Jim Chambers Lancaster or York

[MontanaFrontier86]

I will be attending the jim chambers class in may. I am trying to decide between a Lancaster or York kit witha wooden patchbox. If you have built eeither please post pics. I am into the fur trade and would like something that would fit into the rocky mountain fur trade era. Please post pics of your kit! Thanks

[Okefinokee Outlaw]

I'm not sure that either would fit in the Rocky Mountain fur trade era.

[bama]

Either will make a beautiful rifle. Jim's parts are well engineered to work together but at the same time there is plenty of room to personalise your build. Good luck with which ever you choose, take pictures and post them here.

[rich pierce]

I'm not sure that either would fit in the Rocky Mountain fur trade era.

Agree.  But you will learn how to build a kit rifle and can then move on to something that would be appropriate for your re-enacting.

[RHoyle]

I would build whatever appeals to you, being in Utah, everything here is fur trade era, yet I built one of Chambers Isaac Haines rifles and absolutely love it.  No one at any of the rendezvous I've been too has ever said anything about it not being the right time period.  Even shot a nice Muley with it this fall.  I have a Chambers York kit also, still in the box, just haven't found the time to work on it yet.

[MontanaFrontier86]

The books I read say that the Lancaster style rifle was the most popular during the fur trade era. Just not sure if I should do the Lancaster or York kit. The website dont have a very good pictures.

[Kevin Houlihan]

Lancaster rifles were used during the fur trade out west. Quite a few gunsmiths from that area produced rifles for government contracts and for the fur companies. I would go for the optional brass patchbox though. The sliding wood boxes are a little early.
Good luck
Kevin

[axelp]

I have heard the York makes for a great lighter bore gun. I own the Chambers Isaac Haines and love it. I also own the Chambers English short rifle, and their PA Fowler... All nice builds. You cannot go wrong with Jim Chambers. I think its entirely acceptable to go with an earlier gun. Folks often took what they had and were used to.

K

[rich pierce]

The books I read say that the Lancaster style rifle was the most popular during the fur trade era. Just not sure if I should do the Lancaster or York kit. The website dont have a very good pictures.

This refers to a very specific trade gun called the Lancaster model.  It's a much later rifle than the chambers kit.  Much narrower buttstock, deeply curved buttplate, different all around.  Just happened to have the same name.  Like a 56 Chevy compared to a 2014 model.  Same name.  Different car.

[Hungry Horse]

 Rich is right, the firm of J.J.Henry built rifles for the fur trade in two patterns. The most popular was the Lancaster pattern based loosely on the styling of a late Lancaster rifle. The other pattern was was based more on English sporting rifles of the age, and was not as popular.

              Hungry Horse

[flehto]

I've built 3 Chambers' early Lancasters...all w/ my brass Pboxes. The Chamber's kits are composed of quality parts and the precarve had a minimum of over runs.  Although the pictured "kit" LR has a brass Pbox, hope it still helps in your determination......Fred

[Tommy Bruce]

I think the York is a little later style gun, maybe 1780's or 90's?  I guess if you look at the rocky mountains say 1820's a case could be made for one still being around.  I have to agree with what's been said already, great kits!!

[moleeyes36]

I think the York is a little later style gun, maybe 1780's or 90's?  I guess if you look at the rocky mountains say 1820's a case could be made for one still being around.  I have to agree with what's been said already, great kits!!

I've never built a Jim Chambers kit, so I don't have an oar in the water there.  However, on Jim's website the say their Early York is 1770's to 1780's era, and that Davy Crockett is said to have carried one.  Crockett lived from 1786 to 1836 so if he carried one it could have been during the time period of the fur trade.  That's not to say that many, or any, trappers carried them into the mountains during that period.  But it's food for thought.

Mole Eyes

[axelp]

Seth Kinman the trapper/hunter who ended up in Humbolt CA area was known to have carried an old full stock long rifle later in life--decade or more after the Civil War era if I recall. And he was a bear hunter and indian fighter. There are references of folks heading west with older guns and using them until they replaced them with larger bore newer guns, or updating them to percussion. 1830's Texas there were flintlocks and percussion side by side. Immigrant and Gold Rush guns were from all over… I think in the early 19th C, older tools and guns were used long after newer technology was available… The idea of "designed obsolescence" did not start until the 20th C?

I often carry my early chambers english short rifle. It was made with a metal patchbox intentionally to look like a late replacement maybe for a lost wooden lid… older gun fixed and repurposed.

K

[PPatch]

This .50 rifle was completed from a Chambers Lancaster kit. A first build.



Jim's offerings are tops, provide a solid base and it is up to you to take it to the level of decoration and fit and finish you desire. For a working gun I would keep it pretty simple. I have no idea if PA style Lancasters made it into the mountains with the fur trade. Perhaps at the beginning, who knows. I don't, but I would bet that a man would carry the best gun he could afford. Once in the mountains there came a winnowing out, a cull if you will, and those that didn't have the stuffing in them to continue in the trade either died or got out at the first opportunity. The fur trade was a cut throat business which peeked in 1840. But there were men plying the trade from around 1810 and on through 1880.

dave

[flinchrocket]

You might want to consider which caliber and what you are going to use the rifle for to help you decide.
( 58 or 62 cal. Mark Silver Virginia Rifle would make a nice gun for out west.)

[moleeyes36]

You might want to consider which caliber and what you are going to use the rifle for to help you decide.
( 58 or 62 cal. Mark Silver Virginia Rifle would make a nice gun for out west.)

According to Jim Chambers website the original gun his kit is based on is even earlier than the York and Lancaster; possibly as early as 1740.  That's a long time before the fur trade and maybe not well excepted for re-enactemts for that period.  Especially if they are juried events.  

That said, I think you're right about that gun being a nice rifle for out west and bigger game.  The .58 & .62 calibers in which it is offered would certainly "Git 'er done".  I swore I'd never build another kit, but that gun's a beauty and even with upgraded extra fancy wood, a patch box kit and shipping it's a very attractive package.

Mole Eyes

[axelp]

Caliber will help decide. I do not think the York is recommend for larger calibers.

K

[kaintuck]

I'd say......a lot of work and money for a rifle that could be wrong for your fun. BUT, you will make a nice rifle in Jims shop class.....and then make a mountain man rifle with new found knowledge!

Marc n tomtom

[flinchrocket]

Some of you may remember, a rifle found after the Battle at the Alamo in 1836 was a 58 cal. Brass
mounted flintlock rifle with J. Dickert on the top barrel flat. I don't think it would be unreasonable
to assume one of his rifles ended up farther north.