Planning a Rifle :)

My building comes and spurts due to some physical limitations. Likely this will be my last rifle or my best one. I want to go ahead and plan it and get the components.

It is an unusual rifle. My mentor told me ..."You like those off the wall unusual or ugly guns."
so here is the original....
A73gJEw by Travis Brown, on Flickr
lock_pic_feather_gun by Travis Brown, on Flickr
Untitled by Travis Brown, on Flickr
Untitled by Travis Brown, on Flickr

This is just a rough out, mainly to get an idea of the scale of this rifle. It's going to big one.
I have all the hard parts or hard to find parts.
48" Rayl Barrel in.54..copied from the original gun
Reeves #10 Guard and a Brooks casting of the buttplate
A Siler is close to the original lock.

Originally I had planned to build this as a right handed gun. Three factors for that, 1. Of course the Original was right handed. 2. I think Left handed guns are...odd. They just look odd to me. Funny thing though, they look odd in photos but in person it's not really noticeable.
3, this stock pattern is reproduced By David Keck...Fred Miller Feather Pattern in right hand.

I shoot left handed so I'm going to build this one left handed which means a blank build.

I will have to call on several resources. I know some folks who have built this rifle so I'm going to call on them. This is a pretty closeknit community and most of us if we stay in it long enough will meet or at least have some familiarity with....most everybody.

I may try to get a pattern or a tracing from a right handed gun.

I'm going to do a try stock first just to shoulder it to make sure about the shape.

I thought ya'll might like to see how one starts.

Just a suggestion, I'd pin that rigger through the wood, you'll get a much better trigger pull. Also, which Brooks did you get that buttplate from?
I have handled the original several times, I don't recall it being overly big. Is that Goering's gun or the one Gusler was showing round, there are two of them that are nearly alike.

You're at the fun spot now; no mistakes to fix.

Looks like a cool project. I know you said the siler lock is a close match but have you looked at the L&R classic ? They have a left hand lock with no frizzen bridal. Tony

Comfortably_Numb said:

Just a suggestion, I'd pin that rigger through the wood, you'll get a much better trigger pull. Also, which Brooks did you get that buttplate from?
I have handled the original several times, I don't recall it being overly big. Is that Goering's gun or the one Gusler was showing round, there are two of them that are nearly alike.

Click to expand...

It's Mike Brooks. He is offering some castings now. I had a run of bad luck last year getting castings. I had the whole Goering "Feather Gun Set", lost in the mail. I got a empty box.
Untitled by Travis Brown, on Flickr

My advice to anyone ordering castings, especially rare and hard to find castings...

Request That They Be Packaged In Bag Or Even Have Tags Wired To Them With Shipping Information So If They Come Out Of The Box, The Postal Service Knows Where It Should Go Or Go Back To....

Once they come out of the box with no info....that's it.

Brooks came to the rescue with a suitable casting.

"WoodsRunner"

Untitled by Travis Brown, on Flickr
Untitled by Travis Brown, on Flickr
Untitled by Travis Brown, on Flickr
Untitled by Travis Brown, on Flickr

Faber....or possibly Huber but it's known as the "Faber Rifle"
Untitled by Travis Brown, on Flickr
Untitled by Travis Brown, on Flickr

Feather..
A73gJEw by Travis Brown, on Flickr

Of the three, WoodsRunner, Johanne Faber and Feather...
The Feather and WoodsRunner show the most similarities. All have that minimal almost folksy carving behind the cheek. Are they related? Are they a School? Who knows, but they do look alike in a lot of ways.

I'm not doing a bench copy of the Feather but I do hope I can pull off a rifle that would look right amongst the three and especially the Feather and WoodsRunner.

Comfortably Numb,
I'm going to pin the trigger. I just laid those parts out for some scale. I know the rifle is not really "Big" per say but it is long and much more robust than say a early 19th Century Appalachian Rifle.
Since you got to handle the " Feather", I have been told it has a very short lower forestock...about 8 inches to ramrod entry. Do you remember that feature?

the last time I saw it was around 2000 or so when Reeves had it in his booth at F-ship s I really don't remember the details.. I think Gusler had his woods runner there the same year. I'm of the opinion they are made by the same hand. That old "Faber" rifle now known as the "Huber" certainly has had a lot of replacement patchbox covers on it over the years! This one has some sort of rocket ship thing going on.

Comfortably_Numb said:

the last time I saw it was around 2000 or so when Reeves had it in his booth at F-ship s I really don't remember the details.. I think Gusler had his woods runner there the same year. I'm of the opinion they are made by the same hand. That old "Faber" rifle now known as the "Huber" certainly has had a lot of replacement patchbox covers on it over the years! This one has some sort of rocket ship thing going on.

Click to expand...

You bring up a good point.
Since this thread is about planning and making a pattern for a historical rifle this point is worth mentioning.
The rifle you see now may not be the rifle it was when it was built. A builder with a quest for a true 18th Century rifle needs to take this into consideration. You need to really be careful and know the history of the piece you are basing a build from. The following are two examples....

The Free Born Rifle....

I really do like that rifle. I studied that rifle in depth. I was really surprised when I found it in a 1970s copy of the RCA Book.
In that early edition it was percussion, and had a 36" barrel.
In the 90's RCA It was flint with a 44" barrel.
A lot of the features that were unique to the rifle, ( the fancy crowned muzzle) the forestock moulding, pipes and nose cap...( how it was riveted...stuff like that) were all done by a contemporary restorer!

The Shreik or Schrecht (sic spelling) Rifle...

I have a great interest in step-toe rifles. Especially the later post Rev War-Early 19th Century...Jacob Young, Thomas Simpson (Cumberland School) Micheal and Conrad Humble (early Kentucky) Virginia Valley Guns... Honakers... Roanoke Area..'down the Valley to Tennessee eventually to John Bull. A lot of these rifles have a slight...step toe. The Free Born has a step toe as well.
The Shreik Rifle has that subtle Step Toe. Since it was early I thought there may be a link somehow to those later pieces as the architecture seemed similar.
The Shreik Rifle has had at least 3 trigger guards on it maybe more. The Step had been greatly reduced through various restorations through the years, changing the architecture of the rifle.

Many rifles show up looking one way; a few years later, they may look a lot different. It's a good thing to keep in mind.

Yes, I was talking to Kettenburg a while ago and he said we'd all be shocked if we knew how much restoration has been done on some very well known old guns and nobody ever says anything about the new work. I'm always skeptical about anything above the rear ram rod pipe. One of the early Moravian rifles came back to this country with the stock broke off at the rear pipe, no barrel, no lock or side plate and no trigger guard, yet it's a whole rifle now. But, they are what they are and you have to do as well as you can when reproducing the old guns.

I place the feather rifle earlier than the woodsrunner based on a couple things, but both are good early guns. I have several articles on these guns in my binders.

rich pierce said:

I place the feather rifle earlier than the woodsrunner based on a couple things, but both are good early guns. I have several articles on these guns in my binders.

Click to expand...

Although I have never studied either of these guns with more than a casual interest they are both good early guns. it's the architecture that freaks me out, quite unusual. But, there is nothing wrong with unusual! Do you think they are by the same hand?

The Woodsrunner has a couple of really unusual features.

The buttplate orientation, I do not think it's a mistake.
Untitled by Travis Brown, on Flickr

This rifle has cast off. Conventional methods are moving the buttplate over but tilting it to center of the comb line. On this rifle the buttplate is offset for cast off but it's not tilted to the centerline of the comb. Thus it looks crooked but it's going to be flat against the shoulder.
I think this was on purpose.

Another feature that I have not seen, the patchbox cavity is round or oval. The dove tail on the lid is not angular like a conventional dovetail but rounded...a rounded dovetail.

Comfortably_Numb said:

Although I have never studied either of these guns with more than a casual interest they are both good early guns. it's the architecture that freaks me out, quite unusual. But, there is nothing wrong with unusual! Do you think they are by the same hand?

Click to expand...

I don’t see why they might not be by the same hand but there are differences. They might be 10 years apart, or not. With unsigned early pieces, unless there are a lot of them, it’s not easy to discern patterns or make good guesses.

Comfortably_Numb said:

Just a suggestion, I'd pin that rigger through the wood, you'll get a much better trigger pull.

Click to expand...

I need some help with your quote. Dunno what you mean? All my triggers are screwed in. What am I missing? If you are talking about the pivot pin, what is the difference between a pivot in the trigger base bar, verses through the wood??
Flintlocklar

Larry (Omaha) said:

I need some help with your quote. Dunno what you mean? All my triggers are screwed in. What am I missing? If you are talking about the pivot pin, what is the difference between a pivot in the trigger base bar, verses through the wood??
Flintlocklar

Click to expand...

What he means Larry is pinning the trigger axis point through the stock. The above trigger assembly shown has ears and the trigger is pinned through those "ears". Moving the axis or pin point up or higher and pinning at the corner of the trigger plate gives better leverage and thus a lighter trigger.

Most rifles of the period had their triggers pinned through the stock in such a manner. The trigger plate was there as a guide for the trigger and helped to prevent stock wear. It also forms the "nut" for the tang bolt.

54ball said:

What he means Larry is pinning the trigger axis point through the stock. The above trigger assembly shown has ears and the trigger is pinned through those "ears". Moving the axis or pin point up or higher and pinning at the corner of the trigger plate gives better leverage and thus a lighter trigger.

Most rifles of the period had their triggers pinned through the stock in such a manner. The trigger plate was there as a guide for the trigger and helped to prevent stock wear. It also forms the "nut" for the tang bolt.

Click to expand...

He did not mention changing the geometry, that is why I did not understand (my thick head) My last rifle build I altered the ears to give better mechanical advantage
Thanks
Flintlocklar

Untitled by Travis Brown, on Flickr

What I need to do is get my small photo or pattern transferred into full size. This way I'll have a full size pattern to base the build. There are many ways to accomplish this....
1. A pattern or tracing taken directly from the rifle...not an option

2. Drawing it out free hand....a great possibility of distortion

3. A full size print ....beyond my technical computer skill, that and getting it all to line up to size at a printer place...it's just beyond my scope.

4. An overhead projector...A great option, simply project on a wall, line the size up with my Feather buttplate and draw or trace it out. Problem is...I don't have an overhead.

5. The hand drawn grid...It's pretty simple, a grid is drawn on the small photo matched to the full sized buttplate for scale...a larger sized grid is drawn and the full sized reproduction is hand drawn to the larger grid....square by square. With this method there still going to be a lot of free hand to make up the differences.

Too, not only am I blowing up a small photo, I'm also reversing it for a left hand build.
Wish me luck. I'm winging it here.

There's a saying about carving....If you can draw it you can carve it. With this...maybe if I can draw it, I can build it.

“There's a saying about carving....If you can draw it you can carve it.”

Hmmmm........ I may be forever doomed! LOL!


Good luck 54ball! Now I’m excited to follow you on this worthy project!

Untitled by Travis Brown, on Flickr

It's going to be a 2.4 enlargement if my calculations are correct.

Einsiedler said:

“There's a saying about carving....If you can draw it you can carve it.”

Hmmmm........ I may be forever doomed! LOL!


Good luck 54ball! Now I’m excited to follow you on this worthy project!

Click to expand...

It just takes practice and more practice and maybe just a little more practice.
Thanks for your interest.

i read a article once on triggers like yours. the article said this, the higher the pivot point the easier it set the lock off. the lower the pivot point the harder to set the lock off. why no use the base and make your own trigger with a high pivot point. dont ask me where i read the article, dont remember but i remember the article. it might be easy to say because i know how to high temp silver solder well but it would be possible to make a better trigger like that than you can buy.