Need some help with this LWP (?) signed FL rifle

[Chris_B]

I recently won this (reconverted) flintlock rifle at Cowan´s.
It has a signature on the barrel that seems to be L*W*P*, but it is only lightly engraved,
not sure if it is readable in the photo.
I have no idea who made it, nore am I sure about the school (Upper Susquehanna?)
Overall length: 52,5"
Barrel length: 38,3" The barrel may have been shortened, but you cannot tell that by the forestock molding
that does not end apruptely but terminates in C-scrolls right before the nosecap.
Cal: appr. 0,41
The wrist is pretty thick (high).
The inlaid fish and stars in the forestock are no escutcheons for the barrel keys which are placed about 1/2" in front of them.

What do you think about my interesting new find? 
 

[Chris_B]

Some more details:

[louieparker]

Chris I can't tell you who made it..But I would compare the initials to makers around Hampshire County West Va.  LP

[smart dog]

Hi,
I may be way off base but the stock looks to be modern with a mixture of old and new parts?  Perhaps a restock or it has had extensive restoration?

dave

[Dennis Glazener]

Yep Louie beat me to it. Definately Hampshire county VA/WVa (prior to June 1863 it was in VA, after that in the new states of West VA)

Homerifle or Avlrc can probably give you info on the maker.
Meanwhile look through this blog archives and you may be able to find info on the maker http://hampshirecountylongrifles.blogspot.com/p/welcome.html
Dennis

[Dave B]

Congratulations on your new find. I like it very much. The extra cheek side box is not some thing we see a lot of. I have no clue as to the maker. The thick appearance of the inlay may be the normal wood shrinkage and typical for an original. Most inlays are not very thick at all. Here is a couple shots of the inlay of a tang surround and simple wrist oval inlet with out the inlay. The metal on the surround is only .020 thick. The photo is poor but kind of gives you an Idea about the thickness.

[Chris_B]

Hampshire Co., (West) , Virginia, now, that is great!
A wonderful addition to my Sheetz and Shane rifles.

Unfortunately I lack the experience, otherwise I should have come up with that conclusion myself....
Dennis, thank you for the link, I already visited that site before, guess I will have to again.

As for the old/new part theory: Is I said, I lack the experience, but the feeling is that the parts belonged together
from the start.

[smart dog]

Hi Chris and others,
Please look at the rear ramrod thimble and then go to https://www.trackofthewolf.com/Categories/PartDetail.aspx/824/4/RP-TC-O

dave

[Mike Brooks]

Hampshire Co., (West) , Virginia, now, that is great!
A wonderful addition to my Sheetz and Shane rifles.

Unfortunately I lack the experience, otherwise I should have come up with that conclusion myself....
Dennis, thank you for the link, I already visited that site before, guess I will have to again.

As for the old/new part theory: Is I said, I lack the experience, but the feeling is that the parts belonged together
from the start.

That will fit in well with your Sheetz guns. They only inlays That raise an eyebrow for me are the hunter's stars all over the place. They sure  look like those you can by from modern commercial ML gun parts suppliers. I just don't recall them being used in that manner in Hampshire Co......maybe/probably I'm wrong, I don't know. Could be somebody fancied it up a bit in the last 50 or 60 years  to get a few more bucks for it, who knows....
 Anyway, It's a nice gun. I'd be proud to own it myself.

[Avlrc]

 As other says fancied up a bit.  A lot of Hampshire County parts, but some later additions, such as , carving , star, fish.  That  capbox is very common on Hampshire County percussions rifles, not needed on a flint.    I don't recognize the signature, either an unknow maker to  Hampshire County collectors or a replaced barrel.  Here is a list of the makers in HC that we know.  Thanks for sharing. ( would like to see a better pic of sig)


https://hampshirecountylongrifles.blogspot.com/search?q=hampshire+county+gunsmith+list

[Avlrc]

Is it possible that the signature is J W R?  See photo second from bottom in this blog.
https://hampshirecountylongrifles.blogspot.com/search?q=rinehart

[homerifle]

As other says fancied up a bit.  A lot of Hampshire County parts, but some later additions, such as , carving , star, fish.  That  capbox is very common on Hampshire County percussions rifles, not needed on a flint.    I don't recognize the signature, either an unknow maker to  Hampshire County collectors or a replaced barrel.  Here is a list of the makers in HC that we know.  Thanks for sharing. ( would like to see a better pic of sig)


https://hampshirecountylongrifles.blogspot.com/search?q=hampshire+county+gunsmith+list

I would agree with everything that Avlrc  has mentioned.  Spot on!

[Chris_B]

Is it possible that the signature is J W R?  See photo second from bottom in this blog.
https://hampshirecountylongrifles.blogspot.com/search?q=rinehart

The signature ist pretty illegible, I was not able to take a pic by what you could identify it better....
Cannot see it exactly myself, but it is quite possible that it is J*W*R*.

Since the rifle is fancied up , do you think maybe it was not reconverted but converted to flintlock and has originally
been made with a caplock, too?

 

[Chris_B]

Hi Chris and others,
Please look at the rear ramrod thimble and then go to https://www.trackofthewolf.com/Categories/PartDetail.aspx/824/4/RP-TC-O

dave

Dave, you´re right, these thimbles resemble that on my rifle a lot...
Maybe someone fancied them up, too, or maybe the "track of the wolf-guys" used old ones as a sample?

[Avlrc]

Is it possible that the signature is J W R?  See photo second from bottom in this blog.
https://hampshirecountylongrifles.blogspot.com/search?q=rinehart

The signature ist pretty illegible, I was not able to take a pic by what you could identify it better....
Cannot see it exactly myself, but it is quite possible that it is J*W*R*.

Since the rifle is fancied up , do you think maybe it was not reconverted but converted to flintlock and has originally
been made with a caplock, too?

Exactly. since antique  flintlocks are more desirable, some modern day gunsmith tinkerer , put the flint on it to grab attention & make a lil profit.  Still a nice piece, I have a couple rifles that had the same treatment.  Not worth converting them back IMO.  Unless you could find a reasonable priced  original percussion lock to fit, without whittling.

[smart dog]

Hi,
I suspect the incised carving, rear pipe, "John Armstrong" side plate, stars, and current finish are all later than the 1980s.   

dave

[Mike Brooks]

Well, I guess I might be a little naïve, but the only things that bother me on this gun are the hunter's stars and the conversion to flint. I believe the rest is legit as it all goes with Huntington guns I have seen.

[Chris_B]

Well, I guess I might be a little naïve, but the only things that bother me on this gun are the hunter's stars and the conversion to flint. I believe the rest is legit as it all goes with Huntington guns I have seen.

I might be a little naive, too, but I can gladly accept that.
Dave might be right, but even if so, it´s a nice gun that I like a lot.

[Nordnecker]

This gun looks familiar to me. Now that Rinehart has come up I know why. A friend has a Rinehart gun I studied some years ago. The patchbox and cap box look just like the ones on his gun. The toe plate looks right, too. However, The pipes, muzzle cap and inlays don't.
His Rinehart has 5 1/4" drop at heel and the trigger bow has a front finger spur. The triggers on yours look like his. His is percussion and only has a single lock bolt with an escutcheon. There is no insiced carving on his.

[Chris_B]

So obviously what I have is a Rinehart rifle that has been modified sometime .
Even if it is far from perfect, as I said; I like that rifle, even more, the more I know about it.

Thank you all for helping me out here!
 

[smart dog]

Hi Chris,
I looked at some of the rifles shown in the Hampshire County blog site and now believe the carving is original.  It just looks like the lines are fresh with no buildup of crud in them but that probably is because I only have the photos to go on.  It is a nice rifle and a nice addition to your collection. 

dave 

[Brent English]

The pipes look like those made by Cash Mfg. in Waunakee, WI. I used to work there and and made many. That style has been in production for about 50 years. I visited  there last week and they’re still going strong. TOF, Dixie and others sell them. That’s probably where the newer inlays came from too. You see their parts on a lot of home built guns and some restorations. Some pro builders use them too, often with modifications. I agree with others this gun has been “enhanced”. The carving is nice but to crisp. Nice gun though. Like others have said, I’d be happy to own it.

[Chris_B]

The carving may be fresh (looks so, indeed, if not as much as in the pictures),
but it somehow resembles that of my Sheetz rifle and so I guess it fits pretty well
for a Hamphire Co. gun

[Mike Brooks]

I'm lost on the pipes, I agree they look like ted Cash pipes, but somebody sure put a lot of effort into putting some convincing wear on them.
Now I'm wondering if the upper forestock is a replacement...an thoughts? Wood certainly looks different than the buttstock....Maybe that's why all those inlays and pipes aren't quite right.

[jdm]

Mike, I thought about that too. If  The rear entry pipe was replacement . Why? There would be some kind of damage and signs there of .  I can't see from the pictures any lines or dark spots where the fore end was replaced.   I have seen other rifles from this area that haven't had much wear. probably because they are a little later gun.