Virginia Rifle Plan

[flintriflesmith]

The "Johannes Faeber" gun ... I say there's no way on earth that this gun predates about 1770, though Mr. Gusler (who has this gun too) swears it is 1760 or earlier, saying this style of sideplate goes back into the 1750's...of course I haven't seen a positive example of one.

Fatdutchman,
Without getting into all that you admit you "haven't seen," or why you haven't seen them, I would like to mention a couple of things:
1. Wallace Gusler does not own or "have" the Farber rifle.
2. If he did, your posting that information on a public message board could have lead to a theft and left you liable.

There is a good reason that many collectors of valuable antiques--from coins to cars-- keep the contents of their collection private. This has been addressed on other boards and the moderators regularly remove any reference to the present ownership of guns under discussion.

Flintriflesmith, Williamsburg, VA

 

[Stophel]

Please forgive me if I let out any "secrets"...he brings these guns to shows.. It is certainly no secret that he has the brass barreled gun.

1. I never said Mr Gusler has the "Faeber" gun. I said he had (at least when I saw him last) another gun, which I then described.

2. I am not liable for anyone else's criminal activity. Besides, again, it is no secret who Wallace Gusler is or what he does.

If I have given offense, please forgive me. I shall never mention the name again.

I ask the moderator to please delete my post #180701. I can no longer edit it.

 

[rich pierce]

I have always thought the Johannes Faber gun is about as early a fine gun as we could expect to ever find.

 

[Stumpkiller]

Welcome FRS!

This has been addressed on other boards and the moderators regularly remove any reference to the present ownership of guns under discussion.

I am a proponent of deontological ethics and have a very laissez-faire moderating philosophy. I take the first amendment as seriously as the second.

When I start having to pull one word at a time out of the 200 or so daily posts in my sections here Claude will have to increase my salary substantially.

 

[Stophel]

Let me also clarify something. When I previously wrote phrases like "he has this gun", I should actually have said that he had a particular gun at a show. Actually, I don't know for sure that he owns any of them...I suppose I made an assumption that I shouldn't have made. Please forgive me. I also did not let out any information that was known only to me. I was not given privileged access to any of these guns by a secretive collector. I handled them at the Norris show, and at Friendship. He no doubt takes them to numerous other shows. I haven't a clue as to the whereabouts of the Faeber gun. I never said I did. I did not think I was doing anything untoward. If I have wronged anyone in this respect, I beg forgiveness.

While I certainly have differing opinions on some of these guns, I did not think I was making a personal attack on anyone. In fact, I am grateful to him and others who have let me see and handle some of these guns, like the brass barreled gun, or #142, or the other Shenandoa gun that I wrote about (which, by the way, I think is really neat...bizarre, but neat!). If any of my posts were construed to be a personal attack on anyone, again, that was not my intention.

Henceforth, I shall endeavour to refrain from offering any opinion or information which might be construed to be offensive or troubling to anyone in any way. It is not becoming, nor is it worth the headache. eace:

My ONLY intention was to describe some early rifles that could be from Virginia, and what dates I think they may have been made. All the guns I wrote about I think are really neat, and I think #142 or even the Faeber gun are as good examples as anyone is apt to find to model a 1750's Virginia rifle after.





"If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat; if he be thirsty, give him water to drink..."

 

[flintriflesmith]

Fatdutchman,
You are certianly right that Wallace, in bringing the early rifles to shows, is exposing them to some degree of risk. (More of a risk than he knew until he got the recall notice on his potential fire bomb Ford F150 truck and got the cruise control disconnected!)

Wallace feels it is worth the risk to share the rifles and his knowledge with others interested in the subject. As you know many collectors don't share either.

Lots of folks see the rifles at these shows, and may reach some conclusions about ownership, but no where near the number and "variety" of folks who can be seaching the Web. All it takes is a powerful search engine and the Russuian Mafia (or anyone of like mind) can be reading anything we post.

I think your idea of saying you saw such-and-such rifle at Friendship or in TN is right on. :agree:

 

[Gaze]

I am a proponent of deontological ethics...

Me too. There is nothing worse than a crooked dentist. :thumbsup:

 

[Stophel]

There is another gun ("gun #118) which has a lot in common with both the Faber gun (in the cheekpiece construction) and with the really wild "crooked" gun from the Muzzleblasts, oct. 1982 article. Or, I should say that 118 is "the remnants of a gun"... I am told that the carving behind the cheek is very similar to a lot of carving on 18th century furniture of the south. It is tempting to think this gun too is from the 1750's, but I would be willing to bet that this one is late 1760's as well.

A really super cool walnut stocked gun is #124 (which even has a stepped wrist!!!) It looks 1765-1770 too...manure.

142 is still as good a pattern as any to emulate. I've been intending to do a gun like this, but haven't gotten around to it yet...

 

[DrTimboone]

Your conclusions are much the same as mine. I wanted to build a rifle that a long hunter of the 1760-1790 period might have carried out of VA or NC across the mtns into KY or TN. I looked at all the books you mentioned and lots of other stuff and finally built the gun at

http://www.hcdllp.com/pages/3/index.htm

which is my guess about what a colonial period So or VA rifle might have been like... There are a few things we know that are typical of the period, wide butt, the carving around the tang, wider than height wrist (oval), Round faced English style or early Ketland lock, perhaps iron mounted...etc. So I say take your best shot and have fun.. People can argue but they sure can't prove you wrong given the data that is available today! eace:

Tim

 

[oldsailor]

I had a buddy of mine made me an early style Virginia rifle back in 1982. It is a fine shooter and I have enjoyed shooting it for all these years ,I even took it to the Sgt. York shoot in Pall Mall Tennessee a couple of times. Those chunk guns sure made our KY. and Tennessee rifles look bad over the log. I hunt with mine and have taken several deer with it as it points well with the English style musket stock with sliding wooden patch box we selected for it. The large Davis Flint-lock looks right to my eyes and it is long enough in the barrell at 40 in.
If I could do it again I would go with the Getzee barrell of 44 in. length in 54 caliber , swamped with a 1 1/4 inch barrell in the breech area to look more like the rifle that Wallace Gusler showed me at Western Ky University rifle seminar as his idea of an early Virginia rifle.
I think the 54 was the right choice for caliber as I can find balls and ramrod tools in that caliber in Tennessee without much trouble . The 54 caliber can obtain some good velocity out of that long barrell also .