Making a long gun ... ?

[rfd]

A kit muzzleloader long gun, like a kit model plane, is an assembly, not a build.  This is not a bad thing, it is what it is.  Not everyone has the skills, and/or tools, and/or time for such a venture.  I'll add - there appear to be "levels" of kits, some are literally screwdriver built, others require varied levels of skill, tools and time.

To build (or "make") a long gun depends on one's definition of those words, particularly the word "make".  In terms of a long gun build, will all the components be created from sourced raw materials?  Where does one draw the line at "raw materials"?  Will it still be a "made muzzleloader" if one purchases one or more pre-made: barrel, lock, double set trigger, castings for butt plate and trigger guard and nose?  If one has a plank of wood for the gun stock, will the completed stock be an equally "made" stock no matter if a CNC machine was used or manual chisels, rasps, and drill?  Are there levels or categories of "made" guns?   

What is considered to "make a muzzleloader"?

     

[flehto]

I dunno.....Fred

[retired fella]

Presuming the builder/assembler is a nubie and is proud of his/her accomplishment and shoots his/her pride and joy which furthers our sport who cares.  Who knows on the next build and as you know there will be one he/she might say I can put a lock kit together, I can make rr pipes, I can inlet a lock or a trigger, etc. 
I am not slighting you true builders in the least.  There is more talent on this forum than I can ever hope to accomplish, but you got to start somewhere.

[Eric Krewson]

I have built from a plank and from a precarve, the precarve took more work to finish than the plank build. Neither were anywhere close to being just "assembly".

[mikeyfirelock]

Well,  I’ll put an opinion in here, too.   If I read history correctly, many of the old time builders did not fabricate the whole gun.  They bought barrels from barrel mills if there was one locally, and locks which were imported from England, and probably some castings from suppliers if they were close to a larger city.
  If I have bought a barrel and lock, and rough castings, (and maybe some smaller pieces.) and worked from a plank and fabricated the rest,  and put them together and finished it to the point it’s respectable and shootable then I feel comfortable saying that I “built” the gun. 

[David Rase]

I have always felt that gun builders fall into two categories, gun makers and gunstockers.  Gun makers are the ones that hand make many of their own parts for their gun and gunstockers assemble store bought components.
David

[rich pierce]

Colonial Williamsburg’s amazing recovery and practice of building everything has led to a lot of folks thinking that the masters of American longrifle making did the same.  Some probably could forge a barrel and lock, but that was not common practice.  Casting one’s own buttplates and guards was probably more common, and for later iron mounted rifles, forging the mounts was part of the build.  Building from a blank with a bought barrel and lock is the same as probably 75% or more of early American rifles.  Later on, in the percussion period, very few American builders made their own locks and the vast majority of small shops used bought barrels.

[Jeff Durnell]

This is the same sort of thing I've seen posed to bow makers. If you assemble a recurve or longbow with bought parts and plans from a supplier, are you a bowyer? How about if you design your own and gather the wood and grind your own lams? Or must we cut down trees and make wooden selfbows with hand tools? Are you a 'real bowyer' then?

I figure, who cares.. Like you said, there are levels. It's a process, a journey, we all start at different times and places on the trail, and some go farther than others. Some want more challenge, or want to develop their skills to greater degrees, and folks often have different goals and values within the same craft. Hand tools, power tools, bought or home forged, it's all good. I like it all and respect each for what it is. In the end the only person your 'hows and whys' should really matter to, is you.

[sqrldog]

We know that gunsmiths in the past bought at least some of their barrels,locks, hardware, and wood  from other places. They also used apprentices to do a lot of the grunt labor in letting barrels, fitting and filing hardware etc. So doe this mean that gunsmiths like J.P. Beck, Jacob Dickert, and others  having help in their shops and using bought parts not be considered gun builders. I admire people that can build every part of a long rifle. They are true craftsman. I suspect back in the day few gun builders worked alone and made every part on the rifles coming out of their shop.

[Bigmon]

HAve built them from several manufacturers kits as well as planks from basically scratch.  All were far more than the term "assembly" would suggest,
Right now I am doing my first Kibler kit.  It is very close to "assembly" but still there are some things that are a lot more than "snap together".  As an example, the butt plate took me maybe an hour instead of a week, and is the best fit I have ever done, what little I had to do.  Still the opportunity is there to mess it up if not careful.
To each his own.  We are all of different skills and tastes, yet it seems the same addiction!

[Mike Brooks]

I have always called my self a "Gunstocker" or "Gunmaker". I try to void making parts if can, but will make mounts if I have too. I refuse to make barrels or locks, just not even remotely interested in that sort of thing. So yes, I do make long  guns, they certainly don't make themselves.

[Mr. Bubbles]

How about; if you did not sign the barrel flat, could people recognize the finished piece as your work when viewed with others of a similar style?

[Mike Brooks]

How about; if you did not sign the barrel flat, could people recognize the finished piece as your work when viewed with others of a similar style?

Yes, I believe so. I can recognize many people's work with out seeing a signature, Some of it from across the room. As I think on it a bit I think I could come up with a pretty long list.

[rfd]

an investarms "screwdriver" trad muzzleloader kit literally can be assembled and ready to load and fire with a screwdriver and nought else.  on the other end of the spectrum is fully handmade flintlock long gun (from raw components) in the colonial williamsburg gun shop.

are there degrees or levels of "gun builder/gun maker" between the above bookends?  if so, where or should any of this matter?

[JBJ]

I recall seeing adds by John Bivens years ago and he was a self-described "gunstocker".
J.B.

[Mr. Bubbles]

How about; if you did not sign the barrel flat, could people recognize the finished piece as your work when viewed with others of a similar style?

Yes, I believe so. I can recognize many people's work with out seeing a signature, Some of it from across the room. As I think on it a bit I think I could come up with a pretty long list.

Those would be gun makers then.  They are sought after for what THEY can do, not just a mere commodity that is produced.

[oldtravler61]

  Here we go again...! This is a never ending question. When I first got on here 8 year's ago. Really it's up to the maker of the firearm. How much do you want to hand make ?
  Great if you can forge or cut a barrel out of steel. Make all the lock parts. Grow your own stock wood. Cast or forge your own butt plates, trigger guards.  But in reality how many can do that ? What you call yourself is your business. 
   Does it really matter ? I've seen personally a lot of the fine work members here have made. To me they should take pride in calling themselves gun builders.   It's just not picking to me..  Oldtravler

[Stophel]

I despise the word "build".  It has become a major peeve of mine.  It is everywhere.  "build quality", "my next build", "I'm building a gun", build, build, build....... with everyone and their brother "building" AR-15's, slapping parts together like Legos.... drives me up a wall.  I haven't made a rifle in a while now, but when I do I MAKE them, I durn sure don't "build" them!   

It's funny how almost no one, even the most capable, wants to call themselves a "gunsmith" these days....

[J.E. Moore]

I despise the word "build".  It has become a major peeve of mine.  It is everywhere.  "build quality", "my next build", "I'm building a gun", build, build, build....... with everyone and their brother "building" AR-15's, slapping parts together like Legos.... drives me up a wall.  I haven't made a rifle in a while now, but when I do I MAKE them, I durn sure don't "build" them!   

It's funny how almost no one, even the most capable, wants to call themselves a "gunsmith" these days....

And for me the usage of the word "platform".

[Mike Brooks]

I despise the word "build".  It has become a major peeve of mine.  It is everywhere.  "build quality", "my next build", "I'm building a gun", build, build, build....... with everyone and their brother "building" AR-15's, slapping parts together like Legos.... drives me up a wall.  I haven't made a rifle in a while now, but when I do I MAKE them, I durn sure don't "build" them!   

It's funny how almost no one, even the most capable, wants to call themselves a "gunsmith" these days....

Ditto, I hate the term "build" as well. Never heard of it till I started on this forum.

[redheart]

Years ago I ran across a description of what skills a German apprentice had to master to become a certified Gunsmith. I have no clue now where I saw it , but I do remember being in awe of the skills that were required and deciding to choose another career. I guess that in colonial times you'd have to be a competent blacksmith, machinist and woodworker and perhaps a Master would also have to be competent in engraving, decorative wood carving skill and perhaps even casting/foundry skills. I think the term "builder"
 describes a person like me pretty well. A person that can assemble a basic undecorated muzzleloader out of parts that other people have made and whittle out a stock from a block. It doesn't seem to fit as well for those of you who are master machinists, engravers, carvers and such.

[Mike Lyons]

I despise the word "build".  It has become a major peeve of mine.  It is everywhere.  "build quality", "my next build", "I'm building a gun", build, build, build....... with everyone and their brother "building" AR-15's, slapping parts together like Legos.... drives me up a wall.  I haven't made a rifle in a while now, but when I do I MAKE them, I durn sure don't "build" them!   

It's funny how almost no one, even the most capable, wants to call themselves a "gunsmith" these days....

That’s good info to have.  I haven’t been around enough to know the lingo.   It reminds me of people calling a magazine a clip.  It sends shrills down my spine.  Ughhh it’s a freakin magazine!!!

[M. E. Pering]

Well, I for one consider myself a Gunsmith.  A Gunsmith is someone who can work on all aspect of a gun.  I do that with every gun I make.  I have repaired a few muzzle loaders, and even more modern guns.  I would wager that most professional gunsmiths today have not concerned themselves with muzzle loader construction, though they are generally proficient in repairing them.

I make my own ramrod pipes.  I make my own triggers and trigger mounts.  Every lock I have ever touched I have had to tune or modify or both.  Even a Chambers lock, which is a great lock off-the-shelf can benefit from a bit of fine tuning.  I have had to work on every barrel I have ever touched in constructing a muzzle loader.  I make my own sites, and I make my own patch boxes.  And, I am soon to begin casting my own trigger guards and butt plates.  In other words, there is no part of a muzzle loader that I don't either modify or build.

Does that make me a gun stocker?  Does that make me a gun builder?  Does that make me a gun maker?  I think it makes me all of these things, but those terms really are limiting in the scope of what I actually do.  A Gunsmith takes a group of parts and puts them together as a functionally and aesthetically congruous tool.  Some of the ancient gunsmiths did not make their own locks or barrels, and we still call them Gunsmiths.  Most Locksmiths today don't make their own locks, yet they are called locksmiths.

I take a group of parts, made by me or not, and attempt to put them together as a functionally and aesthetically congruous tool, and I would wager that many others here who have answered this question actually do this too.  But we are also a group of artists.  Back in the day, a gunsmith was not usually considered an artist.  Even if you are making the most simple gun that is based on a school or style, you are practicing an art in the form of the gun.

Matt

[Bill Raby]

I despise the word "build".  It has become a major peeve of mine.  It is everywhere.  "build quality", "my next build", "I'm building a gun", build, build, build....... with everyone and their brother "building" AR-15's, slapping parts together like Legos.... drives me up a wall.  I haven't made a rifle in a while now, but when I do I MAKE them, I durn sure don't "build" them!   

It's funny how almost no one, even the most capable, wants to call themselves a "gunsmith" these days....

I call it "building a gun" or "my next built" because I can't think of anything else to call it.

[thecapgunkid]

This strikes me as one of those posts where we'd need a convention so we could all get into the same room.
When I walked into Dixons on a lark after a cowboy action match and walked out with a reborn interest in the 18th century, and when Anne and I moved down here to south central PA., I had no idea of the depth and scope the growing interest and fascination would call for.

Compare the Gunsmith of Williamsburg video with Wallace Gussler, William DeVane and Good-Night-David Brinkley with all the snippets I used to review while writing A Season Of Purpose where it was so obvious that Arsenals waited for the lowest bidding gunmakers to assemble arms in time of war and this becomes an ongoing topic.

Dover Books published  one entitles "The Colonial Craftsman"  by Carl Bridenbaugh.  After reading it several years ago, I started to dig through his footnotes for lack of a bibliography.  There's no end to this topic once the 18th Century Skilled worker is put into a context of making money.

Probably the core issue here is what did  did these guys do to  feed their families?