Hand me down

[wildcatter]

Dandy little rifle, thanks for posting!!

[mountainman70]

You sho 'nuff got all of us fired up. Thanks for coming on board. Dave

[Mike Brooks]

... By gorsh, Mike... you still got 'um good eyes ... !!... I missed that until I enlarged photo ... !!! ... I do think was originally flint .... anyone else..?? .. Dennis ...what think ye ..??

Yep, started as flint. But they were still making flint guns in the 1850's in NC. Looks like a 1810-20 gun to me. Love to get a tracing of that stock and some measurements.

[David R. Pennington]

What's the detail either side of the front sight blade? Engraving? Really neat little rifle.

[Mullengunbarn]

On either side of the blade it looks like it was stamped with a Tool that left some type of marking, but it could be engraving.

[Cades Cove Fiddler]

  ... Wow this is one helluva interesting rifle ... !!! .... Another observation while Mike Brooks eyesight is available (HaHa) ...do I see holes at front & back of trigger-guard where was once pins.. .... maybe replaced T/G ...or tabs broke & screws were then used to attatch..  ..... whatcha think, boys...??... would love to hold this one & study her ... !!!

[ghost]

I agree with Mr Brooks! I'd like to see measurements, and possibly get a tracing!

[Dennis Glazener]

... By gorsh, Mike... you still got 'um good eyes ... !!... I missed that until I enlarged photo ... !!! ... I do think was originally flint .... anyone else..?? .. Dennis ...what think ye ..??

Yes I feel sure it was an original flintlock rifle. If you look to the rear of the hammer you can see where the lock molding was cut for the flint cock, plus the current lock looks to be converted from flint. I would not argue with Mike's 1810-20 dates but as he said there were many flint rifles being made as late as the 1850's and probably later than that.

Did you notice the little (frog?) design on each side of the sight blade, on the top of the brass base, haven't seen that before.

I like that trigger guard but something about it makes me think its not original to the rifle, can't explain why. Might be the two screws holding it own which would be normal for a SMR but not for that guard. Take a look at the 6th photo down, the one that looks at the bottom of the trigger guard. Is that hole between the guard and the lock for a cross pin on the trigger guard?
Dennis

[Mullengunbarn]

It was a flint lock so I asummed the holes were from the old pan and whatever else was on a ketland flint lock. My grandpa said he took it to the antique road show once and there antique gun experts said the lock dated 1776, for what it's worth, so that would mean it was a flint lock at one time.
Anyone have any suggestions for loads? I was gonna start with about 10 grains of fff and go from there, planning on shooting skerls with it.

[Don Stith]

... By gorsh, Mike... you still got 'um good eyes ... !!... I missed that until I enlarged photo ... !!! ... I do think was originally flint .... anyone else..?? .. Dennis ...what think ye ..??

Yes I feel sure it was an original flintlock rifle. If you look to the rear of the hammer you can see where the lock molding was cut for the flint cock, plus the current lock looks to be converted from flint. I would not argue with Mike's 1810-20 dates but as he said there were many flint rifles being made as late as the 1850's and probably later than that.

Did you notice the little (frog?) design on each side of the sight blade, on the top of the brass base, haven't seen that before.

I like that trigger guard but something about it makes me think its not original to the rifle, can't explain why. Might be the two screws holding it own which would be normal for a SMR but not for that guard. Take a look at the 6th photo down, the one that looks at the bottom of the trigger guard. Is that hole between the guard and the lock for a cross pin on the trigger guard?
Dennis

Dennis I only see one screw and that is in the rear finial.  I think the round thing at front of bow is a rivet that holds the lug on and has a crosspin attaching the front finial to the stock

[rich pierce]

If it wasn't a family heirloom you're unwilling to part with, there's folks who would trade you a contemporary shooter.

It might shoot well but you risk damaging a rare and valuable original and it might be challenging to get it to keep all shots on a softball at say 35 yards.  You might consider having a bench copy made as a shooter.  Just an idea. 

[Dennis Glazener]

Anyone have any suggestions for loads? I was gonna start with about 10 grains of fff and go from there, planning on shooting skerls with it.

Not only the concern for damage to the gun there is also the risk for damage to yourself. Who knows what rust has done to that hand forged barrel over the years.
Dennis

[Dennis Glazener]

... By gorsh, Mike... you still got 'um good eyes ... !!... I missed that until I enlarged photo ... !!! ... I do think was originally flint .... anyone else..?? .. Dennis ...what think ye ..??

Yes I feel sure it was an original flintlock rifle. If you look to the rear of the hammer you can see where the lock molding was cut for the flint cock, plus the current lock looks to be converted from flint. I would not argue with Mike's 1810-20 dates but as he said there were many flint rifles being made as late as the 1850's and probably later than that.

Did you notice the little (frog?) design on each side of the sight blade, on the top of the brass base, haven't seen that before.

I like that trigger guard but something about it makes me think its not original to the rifle, can't explain why. Might be the two screws holding it own which would be normal for a SMR but not for that guard. Take a look at the 6th photo down, the one that looks at the bottom of the trigger guard. Is that hole between the guard and the lock for a cross pin on the trigger guard?
Dennis

Dennis I only see one screw and that is in the rear finial.  I think the round thing at front of bow is a rivet that holds the lug on and has a crosspin attaching the front finial to the stock

Don,
You are correct, I didn't look at the "rivet" that close earlier. No question you are correct and the hole between the guard and the lock molding is for the cross pin.

I still am not convinced this guard was made for this rifle. Maybe re-used from another gun.
Dennis

[JCKelly]

The grease hole was drilled with a bit having a point in the center. Tool Collector Guys know (NOT me) when this point began to be used. Earlier bits had no center point. Gives some idea of stock age. Obviously, I know no terminology here but 1000 years ago did know something about drill bits.
If that trigger guard was replaced it was at least a hand forged iron one, contemporary with use of this mountain rifle.

Yeah, I like it.

[rich pierce]

Mr. Kelly, there was a recent discussion of drill marks in patchbox cavities. No hard dates given but interesting. 
http://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=44686.msg438400#msg438400

Based on the buttstock styling and narrowness of the buttstock I'd say its unlikely to be much earlier than 1800. If the flintlock is original and was new-ish when the gun was built, it seems not later than 1820. But parts get shuffled around and I'm no expert on originals like this one.  I bet if it had a buttplate there would be a lot more curvature in the buttplate than we see here.

[mbriggs]

Just to keep the facts and schools correct I would like to add a couple of comments.  Some people have referred to this rifle as being a mountain rifle. Mike Brooks suggested that it might be from the Early Deep River School.  From looking at the photos, I agree with Mike.  The gunsmiths who worked in the Early Deep River School lived in three counties in Piedmont North Carolina.  Guilford, Randolph, and Alamance.  None of those are in or near the mountains.

There are a number of surviving Piedmont North Carolina Longrifles from the Early Deep River School and the Bear Creek School that are iron mounted.  Many people who see an iron mounted rifle immediately think it is a mountain rifle, but it is not always so.

In judging if a rifle is from the Deep River School or is a mountain rifle I always look for incised carved lines along the butt stock. 
[The rifle in this post has two of them.] The lines will often be repeated on the fore-stock. [This is the case with this rifle to.]

Most mountain rifles I have owned or studied have no incised carved lines on the butt stock, comb, or fore-stock.  There could be an exception to this somewhere, but it is generally correct.

Over the years I have seen several Deep River School poor boy rifles like this one and it is great to see it still in the family and appreciated.

Michael         

[mountainman70]

Bro Briggs, I like what you say about this rifle.Now, a bit of personal clarification re mountain Rifle.
Up here in the hills of WVa,long time ago the old timers had a generic term for most all long rifles,be they fancy brass mtd,or plain ol Iron . That term was,and still is in some of us hillbilly circles,Mountain Rifle. This was before the westward expansion.

Many of my ancestors are from the Piedmont region,and you are right about what you said. Heck,man, I would like to have this sweet survivor myself. I don't care if it has been somewhat modified,just the fact that it still IS.
 Have a goodun,all y'all!!! Ol Dave in the Hills o Wes Virginny