Jacob Kuntz Rifle

[swschultz]

I have the opportunity to potentially purchase a Jacob Kuntz rifle. I have talked briefly with the individual who has the gun for sale, but have not seen it yet. It is not their gun, but they are selling it along with some other valuable items for the owner. I will probably get a chance to do so tomorrow or in the next day or two before I head back home from my business trip. I understand that the rifle is in good shape. I don't know if by chance it is somehow an original or a remake. I obviously don't know a ton about guns. The asking price is $4500.00. I have done a fair amount of research on this site, as well as reviewed all of the Metropolitan Museum pictures I could come across of a Jacob Kuntz rifle. If it is an original, I am guessing that this price is a steal. If it is an exceptional remake is it a steal? Can anyone provide me ballpark prices for both?

I am guessing that this gun is not an original, but are there any telltale signs that would give this away? At this point I do not know if there is any sort of certificate of authenticity or other documentation related to the gun. Any additional information, pictures or links that folks would be willing to pass along would be greatly appreciated. I don't want to get taken, but at the same time I don't want to pass up the opportunity of a lifetime. I hope this makes sense. The sooner folks can get back to me the better since I will probably be examining the rifle tomorrow.

Thanks so much up front!

[Dave B]

I know that there are some contemporary pieces out there that you could swear they were original. If a person is selling something like that I would want to make sure that I had someone with me to verify the item. If the item was ever appraised there should be documentation as to the value at that time. If a deal sounds too good to be true it probably is. That being said I have seen a Kuntz rifle that came out west and was an original percussion full stock with the sweetest patch box I have ever seen. Nicely engraved, but the rest just as plain as can be. He wanted only $1,000 for it. Had I the bucks I would have done it then and there. You may have a winner but you got to CYA on some of these deals involving some one selling for some one else. I would like to talk to that some one else first. I always want a written bill of sale with verified identification.

As far as a quick test to see if its original. I like to pull the lock out and see what the mortise looks like as well as the lock internals. I have had people tell me that the lock was all original flint condition and see the parting lines still on the castings use for the reconversion. The average Joe wouldn't think to check with a bright light in the elbow of the frizzen spring for the parting line that is always there from the casting mold. I know some folks use a portable black light to run over a piece to check for finding other wise invisible wood replacements and repairs.
Some signed barrels have been restocked in the correct style and passed off as the real deal with other original parts to go along with it for that extra old feel. The other thing to check it the threads of the screws. Original screws tended to have rounded over thread tips. Look at original screws some time. they are not sharp like the new ones. the wood screws shouldn't have pointed ends to them  they should be tapered but look like they have been cut off flat at the tip. I know there are others here with allot more experience with this than I and deffer to their expertise.

[40Haines]

I would not put much faith in an appraisal supplied by the buyer.

There is no telling if the appraiser knew any more than you do.

If it is an original, it is a good deal.

Go ahead and get it with the understanding that YOUR appraiser verifies it as real.

In general I don't see much upside to a novice buying ANY expensive antique, especially through a 3rd party.

[smshea]

I have seen one or two fairly plain signed Kuntz rifles at auction locally go for well under 3000.00 in a room full of collectors. They were plain but in good condition, had p-boxes and were signed. They are not all like the one in the Met. 4500.00 might be all the money.

You should really have someone who knows what they are looking at check it out.

Be very cautious.

[swschultz]

So I was not able to see the rifle today, but the person who has it sent me the attached images of the rifle as well as the following description:

“Jacob Kuntz flintlock longrifle Lehigh Valley and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, early 19th century. Walnut stock with extensive rococo relief carving, brass furniture with initials "JK" engraved on the patchbox, very rare bone inlay around patchbox and on the toe plate. Replaced 12" at end of forestock and a 1" chip to stock at tang. Measures 37.5" barrel, 53.75"













The pictures are not that great, but I may get a chance to take some better ones tomorrow. Hopefully the images and decription make it at little easier to provide some more detailed feedback regarding the rifle.

Thanks

[msmith]

Most builders signed on the barrel near the breech ,not the patchbox.

[Acer Saccharum]

Let me say first of all, I am no expert on Jacob Kuntz.

Appears to be an original to me. Looks like JK's engraving, both in hand and style. There are details in the carving that look like his, too. The little triangular nip border around the nose of the comb, etc. I'd also say a Philadelphia gun, not Lehigh.

Maybe Rupp stocked his Lehigh guns, and JK has someone else stocking for him in Philly.

[The other DWS]

FNG question

why do the sideparts of the patch box look different that the lid and the end piece?

edit:  duh!!   I should have read more carefully and thoroughly

[Hurricane ( of Virginia)]

I am concerned that this is a restock using some Kunz related parts. The Kunz family guns that are widely published have extraordinarily engraved finials that are almost a signature unto themselves.
See the one in the"Relic" section of the ALR Museum:

http://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=5698.0

Hurricane

[msmith]

jamesdjulia.com auction has a Jacob Kunz rifle ,lot 2583

[swschultz]

As I understand it the side plates are a bone inlay. Does anyone know of JK using bone inlays?

[JTR]

I believe Kuntz did use bone for inlays on some of his guns, however I don't think this is a Kuntz made gun.
The patchbox and star on the cheek piece are probably Kuntz items, but the gun looks like a European made gun to me, so I think these Kuntz parts were added to an existing gun, and the carving added as well.

Now, I'm not any sort of a Kuntz expert at all. I've only seen a couple, but the ones I've seen are sleek and lean, which this rifle isn't.

Hopefully some of the guys that are more familiar with Kuntz work will pop in and give more definitive info.

John

[Eric Kettenburg]

I've seen other genuine Kunz rifles like that.  Late Philadelphia work, probably 'shop' made although the carving and engraving definitely look like his hand. 

[Majorjoel]

I'd sure like to see the sideplate side opposite the lock. Do you know if the lock is held by one or two bolts? There are 4 rifles by Jacob Kuntz as well as two pistols pictured in the book "Steel Canvas" by Wilson. This includes the two famous Lehigh examples from the NY MET. The other long guns are late percussion, one swivel breech and a SxS double rifle made for Titian Peale. It seems Kuntz worked in early and late mediums of the art of the muzzle loading rifle! His engraving work on the book's pictured rifles is what I would call "Bank Note" engraving and much finer than this example. That does not mean anything, however.....it all goes down to what the customer wanted and could afford.  It would be interesting to know the details that are known of his life. I also find the trigger guard interesting on this rifle that is for sale, unusual, but Kuntz was very different from all the rest.

[nord]

Mr. Schultz -

And this is the reason I directed you to come here! As I suspected... More questions than answers.

My take isn't quite as technical as that of some of the others.  More a visceral feeling on my part not intended to downplay the rifle.

Two details immediately stand out about the rifle. The bone inlays (patchbox) and the walnut stock. As has already been observed, the bone inlays are not unknown by this maker. The problem is that my eye tells me that the inlays and the brass lid don't seem to blend all that well. Maybe just my eye and personal taste, however one of the hallmarks of a fine rifle is the seamless blend of features. The overall "flow" if you will.

The stock (as noted previously) is somewhat heavier than I might expect and of walnut. Certainly walnut is not uncommon but I'd sooner expect a flint rifle of this era to be stocked in maple.

As to a restock or rebarrel I have no opinion at this time. I'd only say that fine rifles made by proud craftsmen were usually signed on the top barrel flat, not on the patchbox lid.

All of the above posts come back to one basic piece of advice... Purchase this rifle at the asking price and take your chances or place the rifle in the hands of someone with a bit of knowledge and take less of a chance.

Oh... And there is no such thing as an expert! Those that know the most usually claim the least.

If the rifle is right or largely correct, then you should do well at the present price in my opinion. On the other hand, if there arise more questions than answers you might do well to hesitate as there are rifles out there with better provenance.

Perhaps most importantly... If the rifle "speaks" to something inside you and the present price is within your means, then buy it! It's certainly a nice rifle no matter what we've noted. This is especially true if the price will not make you miss dinner.

The only unanswered question then is what the rifle might bring should you purchase it and decide to resell. Would it remain a $4500 piece, would it bring offers of only half that amount, or might it be worth much more?  None of these questions can really be addressed based on the present information.

So... Your next move?

[Hurricane ( of Virginia)]

No one has mentioned yet that the barrel is considerably shorter than expected.
Hurricane

[Roger Fisher]

Looks like a mix of parts to my v untrained eye!

I'm used to seeing J Kuntz rifles of the Lehigh style in c maple; but I'm wrong quite often...

Hope ol Taylor chimes in on this.  I do believe he spent a lot of time studying his style to build a similar a yr or so ago...  What say you Taylor?   Ron Gabel of our area would be the source for info on your rifle of interest. 

Consider this: are you buying for your own beginning collection or for re-sale?  Is ol man Greed part of your consideration to buy?   Only something to consider.

[Stan]

I own one early Philadelphia J Kunz rifle and this by & large looks like the real deal. However it may be different in hand. The engraving is I believe J.K.s as well as the cheek piece inlay & cheekpiece, stock moldings and over all design. The only thing I don't like is the heavy lock moldings but that may be due to the late period of manufacture as many late rifles of Phila. show this detail.

[smshea]

I'm with Stan and Eric, I think it could be the real deal... just very late. I do wonder about the bone side plates because of the engraving lay out. They just don"t seem to have the Kuntz 'FLOW' that you normally see....but who knows? Could just be that's how he felt like doing it that day!
 I've seen other late guns from the Lehigh area makers that bare almost no resemblance to their earlier work....some late Molls also come to mind. I have seen Kuntz rifles that looked as though they still have Lehigh influence but were marked Philly in block letters as i recall....but these were a bit earlier.
 As a side note: If you ever get the chance to pull the butt plate, I would be curious as to wether there is a JK on the inside of the casting, I've seen that a few times. 

[D. Taylor Sapergia]

I find myself in a peculiar position.  I have studied several original Jacob Kuntz rifles and pistols in hand, and many more from publications.  This is what turned me on to build one.  The best I can do regarding this subject is to offer my impressions, based on a couple of not particularly good photos.
I agree that at least the lid and head of the patch box, and the cheek piece inlay, are by Jacob Kuntz.  He used bone, horn, and other materials for inlays and embellishments on many of his rifles, so the side plates of the box may also be by his hand.
The stock's architecture is a departure from his flint era longrifles, and being walnut also is different.  There are two details about the carving that are giving me a red flag.  the first and more important one is the carving behind the cheek piece.   It does not have the artistic merit I've come to love about his work.  The elements of the carving are rough and don't have the flow I'd expect to see by Jacob Kuntz.  I don't think he carved it.  Secondly, the lock molding is thick and abrupt, and again, does not look like his work.  The comb from the butt plate's heel to the wrist is not up to Kuntz standard either. 
More pictures, or the side plate side of the lock area, the toe plate, the muzzle treatment, etc, would give me a better chance to comment.

[rich pierce]

To me it's a Kuntz patchbox and it's carved roughly in the Kuntz style so it's either a late shop gun or a restock carved up to look Kuntzy.

[smshea]

Just curious Stan, Is yours carved? I don't think Ive seen one this late that was carved. I was checking through my picture files but I have a bad habit of not labeling my pictures on allot of this later stuff.

[Eric Kettenburg]

I went back and went through some of my notes and photos and I think at this point I'm pretty confident it is from Kunz's shop.  The box and carving and inlay, from what I can see in the photos, all look right to me.  And I'll reiterate, I've held in my hands 2 or 3 other JK/Kunz guns, very late, that looked pretty much like this.  Maybe made for trade/sale to those heading West?  No clue.

I think too often, one might use a stellar example of a particular maker's work - such as the Met guns, or a few very 'red' Kunz rifles privately held - and mentally establish a benchmark which thence casts a very dark shadow across other pieces which may not be so fine.  In Philly, Kunz had a very busy shop and apprentices.  Not everything received the attention the Met rifle did.  And, everyone has bad days.  Or bad years.  Business is business:  let's not over-romantize some of this stuff.  I'd feel pretty comfortable saying that - based only upon what I've personally seen - a number of these JK/Kunz rifles evidence workmanship much more along the lines of this piece as opposed to the Met masterpiece. 

[mr. no gold]

After looking over the photos provided above, it is my opinion/feeling that the rifle is the genuine article, albeit very late in the game. The stepped wrist; use of walnut, but carved nonetheless, clear Kunz indications and traits suggest that is correct. The rounded lock plate, the 'different' trigger guard, but architecture that is still Lehigh, suggest that this rifle is almost a parody of what he made in his earlier years. I have seen other guns by him that could best be described as 'clunky', much as this one is; it still would be worth having.
Not sure why his style changed over the years (I avoid using the word degraded, here), but many other makers followed a similar route (John Meals?). Go for it!
Just my private thoughts here.
Dick

[jwh1947]

Scott Shea has offered brief but strong advice.  I agree.

Also, I've said before and I reiterate: Appraising, vetting and passing judgment on longrifles based on pictures is folly. I cannot, in good conscience, say a gun is good, worth such-and-such, and looks like such-and-such, based entirely on pictures. Most times you simply end up with one of the more common lab notations...insufficient information.