Rupp questions

[SHARPS4953]

Ive built several long rifles and Hawkens and try to be historically accurate when I can but I'm building my 1st Herman Rupp rifle. Its iron mounted. I purchased the parts set from muzzldrs builders supply and am very happy with the quality. I have a couple questions. Would a poured muzzle cap be appropriate for this style of rifle?...Im hearing this is actually a new "Woodberry" adornment not really used much on originals. I do like the look though. 2nd is the patchbox...were sliding wooded box lids used much on Rupp guns?

Thanks Scott F

[David Rase]

The short answer is no and no. 
David

[Mike Lyons]

What caliber rifle are you making?  I did the MBS Rupp kit and it needs some stock adjustments to be comfortable to shoot.   

[Ed Wenger]

Hi Scott..., Mr. Rupp made some beautiful rifles, that’s for sure, but I don’t think you’ll find many that utilized steel furniture.  If historical accuracy is a consideration for this rifle, you might want to think about using brass furniture.  I understand completely if you like the steel “look”, just passing it along...  On that same note, no, a poured muzzle cap really wouldn’t be appropriate for this style of rifle.  Also, a metal patch box would probably be more appropriate.  Good luck and keep us posted on your rifle progress!  Best,


            Ed

[rich pierce]

Unsolicited advice: Study real Rupps.  Don’t rely on what some folks said on some chat forums. Most of all don’t rely on what Track or somebody else sells as “Rupp” parts.  Buy books and CDs if you have interest in originals.

In the end if you use steel mounts and a non traditional nosecap please call it a Woodbury style gun, not a Rupp. 

[David Rase]

In the end if you use steel mounts and a non traditional nosecap please call it a Woodbury style gun, not a Rupp.

Or start your own new school, "Ruppbury" 
David

[Joey R]

Check out Hansen's book "An Intimate Look At The American Longrifle It's Art And Evolution". It has Rupp rifles illustrated in color. Great book.

[Mike Lyons]

Scott,  I stuck with the kits architecture and it’s not correct. Mines a .50 and it will nearly break your cheek bone if you try to snug up to it. You’ll need to pay close attention to getting the forearm rounded.   The diamond wrist is doable but the stock needs a ton of attention.  Pay attention to originals drop at the comb.  The kit has a massive curve on the comb unlike originals.  I would toss the buttplate that came with the kit and get a better example from Mike Brooks.  The web between the barrel channel and ramrod is thick.  What helped me the most with my second Lehigh from a plank was handling a few fine examples from reputable gun makers.  It’s hard to get all the details of a Lehigh rifle from flat pictures and shadows. The KRA disk has some fine shots of originals and the “Lehigh Jedi” Allen Martin has good reference shots all over this site and on the web.  I’ll add some pictures of mine to this post as soon as I can get the server to connect.

Mike

[deepcreekdale]

I second Joey's comment on Hansen's book. I have built 2 Rupps, unfortunately before I had that book. I made the "Marge Simpson" or "Man in a Liberty Hat" inlay out of brass on both of mine, instead of silver like the book shows.  . I also second Rich;'s comments. Research, Research Research before you buy any parts for a documentary copy. If you want to just make a nice gun loosely based on one that you like with some features you find attractive, go for it and don't listen to the critics. Personally, I am not a fan of pewter nose caps unless I am making a much later (1850's or so) half stock.

[blienemann]

A long time Colorado collector had a Rupp style rifle - don't remember if it was signed but was a very fine rifle of that school with iron mounts - quite a surprise.  I think Jack Brooks had it for a while.  Never say never, iron mounts OK but you still want to study the architecture and details as others have suggested.  Bob

[SHARPS4953]

thanks for all the advice, unfortunately I inletted post of the iron mount and will probably stick with them. I was originally going for a Last of the Mohicans movie rifle clone but then what lil research I did put that rifle in the wrong time frame.... I think i'll forgo the wooden box lid and and pewter cap  go with metal.
Scott   

[Eric Kettenburg]

There's nothing wrong with a wooden lid.  Wood lids in the area of old Northampton Co. - Lehigh Co. - eastern Berks Co. - held on into the 1810-1820 period, even on more decorated rifles with carving.

I would seriously recommend getting the KRA Lehigh CD if you are interested in this area.  Also the KRA 'best of show' CD has detailed shots of probably the finest Allentown rifle of all, a John Moll (who I'm sure trained Herman Rupp) that is believed to have been made for Isaac Greenleaf.  Incredible rifle.

[D. Taylor Sapergia]

Creating a Rupp rifle that is believable is not easy, and it is unlikely that any precarved stock will make you happy.  Very thorough and careful study of the photographs in several books will take you so far, but understanding what you're seeing is necessary to take it to fruition.  I'm currently building a Herman Rupp rifle based on Rupp's 1793 and 1809 rifles, pictured in "An Intimate Look and the Amercian Longrifle, It's Art and Evolution" by Hansen, Shumway's "Rifles of Colonial America" Vol. I, and Lindsay's "The Kentucky Rifle.  These rifles are also pictured in Johnston's "Kentucky Rifles and Pistols 1750 - 1850".  But the first work I mentioned is by far the best, followed by Shumway's classic work.  Another great source is the contemporary work of Allen Martin.  His web site has a couple of dandies. 
This is my fourth Rupp effort, and I am in a constant battle with myself over correct architecture.  Anyway, here's a couple of pics of where I am currently on this fun build.

[Mike Lyons]

That is a dandy Taylor. 

[SHARPS4953]

Taylor, thats a sweet build for sure.  Looks like im stuck with my pre-carv so I gotta make do. I've taken all the advice and ordered a couple KRA cd's.  I live in Maryland and other then the Balto arms show i'm not sure were I can examine any in person. Maybe my next one.

[D. Taylor Sapergia]

Mr. Sharps:  you can make the precarved stock work, but you will likely have to remove a lot of wood to get "there".

Here's my advice:  often precarves have an exaggerated step along the lower butt stock line.  The originals achieve more of the look by leaving the lower edge of the stock square until it arrives at the back end of the trigger guard, where the apparent step begins.  Then the wrist is rounded ahead of that accentuating the appearance of a stepped wrist.  The same goes for Jacob Kuntz work.

Second, when the butt stock is finished, it will have a swamp along the sides from the butt plate forward, flaring slightly as one approaches the lock panels.  Lay a straight edge along your stock as it is now, and see if there is a swamp in the stock.  If not, make it so, No. 1.

Third, the wrist drops down immediately behind the barrel, not at the end of the tang.  In fact Rupp filed off some of the back end of the barrel of 1793 to achieve that look.  the top line of the wrist is a very gentle curve, terminating at the transition to the comb.
 
Fourth:  the comb line is a gentle arc, much less so than the to line to the trigger.

Fifth, and arguably the most important:  your web between the barrel and the rod hole is likely around 3/16" - 1/4".  Set the barrel deeper into the wood, leaving only about 1/8" of a web.  This of course depends on how much wood you have below the lock and through the wrist vertically.  You will likely have to notch the barrel for the forward screw to pass, but that's how you get that ultra skinny rifle through the lock section.  The lock gets mounted above centre on the side flat of the barrel.

Sixth:  The cheek piece is only about 2 1/2" long along the bottom edge.  I have to shorten up the one on the piece I'm working on now, and I've already done it twice.  Otherwise, the carving behind the cheek piece gets scrunched.

Seventh:  reduce the wood along the barrel, especially at the breech end to way less than half of the side flat.

There's more naturally, and if I'm out of line, I hope others like Eric K., Eric V.,and Allen M will jump on this.  I'd love to hear from Mark W. too, if he's still posting here.

[Tim Crosby]

In the end if you use steel mounts and a non traditional nosecap please call it a Woodbury style gun, not a Rupp.

Or start your own new school, "Ruppbury" 
David

 LMAO!

  Tim

[flehto]

Hi....I've avoided building a Rupp again because my 2nd build was a generic, plank built   Lehigh which really "socked" the cheek. So I concentrated on mainly Shuler  Bucks County LRs which also have a curved comb line and toe line but aren't painful to shoot. To me, the all important factor w/ any build  is if it is comfortable to shoot....that's why the Lancaster style's buttstock design {English} persisted into the modern age.

A Rupp is surely a beautiful LR w/ it's unique  design but if  it turns out to be a cheek slapper. …then what?......Fred

[Stophel]

Too many people try to put WAY too much curve, and WAY too much drop in the butt and in the wrist.  Granted, there are original Lehigh guns that hook down pretty bad, but not generally the Moll/Rupp variety.  These tend to have fairly level combs, and gentle curves.  The main place where people begin to go wrong is the wrist (not that I'm saying I've got it all together!).  They want to turn it down way too much.  Look closely at the 1793 Rupp gun.. it has VERY LITTLE downturn in the wrist... it's pretty straight back.  This brings the butt up and levels it out.  Few seem to have a handle on that.  I can say that the straight wrist is somewhat odd at first, and you think your thumb is going to block the view of your sights, but you can get used to it after a while, and it's no problem... certainly better than a bruised cheekbone.




This gun is a very natural pointer, and is very comfortable to shoot.  And it's not even as straight and level as the Rupp gun is.  The wrist took me a while to get used to, but the cheek is great.  Of course, I'm a cheekpiece fanatic, and I will work on one until it is perfect.  I'll also fire the gun before it's finished to make sure it's all good.  I have had to rework one before.  Just a small amount of wood had to be removed to make an uncomfortable kicker into a sweet shooter.

[Hungry Horse]

 In my experience, its pretty hard to get these guns to shoot comfortably in calibers much above .45. I did shoot a fifty once that was pretty good, but it was a 1 in 48” twist, and shot great with light charges.

  Hungry Horse

[smallpatch]

I've got a .54 by Mr Allen Martin that shoots like a dream.  It's all about the architecture. Based on an original Rupp rifle, no cheek slap here.

[Joe S]

I have a .54 Lehigh that is very close to Rupp's profile. No problems shooting standing or shooting off the bench. I would be cautious about generalizing about shooting Lehigh stocks. Some are cheek slappers, some aren't.

My standard load is 90 grains of 2F Goex, or 80 grains of 1 1/2 Swiss. Comfortable to shoot, and based on field tests, this load will penetrate a deer the long way at 85 yards.

[RockLock92]

Check out this video. It’s based off a Kuntz rifle, but it’s the same school and close time frame of a rupp rifle. It was very helpful for seeing all the subtleties of a Lehigh rifle shape. Unlike still photographs you can see the details of the wrist and stock as it gets twisted and moved around during the video. I hope it helps you as much as it did for my rifle!

[SHARPS4953]

Great video thanks!

[Daryl]

I REALLY like that Carolina gun.