I don’t generally comment on new rifles as I don’t build them, but just collect old ones instead.
So would like to say I really like the layout and execution of you carving and the general workmanship on your rifle, as it’s obvious that you’ve put a tremendous amount of time and effort into it.
I agree with the other posts congratulating you on the job, but also agree with Don with his helpful hints for future rifles. Along that line, I’d like to point out a few other things that you might want to consider in the future.
The front sight. For some reason it seems the norm to perch a gigantic front sight on rifles today. Maybe this is leaving excess to be filed down during sighting in, but on originals the front sight is rarely more than about 1/8” tall.
The rear sight is generally more or less positioned atop the ramrod entry pipe area, as opposed to far to the rear where you’ve put yours. Although, perhaps this rearward positioning is for your eyesight?
Don has pointed out that the lock panel could be slimmed down some, and I’ll extend that thought to include the entire forearm, as it just looks to tall, top to bottom, to me. I think lowering the top line of the forearm down a bit, a 1/16” or so, to show more barrel, then taking a bit off the bottom of the forearm would make a slimmer and more pleasing forearm, and would also slim the top and bottom of the lock panel as well. The amount I’d suggest trimming the bottom of the forearm is about the amount of space you have between the muzzle cap and the ramrod brass tip. I realize this might create interference with the forward lock bolt, and thin wood on the rear part of the forearm, but the ol’ guys did it and so can you.
(As a note, perhaps the forearm top line is centered at midline of the barrel flat, which seems to be some sort of rule, but I’m not sure that rule should be followed without variance, in regards to creating a slim forearm.)
Don has already pointed to the trigger, and I’ll just suggest that making a trigger from a piece of mild steel flatbar is really a pretty easy task, and would delete that ‘out of the bag’ look.
And the same for the frizzen; a little judicious grinding could make it look more at home and less out of the bag.
And Don doesn’t like the muzzle cap,(he’s old, what’s he know
) but Fordney and others did and they can look very nice on the appropriate rifle. Keep in mind the time period of the rifle you’re creating, as cap length, shape and decoration varied with time period and maker/school.
The last picture of the cheek side of the rifle really shows your exceptional workmanship, so please don’t take my comments as criticism of your work, but instead as thoughts for rifles down the road.
John
