Rangers Musket

[JCKelly]

Here is what I think is an original Roger's Ranger's musket. It was originally a Long Land pattern Brown Bess. Then cut from its original 46" down to 36" barrel length, as Roger's R did during the French & Indian War. Archaeologists have found a number of 10” barrel pieces on one of the islands associated with Rogers’ Rangers. Sorry, I did not record my reference for this. Gun likely reconverted to flint. Lock old pattern, before 1762.
Whether or not I am correct about this individual (nominal .75 cal.) musket, it is a proper pattern for F&I War Rangers.

 

[FlinterNick]

I cant say I rubbish the India muskets entirely, honestly.

Some of them look pretty good and I don't drink the kool-aid on their being nothing more than cheap pipe bombs. although I would have them tested at the dealer before it was shipped to me.

That aside, it seems to me that their biggest flaw, aside from cosmetics, is the lock which obviously is the most ESSENTIAL part of any muzzleloader.

Thing is, I know that if I ever do buy an India-made gun, the first thing to go would be the lock and hope and pray that it can be replaced with a better quality lock that wouldn't require too much inletting and fiddling around with in order to make it work.

Then again one is left up with the question of whether or not it's really worth the hassle.

id say not worth it; that is to buy an Indian made gun knowing you’ll have to replace the lock with a higher quality lock at the end of the day you’re at the price of the Indian gun which will be around $800 and then the lock which would be another two to $400.....I know a lot of folks would do this and often fail at it too

 

[firemanjim68]

That's where I'm at with this carbine. Spend twice as much as buying TWO India muskets and still have to replace the lock.
Yup, not worth it.

 

[JCKelly]

Guess there is disagreement about Rangers' barrel lengths.
I would like to offer another view on firemanjim's post - " lock which obviously is the most ESSENTIAL part of any muzzleloader"
I'd say the essential part is the barrel. It is that which goes BOOM and sends a ball somewhere. The stock & mountings are so one may point the barrel in the right direction, and the lock conveniently ignites the powder. But with a loaded barrel alone one can locate some fire and make the thing send a ball somewhere.
A very practical matter is take a good look at that Indian barrel, specifically how it is breeched. Unscrew the breech-plug and see how the threads look. They should be coarse threaded and fit well. I have seen other posts suggesting they are not all. The only one I saw was a blunderbuss some years ago with the plug quite blown out. Happily it missed the shooter's head. The musket itself may or may not suit your ideas of authenticity but one serious matter is will the plug stay in.

Authenticity? Safety is more important, to me anyway. But then I was an Expert Witness for some muzzle loader lawsuits, and have seen burst barrels and heard of the injuries to the shooter. There are always times when something goes bad. Some barrels bulge and need replaced. That's life. Other barrels don't have such ductile steel and shatter instead. That is most hurtful to the man holding it.

I shot my first muzzle loader in 1954. Have shot with local groups in four states. I never personally heard about a gun bursting. But I have done failure analyses on several that have indeed blown up. I can tell you that well-known barrel maker in West Virginia went out of the muzzle loading barrel business mid-1980's, after a union plumber blew off 3/5 of his right hand from one such barrel.

Reported in a three-part series, Oct-Nov-Dec 1985 Muzzle Blasts

 

[firemanjim68]

Definitely something to consider, but with Sitting Fox's version of the Rogers's Ranger's carbine l know that the barrel is not an India make so l don't think any customer has to worry about a burst barrel.
But that lock though.....

 

[FlinterNick]

Guess there is disagreement about Rangers' barrel lengths.
I would like to offer another view on firemanjim's post - " lock which obviously is the most ESSENTIAL part of any muzzleloader"
I'd say the essential part is the barrel. It is that which goes BOOM and sends a ball somewhere. The stock & mountings are so one may point the barrel in the right direction, and the lock conveniently ignites the powder. But with a loaded barrel alone one can locate some fire and make the thing send a ball somewhere.
A very practical matter is take a good look at that Indian barrel, specifically how it is breeched. Unscrew the breech-plug and see how the threads look. They should be coarse threaded and fit well. I have seen other posts suggesting they are not all. The only one I saw was a blunderbuss some years ago with the plug quite blown out. Happily it missed the shooter's head. The musket itself may or may not suit your ideas of authenticity but one serious matter is will the plug stay in.

Authenticity? Safety is more important, to me anyway. But then I was an Expert Witness for some muzzle loader lawsuits, and have seen burst barrels and heard of the injuries to the shooter. There are always times when something goes bad. Some barrels bulge and need replaced. That's life. Other barrels don't have such ductile steel and shatter instead. That is most hurtful to the man holding it.

I shot my first muzzle loader in 1954. Have shot with local groups in four states. I never personally heard about a gun bursting. But I have done failure analyses on several that have indeed blown up. I can tell you that well-known barrel maker in West Virginia went out of the muzzle loading barrel business mid-1980's, after a union plumber blew off 3/5 of his right hand from one such barrel.

Reported in a three-part series, Oct-Nov-Dec 1985 Muzzle Blasts

I only of one Indian made barrel that burst and from what I read it was a very dirty barrel with the charge not fully seated, this caused the seam of the mandrill scar to open out. Would this have happened with an Italian made or US made barrel That is not DOM... not likely.

I’ve helped some friends out with Indian made guns, Not all Indian made barrels are Drawn of Mandril or cold rolled. Some are made of seamless carbon steel tubing which are very much so fine.

The bigger issue with Indian Barrels is the excessive weight due to the thickness of the barrels the way the breech plugs are fitted.

Thick Heavy barrels are not an indication of a higher quality gun or a more sturdy heavy duty gun, what it means is that the barrel is not tapered correctly putting a lot of weight on the gun which puts pressure on the teakwood stocks, which is why so many of them break Along the forearms and breech areas.

The Breech plugs are either correctly fitted or not, I’ve seen several with gaps between the plug and breech and some where the threads were cut unevenly making one side of the barrel much thinner than the other.

The most consistently accurate barrels I’ve seen by an Indian made guns are by Loyalist arms, they tend to select the highest quality products to sell.

 

[firemanjim68]

Well, it seems we're heading down that same old India vs whoever gun debate so I'll try to swerve this back to the original subject of this post.
This version of the Sitting Fox carbine is a very nice carbine regardless of historical accuracy. The one he'll be releasing next will have the lock and barrel browned or blued which would be more consistent with what a Ranger would want in the field, although the stock will still be curly maple unless you request walnut.

I might still take the plunge on this carbine but only after l buy the Pedersoli Bess carbine first which seems to be the more popular choice.

Anybody know anybody who can defarb a Pedersoli lock and get rid of that annoying "Grice 1762" engraving?

 

[toot]

people are never going to stop PUCKING / DUMPING on INDIAN MADE GUNS!! that is the nature of the BEAST!!

 

[FlinterNick]

people are never going to stop PUCKING / DUMPING on INDIAN MADE GUNS!! that is the nature of the BEAST!!

Well, it seems we're heading down that same old India vs whoever gun debate so I'll try to swerve this back to the original subject of this post.
This version of the Sitting Fox carbine is a very nice carbine regardless of historical accuracy. The one he'll be releasing next will have the lock and barrel browned or blued which would be more consistent with what a Ranger would want in the field, although the stock will still be curly maple unless you request walnut.

I might still take the plunge on this carbine but only after l buy the Pedersoli Bess carbine first which seems to be the more popular choice.

Anybody know anybody who can defarb a Pedersoli lock and get rid of that annoying "Grice 1762" engraving?

Dave Stalvo at Lodgewood Arms will defarb the Grice lock to Tower.

The gun I’d look out for is the Dixie Gun Works Brown Bess Carbine or the Navy Arms Brown Bess Carbine. These were made by Miroku And were high quality. I might even go for a regular Miroku Bess and make some modifications like swapping out the trigger guard. At least you‘ll known getting a high quality lock and Browning Quality Barrel. You can find them on auctions like Gunbroker, Armslist etc.

 

[FlinterNick]

people are never going to stop PUCKING / DUMPING on INDIAN MADE GUNS!! that is the nature of the BEAST!!

Personally I don’t dump on Indian made guns, I think Loyalist Arms does a fine job as does Veteran Arms. More attention to detail needs to be applied to Indian gun imports because of the lack of laws and oversight on those guns made in India. With that said I’ve seen some Indian made guns that look really good, almost as good as a custom gun.

I’d avoid the Discriminating General and Middlesex Trading, their customer service stinks and their products are often defective.

 

[firemanjim68]

Yeah, l kinda like the stuff they have at veteran arms and I'll probably buy from them since miroku guns are so hard to find.

 

[Zonie]

people are never going to stop PUCKING / DUMPING on INDIAN MADE GUNS!! that is the nature of the BEAST!!

Folks: Please DO NOT get into a discussion of Indian made guns in this thread. We have enough threads on the forum that get into that area.

 

[ADK Bigfoot]

This very interesting gun is a fantasy gun at best. Having read Roger's own writings and sixteen other books on the F&I period ( I had a heart attack and for four months dedicated myself to seven years of American history) there is no definitive description of Rogers' weapons. He makes specific references to carrying fusils and one or two references to rifles. He never refers to cut down British military muskets. There are occasional references to picking up guns in the field.

ADK Bigfoot

 

[firemanjim68]

Yeah, I'm starting to see that more and more.
Still, even if it's just a myth in the end, the concept of an actual Roger's Rangers carbine is a pretty cool myth.

I'm curious to see what any Ranger reenactors are using for their primary weapon especially since l heard that some are actually using the Pedersoli carbine which l guess is due to the mythos of the cut down musket theory.

 

[JeffG]

She's a beauty, I almost bought her. As far as I could see and research,that is a GREAT representation. But not correct.

 

[FlinterNick]

Yeah, I'm starting to see that more and more.
Still, even if it's just a myth in the end, the concept of an actual Roger's Rangers carbine is a pretty cool myth.

I'm curious to see what any Ranger reenactors are using for their primary weapon especially since l heard that some are actually using the Pedersoli carbine which l guess is due to the mythos of the cut down musket theory.

I’ve only seen two muskets marked as Queens Rangers Muskets.

Both were Brown Bess, one was a short land the other was a long land with a shortened barrel. Both were in Neuman’s collection.

One generalized fact about the Rangers is a good majority of them carried a type of Brown Bess, whether it was a carbine or not is an assumption. I did read that rangers did enjoy using french muskets too because they were light weight, however I’ve never seen a french musket marked by the queens rangers.


Its plausible that a regiment of rangers were armed with a mix of muskets and some rifles, the riles would have been personally owned or property that was confiscated.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

as Roger's R did during the French & Indian War. Archaeologists have found a number of 10” barrel pieces on one of the islands associated with Rogers’ Rangers. Sorry, I did not record my reference for this. Gun likely reconverted to flint. Lock old pattern, before 1762. Whether or not I am correct about this individual (nominal .75 cal.) musket, it is a proper pattern for F&I War Rangers.

AYE that's the rub. There is a rumor that the muskets were "cut down" by Roger's Rangers, BUT the only legal shortening of a King's Musket is from 46" to 42" at that time. The barrel "pieces" have disappeared, and they were not all 10" in length according to notes, which seems more to indicate a shortening of civilian "fowlers" than British muskets.

Further, we know that some of the Ranger firelocks were not "regulation"...,
"You will take your men as light with you as possible, and give them all the necessary caution for the conduct, and their obedience to their officers ; no firing without an order, no unnecessary alarms, no retreating without an order ; they are to stick by one another and nothing can hurt them ; let every man whose firelock will carry it have a bayonet..."
So we see that some of the firelocks did not accept a bayonet, BUT some obviously did or the order would've been unneeded. This does not mean, however that the firelocks that did not carry a bayonet were cut down LLP Bess. Were these "shortened" or were these civilian firelocks that never could carry a bayonet?
Rogers does not document shortening of Bess muskets in his journal, but does once mention that he was carrying a "fusee" (fusil) which might be referring to a musket, but more than likely was a civilian hunting gun.

LD

 

[Loyalist Dave]

id say not worth it; that is to buy an Indian made gun knowing you’ll have to replace the lock with a higher quality lock at the end of the day you’re at the price of the Indian gun which will be around $800 and then the lock which would be another two to $400.....I know a lot of folks would do this and often fail at it too

I have owned five India made flintlocks, and still own three India made muskets and one tradegun, and so far NONE have needed replacement of the lock and all fire quite well, thank you. I've hunted with the trade gun as well.

LD

 

[FlinterNick]

I have owned five India made flintlocks, and still own three India made muskets and one tradegun, and so far NONE have needed replacement of the lock and all fire quite well, thank you. I've hunted with the trade gun as well.

View attachment 46346

LD

The only time I’ve ever changed out anything on an Indian made lock was I took a casted frizzen, frizzen spring and flintcock and replaced them. It made the musket look more authentic than the previous parts which were chunky and not as graceful. It added value to the musket as I had sold it for slightly more than I purchased it for.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

The only time I’ve ever changed out anything on an Indian made lock was I took a casted frizzen, frizzen spring and flintcock and replaced them. It made the musket look more authentic than the previous parts which were chunky and not as graceful. It added value to the musket as I had sold it for slightly more than I purchased it for.

Yeah no doubt! Some of the springs on them are super clunky.

I have a Pedersoli SLP Bess, and the previous owner changed the sideplate over to a rounded style to more resemble the LLP Bess, and had the lock engraving changed from "Grice 1762" to "Grice 1752". ☺

LD