Hi Tony,
In all my studying of original and contemporary swivel breech rifles, I don’t recall ever seeing a lefty! You are to be admired for producing that! My left-eyed son has to put up with my right handed guns, and I will never have the skill, patience, and determination to make for him what you have made. Congratulations.
You ask for comments on your build, and I would like to provide some. Keep in mind that I am a student of and hunter with these Kentucky double rifles, and not a builder. I have a lot of learning to go, but have picked up ideas over the years about them and will share with you some thoughts on your rifle.
The nose cap nicely follows the unique molding at the edge of the “barrel channels” (I assume these are actually on “panels” instead of on a double-inlet fore stock). The thinness of the edge of the molding looks a bit delicate for holding up to my style of hunting use.
Your modern sights are great for shooting, but detract from the appearance for the rifle in my opinion. The original low smooth beautiful sights look great but don’t shoot so well, I admit. This comment has no correct answer and your sights are certainly best for shooting.
The pan/frizzen plates of the Waters swivel breech action are admittedly awkward and make for challenges in forming the panels around them. Making your fore stock panels more delicate in front of the frizzen plates would improve the looks on my opinion.
On the lock side of the butt stock, the transition between the wrist and the comb would look better if the “groove” followed the line of the wrist instead of traveling up toward the comb. These points might be useful for your next build.
On the cheek side, the transition might do the same, and would require making the cheek rest narrower, thinner, and lower on the stock. If you need the cheek rest that high and large for function, then function trumps aesthetics in my mind, but usually it can be made smaller without sacrificing function.
The notch in the front of the comb is unusual and distracting to me when I view the gun. If it needs to be there for function, so be it, but if not, your next build would look better with a more conventional comb in my opinion.
The Waters lock and swivel action are relatively late flintlock styles, while the Moll-type two piece box, the butt piece, and trigger guard seem earlier to me. If they feel best to you for use, than again function trumps style.
Your second to last photo shows remarkable mirror-like polishing on the butt piece. Am I seeing the photographer in it?!!
Again, you have produced a rifle way beyond my skill level, and I commend you for it.
Congratulations.
Bill Paton
