Thoughts on Kit Guns-Update

[t.caster]

This seems to be a recurring problem with kit rifles and fowlers.



 1. The barrel not inletted deep enough.
 2. The lock inlet is so far back the touch hole liner would have to be behind the face of the breech plug. I don't like to notch the face of the plug. A pet peeve of mine!
 3. The wood is sloped down immediately behind the barrel in three directions. If I move the barrel back it would have to go deeper too. This is a problem for inletting the breech tang. LOTS of filing!

In this picture, I have already inlet the barrel 1/32" deeper, and it still has to go deeper. You can see where I have scribed the barrel side for the breech face location and set a point where I like the touch hole to be. See where the pan lines up? Way off. Fortunately, I can move the lock forward, and will. But even after I do that the vent is going to be above the top of the pan, so I may have to offset it below the barrel centerline.

I can make it work after all the alterations, but I pity the beginner who thinks these things just line up and snap together, because it is what everyone recommends for a start.
Enuff ranting, and back to work.

[Marcruger]

Tom, Would shortening the breech plug to 1/2" and the barrel be a good start?

[rich pierce]

This is a well-known common problem that should have been corrected by now. Solutions are not great. Having the lock inlet too far back is just messed up.

[Eric Krewson]

You think that is bad, take look at this one, you have probably seen it before as I use it often as a caution to others never get a precarve with the lock inlet done. This picture was taken after I moved the barrel back 1/4".



In the finished picture the entire lower lock molding is glued in wood to raise the lock up to where is is suppose to be, I put the glue line right where the lower molding breaks over to hide it. as for the wonky trigger guard instillation, I installed it early nice and tight, then found another precarve flaw when I was finishing the gun and had to reinlet parts of the trigger guard which put my already drilled pin hole in the wrong place for a tight fit. I plan to fix that at a later date.



This is the before picture;

[Eric Krewson]

That is one of your flints Rich, 45 shots on it so far.

[smart dog]

Hi Tom,
Every kit gun I've worked on except for Jim Kibler's had the same problem.  The stock machining for the locks leaves a lot to be desired, which is why I wish all the kit makers (except Jim Kibler) would offer stocks without the lock inletted.

dave

[Eric Krewson]

The people who supply these kits should off the option of no lock inlet or with a lock inlet.

[JPK]

Or they could correct their patterns, Kibler did it so it must be possible.

[DavidC]

Kibler is using a full CNC setup and a lot of his product hasn't been sitting around for long enough to warp to the point where the inletting has shifted as the wood dries or changes to humidity.

I made the mistake of ordering 2 Kibler colonials and having 1 sit for almost a year before I could find time to work on it. It did not assembly anywhere near as easily as the first kit did.

Don't some of the kit makers just use converted manual mills to mill out some basic channels for the lockplate and barrel channel? It always seemed like they do a single undersized profile to "fit" any barrel. I did a jaeger kit with a swamped barrel and I had to inlet only the outer edges of the pre-milled channel which suggested to me they were just milling a straight pass which did not match the profile of the barrel.

But I'm thinking with the rising affordability of CNC machines and the growing awareness of that accessibility we will see a shift in kits, even if it means a temporary monopoly by Kibler.

[rfd]

I assembled a Kibler Colonial a few years back and it was as precise as could be in all regards.  Yes, chisels, rasps, files, scrapers, abrasives, and some smarts are still required.  I'd buy another.  Dunno about other onshore kits other than Jim's.

[JPK]

Eric’s stock isn’t a shift of the wood. I’ve cut stocks on a pantograph that came out very useable. Even though the inlets were made undersize and the shaping was oversized they finished up well. That’s old technology now but the patterns and the setup made some fine stocks.

[Scota4570]

Never buy a run of the mill precarve with the lock inlet done for you. 

[Eric Krewson]

Mine was A TOW kit that I picked up for half price, the guy who bought it realized he didn't have the skill to build it and traded to the guy I bought if from for 3 vintage bows, turn out is wasn't such a bargain after all.

[t.caster]

Yes, I much prefer to order without the lock pre inlet. In some cases that is an option. In this case the inlet is much smaller than the Deluxe Siler, so it looks like I can manipulate it enough.
I have also done a few of these kits for fellows who bought them and found they were in over their heads! I prefer starting with a blank stock. fewer problems.
The wrist is made too skinny for a Haines/Lancaster style on this one too.
I'll make it all work, but it shouldn't have to be this way from a top-of-the-line vendor. Not naming names, but I think he knows.

[ShutEyeHunter]

For me, precarved but not inlet is the way to go. The MLBS precarved I just bought had a 1/4” web, but it’s easy to go a little over 1/16” deeper for the barrel. Plenty of wood everywhere to pare away for a slim rifle. And I avoided the trauma of drilling the ramrod hole in an expensive chunk of wood

[Bob Roller]

My old friend and top gunmaker Tom Nixon said he liked precarves because all the mistakes are made and he can then add his own .
Bob Roller

[fahnenschmied]

Often I've had to straighten tangs and inlet barrels deeper in assembling kits for others.  The worst is when the barrel is too deep - that is a difficult fix.  I don't mind notching the face of a breechplug one bit - but I hate when the triggerguards or tangs are smaller then the inletting cut for them.  The advantage of a pre-inlet stock is that it makes building scratch easier.

[borderdogs]

I have built three kits or what I have been calling parts sets. I have run into some issues with the lock mortise but nothing like those shown. Pecatonica will not mortise the lock if you ask.
Rob

[JPK]

“I'll make it all work, but it shouldn't have to be this way from a top-of-the-line vendor. Not naming names, but I think he knows.”

He doesn’t know if nothing is said, and if he sent it out he doesn’t care. Not naming names means the next fellow can be placed in the same position. Any seller should be give first chance to make things right and if they prefer not to then I’d like to know so I can take my business elsewhere. Nothing mean by this but this is how good venders are sorted out.

[conquerordie]

I would build from a plank before a kit. But the kits I have done have made me a better builder because there is so much to overcome. They really make you think, and repair, and redo. No they shouldn't be that way, but you do learn from them. 

[Birddog6]

This seems to be a recurring problem with kit rifles and fowlers.



 1. The barrel not inletted deep enough.
 2. The lock inlet is so far back the touch hole liner would have to be behind the face of the breech plug. I don't like to notch the face of the plug. A pet peeve of mine!
 3. The wood is sloped down immediately behind the barrel in three directions. If I move the barrel back it would have to go deeper too. This is a problem for inletting the breech tang. LOTS of filing!

In this picture, I have already inlet the barrel 1/32" deeper, and it still has to go deeper. You can see where I have scribed the barrel side for the breech face location and set a point where I like the touch hole to be. See where the pan lines up? Way off. Fortunately, I can move the lock forward, and will. But even after I do that the vent is going to be above the top of the pan, so I may have to offset it below the barrel centerline.

I can make it work after all the alterations, but I pity the beginner who thinks these things just line up and snap together, because it is what everyone recommends for a start.
Enuff ranting, and back to work.

Well, IMHO, the first thing you do on a Precarve stock is inlet the lock 85% of the way.
#2 inlet the barrel back to get the pan to align with the barrel where ya want it.
& so on.

Someplace I have a list of steps building a precarve. I will see if I can find it.

The idea of gluing in wood to make things work on a precarved stock is absurd to me.
Gluing in wood on over inlet entrypipes & lock inlets, totally ridiculous.
Paying $200-500 & have to glue & Patch it ?  Not this guy.....

I have had several stock carvers send me stocks for approval & they got upset when I told them
they are Wrong.  Their answer ?  Can't change it, already cut 75 of them.  My answer, then you
have allot of kindling.  Why in the H would you carve 75-100 of them & not KNOW if they will
work. 

It should be precarved  Correctly or not at all, in my opinion, which means nothing.

Most everyone calls these parts sets Kits & most are just a box of parts.

From what I have seen, Jim Kiblers kits are kits & his is one of the few I have seen. 

 

[hanshi]

I own a rifle from a retired builder and it is scratch built.  This builder absolutely, positively refused to build from a precarve.

[Scota4570]

Back to the OP's problem.  Move the barrel back as far as possible.  Shorten the plug. Move the lock as far foreword as much as possible.  It bothers me to suggest it but, notch the plug face. 

OOOOrr???  Make a new plug with longer threads.  Tap the barrel deeper.  Run the liner into the side of the threads CVA style.  Make a powder chamber in the plug face.   

[Frank]

The only kit gun I would ever buy is a Kibler.

[bob in the woods]

I've have built 3 N.E fowling guns, 1 Officer's fusil, 1 Pennsylvania smoothbore, and one Edward Marshall rifle.....all from kits by Chambers.   Never had a problem with any of them.  I still recommend them to others , especially since Mr Kibler's kits are as yet restricted to two models.
If I ever did have a complaint, I'd first contact the seller and see what the response was.