Builds--Many different Schools--Why did you choose to build what you did?

[Col. Batguano]

There are just SO many options to choose from. Of course, intended use dictates caliber for the most part, and method of use often dictates barrel length or target weight. But in say, a "long barreled 50" there are a zillion options. When deciding on a school or style, we all have make choices. What did you choose to build and what was the thought process (or features) that led you to choose what you did? Do you have any favorites? Everybody is slightly different.

 

[rich pierce]

As I work with clients I find I have to draw out from them what it is that appeals to them when they like this gun or that. I have to ask a LOT of questions. Recently I was discussing a possible club butt fowler build. We talked about specific originals he found attractive. After some questions it was clear the butt stock and wrist profile was the “it” factor. He prefers a strongly downward curving wrist that then swoops into a belly on the lower edge of the buttstock. Now I know.
This sort of interchange has helped me figure out why some originals appeal to me more than others.
I generally start with history for my builds. What about a particular gun speaks to a period and place that fascinates me?
Next, style. Among originals from that timeframe, which really appeal to me? Third, I enjoy building guns that are not run of the mill, available in kit form, built hundreds of times by others. Unusual builds require more parts fabrication and planning. This engages my interest. My last 4 builds were a George Fainot Lancaster fowler, a George Fainot Lancaster rifle, a Deringer trade rifle, and a New England fowler. All required parts fabrication and design from the ground up.

 

[BV]

I just pick what looks good to me.

 

[Dale Lilly]

I admire builders like Rich. However I know that I do not have the patience to build from scratch so I build from kits. As fan of plains rifle, particularly the Hawken, I usually build that style. I have built other styles. Every muzzle loader excites me and I love to see other folks builds. Keep 'em coming. Dale

 

[Larry (Omaha)]

There are just SO many options to choose from. Of course, intended use dictates caliber for the most part, and method of use often dictates barrel length or target weight. But in say, a "long barreled 50" there are a zillion options. When deciding on a school or style, we all have make choices. What did you choose to build and what was the thought process (or features) that led you to choose what you did? Do you have any favorites? Everybody is slightly different.

My first build was a Roman nose flintlock longrifle. I loved the look beginning in my early years of life. When I finished the rifle and started shooting, my mind did a major reset. How? I still loved the look, but it was a real PITA to shoot! I could not get down on the comb without it beating my cheekbone. (only a 45 cal ) I have since found the Early Lancaster to be one of my favorites. The grace and lines are aesthetically pleasing to me and the style fits my body for shooting. First attractions of style for me did not pan out to be a good shooting fit.

 

[kje54]

I admire builders like Rich. However I know that I do not have the patience to build from scratch so I build from kits. As fan of plains rifle, particularly the Hawken, I usually build that style. I have built other styles. Every muzzle loader excites me and I love to see other folks builds. Keep 'em coming. Dale

Like you I lack the patience and the confidence to do a detailed scratch build and prefer the easy builds but unlike you my preference is for fullstocks. Of course having done some and having modified the kits I'm gaining more confidence and patience. I don't think I'll ever build one from the ground up but I may get good enough and patient enough to take on the other so called "kits".

I prefer the Golden Age rifles and earlier smoothbore fowlers but don't really like the early Jagers that much and I find the Schuetzens are God awful ugly.......

 

[Tom A Hawk]

I just pick what looks good to me.

Me too. I've made a half stock Hawken, a Golden Age, a full stock Hawken, a Tennessee and now working on an Isaac Haines Lancaster. Patterns that appeal to my eye and hunting habits.

 

[Vaino]

Seeing I built mainly "spec LRs" the styles chosen were 2 that sold well. ....early Lancaster and Bucks County. I've also taken orders for early Virginia LRs, Lehighs, Hawkens and Beck LRs, but these were exceptions. Also have built a few parts sets, but normally my builds are from blanks.

The early Lancasters are pretty straight forward and only the Pboxes, sideplates, triggers and trigger plates toeplates, RR pipes and Mcaps were made. The Bp;ates, flintlocks & TGs were used w/o alterations,

The Bucks County LRs were by far the most numerous of my builds...my favorite style of LR. Again the Pboxes w/ BC toeplate releases, sideplates, triggers, trigger plates and Mcaps were made...bit in addition besides making the 2 forward RR pipes, the entry pipes w/ the elongated finial had to be made. The Bplates and TGs were purchased but had to be greatly modified......there just weren't any Shuler BC styled Bplates and TGs on the market. Shown below are an early Lancaster,

a Bucks County and an early Virginia.....Fred






























tG were purchsed but

 

[tenngun]

I just pick what looks good to me.

I built a Leman in .54 with a full stock. They were made light. I went with a full inch barrel instead of the 15/16. With the narrow but plate it was very uncomfortable to shoot.
I like the looks of early Lancaster, Maryland and Virgina. And find them real comfortable to shoot.
I THINK Lehigh style was drawn from French, and though I find my TFC my favorite gun every Lehigh I ever handled felt uncomfortable for me.
I like the upper arm cross body shooting stance but extreme curved butts to not fit me well. So I don’t go for the Ohio styles.
So for me it’s looks, fit, and my historic interest.
Im not as concerned as little details as some, I wouldn’t trade my Centermark for a more correct, I wouldn’t dwell on what’s wrong with a Perdisoli Bess or Charley or even their trade gun, but I do want a gun reasonably correct for my time intrerest. I would be happy with Tracks Hawken if I wanted a Hawken, but as much as I find Hawkens appealing it would not fit my aspects of the sport, so no almost Hawken in my stable.

 

[acorn20]

I prefer earlier rifles with big bores and wide butt plates; with a little Germanic flare thrown in. About seventeen years ago, I befriended Ed Wenger at Dixon's gunmaker's faire. I had the components for an early Lancaster smooth rifle and needed someone to build it. One look at the metal to wood fit on Ed's rifles sealed the deal for me. Since then, he's completed an English Gentlemen's rifle in .62 caliber, restocked a .54 caliber, 24 inch barreled Jaeger and most recently, an outstanding .62 caliber Germanic Hunting Rifle.

I also have two Casteel transitional rifles that I've had for forty years. Both of these rifles have a heavy Germanic influence as well. These rifles just hold instinctively when shouldered and are a joy to shoot.