Looking for info on German Jaeger Rifle

Zonie said:

I gather from your negative responses to the ideas put forth that there may have been several different factors which go beyond the Jaeger which led to the creation of the Pennsylvania rifle and the Hawken brothers rifle that you do not agree?

That is your right however it is not your right to make rude or derogatory comments concerning the other members of this Forum and it will stop.

Click to expand...

I certainly hope the rude or derogatory comments will stop!

This issue seems to have started with off-topic statements by "tg" regarding the origins of Hawken rifles. This was triggered by a totally tangential comment in my original post about the similarity of my Jaeger rifle to Hawken rifles.
Kinda like "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State," is tangential to "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Considering that numerous sources attribute American rifle development to German immigrant gunsmiths. That is, classic American arms, i.e. Pennsylvania rifles from the Pennsylvania "Dutch", actually Deutsch or translated = German. That the Hawken Bros were descended from immigrants from that part of Europe. A reasonable statement.

Somehow this tangential statement touched some "third rail" and was interpreted as to say I thought that MY German Jaeger rifle was a blueprint model used by the Hawken Bros themselves to design the famous rifle they produced.

My post was to get information about a German Jaeger rifle made by Cristoph Funk in Suhl Germany. That's all. I wasn't asking about the evolution of American rifles, Hawkens, Kentucky, Pennsylvania or any others. Sheesh!

Please no questions about whether or not the 34th division was in Germany during WWII. I don't care.

All my initial posts were to the point. Any information I got was looked into. If I provided information, I provided links (courteously) to back up the point and, hopefully, inspire the person to do their own research.

I posted the same text & pics to several other Forums and have had no reaction like here.
The fellow on the British forum was an encyclopedia of information on the "tige" system and European military arms.

Finally, "Rusty Frizzen" has just posted the type of civil message that I was expecting from members, although still no references just conjecture.

Just because I am a new member of the forum doesn't mean that I have to be talked down to, lectured to or treated like the new kid at school.
I'm a Bill O'Reilly type person. Get to the point, give verifiable factual info and no bloviating.

You do have a nice rifle, but if information is what your after you have gone about it all wrong. If you treat people on this forum with respect, than I think you will be rewarded with good information that will save you a lot of time and effort.

I DID receive good information.
Check out the post by "bpesteve".
And the last post by Russ T Frizzen.
In the future I'll be polite and ignore all off-topic posts.

I love you too. :v

This post was the type of civil, intelligent, factual response I was looking for.

As "bpesteve" stated earlier:

"Since Captain Claude-Etienne Minie's slightly later invention was so much simpler and effective, the 'tige' system did not persist much past the early 1850s. My guess is that your rifle dates from 1845-1850 based on that."

The tige breech on this rifle is the key and pretty much nails the birthdate of this rifle to that short period. I agree with this.

I don't think checkering, inletting tolerance, back action locks or type of lettering are relevant. (no flame intended). It wouldn't make any common sense for an expensive rifle to be made with the failure prone tige breech. Even as a "reproduction" by tradition drenched (and hopefully not beer drenched)Schuetzenfesters.

I was hoping to maybe find a source of info on the serial numbers. That will never be possible thanks to the superb efforts of the USAAF and the RAF which gave the arms producing areas of Germany the bombing and total destruction they so richly deserved. Anything that was left was taken back to the motherland by the Russians.
(Why aren't there any Russian made repro muzzleloaders? OOPS, sorry, off-topic)

The rear peep sight never made the trip to the US. I would like to see references that show pictures of what it might have looked like. Maybe I could fabricate a copy.

I had no intention of saying THIS rifle was a pattern for the first Hawken Mountain Rifle in the 1820's. My previous reference to 1820-1830 period was regarding the back action lock existing early in the 19th century and not being a dating tool to place manufacture date in late 19th century. The tige breech was not even a silly grin on some Frenchmans face at that point. I'm smart enough to figure that out. I still think that it's a reasonable assumption that the German-American gunsmiths (or Germanic Swiss-American in the Hawken Bros case) would look back to traditional designs for inspiration.

As the targets show, this is already quite accurate. I was not using the tige system as it was meant to be used. As mentioned, PRB. I'm sure it would be too expensive to have a odd caliber solid base tige type mould made to experiment. The mould I have was an accidentally "matching" old mould (no sprue cutoff) found at a gun store. It was just finicky in that one day great, another day so-so. Typically so-so days and shooting match days coincided.
Re-bore to .54 was not recommended by a gunsmith in Ironton, OH I sent it to back then. If it had been done maybe I could use a Minie mould with out the cavity part. I will unscrew the breech and see just how much powder it takes to fill up to the top of the tige.

There, now wasn't that a lot more fun?

Now that everyone is rid of their booms and sniffs I'll offer this. You say that pillar is approximately 1" long and 1/4" in diameter that doesn't leave a lot of room for powder and hammering down a bullet and having the "Tige" be able to expand it into the rifling. Do they perhaps have a flame channel through the pillar directing the flash into the front portion of the charge? Elmer Keith IIRC talked about setting up cartridge cases with a tube installed to carry the primer flash to the forward part of the powder charge. It seems he wrote about this in the late 60's or early 70's but I can't remember for the life of me how it worked out. It sure seems like a lot of work on a CF case to me for probably minimal returns.

Bob Krohn said:

Obviously, I must have accidentally stepped on one of your sore toes. There must have been a previous "debate" that you got into. I really can make little sense of your reply. If you can't see any similarity whatever or accept generally accepted common historical wisdom then I am helpless. It probably wouldn't help to point out that the Hawken brothers were descended from a long line of Swiss gunsmiths either. (You know, that small country that is right next to Germany and where most speak German) There is no sense discussing this anymore as you have personally held convictions that are "different". A contrarian looking for an argument with me.
I will not engage in an intellectual battle with an unarmed person. Sorry.

Click to expand...

I don't think TG was trying to attack you persoanlly, as you have done to him. He even closed his post with... " :v no flame just some thoughts."

You seem to be upset that TG doesn't agree with you? Disagreeing with the opinion of another member is quite common. You should not take it personally.

[/quote]

I don't think TG was trying to attack you persoanlly, as you have done to him. He even closed his post with... " :v no flame just some thoughts."

You seem to be upset that TG doesn't agree with you? Disagreeing with the opinion of another member is quite common. You should not take it personally.[/quote]

Please.
I don't want to talk about "TG" anymore.
I don't want to discuss motives for off-topic irrelevant posts.
I am only interested in talking about German Jaeger rifles, tige breeches and related technical information in this topic thread.

from runnball:

"pillar is approximately 1" long and 1/4" in diameter that doesn't leave a lot of room for powder and hammering down a bullet and having the "Tige" be able to expand it into the rifling."

I agree. I tried to un-breech the barrel with no success. I do not now have the necessary tools to do this. I used to (35 years ago) be able to get it unscrewed without too much problem. I'll soak it in oil and try again with lead liners in vise jaws.

I used a straightened piece of coat hanger wire to do a little probing. Wiggle it down, past the pillar, and it reaches to a point opposite the nipple. Use a dowel or ramrod and it bottoms out (assuming its on top of pillar) at 7/8" less. Note, I was previously estimating 1" based on the last time I laid eyes on the actual thing as mentioned above. So, I'll also use my dim recollection of pillar diameter of 1/4" to calculate a volume for the cylindrical space surrounding the pillar.
Someone please check my math here. In all my professional life having someone else check your work was SOP.

(make things a little easier by generously calling pillar 1 full inch tall)
( Chamber wall same as bore, cylindrical not tapered)


Volume of a Cylinder = Pi* (Radius squared) * Height
Pie are Round

Pi = 3.14
Height = 1"

Dia = 0.25"
Rad = 0.125"

Pillar = 3.14 * (0.125 squared) * 1
Pillar = 3.14 * (0.0156)
Pillar = 0.05 cubic inches

Bore Dia = 0.52"
Bore Rad = 0.26"

Chamber = 3.14 * (0.26 squared) * 1
Chamber = 3.14 * (0.068)
Chamber = 0.21 cubic inches

Subtract Pillar volume from Chamber volume
cylindrical space surrounding the pillar = 0.21 - 0.05 = 0.16 cubic inches

Now, what would 0.16 cubic inches equal in a solid cylinder of say 3/8" (0.375), like my brass powder measure?

Dia = 0.375
Rad = 0.1875 (yes, I know, four decimal places. Just carrying for now)

0.16 = Pi * (0.1875 squared) * Unk Ht
0.16 / (3.14 * (0.1875 squared)) = Unk Ht
0.16 / 0.1104 = Unk Ht
1.45 in

The fully collapsed T/C telescoping 50-120 gr adjustable measure is about 1 1/2" deep. I beleive that is 50 gr

Assuming no silly math errors then, this is about 50 gr of blackpowder. (!?)

"Do they perhaps have a flame channel through the pillar directing the flash into the front portion of the charge?"


I also thought, those many years ago, that this gizmo was some kind of ignition time improving device. I remember thinking how skyrockets had a hollow core that would allow a much larger surface area to ignite all at once. But this pillar would not do that. My recollection was that there was no flame channel that opened up on top or along the pillar. I guess all these systems have to be actually tried out to see if there is any advantage. I remember the GyroJet and attempts at caseless cartridges I think by Daisy. I've always been amazed that the common flintlock works as well as it does. In fact, I'm amazed that it works at all.

You have me really interested in shooting it again.
I'm now wanting to experiment a little more with this gun. Maybe the finicky behavior was a result of slightly different powder charges allowing (by small increments) or not allowing at all, the PRB I was using to deform to various degrees against the rifling via the pillar. Whether that would be good or bad I'll have to find out. Maybe varying the charge by a grain of two will make a difference in this gun where it wouldn't make much in a "normal" rifle.

Thanks for you post. I enjoyed the chance to play with my calculator which is another hobby.

Your math checks out pretty close to what my calculations arrive at.
My numbers says the volume of the powder area in the barrel up to the top of a 1 inch high "post" is .16328 cubic inches.
That volume divided by the area of your powder measure (assuming a .375 inside diameter) is 1.47870. Close enough for Government work.

Of course this assumes the top of the "post" is squared off at the top end rather than being conical.

In any case, black powder is somewhat compressible and if it extended slightly higher than the tip of the post prior to ramming the ball, it would be crushed by the force of ramming the ball down to expand it on the post.

Bingo!
(Unless you are doing same silly mistake I am.)

I recall the pillar being flat on top. Seems like if it had a point or dome that would work well for pressing flat base dome bullet into rifling

If I can't get the breech off I may try this:
*flat face dowel down barrel against pillar.
*Mark it.
*Add small amounts of powder until I notice a change in rod depth.
* That weight charge is the starting point.

I guess even ram rod force would become critical as to control of deformation.
Maybe make up a device based on the "Dent Puller Hammer" that body work guys use. Lift it X number of inches and drop to apply a repeatable force.
Small deformation would really make tight fit.
Even that could be measured on a hard flat surface. That is, what happens when X pounds is dropped from Y inches on a lead ball.
I'll bet this "hammer" has already been done in the past.

Guess I have an excuse to go to Harbor Freight.

Both of you are within a couple of 10ths on your calculations. 50 grains would definately get a ball down range. It would probably be doing (speculation) around 1050-1150 fps. A conical of 300-350 would probably do 950-1000 fps. Sounds a little slow but minie bullets with a service load won't do much if any more. Keep us posted I for one am very interested in this rifle. Also I think it really shows off old world craftsmanship.
:thumbsup:

Bob Krohn said:

Want to find approx date of manufacture and value.
...
Thanks for any help.
...

GUSSSTAHL (engraved) (translation = cast steel)

CHRISTOPH FUNK IN SUHL (engraved and gold filled) (the maker in the city of Suhl, Germany)

ENGLISHER (engraved) (translation = English model or style)
...

Click to expand...

:hmm: Maybe this is helpful?
I - as a native german speaker - wouldn´t read it like you "English model or style".
I would read the two words together: "Englischer Gußstahl".
Reading it that way it would mean: English cast-steel.

Could be that this kind of steel was known as very good and the maker put it on the barrel to say that it is made from quality-parts.
Could also be that in the time of making there were already ready made (or "half-ready") barrels availiable.
Maybe we got some experts here who know a little more than me about when industrial made barrels came up?

Clear about that marking: It was obviously made by a german and not in England. "Englischer" is the german word. English speaking persons write it without the "C". :wink:

:2

Danke.
Yes, you are correct. Bill Curtis, (on the Muzzleloaders Assoc. of Great Britian Forum) a fellow with an encyclopedia apparently built into his noggin, said this:

"A couple of comments, The 'Englischer' and the 'Gussstahl' go together signifying that the barrel is made of English cast steel (possibly by the makers Cornforth or Firth who are known to have produced cast steel specifically for rifle barrels)."

Another nugget of information confirmed and verified. My initial "translation" was coutesy of Dictionary.com and was simple word conversion with no context.

Happy Oktober Fest.

P.S. Locally there is a really large German-American cultural group called "The Phoenix Club".
They used to have their own air rifle shooting sub-group complete with small range inside the building. I'm planning on attending the October festivities and doing a little "research". I will also probably feel forced to drink some beer and eat giant pretzels. Sometimes ya do what ya gotta do. :wink:

When I was shooting the .50 cal T/C Hawken back then I remember for sure that I was using a shooting charge of 50gr. Light recoil, cheaper to shoot and good accuracy (even out to 100yds). I was using the same load in the Jaeger rifle before that. I may have, and just don't remember now, come up with that by doing the "fill the removed breech" thing.
Bad thing is that the finicky shooting of the Jaeger caused me to buy the T/C Hawken when they first came out. If I now find out that the Jaeger could have been a reliable shooter that means I never had to buy the T/C in the first place. I wonder if I can return the T/C and get my money back. Awe forget it.
Getting to the range will take a little while. the place I used to go has closed due to creeping civilization. A new one is now a little farther away. Crappy business shooting in a large metropolitan area.

Great looking rifle Sir.

To your health Bob!

There is one for sale on a german auction that reminds me a bit of yours.
Take a look:
Link to auction

Oh My! It looks like a twin!

I just noticed something very interesting about the auction gun. The last picture shows the muzzle end close-up.
There is a metal catch or hook of some kind.
I wonder if it's for some kind of loading lever type device. Maybe to press a bullet that last little bit to deform it into rifling?
Wonder if it too has a "tige" breech?

Gun is different maker but almost exactly the same. Great find! Thanks again.

I sent a message to the seller but it had to be in English (and crude translation via Dictionary.com). If there is a problem, maybe I can trick you :wink: into using your skills in palavering with the local natives.

That thing close to the muzzle is for a - well, what´s the correct word in english? - civillian bayonet. :hmm:
I found the English word "hunting hanger" as one way to translate it, maybe that´s the best one. :hmm:
There used to be professional hunters working for the royals. In times of war as skilled shooters they had to fight for their "bosses".
They got a different self-image and also had different clothes and stuff. Could be that this is the background to that "extra" on this gun.


If you don´t get along with your online translations I sure can help a little. :yakyak: