[David Rase]

Last night while on the phone with a good friend from Kansas I brought up the subject of my Tulle project.  I mentioned that I spent yesterday inletting my triggerguard.  During this conversation he brought up the need to make sure the Tulle was thin and lightweight, almost like the Type G guns.  My question is, how were the rear extensions on tradegun and fowler guards installed, were they inlet or was the rounded section of the stock where the extension sets flattened and the guard mounted on top of the wood?  I suspect that it depended on school, country of origin etc.  What are your thoughts?
DMR   

[George F.]

First off, congradulations of Muzzleloader  Magazine featuring you in their magazine. I 'm guessing yopu don't have Grinslade's Fowler book. From looking through it, some rear extensions were screwed and some were pinned. For the price of the book, it's well worth it   ...Geo.
  P.S. ...  Sorry Dave I totally missed the inletting part of the question.

[Longknife]

David, I don't believe any one can make a general statement about wheather trade gun  triggerguards were inletted or not. Usually the flat formed guards were surface mounted but the better made ones were inleted. If they took the time to form a nice sculptered guard then they inletted it too---I'm sure there are exceptions. Most of the pictures in Hamiltons book are of excavated parts and it is not stated weather they were inleted or not. All the French made "Tulle" guns (complete) in the book appear to have inletted guards.....Ed

[Dave B]

Dave,
I had a guy pull up in my driveway with an old Tulle that he wanted my opinions on restoration. The guard on it was inlet but only by the smallest margin. It almost looked like the guard had been set with a big hammer causing it to indent the wood only. With the guard removed it was only a .020 in depth. This guard was pinned. I don't know about  others of this type but it was of the type they used durring the Rev war or just before the 1800's to my thinking. The lock was unbrideled at the frizzen. I was not able to convice him that it was old junk and bad luck to have around.  ;DHe wanted to make sure he didnt mess with it till he had talked to someone. I think he got the point it was best left as it was but oiled up and kept away from damp.  I like the looks of your lock youve got on the thread on Lock polishing, Its almost a dead ringer for the lock on the piece this guy brought by.

[rallen]

Ed seems to have summed it up well. Tulle guns seem to be of exceptional quality for trade weapons. They spared no expense on quality so the hardware was inlet. Tulle also outfitted marine companies in New France, so quality was in issue. According to Bouchard, the fusil fin and the military guns were all of the same quality and photographic evidence indicates that the fusil de chasse had inletted trigger guards secured with screws.  In Hamilton, if the trigger guard was of pounded sheet brass it was just surface mounted, other wise it was inlet.  Looks like its up to you as to quality and price.
Ryan

[P.Bigham]

 I have been able to handle only one Original Tulle. What Impressed me most is what you have said. The Trigger Guard was thinner and the gun as a whole was more Smaller proportioned than the kits offered today.

[David Rase]

Thanks for all the feed back.  The trigger guard is inlet into the stock.  What prompted this question was while inletting the rear extension yesterday, I thought it was taking an enormously long time.  My mind started to wonder and thoughts of workman like danced through my head.  Yes, my gun is over built, like many things I do, but I had to go to the board for advice.
DMR

[elk killer]

David,, do you have a picture of it..??..im going to be rebuilding a Tulle.. this week ,, im going to shorten the pull and take what i figure to be about
2 to 3 cords of wood off this one,, the one i have i believe was made m by Centermark

[Pete Allan]

One of my friends had an original Tulle that was at least 6' long and I don't think it was 7 lb. A h-ll of a lot lighter than the one I made for myself and mine was a lot shorter. I think many home builders of muzzleloaders have a problem taking enough wood off. I know it took me at least 40 years to start making slim trim rifles and I don't think I am alone

[deano]

I had the smooth rifle I built out the other day and I sure wished I would have been more aggressive in wood removal, and just put the whole thing on a diet before I finished it. Looking at the 2" butt plate just screamed that there could be more wood left in the butt and it would still look right but it now it looks chunky.

However I think that most of the real heft is in the barrel, there is a lot more metal in a modern "safe" barrel than in a 200 year old skinny, thin walled, shot out and used up antique fusil.

Ken

[David Rase]

Ken,  You are right on the mark with barrel weight.  I don't think there has been a round or octagon to round barrel that I have not thrown in my lathe and peeled of a little weight.  Not to the extent of the originals but I do pare them down.
DMR

[J.D.]

What an appropriate thread. I have an french fusil in the basement that was started some time, years, ago and never finished. I have been, periodically,  working on that gun and  thought the gun was almost ready to stain and finish, but it is not what one would call thin and light. So I suppose more file and scraper work will be necessary.

So, how thin is "thin"? How wide should the buttpiece be?
Thanks,
J.D.