Available trade gun stock drop opinions?

[Canuck Bob]

On another forum thread it makes reference to the changes in trade guns regarding slim early types and straighter blocky styles in the later early 1800's. It referenced a scanned document from Goodings book (link from hosting site).

https://ibb.co/Y0FpTpq

A few guns are listed and drop at heel DAH is 2 1/2" or less. I'm considering a Pecatonica carved blank at 2 5/8" DAH.

TOW plans are drawn from a 1816 Barnett listed with 3 3/4" DAH.  The pictures seem to confirm this.  Do kit owners find this to be accurate?

Given similar designs which geometry would be most comfortable for stout 20 gauge shooting?  The pitch would be designed right for both.

[B.Habermehl]

Although my type G was based on a profile taken from Reaves Goerings trade gun circa 1770 something. And has more drop than the northwest guns I find it comfortable. In 28 bore with shot or ball. It gets a bit cheeky with shot loads, due to the light weight and drop. For shooter comfort with shot perhaps the straighter north west pattern might be a bit better in 20 ga. I’m a bit recoil sensitive so maybe I’m splitting hairs. As popular as the basic stock patterns were I would think they are reasonably comfortable as we see plenty of them at the smooth bore shoots here in Pa. Most of the available barrel choices are a bit heavier than the originals so this will help comfort wise. The only way to get the correct barrel profiles is to get a custom barrel from Ed Rayl or one of the other custom barrel makers. BJH

[Mike Brooks]

The measurement of most concern is the drop at the front of the comb. Drop at the heal doesn't make much difference.

[B.Habermehl]

Mike, do you have a suggested range of measurement? My trade guns are all based on tracings of original work I’ve either made my self or got from blowing up pictures with my sons power point projector. BJH

[Mike Brooks]

1 1/2 to 1 5/8" works well.

[jerrywh]

I  don't disagree with Mike but when I made mine I built it with a 3 1/2" DAH.  I hate those straight stocked guns. I also gave it some cast off.

[mikeyfirelock]

If I understood Mr. Brooks post, the measurement he quoted was drop at comb, not heel. Is that correct?

[Daryl]

correct

[skullcap]

I would look  to do 3” to 3 1/2 in the heel with 1 1/2 or a bit more at the comb for sure or it will be in your cheek bone for sure.  Straighter it is , the more in the nose or cheek I’d feel     The late guns was straight cause you can get more stock out of narrow plank of wood. Just cheaper to build.     

[Mike Brooks]

I would look  to do 3” to 3 1/2 in the heel with 1 1/2 or a bit more at the comb for sure or it will be in your cheek bone for sure.  Straighter it is , the more in the nose or cheek I’d feel     The late guns was straight cause you can get more stock out of narrow plank of wood. Just cheaper to build.   

I have found just the opposite. the stock dimensions you mention will bust you good.  The more parallel the top of the comb is to the center line of the bore the less felt recoil you will have. My typical drop I use is 1 1/2 to 1 5/8" at the comb and 2 1/2" to 2 3/4" at the heal. Except for lehighs .....

[rich pierce]

Mike, on a rifle with sights are you measuring drop from the barrel or sight line? Or am I over-thinking things?

[Mtn Meek]

On another forum thread it makes reference to the changes in trade guns regarding slim early types and straighter blocky styles in the later early 1800's. It referenced a scanned document from Goodings book (link from hosting site).



A few guns are listed and drop at heel DAH is 2 1/2" or less. I'm considering a Pecatonica carved blank at 2 5/8" DAH.

TOW plans are drawn from a 1816 Barnett listed with 3 3/4" DAH.  The pictures seem to confirm this.  Do kit owners find this to be accurate?

Given similar designs which geometry would be most comfortable for stout 20 gauge shooting?  The pitch would be designed right for both.

I believe the thread on the other forum you are referring to is one of my postings.  The thread was discussing North West trade guns.  I assume your question here also pertains to NW trade guns and not trade guns in general.

The issue of drop at heel depends on what type of shooting you plan on doing with your NW trade gun.

If you plan on using it as a shotgun, then you can comfortably shoot a gun with less drop because you're instinctively pointing the gun versus deliberately aiming the gun.

If you plan on shooting round balls in your NW trade gun, you may find that it's difficult to get your face low enough on the stock to sight down the barrel if the gun doesn't have sufficient drop.

Another issue is the top of the comb on many NW trade guns were flat with a square corner right where the cheek rests. That might have been the source of the Indians' complaint of the guns being "too square".

Some natives found their own solution to these two issues by modifying the comb of the stock like this one.



I have a NW trade gun that was made in 1979 by Michael Hayes with a DAH of only 2-1/4", and it is very uncomfortable to scrunch my face down low enough on the stock to aim down the barrel.


I have another NW trade gun made from a Danny Caywood kit that has a DAH of just under 3" and is easier to aim.  It also has a rear sight and little higher front sight that helps to raise the sight line.


On a NW trade gun without rear sights, drop of 3-1/2" might be more ideal for me for round ball shooting.

[Mike Brooks]

Mike, on a rifle with sights are you measuring drop from the barrel or sight line? Or am I over-thinking things?

When you hear me talk of drop 99% of the time I'm talking off the top  of the barrel. 'Ideally" when measuring drop with sights it should be measured from the top of the sights. It's just the way I lay out a pattern.

[Mike Brooks]

On another forum thread it makes reference to the changes in trade guns regarding slim early types and straighter blocky styles in the later early 1800's. It referenced a scanned document from Goodings book (link from hosting site).



A few guns are listed and drop at heel DAH is 2 1/2" or less. I'm considering a Pecatonica carved blank at 2 5/8" DAH.

TOW plans are drawn from a 1816 Barnett listed with 3 3/4" DAH.  The pictures seem to confirm this.  Do kit owners find this to be accurate?

Given similar designs which geometry would be most comfortable for stout 20 gauge shooting?  The pitch would be designed right for both.

I believe the thread on the other forum you are referring to is one of my postings.  The thread was discussing North West trade guns.  I assume your question here also pertains to NW trade guns and not trade guns in general.

The issue of drop at heel depends on what type of shooting you plan on doing with your NW trade gun.

If you plan on using it as a shotgun, then you can comfortably shoot a gun with less drop because you're instinctively pointing the gun versus deliberately aiming the gun.

If you plan on shooting round balls in your NW trade gun, you may find that it's difficult to get your face low enough on the stock to sight down the barrel if the gun doesn't have sufficient drop.

Another issue is the top of the comb on many NW trade guns were flat with a square corner right where the cheek rests. That might have been the source of the Indians' complaint of the guns being "too square".

Some natives found their own solution to these two issues by modifying the comb of the stock like this one.



I have a NW trade gun that was made in 1979 by Michael Hayes with a DAH of only 2-1/4", and it is very uncomfortable to scrunch my face down low enough on the stock to aim down the barrel.


I have another NW trade gun made from a Danny Caywood kit that has a DAH of just under 3" and is easier to aim.  It also has a rear sight and little higher front sight that helps to raise the sight line.


On a NW trade gun without rear sights, drop of 3-1/2" might be more ideal for me for round ball shooting.

All very nifty. But, if you have 3 1/2" at the heal and 1 1/4" at the comb it's going to bust your nose. The drop at the comb is the critical measurement. I just saw a gun posted on Fake Book that looks like it has a 1" drop on the comb (or less) I guarantee you it will be unshootable.

[Mtn Meek]

All very nifty. But, if you have 3 1/2" at the heal and 1 1/4" at the comb it's going to bust your nose. The drop at the comb is the critical measurement. I just saw a gun posted on Fake Book that looks like it has a 1" drop on the comb (or less) I guarantee you it will be unshootable.

I've got no argument with your point, Mike.  I would agree "The drop at the comb is the critical measurement."  But since the comb of a NW trade gun is a straight line, the drop at the heel will be proportional to the drop anywhere along the comb line.

I was just trying to address the OP's questions that were expressed in terms of "drop at heel" and that with a NW trade gun, the degree of drop (from where ever one chooses to measure it) can be dependent on the type of shooting the OP expected to be doing.

[Canuck Bob]

Phil that is the thread. I linked the thread and referenced you but got cold feet as I was unsure of this forum's ethics regarding that particular forum.

I'm interested in the HBC trade gun, most likely an early Barnett. My family homesteaded in Salt Prairie Alberta (High Prairie region) in the early 30's and did much business with the HBC posts in the north.  I remember back to the 50's and remember only Lee Enfields everywhere.

I want to build from a walnut blank or preferably a shaped blank with ramrod channel and hole done but no inletting for the lock or barrel.  Recoil is an issue as I grow wiser or just plain older.  I'm a natural borne rifleman so tackling a prb smoothbore challenge is my goal, no hunting or shot.

Mike's numbers are workable for a Pecatonica stock and he is like the old E. F. Hutton commercial for me!  When he talks I listen. I would like to thank such skilled smiths and shooters for all the honest well informed advice I get so generously here.  A special call out to Bill Raby and his videos.  They convinced me I can build a first gun, thanks.

How does a 24 gauge kick with a decent stock for 50 paces loads?

Is a 28 gauge correct enough for HBC guns? 

[Daryl]

Not a trade gun, but 1 3/4" at the comb, 2 3/4" at the heel.
Beautiful shooting rifle. In recoil, it drives the shoulder back and down, automatically lifting your face off the comb
instead of driving the comb into your cheek bone.

[Canuck Bob]

Something tells me that isn't 60gr's fffg in a .45!  My 54 Deerstalker is a mouse gun in comparison.

[Mtn Meek]

Phil that is the thread. I linked the thread and referenced you but got cold feet as I was unsure of this forum's ethics regarding that particular forum.

I'm interested in the HBC trade gun, most likely an early Barnett. My family homesteaded in Salt Prairie Alberta (High Prairie region) in the early 30's and did much business with the HBC posts in the north.  I remember back to the 50's and remember only Lee Enfields everywhere.

I want to build from a walnut blank or preferably a shaped blank with ramrod channel and hole done but no inletting for the lock or barrel.  Recoil is an issue as I grow wiser or just plain older.  I'm a natural borne rifleman so tackling a prb smoothbore challenge is my goal, no hunting or shot.

Mike's numbers are workable for a Pecatonica stock and he is like the old E. F. Hutton commercial for me!  When he talks I listen. I would like to thank such skilled smiths and shooters for all the honest well informed advice I get so generously here.  A special call out to Bill Raby and his videos.  They convinced me I can build a first gun, thanks.

How does a 24 gauge kick with a decent stock for 50 paces loads?

Is a 28 gauge correct enough for HBC guns?

S. James Gooding's research of HBC records suggested that 28 balls to the pound was the standard or most common size from HBC orders for NW trade guns.  That is equivalent to a ball size of 0.550", and assuming windage of 0.02" to 0.03", a bore size of 0.570" to 0.580".  I don't know how historically accurate you want to be, but a .58 cal smoothbore would be best.  If that's not high on your priority list, then a 28 gauge (.55 caliber) barrel is close.

My advice on drop (from which ever point one wants to measure) has little to do with perceived recoil or "cheek slapping".  Neither the Caywood trade gun nor the Hayes trade gun are uncomfortable to me to shoot with respect to recoil or "cheek slapping".  I was simply advising from the perspective of being able to aim down the barrel when shooting a patched round ball.

Keep in mind that the NW trade gun has a comb that is more angular than most fowlers and other types of trade guns.  It can make it difficult to get ones eye low enough to use the barrel as a sighting plane.  This could probably be addressed by building in some cast off like jerrywh mentioned.

D. Caywood NW Trade Gun Comb


M. Hayes NW Trade Gun Comb


I don't know what Pecatonica's return policy is, but you might be able to order a stock from them and try sighting with it before you do any work on it to see if it fits you.  If not, you may be able to return it and be out shipping costs only.

I've gotten more recoil sensitive with age, too.  I manage it by reducing the powder charge when I'm target shooting.  Whether you are shooting a 20 gauge, 24 gauge, or 28 gauge, I suspect you can find a moderate powder charge that will give you adequate smootbore accuracy out to 50 paces with tolerable recoil.

For what it's worth, Barnett made guns for the Northwest Company up until it merged with the HBC in 1821.  He didn't make guns for the HBC until after that date.

I anticipate your next questions are going to be about suitable barrels and locks.

[Canuck Bob]

Phil, the plan is to order a drawing from TOW and track down some books that are recommended here.  Then cut out a rough pattern or two to check fit. As far as HC the build will honour the physical gun but the components can be representative rather than faithful repros.  Build details representing the Barnett pre or post merger is not an issue.

As for locks I'm hoping to swing a Hollenbaugh F&I war period lock. Failing that it will be a Chambers Siler probably. The barrel will be OtoR 30" 28 gauge of .550  to share components with the .54 lefty Deerstalker.  Maker is a question mark but it needs to be profiles for the gauge rather than a smaller bore 20 gauge profile.

From your comments about recoil I'm considering a reduced load that keeps the 54 prb super sonic to 50 yards.  The Hornady calculator indicates 1500fps works.  The Lyman manual suggests 80grns of fffg, seems heavy.  Does passing through the sound barrier mess up a rb?

[Daryl]

Does passing through the sound barrier mess up a rb?

Less so, than with any other projectile shape.  The worst shape for turbulence in the transonic and ultrasonic zones is the common diabolo (wasted) pellet shape.

[Bob McBride]

I would look  to do 3” to 3 1/2 in the heel with 1 1/2 or a bit more at the comb for sure or it will be in your cheek bone for sure.  Straighter it is , the more in the nose or cheek I’d feel     The late guns was straight cause you can get more stock out of narrow plank of wood. Just cheaper to build.   

I have found just the opposite. the stock dimensions you mention will bust you good.  The more parallel the top of the comb is to the center line of the bore the less felt recoil you will have. My typical drop I use is 1 1/2 to 1 5/8" at the comb and 2 1/2" to 2 3/4" at the heal. Except for lehighs .....

I’m a fan of 1 5/8” 2 5/8” like this one you built. My favorite dimensions for lack of felt recoil and my favorite offhand shooter.

[Mike Brooks]

Bob, most people would tell you that gun would be a cheek slapper. If I were going to make that a shotgun I'd probably go 2 1/2" at the heal.

[Bob McBride]

Bob, most people would tell you that gun would be a cheek slapper. If I were going to make that a shotgun I'd probably go 2 1/2" at the heal.

It’s far from a cheek slapped for me. I may like 2 1/2” for a 12 bore or better but as a short barreled .58 it’s got it all.