Patch Box (wood vs brass)

[Swamp Buck]

I have watched the Chambers flintlock building video where a Lancaster rifle w/wooden sliding patch box is put together by James Turpin. The video is good and answers a lot of questions.

For those of you with flintlock rifles that have wooden and brass patch boxes, which ones hold up the best and the longest. It seems that most of the posts on this forum lean towards brass patch boxes. I just wanted to make sure that if I ever decided to build a rifle with a wooden sliding patch box - I wouldn't live to regret that choice.

 

[Birddog6]

Hard to say, we will know in 300 years maybe ? However the brass ones do not come off & you see allot of old ML's with the wooden box lids gone, so I would have to speculate the brass ones are the longest lasting as they are not gonna get lost.

For me they are both basically useless, but at times they do enhance a rifle with so-so wood. I have seen allot of ML's with patchboxes that should have not been put on, as they were poorly done & took away from the rifle rather than adding to it. Also guys tend to use too large of metal patch boxes & for me it unbalances the looks of the rifle. :hmm: Guess I am just not a big patchbox fan, just like to see killer wood !

 

[LRB]

I prefer the wood boxes, and would rather make one of them, than inlet an intricate brass box. The wood also, in most cases but not all, indicates an earlier gun, especially if the gun has a wide flattesh butt plate. I guess I just prefer earlier guns. I find them more comfortable to shoulder, and shoot.

 

Depends on what you are looking for--a hunting, shooting, art gun or a period piece for reenacting, or? John Curry has an article in the latest MuzzleBlasts mag on having to replace his wooden box lid, lost in the woods--and he chose to go with brass this time, reasoning that it was a common period fix. Simple brass boxes can be documented to at least 1755 and the four piece brass box dates to at least the 1760s. So "early" is subjective. I have a 32 year old rifle with a wooden cover, but it has seen little use in the last 15 years. My newest "early Dickert" has a brass box cover. My "longhunters" rifle has no cover, no box. Several folks have told me that the wooden covers are not as durable as brass or iron ones, and that seems to make sense, seeing how they are built.

 

[Geoff Jones]

I'm with Wick on this one....I prefer the wooden boxes. Probably the same preference for earlier guns.

Here's another thought, however. Many newer builders have not yet perfected or attempted any engraving. Rather than have a "plain" brass box...which sometimes looks quite large and plain without engraving...why not a simple elegant wooden lid. Pretty easy even for the newbie to add a few molding lines to the wooden box...

(not implying you're a newbie...just a general statement)

 

[54JNoll]

I agree with Mike, It really depends on what you are after and what look you want.

I opted for a wooden lid on my rifle. Being newly finished it has not seen much use yet and only time will tell how it holds up. There is the potential to loose the lid too.

Now for my son's rifle I am going to go with a very simple and plain brass patch box. It should prove very durable and he should not be able to loose it either.

 

[szihn]

Well, My 2 cents worth:
I make rifles for customers all over the country, and in Europe too. When I make one with a wood box I have to keep in mind where I am, and where it's going.
Wyoming is very dry. If I make a rifle for someone in the deep south, I must fit the wood lid a little loose to alow for the humid air down there. The wood will always swell, and there is NOTHING that can be done to stop it. Some of my customers travel a lot, and such men need a wood box with a slight bit of "rattle" to it if they might be in Arizona one week, and Florida the next.
Now a metal P.B. is more forgiving. It works anywhere. However, the whole muzzleloading hobby is not fundamentally about having the "most pratical rifle". It's about having the rifle that brings you the most pleasure and joy. If we were all to be into "most practical" we'd be carring stainless steel bolt actions with good scopes, or maybe FN-FALS.
So make you decission on what pleases YOU the most, and not on what's "the best". If you like wood, make it! If you want metal and you feel you can't do a good job of engraving it, have a gunsmith do it for you.
Good shooting.
Steve Zihn

 

[Vaino]

Whether a wood or brass Pbox is selected, either one fills an otherwise large blank space w/ something of interest. Personally I don't utilize the brass Bboxes on my hunting LRs so they end up being a large decorative inlay. On my recent builds, the Pbox recesses aren't very deep {1/2"} and are only there to satisfy some sense of correctness. Either type, if done well, enhances the overall beauty and appeal of a LR.....Fred

 

[Stophel]

"Simple brass boxes can be documented to at least 1755.." Really? What documentation would that be?

 

[rich pierce]

I agree that the box should fit the gun. If the style calls for one or the other, go with it. If building a "generic" gun or a "fantasy" gun, go with whatever you like.

I think the earliest (attributed to being early) rifle with a brass box in America is the "musician's rifle" that may have been made near Bethelehem, PA. Some attribute it to the later 1750's or around 1760. Much has been made of the latch system which is "non-standard" as is the latch etc on "#42" and a Schroyer- attributed rifle with an extra wide, 2 piece brass box. The idea being, that a brass box with an unusual mechanical design to the hinge or latch or spring that opens it, may predate "standard" versions. But I am preaching to the choir here, and hoping someone else overhears. The "musician's rifle" is a beauty, for sure, but we know so little that it is hard to know whether it predates the Revolutionary War by much, and exactly what it is, that points to it being 1750's (except the scratched date on the patchbox).

But as we all know, there are no signed dated rifles predating the Schreit rifle (1761, wooden box), that stand up to close scrutiny.

 

[Stophel]

I've only seen a couple of detail photos of the "musician" rifle. Mr. Gusler has "let out too much about that rifle already" and he's not "letting out anymore right now".....(his words, not mine).

From the very little I have seen of the gun, I don't know how it can be attributed to anywhere in particular. I was unaware of any date on the gun. I know he has attributed it to Bethlehem and 1755, but why, I have no idea (I can say the same thing about several guns...). I also don't know why the big "Schroyer" box "must" be very, very early. I've only seen a photo of the box side of the butt of this gun, but what I can see looks like about 1770 to me.....

I don't follow the "logic" of unusual box releases being "early". RCA #86 definitely has an unusual box release, but I can't imagine this being a Pre-Revolutionary rifle! All it says to me is that the maker wanted to try something different.

The famous "brass barreled" gun, I am told, has a date of "1771" engraved inside the box lid (I have been told a lot of things about this gun...) There are some PA rifles with brass boxes dated 1774, and I think I have seen one 1772. And these are "early-looking" boxes. It is widely conceded that the large cast brass "horsehead" box from Lehigh is pretty early, and that it could well go back to about 1765, but before then, it seems to me, all else is just speculation, at least until something concrete turns up.....

 

Gusler is my source of info on the 1755 date and If I remember right he had one with a date inscribed in it, but we all know the potential problems with dates inscribed...at any rate the 4 piece box appears very early (by mid 1760s?) and most folks assume that the simple ones predate it. Certainly(if we can use that term for any of this?) brass box covers of various designs were realtively common by 1770s and I am at a loss as to why so many reenactors of that period shun them. It isn't so simple that wood predates brass, and some wood covers were used even after the AWI, when brass covers dominated the scene--or at least dominated the surviving guns!

 

[silverfox]

Mike if you have to have a patchbox they both serve the same purpose right. I have a thing about wood that I don't understand. Only on well striped gun stocks. Why not make the box lid stripes match the stock stripes instead of them being off line about 10 to 15%. What I mean to say is most rifle stock stripes are close to vertical and most box stripes are vertical to the box but when put on the rifle they are lined up with the drop in the stock making them a missmatch. Just thinking would it make the box lid weaker if it's cut at and angle.
Fox

 

[rich pierce]

Sorry to have stolen the original thread and gotten off into a thicket.

I use both and like both. I think the side-opening brass patchbox is the easiest to use and sturdiest. Holding the rifle naturally, the lid swings down, open to the hand. It flips back up nicely and is easy to close. I would stay away from brass boxes made from thin stock. They are flimsy. Originals often used thick stock, even cast sheet, 1/16" thick and even more. With the wooden box lid, you have it in your hand. Set it down somewhere, then have to run off for some reason, and it is gone. I still like them.

Summary of dating, which is the other topic:
We know wooden lids were used from before 1700 until at least 1800 on some Germanic guns and until the 1790's on American longrifles. The earliest dated American longrifle, 1761, has a wooden box. "There is nothing about THAT rifle that screams, "1760's" to me).

We know that brass patchboxes were in relatively wide usage by the Revolutionary War period in America.

It is surmised that the earliest brass patchboxes were 2-piece affairs, with the side-opener perhaps within that group (it has 2 pieces, but one is in the stock). 4 piece brass patchboxes are believed to have been first used slightly after the "innovation" of the 2 piece box, but regional styles vary, and 2 piece boxes persisted in many areas for a long time.

Arguments have been made that "unusual" hinge and latch or spring mechs may indicate earlier dates for a gun. Your mileage may vary, and certainly some folks enjoy being unique or clever.

Folks who love early longrifles could talk about these things all day, for weeks, and not come to a consensus.

So- go with what you like, or research it and come to your own conclusions.

 

[Vaino]

All these dates as to when wooden covers ceased to be made and were replaced w/ brass Pboxes is quite academic, not at all definite, and really doesn't answer the question. W/o going into all sorts of contortions, if a generic early rifle is to be built, a wooden or brass Pbox would be appropriate and anything later would definitely require brass.....Fred

 

[rich pierce]

All these dates as to when wooden covers ceased to be made and were replaced w/ brass Pboxes is quite academic

I couldn't agree more, and as I am a professor, it seems almost appropriate!

Just havin fun, Fred! Keep up the good work. As I said in the practical part of my blabber, I like 'em all!

 

[Vaino]

Rich...I admire and respect builders who delve into and research the history of the American LR and I really enjoy some of the discussions. Since my retirement, building LRs has become my main past time and w/ each LR I make, it becomes painfully apparent that I should have started earlier in the pursuit of "hands on" viewing of originals. In the meantime, the photos in Shumway"s and Kindig"s excellent books will have to do and hopefully my interpretations of these photos are somewhat correct. I hope that my post wasn't taken as a criticism of people who have a passion and interest in the history of the American LR......Fred

 

[Stophel]

Wooden box lids lasted WELL into the 19th century in America, most commonly found on Lehigh area guns, but other areas too. By this time, the wood box was usually relegated to the very plain rifle for a customer who wanted a box, but didn't want to pay for the brass one. Then, of course, there's those cool late North Carolina rifles with wood box lids that SWING open...

You have to imagine the Schreidt gun as it was when it was made. Fully stepped wrist and a guard that was larger than the one currently installed.

 

[barebackjack]

How difficult are both to accomplish?
Im going to build an A. Verner bucks county rifle this winter (my second build) and was toying with either a wood or brass box. But, like has been said, if I royaly screw it up, it will detract rather than add to the gun. I think that is the reason that makes me shy away from them completely.
How dificult are they to install when compared to other fixtures?

Thanks

Boone

 

[Stophel]

Wow, I haven't done a brass box in a LOONG time. Everything's been wood. But then, I generally do pretty "early" guns. Metal boxes are not hard to install. Contriving the catch is the biggest part, if you have a ready-made box lid already.

The most irritating part of a wood box lid for me is the end cap (if you use one), but I'm finally getting the hang of those. Making a wood box lid is not nearly as hard as some might make it out to be. Actually, I think it's pretty easy to do. Again, messing with the catch is more work than doing the actual lid itself.