Canoe gun?

Kootenai said:

"Canoe Gun" is nothing more than a marketing tool for modern day gun hacks to sell their product to an uneducated customer."

For Mike Brooks and Okwaho: When was the last time you guys walked on water? I am surprised you two can both live together back East. With the opinion you two have of yourself I would not think there would be room for the two of you.

Kootenai
Eureka, MT

One of the "modern day gun hacks" that builds the Canoe gun, Blanket gun, Buffalo runner, etc.

Click to expand...

K,
Just because you build them, doesn't make them any more PC/HC. The guys gave you honest research and you are willing to discount factual historical information for your own opinion.

Were there guns with shortened barrels as stocks? Sure.

Were there purpose-made guns with shortened stocks and barrels? Sure, they are called pistols......

Albert

Carl Davis said:

paulvallandigham said:

why is it when someone hear shares their knowledge gleaned from years of research, people become jealous, and begin criticizing them as " All-Knowing"?

Click to expand...

Oh, maybe it's their condescending and rude attitude that solicits the comments? It's one thing to offer information, it's another to call the gun makers and customers names. Maybe it's the bad attitude that some of the "knowledgeable" members have. They can't just present the facts, as they see them, they have to get nasty about it. Maybe that's why?

Click to expand...

Yep, that's me Flamin' A whole! :blah:
If you'd prefer I could just as easily read posts and not participate, no skin off my butt. :thumbsup:

Nah, you should keep posting, Mike. Have you noticed that Carl has made an art form out of the snide post? I'm learning a lot from him. Just wait 'til the next thread on Heli-Coils comes along! Yee-Haw! I'm loaded for bear! :rotf:

This is a bit controversial, so all the young 'uns out their cover your eyes. I have developed the ultimate Canoe Gun! Now don't tell anyone as I haven't patented it yet.

As we have all been told, short barreled guns are the best guns, so I got to thinking: why not do away with the barrel all together? Once you do that the weight and cost savings snowball. You don't need a lock any more or a stock or a trigger or...well anything!!! Brilliant, if I do say say so myself! It's light, compact and perfect for concealed carry. You'll never have to buy powder again as you just whip the ball at the target as hard as you can! I believe this Canoe Gun out shines all other versions out there in every way. Price has yet to be determined.

I haven't figured out how to mount a telescopic sight on it yet, but if anyone comes up with an answer I'll happily cut them in on the profits. Honest. Carl--are listening? If you miss the noise a gun makes, you can yell Bang! or Kapow! or some such.

Carl: Is this the Pot calling the Kettle Black??

"Oh, maybe it's their condescending and rude attitude that solicits the comments?"

Some allowance needs to be given people who have put in the hours of Research time to learn their stuff. When they confront some statement that is at variance with what they have read, and believe to be true, they can be very assertive, and come across as "rude". We all live in Glass Houses, on occasion.

The last time " Canoe Guns" were discussed produced some amazing records showing that short barreled guns were ordered and used, in the Western Fur Trade, but that the guns were NOT Brown Besses, but the slightly smaller bored ( .66 cal.) muskets that at first glance, often are mistaken for Brown Besses. This information established the confusion among our members, many of whom who had seen short barreled guns in armories, and museum collections.

The Experts started the hornets nest abuzz here be insisting that RECORDS show no short barreled Brown Bess guns were ever made in the English armories. Of course, their first claims were a bit broader than that, saying that no Short Barreled Brown Bess existed, but once their position was qualified a bit, the truth came out. It seems that guns sold to the Hudson Bay Company where shipped from England to Montreal, and for the western trade, guns were altered at the Montreal facility. And the " Experts " finally conceded that it was possible that some Besses were shortened in the field for any number of reasons, explaining a few surviving examples.

It is these fine points that are often the basis of many academic debates. LIke this one, they can become very heated. Some people come off as overbearing, and rude. Some say things they later regret. An apology is in order, and those with some sense of decency offer it when they realize they have offended someone. Some were raised to believe that any apology is a sign of weakness, instead of moral strength. That is another debate. :thumbsup:

Kootenai said:

When was the last time you guys walked on water? I am surprised you two can both live together back East. With the opinion you two have of yourself I would not think there would be room for the two of you.

Click to expand...

Is this a private fight, or can anyone get in on it?

IMHO, there is no shortage of customers for canoe guns and Conan the Barbarian swords. So unwad that underwear, K?

Those of us who care about historical accuracy (or even things grounded in reality) will always treat people like Mr. Brooks and Okwaho like they can walk on water, even if they can't.
:bow:

As for there not being room... we all know California is chock full of wonderful people :youcrazy: and still growing. Plenty of room for quality craftsmen here in "flyover country." Those who don't like what we do, just keep on flyin' over... don't stop. :wink:

Pichou....you card :grin:

I always get fouled up in these type posts. Never can figure out if we're talking about the same thing. There were local makers. Why is it that we put so much emphasis on records preserved from orders from London, through Canada, etc...

Thinkin' there were skilled craftsmen that didn't give a hoot about keepin' records, if they could even write. Folks in rural and frontier areas lived differently then their landed gentry classes. Blacksmiths were of low social order, even if they had more land and property then say a learned scoolteacher. Those that built wagons were considered to be of a lower class. Yet they may have garnered wealth. I would think the same was true of the gunmakers...

Anyrate, hope this puts things back on track...read enough squabbling posts. :wink:

I look at many original guns here in Maine. In my area, I have never seen a 48" Fowler. But I live inland in the Western Foothills. I have seen a good deal of shorter guns, including Wheelers built in my hometown. None are as long as the coastal guns...or as we call them ~ Flatlander guns. :blah:


giz

Russ T Frizzen said:

Nah, you should keep posting, Mike. Have you noticed that Carl has made an art form out of the snide post? I'm learning a lot from him. Just wait 'til the next thread on Heli-Coils comes along! Yee-Haw! I'm loaded for bear! :rotf:

Click to expand...

Naw, don't compromise yer intellectual honesty in that way, Russ. Honest discussion is what makes this forum work.

Those what baits others fer their own entertainment (and this is directed at NO ONE in particular) got no place at the fire.

Let 'em pick; they ain't nobody.

:hatsoff:
Spot

gizamo said:

Pichou....you card :grin:

Click to expand...

Yessir. Always enjoy hearing from the malicious person. :haha:

Thing is, the "canoe gun" thingie is based on a trade gun. Trade guns were not made by "under the radar" makers, be it Birmingham, London, Liége, or Philadelphia.

So, we do know what they were making. We also have the orders from the fur companies for these guns.

As for 48" barrels, I have never seen one show up here either, but that does not prove they don't exist. :wink: :haha:

-----

Oh boy! I can't wait till I earn "curmudgeon" status. :blah:

Obviously if you did some research you would come to the correct conclusion and join the rest of us that have seen the light.

Click to expand...

Bullpuckey Mike - by your statements (mostly unsupported) you and others showing such disdain have apparently only done the research and seen the light as you and Tom and others "wish" it to be and ignore what you don't or demean it - that is you seem to stop at 1800 and east of the Mississippi. See some of my posts in which I've just presented the tip of the iceberg when it comes to actual primary documentation, but as always it just seems to get ignored because it doesn't fit yours or others oh so PC ideas, based on your apparently limited research.
Were they called "canoe" guns - NO and no more so than Type D's, G's, etc. were called that back then, but those names are used and RESPECTED by serious students of the genre so what is the problem???? Were fowlers only used to shoot fowl? NO, were Carolina guns only used in Carolina? NO, were Kentucky rifles only used by Kentuckians? NO, were Rocky Mtn Rifles or California Rifles (both names used by the Brothers Hawken in their advertising) used only in the Rockies or in California? NO - so again what it this problem over a name, whether it be PC or not......
And I call BS again over your comment about only
"gun hacks" making such guns - you make a nice gun by all reports, but you are not GOD so IMO back off with the really snide remarks about other makers. I knew Curly G., albeit not well, and he was one fine gentleman and a heck of a maker, just like the folks currently making guns at NSW, or Ric Carter, or many others who make such guns and yes who have done the research for the time and place - have you?? Yep the term canoe gun is a marketing tool, but to imply that it is used only to "suck in" the newbies (implying something illegal which could be technically libel by the way dependent on jurisdiction) is again BS. IMO if you're a newbie you should do real research - as the Romans said a long time ago caveat emptor...........the idea that you or anyone else are protecting the innocent is again just so much BS...........
Sorry for the rant and if it gets me kicked off this forum so be it, but I reckon I'm just blankety blank tired of some folks pontificating on how they and they alone are the purveyors of the "truth" when in fact their knowledge is limited in scope when it comes to certain subjects.........
and no I make no claim to being an NO expert, but when I do answer, as I have done here, I try my best to keep a civil tongue and back up the info I offer with primary documentation, something the naysayers in this thread and others on the subject seldom seem to do.
And I am not against spirited discourse, but IMO we should all remember Mr. Voltaire's dictum (paraphrased), "I will fight to the death to allow you say what you wish, whether I agree or not"........and thus we should keep our comments as civil as possible since there is absolutely no need to answer with the kind of assinine disrespect seen in some of the answers here........

OK, I guess I will never make it to "curmudgeon."

Anyhoo...

24" barrels: there are a few trade orders or inventories that are pre-1840. I have not yet seen one of these guns. The short barrel guns I am familiar with are all late guns, with the rounded end lockplates.

So, now the question is, do any of the reproduction short guns resemble the early short guns, or are they at all close? What are the differences or similarities?

If we can answer that, maybe we can add to our knowledge and hope for closer, well documented reproductions of all types. Dates would be helpful as well, since there is a rough correlation between barrel length and date of manufacture.

:v

As you can see the quote thingy didn't work.....

that is you seem to stop at 1800 and east of the Mississippi.

Click to expand...

That is correct. I don't have much interest in the west or after 1800 untill you get to the cowboy era.

Were they called "canoe" guns - NO and no more so than Type D's, G's, etc. were called that back then, but those names are used and RESPECTED by serious students of the genre so what is the problem????

Click to expand...

Serious students of the genre are moving past those labels. Hamilton's "Types" were great in their day, but we're moving past that now.

And I call BS again over your comment about only
"gun hacks" making such guns -

Click to expand...

I can honestly say I have ever seen what the owner said was a canoe gun that wasn't a "hack job". Chubby, poor craftsmanship and of course a complete fantasy. Of course my standards of craftsmanship are probably different that what others will accept....comes with the occupation I make a living at. One of my many flaws I suppose, the ability to know a turd when I'm looking at one.

you make a nice gun by all reports,

Click to expand...

Thanks! :bow:

but you are not GOD so IMO back off with the really snide remarks about other makers.

Click to expand...

NOT GOD!!!!!! :shocked2: First I've heard about this! :haha:

I knew Curly G., albeit not well, and he was one fine gentleman and a heck of a maker

Click to expand...

Yea, me too. Made the mistake of my life camping next to him at the '83 midwestern rendezvous. He and his buds drank hooted and hollered all night long then went to bed when the sun came up. That really sucked as I was there to shoot, not drink all night and sleep all day. I lost alot of respect for the man at that point.

just like the folks currently making guns at NSW, or Ric Carter, or many others who make such guns and yes who have done the research for the time and place - have you??

Click to expand...

RESEARCH! I have been building historically correct guns for 29 years, 13 of those years full time. I have been making a living doing so with out ever having to stoop so low as to have to find a gimmick like a "Canoe gun" to dupe the unwary into parting with their money. I have more books on old guns than any sane person should have and was recently hired by the largest gun auction company in the country as their antique arms expert and description writer. My experience, pedigree and research back ground is as good or better than anyone that's producing "canoe guns".

Yep the term canoe gun is a marketing tool, but to imply that it is used only to "suck in" the newbies (implying something illegal which could be technically libel by the way dependent on jurisdiction) is again BS

Click to expand...

:rotf: I think sucking in newbies goes back several millenia.... nothing new about it.

IMO if you're a newbie you should do real research - as the Romans said a long time ago caveat emptor...........the idea that you or anyone else are protecting the innocent is again just so much BS..........

Click to expand...

So, let me get this straight....Newbies are fresh meat and shouldn't be brought up to speed on what is correct and what isn't?? caveat emptor In this case I guess you mean "screw them over before they figure out the truth". I really couldn't live with myself if I had to make money that way.

I make no claim to being an NO expert, but when I do answer, as I have done here, I try my best to keep a civil tongue and back up the info I offer with primary documentation, something the naysayers in this thread and others on the subject seldom seem to do.

Click to expand...

Honestly I don't have the time to give the proper documentation on all this stuff. I spend way too much time on this board as it is. I can point interested folks in the right direction and they can buy the books like I have if they are truly interested. I give my 29 years of research away for free so anyone is free to take it or leave it.

but IMO we should all remember Mr. Voltaire's dictum (paraphrased), "I will fight to the death to allow you say what you wish, whether I agree or not"........and thus we should keep our comments as civil as possible since there is absolutely no need to answer with the kind of assinine disrespect seen in some of the answers here........

Click to expand...

Hackers are still hackers, hard to sugar coat that sort of thing.
By the way, I don't think it was Gostomski that "invented" the "canoe gun". He reproduced the "blanket gun" which is 100% correct, but the "canoe gun" didn't come into being untill the last decade or so, long after his passing.

Excellent Mike. You've pretty much said it all with that post, keep up the good (and honest) work and the information you share is truly appreciated by those that care.
:applause:

I should like to take this moment to induct you into the Royal Order of Honorable Curmudgeons. You have the sterling qualities of leadership, knowledge, integritity and acerbic wit that many aspire to but fail to attain. You have demonstated an ability to "gripe slap" with words the occasional miscreant while demonstrating laudable restraint in the use of said technique. Welcome, brother and may your arsenal of crusty and stinging verbiage be forever full! Amen! :thumbsup:

Great post Mike! Facts is facts and your post should end the discussion. Somehow I fear it won't though.

And as always there are those will choose the "facts" (none of which were really documented so more opinion than fact) they agree with and "real facts" such as I presented are left in the dust......

My experience, pedigree and research back ground is as good or better than anyone that's producing "canoe guns".

Click to expand...

except by your own admission you have not done the research regarding the west of the early and mid-19th century and therefore would be offereing "opinion" and/or unsubstantiated remarks......
researching an earlier period and applying that info to a later one DOES NOT count.....

FWIW - I do agree that canoe gun is a dumb moniker - IMO buffalo runner would have been much more appropriate.....and mo I do not think shafting anyone is "right" but then again folks who go into anything without studying the subject for themselves (and that does not mean depending only on the opinions and/or unsupported "facts" of others) have set themselves up for the fall, deserved or not, but that's what being responsible is all about.....and yes like you Mike I'm in the historical reproduction business and have been since the 1970's and I spend an inordinate amount of my time talking with/advising potential customers about what can be documented and what can't..overall I'm betting we'd have more in common than not but as always discussions on these boards are by their very nature limited to the written word only.....

Oh well as Mr. Lincoln said you can please some of the the folks ad infinitum.......

I will now gracefully bow out and leave those to "believe" what fits their image.........
I've spent far too much time looking up and offering documentation.......

LaBonte said:

...and thus we should keep our comments as civil as possible since there is absolutely no need to answer with the kind of assinine disrespect seen in some of the answers here...

Click to expand...

Thank you! :thumbsup:

"...I have no desire that anyone else shares my opinions about the Kentucky and its makers, but I do hope that other students will attempt to prove or disprove them.Being proven wrong or right would bring me equal joy because such proof would indicate that others were affording the Kentucky rifle the importance which I believe it deserves."

Joe Kindig Jr.
"Thoughts on the Kentucky Rifle in its Golden Age"
{1960} Preface, P.VII

The above statement was written by by Mr. Kindig with reference to the Kentucky rifle but I have always thought it to be highly appropriate in the study of antique firearms and find it as relevant in 2009 as it was in 1960.Scholarship is its own reward and I have always striven to share mine in the hope that others may benefit.I know others feel the same way and for this I am glad.
:bow: :v
Tom Patton

Labonte,
Sounds like we're both on the same page to me. :v Other than my tendency to call things the way I see them. :wink: I get tired of those that produce guns using incorrect terms just to increase sales. Canoe gun, Carolina guns that aren't Carolina guns, The term "Early" so they can sell to guys interested in the F&I period.....I can go on and on. :haha: Gimmicks aren't needed to sell good work.
By the way, you're quite a craftsman yourself, I've always admired your work. :thumbsup:

Well I just made a "canoe gun" out of a "blanket gun"! :haha:
A friend traded into a blanket gun, shortened at both ends. Unless you run buffalo on horseback or need to conceal your weapon, that is about the most useless thing I can imagine, except maybe a pistol grip pump shotgun. So he asked me to add on to the buttstock so he could actually fire the darn thing. Well the addition is pretty conspicuous since I couldn't match the wood color at all but I've shot it and with the jug choke I put into the 18" barrel is actually throws a useful pattern. Another foot of barrel would be much better, it's really stubby and butt heavy in balance but it does shoot OK.