Author Topic: .62 Cal Smooth Rifle Build (Read 10057 times)

Pennsylvania Dutchman · « **on:** July 11, 2015, 02:47:32 AM »

I wanted to post a few photos of the smooth rifle that I am building. I have done some doodleing on the buttstock to get an idea of the carving that I want to do. The buttplate and triggerguard are Reaves Goerings castings of Shumway's Issac Berlin rifle. I have drawn a side opening patch box like the Georg Leyendecher box that Eric Kettenburg showed in a September 2007 Muzzle Blasts article. I have added my 4th great grandfather's name. The lock is a large Siler kit that I made a new plate for and the barrel I machined from solid bar. The triggerguard will be inlet it is just setting on top now. Comments and criticisms welcome. Thank you.
Mark Poley

greybeard · « **Reply #1 on:** July 11, 2015, 03:51:37 AM »

Looking really good. If it were me I would move the but stock carving down about 3/8 or 1/2 inch,. Bob

Pennsylvania Dutchman · « **Reply #2 on:** July 11, 2015, 04:57:54 AM »

Thanks greybeard. It may need to be moved down. Here is a photo that was taken straight to see if there is a difference.

Acer Saccharum · « **Reply #3 on:** July 11, 2015, 05:02:36 AM »

If you have an incised line along the lower edge of the buttstock, it eliminates all the concerns about the carving looking too high.

The carving under the cheek can overlap the lower line, so it looks laid on top of said line.

rich pierce · « **Reply #4 on:** July 11, 2015, 05:11:12 AM »

I like what you are doing a LOT. I might consider having more room behind the cheek piece. Look at RCA 42. Don't want the carving to look crowded into the space but reaching out into it.

Pennsylvania Dutchman · « **Reply #5 on:** July 11, 2015, 05:19:41 AM »

Thanks Acer, I do plan to have an incised line along the bottom, I didn't draw it on yet, I should have. I have noticed in RCA what you mention about the carving under the cheekpiece overlapping the incised line. I like the looks of it done that way.
Mark

Pennsylvania Dutchman · « **Reply #6 on:** July 11, 2015, 05:25:05 AM »

Thanks Rich, If I shorten the cheekpiece a little from the back, would you keep the carving as close to the cheekpiece and give more room behind the carving? Or should I have a little more space between the carving and cheekpiece also.
Thanks again, Mark

greybeard · « **Reply #7 on:** July 11, 2015, 07:36:41 AM »

Yes Mark. Looks good straight on. Bob

PPatch · « **Reply #8 on:** July 11, 2015, 01:12:54 PM »

You are doing a fine job and the gun should prove a proud addition to your efforts. I love the way the grain runs through the wrist, you couldn't hope for better. Your inletting is super.

I totally agree with Acer's idea of running an incised line along the lower buttstock. I think the patchbox needs raised straight upward just a bit, looks a bit low and will look lower once you add the incised line. Plan your line (or go ahead and execute it) then center the patchbox just above center between the top of the comb and the incised line. By a "bit" I mean no more that a 1/16th above center, if that. Its a visual thing but I believe you have a good eye and will know when it is "right." The point being to provide a bit of visual "lift" to the box. (nice patchbox design by the way) .The relief carving you have penciled in looks right. I think it will enhance the overall look of the gun considerably. The only criticism I would offer is to extend the carving left and right of the tang forward toward the breech some more. Perhaps have it terminate immediately beyond the upper lock bolt. I hope that makes sense.

Those are nice slopes from the tang to the upper lock panels too, very nicely done.

dave

Pete G. · « **Reply #9 on:** July 11, 2015, 03:16:06 PM »

I agree with the others on patchbox placement. Also, shorten that cheekpiece by about 1/2" or so towards the rear so that your carving is not cramped. A design like that really needs some space to "flow". I would also try to soften the area behind the tang to help smooth those areas a little better. The carving will help, but a sharp edge is hard to blend in.

You are doing well; you can draw and plan on paper all you want, but it is no substitute for actually drawing your designs on the three dimensional stock.

rich pierce · « **Reply #10 on:** July 11, 2015, 11:23:35 PM »

If you do shorten the cheek piece at the rear I would keep the carving snugged up to it. But the way you have it is not by any means "wrong". Just a matter of taste.

And great choices in furniture and the Leyendecker patchbox to incorporate.

Pennsylvania Dutchman · « **Reply #11 on:** July 12, 2015, 12:26:02 AM »

PPatch, Thanks for the reply. I see what you are saying about moving the patchbox up. Another good reason why I should have drawn the incised line on the lower edge. Now that you mentioned it, the patchbox looks a little low now without the line, so adding the line as you said would really make it noticeable. Thanks! I also agree with you about the carving along side the tang. It does need to be extended to maybe within 1/4" to 3/8" of an inch of the breech of the barrel.
Thanks again and for the kind words.
Mark

Pennsylvania Dutchman · « **Reply #12 on:** July 12, 2015, 12:33:34 AM »

Pete G., Thank you for your reply and kind words. I do need to soften the area behind the tang as you said. Thanks for pointing it out, I didn't notice that. I may shorten the cheekpiece at the rear some. The carving could use some more room. I don't want to shorten it much, as I like the looks of the longer cheekpiece.
Thanks again,
Mark

Pennsylvania Dutchman · « **Reply #13 on:** July 12, 2015, 12:55:36 AM »

Thanks, Rich for the reply. I think I will shorten the cheekpiece a tad. I do see what everyone is saying about the carving needing a little more room to flow. Thanks for the comment about the furniture and patchbox . I knew that they came from the same time and area, but I was a little concerned that maybe I was mixing parts that didn't belong together.
I know that my choice of lock style is early and a little odd to some, but I noticed in RCA 1 and 2 that there were several longrifles with earlier locks. I may be wrong but I figured that gunsmiths in the 18th century using an older lock that was in good shape and still serviceable, is sort of like us today building a rifle on a Mauser action. My Grandfather whose name I have on the patchbox, emigrated for Zella, Germany with his parents in 1753 when he was 4 years old. His sponser at his baptisim in Zella was Johann Valtin Bader a master gunsmith. I am assuming that he could of had a rifle built here with a lock from a gun brought from Germany. Sorry for the ramble.
Thanks again, You all have been a big help.
Mark

Ryan McNabb · « **Reply #14 on:** July 13, 2015, 02:24:08 AM »

Did nobody read "...and the barrel I machined from a solid bar"?

bob in the woods · « **Reply #15 on:** July 13, 2015, 04:59:08 AM »

I read it, and was waiting to see how long before anyone else mentioned it,…all being caught up in answering the carving design questions

Deep drilling a barrel is a major deal, so I wondered how it was done ? What machinery and material etc.
That is going to be one nice smooth rifle !

flatsguide · « **Reply #16 on:** July 13, 2015, 06:10:11 AM »

I hope some folks here can explain to me what a " smooth rifle" is"; from what I understand Marc drilled the bbl ( gun drill?) and reamed it. Is it a smooth bore that looks like a rifle ? Anyway it looks very nice.
Thanks Richard

Collector · « **Reply #17 on:** July 13, 2015, 06:12:39 AM »

Quote from: Ryan McNabb on July 13, 2015, 02:24:08 AM

Did nobody read "...and the barrel I machined from a solid bar"?

And, I take it that it also doesn't have a breech plug?? Kinky!!

rich pierce · « **Reply #18 on:** July 13, 2015, 06:17:40 AM »

Quote from: flatsguide on July 13, 2015, 06:10:11 AM

I hope some folks here can explain to me what a " smooth rifle" is"; from what I understand Marc drilled the bbl ( gun drill?) and reamed it. Is it a smooth bore that looks like a rifle ? Anyway it looks very nice.
Thanks Richard

You nailed it. A smoothbore built like a rifle is called a smooth rifle. Usually will have a rifle style guard, front and rear sights, and often a cheek piece.

flatsguide · « **Reply #19 on:** July 13, 2015, 04:47:52 PM »

Ah! Thanks Rich for clearing up my confusion.

Pennsylvania Dutchman · « **Reply #20 on:** July 13, 2015, 08:18:22 PM »

Thanks fellas for all the replies.
I measured the drawing that I have on RCA # 83, the Issac Berlin Smooth rifle and my cheekpiece does need to be shortened about 3/8" from the rear. Thanks to all who pointed that out.
The barrel I drilled from 1 7/16" steel round bar. I have a 17"x59" engine lathe that the material would fit thru the headstock. I used the drill in the photo. I drilled as deep as I could without a shank extension, the added an 8" extension and drilled as deeply as I could go with that, then added the long extension and drilled thru. I had about .030" runout in the hole in the outboard end. The drill is a thru coolant drill, so I used the threads to install the different extensions. Next I used the square (armoury) reamer to finish the bore to .620". I machined the outside between centers so the bore is centered. The barrel dimensions are: 41 1/4" long, 1.130" at the breech, .970" at the wedding band, .850" at the waist and .895" at the muzzle. The octagon section is 14 1/4" long.

Thanks for the interest and the helpful replies,
Mark Poley

bob in the woods · « **Reply #21 on:** July 13, 2015, 09:59:52 PM »

What type of steel /material is it ? After all that machining, will you, or did you anneal it ?

Pennsylvania Dutchman · « **Reply #22 on:** July 14, 2015, 01:03:42 AM »

Bob, It is an alloy steel that has been stress relieved. It is not 12L14, but it is a steel that has been used for many years by several well respected barrel makers. I would prefer not to give the actual alloy, as I don't want this thread to be taken over and destroyed by a discussion on the suitability of barrel steels. $:-\$
Thanks for your reply, Mark

Stophel · « **Reply #23 on:** July 14, 2015, 01:51:09 AM »

I'm most impressed with the fact that your comb line is nice and straight and nearly level, without the extreme amount of drop that everybody seems to want to put in them! It looks RIGHT.

I do think, though, that the top of the wrist and breech tang should be "de-humped", and flattened out and vertically narrowed a little.

Pennsylvania Dutchman · « **Reply #24 on:** July 14, 2015, 02:13:29 AM »

Quote from: Stophel on July 14, 2015, 01:51:09 AM

I'm most impressed with the fact that your comb line is nice and straight and nearly level, without the extreme amount of drop that everybody seems to want to put in them! It looks RIGHT.

Thanks for the kind remarks, Stophel. I actually made the drop and pull exactly the same as an old Mauser sporting rifle that I have that fits me perfectly and it is really close to the dimensions of the Issac Berlin gun. Although I couldn't have made it with more drop if I wanted to, the board was just barely wide enough for what I cut.
I can cut more off of the top of the wrist, thanks for pointing that out.
Mark Poley

News:

Author Topic: .62 Cal Smooth Rifle Build (Read 10057 times)

greybeard

greybeard