reproduction Charleville??

[matchlock1607]

Hello all,

I have a reproduction musket that is part of a friend's estate, but am having trouble identifying it. When going through his guns, I first thought it may be a Miroku Charleville repro., but now have my doubts as it doesn't look like many I have seen. If you know what it may be, I would appreciate any help identifying the maker, etc.. The bore appears to be about .69 caliber. The lock is not stamped but engraved as follows: on the tail: : "No. 161" then underneath that "1976" and in the center of the plate, " Manufacture St. Etienne". It also is made of a two piece stock like the Miroku reproductions. Pictures are attached.

 

[matchlock1607]

More pictures...

 

[matchlock1607]

Also- I found no markings on the barrel at all.

 

[Sam squanch]

Could that have been made in Italy or Spain for the bi- centennial? I think a few muskets were made for commemoratives. Not sure.

 

[matchlock1607]

Sam, That does seem reasonable, especially with the "1976" engraving on the tail of the lockplate. I am not sure about it either. Maybe someone will know something more about it.

 

[Sam squanch]

Someone on here will know…

 

[Sam squanch]

Guys, make a hang tag for your guns identifying them and what they are worth. If you die, natural or by accident, your widow or friends will know what to ask for them. Not trying to be morbid, just hate to see people in mourning taken advantage of. I’ve seen it…

 

[hawkeye2]

It was made by the Harpers Ferry Arms Co. during the bicentennial. I have one in my hands right now. My late neighbor had a stockmaking business on the side and he turned out the stocks but I don't believe he was involved in final shaping. He also claimed to have done some of the research for them. The barrel is a 12 gauge blank from Numrich which was breeched in a unique way to give it the proper length. Another late friend who was a gunmaker of some reputation and also had one recommended to those of us who had one that we should never unbreech them. The engraving on the locks was done by the late Ben Troxford of Shenandoah Guns. A lot of them were never assembled and my future neighbor (I didn't know it at the time but we became neighbors 20 years later) had the parts in his basement and sold them as kits in the late 70s. Yours looks to have been assembled from those parts judging by some of the work and the rust on it most likely came from storage in his basement as they all had some rust. The locks needed assembly, heat treatment of the springs and tuning. BTW mine is serial #149 and I have no idea how many were produced. Oh, if you look at the cock the screw looks to be a little too far back on the cock and slightly too low too. Another giveaway is the lack of a bayonet lug.

Harpers Ferry Arms also made a mediocre copy of the Maynard carbine some of which ended up in the same basement. My wife has one of those. I have heard they may have made a '61 or '63 Springfield but I have never seen one. A search of the list of N-SSA approved arms might give a clue. Some of the Maynards were N-SSA approved and some weren't depending on who assembled them.

 

[Artificer]

Harpers Ferry Arms also made a mediocre copy of the Maynard carbine some of which ended up in the same basement. My wife has one of those. I have heard they may have made a '61 or '63 Springfield but I have never seen one. A search of the list of N-SSA approved arms might give a clue. Some of the Maynards were N-SSA approved and some weren't depending on who assembled them.

Matchlock and Hawkeye,

I apologize for sort of "busting" into this thread, but since you mentioned Harpers Ferry Arms Company Repro '61 or '63 Springfield's, I thought I should for the forum.

In the early 1980's, I was visiting my parents while on liberty one weekend. Mom always loved "going for a drive" from the time we kids were very young to the rest of her days. The urge hit her for one of those "not particularly going anywhere" drives on Saturday and we decided to go to Petersburg, VA.

As we were driving through the old downtown section, there was a large sign that said "Harpers Ferry Arms Company" with their trademark "cypher" that was also engraved ahead of the Hammer on their M 1863 Lock Plates. The place looked like it had been a 1940's or 50's Women's Clothing store from the front. When we went inside and after me telling him I worked guns at the NSSA Nationals, the guy who owned the business invited us back into the LARGE back room. It had table after table filled with their M1863 Springfields. I'm guessing there were at least 200 laid out and there may have been many more. The stocks had been stained so dark brown, they almost looked black and they were not American Walnut and may or even might not have been European Walnut. I tried the locks on a few of them and they didn't seem bad, but he didn't have any separate stocks to inspect.

So at the very next Fall Nationals a couple/few months later, I asked the guys on the NSSA Arms Committee if those guns had been approved. Wow, you should have seen the negative contorted faces and some "not so kind" words spat out about them. Bottom line their '61 or '63 Springfields were NEVER approved by my last shoot in 2005. Those guns were so bad, they wouldn't even begin to talk much about them.

Now, I have NO idea if this means anything to their earlier Charleville repro's and I think not. But I will say I most strongly advise against their '61 or '63 Springfield copies.

Gus

 

[matchlock1607]

Many thanks, Hawkeye! This one does have the look of a kit assembled gun too (somethings could have been done better). The information you provided has been really helpful.

Also, Hawkeye, would you have any idea of the value? The lock functions. I cleaned the bore- there is some pitting about midway from breech to muzzle, but it would still be a shootable piece. The stock looks to have been spliced and glued under the rear band.

Thanks again!

Chris

It was made by the Harpers Ferry Arms Co. during the bicentennial. I have one in my hands right now. My late neighbor had a stockmaking business on the side and he turned out the stocks but I don't believe he was involved in final shaping. He also claimed to have done some of the research for them. The barrel is a 12 gauge blank from Numrich which was breeched in a unique way to give it the proper length. Another late friend who was a gunmaker of some reputation and also had one recommended to those of us who had one that we should never unbreech them. The engraving on the locks was done by the late Ben Troxford of Shenandoah Guns. A lot of them were never assembled and my future neighbor (I didn't know it at the time but we became neighbors 20 years later) had the parts in his basement and sold them as kits in the late 70s. Yours looks to have been assembled from those parts judging by some of the work and the rust on it most likely came from storage in his basement as they all had some rust. The locks needed assembly, heat treatment of the springs and tuning. BTW mine is serial #149 and I have no idea how many were produced. Oh, if you look at the cock the screw looks to be a little too far back on the cock and slightly too low too. Another giveaway is the lack of a bayonet lug.

Harpers Ferry Arms also made a mediocre copy of the Maynard carbine some of which ended up in the same basement. My wife has one of those. I have heard they may have made a '61 or '63 Springfield but I have never seen one. A search of the list of N-SSA approved arms might give a clue. Some of the Maynards were N-SSA approved and some weren't depending on who assembled them.

 

[toot]

as we all know, the ride must end and we will all have to get off. sad but true. just hope that it was a good ride??

 

[FlinterNick]

That’s actually an American made Charleville from the 1960’s, there’s one on display in the Bass Pro‘s Shops Museum.

I’ve seen a few at re-enactments, most do not function very well. Overall I’d say it was an average reproduction, not very accurate at all. The Miroku Charleville is probably the most accurate only second to the Rifle Shoppe’s 1766.

 

[Sam squanch]

Is it better than the Indian imports? We need a side by side comparison!

 

[FlinterNick]

Is it better than the Indian imports? We need a side by side comparison!

Those Indian Charleville’s are terrible. I was going to purchase a 1728 Charleville from Loyalist arms until I had the chance to actually hold one, it weights almost 11 lbs, origional 1728’s were around 8 - 9 lbs. Way oversized.

 

[hawkeye2]

Matchlock and Hawkeye,

I apologize for sort of "busting" into this thread, but since you mentioned Harpers Ferry Arms Company Repro '61 or '63 Springfield's, I thought I should for the forum.

Now, I have NO idea if this means anything to their earlier Charleville repro's and I think not. But I will say I most strongly advise against their '61 or '63 Springfield copies.

Gus

Gus thanks for that information. Rather than quote your entire post (#9) I deleted some of it to save space. I couldn't remember whether it was a '61 or a '63 as I had only heard of them and to date have never seen one.

The prime mover behind Harpers Ferry Arms Co. ran afoul of the Feds and took a vacation at our expense. It had nothing at all to do with the firearms and was for something entirely unrelated. Any Harpers Ferry Arms Co. gun is completely legal no matter if it came from the original company or my neighbor's basement.

 

[hawkeye2]

Many thanks, Hawkeye! This one does have the look of a kit assembled gun too (somethings could have been done better). The information you provided has been really helpful.

Also, Hawkeye, would you have any idea of the value? The lock functions. I cleaned the bore- there is some pitting about midway from breech to muzzle, but it would still be a shootable piece. The stock looks to have been spliced and glued under the rear band.

Thanks again!

Chris

I have no idea of the value as it would depend on the quality of the build, condition and how well the lock works and honestly I haven't been watching prices lately. These do not show up often. About 5 or 6 of our group bought one at the time and I have no idea what became of any except mine.

The stock was spliced under the rear band using 2 dowels. Mine came part over the years and was reglued several years back. I remember the wood on all matched quite well and it was very difficult to tell they were 2 pieces.

Those that were not assembled by HFACo. suffered somewhat from storage and had scattered surface rust including the bore. As far as I know there were no parts left over though I do have a few unused pieces in a jar downstairs.

 

[Artificer]

Any Harpers Ferry Arms Co. gun is completely legal no matter if it came from the original company or my neighbor's basement.

You mean the Charlevilles and some of the Maynard Carbines, correct? As far as I know, the M 1863's were not legal as late as 2005.

Gus

 

[hawkeye2]

You mean the Charlevilles and some of the Maynard Carbines, correct? As far as I know, the M 1863's were not legal as late as 2005.

Gus

Actually what I was referring to was that they were not black market guns (or stolen). All transactions between the original company and their final destinations were above board though there seems to be some rumors otherwise among some of the older shooters. HFACo. fell to pieces and their inventory was sold off over the years with my neighbor acquiring all the Charleville parts and years later all of the remaining Maynard parts which also are all gone now.

Some of the Maynards had N-SSA approval and quite a number were assembled from the parts stash and got individual approval cards from the Small Arms Committee.

 

[Artificer]

Actually what I was referring to was that they were not black market guns (or stolen). All transactions between the original company and their final destinations were above board though there seems to be some rumors otherwise among some of the older shooters. HFACo. fell to pieces and their inventory was sold off over the years with my neighbor acquiring all the Charleville parts and years later all of the remaining Maynard parts which also are all gone now.

Some of the Maynards had N-SSA approval and quite a number were assembled from the parts stash and got individual approval cards from the Small Arms Committee.

Thanks for the clarification!

Gus

 

[FlinterNick]

one of the best repro charleville’s that was ever made was made by a Spanish Company in very limited production, it looked almost identical to the Miroku Charleville, but was full stocked In European Walnut, the same company made a Spanish 1752 musket which was very nice.

Consequently when miruoku stopped production of their Charleville nobody purchased the molds or patterns for the stocks and barrel, its kind of a mystery as to where they are.