• This community needs YOUR help today. We rely 100% on Supporting Memberships to fund our efforts. With the ever increasing fees of everything, we need help. We need more Supporting Members, today. Please invest back into this community. I will ship a few decals too in addition to all the account perks you get.



    Sign up here: https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/account/upgrades

Original Restorations

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Feltwad

45 Cal.
Joined
May 28, 2017
Messages
2,007
Reaction score
2,949
There seems to be few threads on original restorations is it because most collectors do not believe in doing it even if its in poor condition and for some would be scrap
Feltwad
 
There aren't very many restoration threads on this forum for a couple of reasons. Number one, few if any of the professional restorers are members of this forum. Number two, the professional restorers I know like to keep their knowledge and tricks of the trade close to their vests.

There are some collectors who prefer to keep guns in "as found condition", but a lot of collectors will have varying degrees of restoration work done on their rifles.

The most common type of restoration on a Kentucky rifle is a re-conversion back to flintlock. This practice began in the US back in the middle of the last century when interest in old Kentucky rifles was beginning, and they had a relatively low value. It has almost become an accepted practice by many collectors today. The biggest issue is that not all restorers understand what cock, pan, and frizzen are correct for the period and type of gun. In the 1950s and 1960s, about the only parts available for re-conversion work were Bud Siler's Germanic lock parts, so a lot locks were re-converted using them--even English locks. Some of these locks have had new re-conversions with more correct parts in recent times.

There are stories of some of the early collectors with buckets of percussion hammers from guns that they had reconverted to flintlock.

Other restoration work ranges from fixing cracks in the stock to repairing broken wrists to replacing small sections of missing wood to replacing the whole forestock with new wood.

One of the most dramatic examples of restoration is the only known rifle with Andreas Albrecht's signature on the barrel. It is shown in its un-restored state in Rifles of Colonial America Vol I by George Shumway as gun No. 46 starting on page 198. In its "as found state", it was just a beat up old stock with the barrel. It was missing the forestock from entry pipe forward, missing the entry pipe, and of course, the forward pipes, missing the lock, missing the wood patch box lid, and missing the side plate. The barrel, trigger, trigger guard, and butt plate were the only metal parts on it. There were also significant pieces of wood missing around the lock and tang areas. The fully restored rifle is pictured in The Lancaster Longrifle by Patrick Hornberger and John Kolar on pages 10 & 11. The missing and damaged wood has been replaced and repaired. The missing metal parts have been replaced including the lock, ramrod pipes, side plate, and screws. The new wood has been "antiqued" and some of the original wood has been refinished with an "antiqued" look. This is not the only antique rifle that has had this much work done to it.

There is plenty of amateur restoration work done, too. Some of it's ok, and some is dismal.

I have a friend that owns a Jaeger with a very unfortunate past. A well respected collector owned it at one time. Its forestock was evidently broken and damaged at that time. After his passing, it changed hands and came into the possession of an individual who decided to take it apart and sell the pieces on eBay. The metal mounts went to one person and the broken stock and barrel to another. The metal mounts found their way to The Rifle Shoppe where molds were made of them. An eventual owner of the stock and barrel decided to have the rifle restored and ordered a set of castings from The Rifle Shoppe. The restorer decided it would be easier to completely replace the forestock instead of trying to glue the broken pieces back together and replace missing sections. The original forestock wood was discarded. The rifle has been restored, but the only original parts are the butt stock and forearm, the barrel, and I think maybe, the lock. This type of treatment may be all too common.
 
Hi Feltwad,
Phil is bang on. There are not many who post on this site who have the skills and knowledge to do good restoration work. I own 3 original English fowlers from the 1760s-1780s. One is by Joseph Heylin, one by Abraham Elston of Doncaster, and another by an unknown London maker. All need restoration work and I have the skills but I am in no hurry with plenty of other work to do at the moment. Moreover, not hurrying grants me the time to learn more about them before jumping in. I won't touch them until I am fully confident that I can restore value, not diminish it. Feltwad, do you know anything about Elston? My only source of information about him is a listing in Bailey and Nie's book "English Gunmakers: the Birmingham and Provincial Gun Trade".

dave
 
Dave
The only information on Abraham Elston to hand that I have is what is in English Gunmakers but I will look further through my research I also have contacts in the Birmingham area they might have something . Restoration is what I do most but I have my own method on what to do keeping to the history of the gun in question .I think I better not say anything on converting back to flintlock which I do not agree with they never look right and mostly done for financial gain
Feltwad
 
Hi Feltwad,
Thanks for the note. I don't disagree with you at all about reconverting to flint. Percussion conversion is part of a gun's history. Having said that however, my Heylin fowler seems to have been a poor choice for converting to percussion, which it was. It has a safety bolt and as such the bridle is somewhat fragile. Because the percussion hammer has no shoulder to rest on the lock bolster, it depends on the bridle and the nipple to stop the motion. Unfortunately, even with a proper nipple in place, the bridle apparently took a beating and cracked at the tumbler pivot hole. That allowed the tumbler to droop and the mainspring to bash into the bottom of the lock mortice, cracking the stock. I have to repair the lock, and in so doing I may turn it back to flint. At the very least, if the lock is to be useable, I would have to replace the hammer for one with a shoulder. The original conversion to percussion was not a hack job. It was well done and the hammer has very nice engraving but the lock is not designed very well for percussion. My fowlers are not for monetary investment. They are an important part of my education into the world of 18th century British gun making. I would appreciate any information on Elston that comes your way. The fowler by him is an interesting mix of plain and ornate.

dave
 
Has for the drum and nipple conversion over the years I have resorted a large number to me this conversion was the history of the gun The last one was about 3 weeks ago I have enclosed some images of this gun which I think would not have been made to look better if reconverted back to flint.
Feltwad



 
Last edited:
Hi Feltwad,
Did that converted flintlock you showed originally have a separate pan attached to the breech? I recently saw a Charles Moore made that way.

dave
 
Back
Top