English Fowler Standing Breech Questions

[Joe S]

I’d like to build a 1750-1760 ish English fowler, and I have a few questions.  I’ve searched the ALR archives, and found some useful text, but the photos that may have answered them have all suffered death by Photobucket. 

So, I’m interested in any photos of guns from this time frame.  I have Neil and Back, but their photos are pretty much limited to the lock area.  Internet searches show lots of 1780 and later guns, but not much earlier.

In the following photograph, how do I treat area 1?   It seems there are three possibilities:
1.   Leave as is
2.   File flush with the barrel flats
3.   Leave proud, but file a radius so that the breech blends into the barrel flats.

From the photos I have, it looks like all three methods may have been used, but I am not certain.

Area 2 is easier.  Most of the early guns seem to leave this proud.  So, I could:
1.   Leave proud and leave the edge square, as is.
2.   Leave proud, and radius the edge to blend with the barrel flats.

[Mike Brooks]

#1 is your best choice.

[Joe S.]

That really surprises me,If I was to bet I would have figured it would have been filed down to follow the barrel flats.Learn something new here every day.

[James Rogers]

Hang on and I will shoot you pics of a couplethora originals.... one is a Spanish pattern barrel like you are probably using.

[James Rogers]

free image hosting ebay

[Joe S]

Mike and James -  Thanks. Those pictures are most helpful.  All of the pictures I have are side views.

So, it looks like I'll leave the standing breech proud on the top three flats, but I think I'll cut them down some, maybe to about half the metal I now have.

One of the interesting things in the photos is the amount of flair that shows in the side flats.  My casting has some flair, but it's not that dramatic.  If I just lower the front edge, it will give me more flair, which I think should help the architecture.  If this doesn't sound right to you, please let me know.

Joe S - Later guns generally have the standing breech flush with the barrel flats.  They also tend to leave off the rear sighting groove.  Later here means somewhere after about 1770-1775.

[smart dog]

Hi,
James and Mike are bang on and Jame's photos are typical.  On the gun below, I tapered the shoulder down a bit closer to the barrel consistent with an original gun I own.  There still is a step but more subtle. My decision to do that was more about the profile of the hump I wanted rather than any function.



dave

[James Rogers]

And go ahead and bring the bottom of the groove close to level with the top flat of the barrel.

[Joe S]

James - Will do.  I'll bring the groove down flush or nearly so.  I'll post some pictures for comment later this winter when I started building.

Smart Dog - Thanks for the explanation.  It's hard for me to tell exactly what you'd done with the breech, with only side photos.  I suspect some of the early guns that look like they have a radius down to the barrel may actually have a small step as you indicated. 

[Joe S.]

Gave you plenty of metal to work with,please post some pics of your progress,looks to be a very elegant fowler when done.

[Ky-Flinter]

Hi Dave,

That's really a very nice looking piece.  What is the function of the small screw toward the rear of the side plate?  Trigger pivot pin?

-Ron

[smart dog]

Thanks Ron,
It just holds the sideplate on when the lock screws are removed.  The inletting is very shallow and the plate would fall out easily.  It is the common treatment on 18th century English fowlers.  That screw, universal use of captured barrel keys and hooked breeches on English sporting guns suggests to me that they usually removed the barrels when cleaning the guns. 

dave

[Goo]

Not to be a dissenter here but it looks to me like the only part that is "proud" on the originals is the top flat perhaps because of the rear sight groove. the other flats look flush in the pictures.

[Mike Brooks]

Not to be a dissenter here but it looks to me like the only part that is "proud" on the originals is the top flat perhaps because of the rear sight groove. the other flats look flush in the pictures.

Must be an optical illusion......all three top flats are higher than the barrel. I've handled lots of originals of this period.

[Goo]

Not to be a dissenter here but it looks to me like the only part that is "proud" on the originals is the top flat perhaps because of the rear sight groove. the other flats look flush in the pictures.

Must be an optical illusion......all three top flats are higher than the barrel. I've handled lots of originals of this period.

Yes your experience has me at a disadvantage. I looked at the pics again and you are correct the breech is higher on all the flats but only by a very slight amount on the side flats.  The ears of the groove are much higher on the pic of the originals than the side flats.  The pic that J.G. posted showed the side flats to be equal with top flat.    There seemed to be a difference in appearance in the pics of the originals and JG's pic.

[Daryl]

This is how Verner did it.

[Joe S]

That's very interesting Daryl.  The amount of relief that this gun shows is about what I have with my castings as is.

Perhaps more photos of other guns will get posted.

[Mike Brooks]

I didn't know Verner used Getz barrels...must be a late gun.....

[smart dog]

Jose,
The Verner is beautiful but not typical of English guns (remember he was of German or Swiss extraction). The photos supplied by James Rogers are your best guide and also keep in mind, the English makers did not fuss overly about this.  If they left a substantial shoulder on 3 flats, they did not really care that much.  During the 18th century, they also did not care that much how finely they carved lock panels or matched left with right.  However, that changed during the 19th century.

dave

[Joe S]

Thanks Dave.  The Verner is interesting, but did not strike me a being particularly close to the typical English style.

Here is a 1760 William Bailes posted very recently on ALR with a little different treatment of the standing breech http://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=43928.msg437713#msg437713



The gun I have in mind will be closer to Twigg, who, as far as I can tell finished the standing breech more like the pictures James posted.  Gun building season doesn't start for another couple of months, so I have plenty of time to do more research.

At this point, I think I will inlet the standing breech as is, and see what it looks like.  It would sure be nice to have a few originals to look at, but they're pretty scarce in my neck of the woods.

I have a couple of questions about your English guns.  Your guns seem to have a fairly high level of finish.  Do you sand them?  What would the appropriate finish for a high end English gun from 1750-1760?

[Daryl]

I didn't know Verner used Getz barrels...must be a late gun.....

LOL - very late.