Author Topic: What style patch box is this... (Read 10653 times)

gizamo · « **on:** March 21, 2016, 01:26:33 AM »

Anyone care to comment on what style patch box this may be?

sz · « **Reply #1 on:** March 21, 2016, 01:33:18 AM »

I don't know but I like it.

Frank · « **Reply #2 on:** March 21, 2016, 02:19:08 AM »

Looks like a Bedford County to me.

Avlrc · « **Reply #3 on:** March 21, 2016, 02:59:11 AM »

Looks like a very late design to me...

Hungry Horse · « **Reply #4 on:** March 21, 2016, 04:03:10 AM »

The buttplate return looks like North Carolina to me. But, the patchbox doesn't look like any I've seen.

Hungry Horse

Tanselman · « **Reply #5 on:** March 21, 2016, 06:28:11 AM »

Is it possibly a relatively modern, higher quality reproduction rifle? Can we see more of the gun? Shelby Gallien

gizamo · « **Reply #6 on:** March 21, 2016, 11:41:22 AM »

Lock seems to say Warranted and Tennessee.

It is a signed original in .41 caliber. I bought it yesterday from a 77 year old gunsmith who aquired it in 1961

Giz

Mike Brooks · « **Reply #7 on:** March 21, 2016, 03:13:47 PM »

Purdy nice old gun, I find the buttplate interesting. Don't know nothin' else about it though.

Hungry Horse · « **Reply #8 on:** March 21, 2016, 05:18:45 PM »

Well, the lock was a late flint, at one time. It still looks Southern mountain to me.

Hungry Horse

T*O*F · « **Reply #9 on:** March 21, 2016, 06:02:07 PM »

Quote

It is a signed original in .41 caliber

So, if it's signed, who signed it?
Wouldn't the maker's name give an indication of where he lived, thus leading to the style?

gizamo · « **Reply #10 on:** March 21, 2016, 07:21:54 PM »

Quote from: T*O*F on March 21, 2016, 06:02:07 PM

Quote
It is a signed original in .41 caliber
So, if it's signed, who signed it?
Wouldn't the maker's name give an indication of where he lived, thus leading to the style?

Beats me...Maybe someone here can decipher it....

Majorjoel · « **Reply #11 on:** March 21, 2016, 09:16:23 PM »

Nice Giz! Would love to see the cheek piece side and the side plate.

Majorjoel · « **Reply #12 on:** March 21, 2016, 09:23:10 PM »

G Joph Galespie ??

Hungry Horse · « **Reply #13 on:** March 21, 2016, 10:31:56 PM »

If the good major's right we might have to tie up Dennis.

Hungry Horse

gizamo · « **Reply #14 on:** March 21, 2016, 11:36:14 PM »

Quote from: Majorjoel on March 21, 2016, 09:16:23 PM

Nice Giz! Would love to see the cheek piece side and the side plate.

Joel....

Too late. Didn't get the pics of that side of the gun. I brought it to my buddy Roy Stroh this afternoon. We removed the conversion parts and preserved them. He is going to reconvert the gun using a new lock and engraving it and aging it to match the original.....

Giz

davebozell · « **Reply #15 on:** March 22, 2016, 04:09:34 AM »

That butt plate does have the look of a Gillespie. I'm sure Dennis will weigh in on this one.

Hungry Horse · « **Reply #16 on:** March 22, 2016, 05:26:14 AM »

In my opinion reconverting interpheres with the legitimate history of the gun. I know it done quite often, but that doesn't make it right. I have a very nice Lehigh that was converted to percussion during its working life, that will stay percussion at least as long as I own it.

Hungry Horse

Dennis Glazener · « **Reply #17 on:** March 22, 2016, 05:41:53 AM »

Not like any Gillespie I have seen. Some of the family spelled their name Galaspy but not Galespie. There was a late GA Gillespie named George Washington Gillespie that made a few rifles.
Dennis

gizamo · « **Reply #18 on:** March 22, 2016, 12:34:17 PM »

Quote from: Hungry Horse on March 22, 2016, 05:26:14 AM

In my opinion reconverting interpheres with the legitimate history of the gun. I know it done quite often, but that doesn't make it right. I have a very nice Lehigh that was converted to percussion during its working life, that will stay percussion at least as long as I own it.

Hungry Horse

I agree... but in this case the original lock and associated parts are being preserved. A new touch hole liner is being fit to the existing threaded barrel hole. Then a new lock is being fit exactly to the original inlet in the stock. That lock will be aged to look original.

Hungry Horse · « **Reply #19 on:** March 22, 2016, 05:11:23 PM »

The gun is obviously a very late flint, if indeed it ever was a flint. More than a few guns were built with converted locks that were never flintlocks in their working life. I just feel that reconverting is disenjenuious. Conversions were done in the past to increase the guns value, because flintlocks often bring a higher price at auction. That isn't always the case today. Many collectors prefer to represent the gun as it was for the majority of its working life. And, often consider a reconversion suspect in other areas because of this "restoration".

Hungry Horse

mbriggs · « **Reply #20 on:** March 22, 2016, 05:19:55 PM »

I have always believed that while everyone is entitled to their opinion, the only opinion that counts is the person that owns the rifle. Do what you want, its yours.

Michael

gizamo · « **Reply #21 on:** March 22, 2016, 11:23:21 PM »

Quote from: Hungry Horse on March 22, 2016, 05:11:23 PM

The gun is obviously a very late flint, if indeed it ever was a flint. More than a few guns were built with converted locks that were never flintlocks in their working life. I just feel that reconverting is disenjenuious. Conversions were done in the past to increase the guns value, because flintlocks often bring a higher price at auction. That isn't always the case today. Many collectors prefer to represent the gun as it was for the majority of its working life. And, often consider a reconversion suspect in other areas because of this "restoration".

Hungry Horse

I am preserving the parts. In less then a hour the gun can be put back to the "as found condition ". That is why I am replacing the entire lock assembly with a new one.

I would never alter the original lock. And I have documented the original condition. The original parts are bagged and will stay with the gun.

The gun has a original barrel with a good bore. I intend to hunt with it as it was most likely made.

I agree with some of your points. And the spirit of your point of view.

sqrldog · « **Reply #22 on:** March 23, 2016, 12:37:30 AM »

Gizmo
What you are doing is no more than would have been done back in the day if someone wanted the gun serviceable as a flint rifle except the owner probably would have tossed the old lock. I'm sure the rifle will be more collectable with the original parts accompanying it. My opinion is that the first butcher job occured when the rifle was percussioned. Part of its history for sure but most likely not as originally built. I have no problem putting one back as close to original as is practical. Tim

Don Stith · « **Reply #23 on:** March 23, 2016, 01:29:25 AM »

I was fine with all your plans until you got to the hunting with it part
I have a friend who is missing two fingers as a result of hunting with an original 40 cal. He was using a light load to hunt squirrels. Have your smith replace the barrel along with the lock.

gizamo · « **Reply #24 on:** March 23, 2016, 01:41:55 AM »

Hi Don....

I am pretty much in tune with what you just shared...

The barrel is in good condition. Intend to take it out and proof it.

Did your friend proof the gun?

Giz

News:

Author Topic: What style patch box is this... (Read 10653 times)

gizamo

gizamo

gizamo

gizamo

gizamo

gizamo

gizamo