• 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
  • Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

Walnut or maple for a Transitional Rifle

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

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

jrmflintlock

45 Cal.
Joined
May 12, 2010
Messages
1,033
Reaction score
157
Location
Nothern Nevada
I'm looking to start my next build and was wondering how appropriate a fine walnut stock would be for a Transitional/Christian Springs type Rifle? I am looking at a Dunlap stock and have about $250 to spend on wood That will get me a grade 7 Maple or a Grade 4 English walnut. Both should have nice curl. Which would be more appropriate for a transitional rifle. I have never worked with Walnut. WHAT SAY THE BUILDERS??

Thanks!
 
IDK how appropriate it may be, but IMO there's no better stock wood for a flinchlock than nicely-finished curly Maple.

:thumbsup:
 
I'm reaching for the sealer and finish this weekend for the Transitional I am doing. I used a grade 4 from Pecatonica. This has awesome curl for over 90% of it for $280. I was even able to do the carvings without any chip out, which always scared me.
I say go with the maple. I was tempted to use cherry, but went with the maple.
 
Don't get me wrong, I love the look of Curly Maple too! This was the last one I built!

P2ttNaJ.jpg


But I got a itch to do something different. But I do want it to be mostly correct
 
Well, English walnut wouldn't be the least bit appropriate for an American rifle.
 
Right! Duh English Walnut on a American style rifle? :doh:

I know brass is more appropriate, but I want it in Iron so I guess I am already straying from accuracy.

So I guess it was a dumb question! Thank you guys for setting me straight!
I’ll keep you guys posted on what I do!
 
jrmflintlock said:
...but I want it in Iron...
Why?
You can build a transitional rifle or a fantasy piece, but let's not mix up the names. If you are building a fantasy piece furnished in iron, you could just as easily use Walnut
 
Most iron (steel, really) fittings are copies of existing brass fittings and are totally wrong. Do your research; it doesn't any longer to build a proper gun than it takes to build a Frankenstein gun.
 
Hi JRM,
It goes without saying, the only important thing is to build what you want. To expand your horizons a little bit, keep in mind Christian's Spring and transitional long rifles are not the same thing. The gun shop at CS was a very small affair and was established in 1762. It closed in 1787. It has over sized influence on our perceptions because the Moravians kept better records of it than almost any other gun making operation at the time. We just know more about it than other likely much more influential gun makers. Indeed, in the 1760s the CS shop likely was better known among native Americans than colonists because of all the work it did for them. The earliest dated long rifle of which we know is the John Schreit rifle made in Reading, PA. It is a fully evolved long rifle that once had a slight stepped wrist before someone filed it off, dated 1761, a year before CS was established (currently, its front sight is on backwards). Another early rifle is the "Faber" gun, again a fully evolved long rifle. The notion linking CS and "transitional" long rifles mainly stems from the attribution by some knowledgeable long rifle scholars of Andreas Albrecht as the maker of the famous "Edward Marshall" rifle, which is a shorter barreled, robustly stocked (maple) gun, with a stepped wrist like those made in the Germanic countries. Albrecht was the first master of the CS shop. There is no documentation that Albrecht made that rifle although it has some traits that suggest his involvement and there is no evidence suggesting it was made at CS. However, companies like Track of the Wolf, Pecatonica, etc all jumped on the bandwagon to market stocks and components for "transitional" or "Christian's Spring" rifles using the Marshall rifle as the model. A much better model for CS guns would be those by Christian Oerter who took over the shop from Albrecht for which there are more surviving examples than Albrecht. They are quite different from the Marshall rifle. When Albrecht moved to Littitz, PA and set up shop as a gun maker again, the few rifles that survive made by him in Littitz look very much like those by Dickert in Lancaster. So much for the wide-spread influence of CS. With respect to transitional rifles made in America, all we can really say is that they probably were more German-like, more robust in the butt (but not the forestock), had somewhat shorter barrels, stocked in local wood primarily maple, and mounted in brass unless iron mounts were imported from Europe.

dave
 
Thanks for the input.

I guess what I am really wanting is more like the "Edward Marshal" type rifle.

I want a "shorter" barreled hunting rifle but not a jaeger. Since I will not be using a precarve, I am free to make what I like but I am still at the mercy of the parts I can get.

I want to be as accurate as possible as far as lines and style. SO I use what the suppliers claim are parts sets, ie buttplate, trigger guard etc. for a particular style rifle.

I don't take my rifles to juried events but I like to be as accurate as possible and not mix parts. I am also not trying to fit a particular Persona with this rifle, I just want a nice shorter rifle to hunt with, since I already have several long barreled guns.

I think as long as I stay within the same geographic area and time frame with my parts its not a Frankenstien rifle. I know enough not to mix a hawken buttplate with a Lancaster stock and a Schuetzen trigger guard etc which is what I would call a Frankenstein. Although I guess European Walnut on an American styled long rifle is just as bad. I'll save using a nice piece of European walnut for a fowler (like the beautiful French one Dave is making) or a Jaeger.

I know Iron/steel was not as common it was not unheard of as some was imported from Europe. I understand that common representation is usually safer. But I love the look of browned steel!

Too much to think about!!

Again Thanks for the insight!
 
Hi,
If you are referring to my posted fowler build, it is English. There certainly could be some imported iron mounts but they would not be rust browned at that time period. They may be heat blued, charcoal blued, or more likely, polished bright.

dave
 
If you want a rifle patterned after the 1750s 60s you want brass on maple fo an American made gun. Should you want the same time in iron and walnut in would most likely be an imported fusil. Should you want to go with a gun that just has the same general look altered at will to fit your taste your free to do what you want.
People over the years used other woods then just maple and walnut.
My first vote would be to make a gun as close as you reasonably can to correct. However I don’t have a vote in how you spend your moneyand this is first and foremost a fun sport. I doubt there is any event that would frown on a iron mounted walnut ”˜transitional’ rifle.
You did ask us for our two cents. So I got to say, should you decide on brown iron parts you might want to go with a maple as well browned steel that looks sooooo good ( my favorite look) can get lost when mounted on walnut.
My first build was walnut and browned steel with wakegon bay brown. Nothing popped out.(except my poor inletting).
 
Hi JMR,
If you go with a Marshall style rifle keep in mind that the stock is robust in the butt but the forestock is as thin as any early long rifle. I've viewed the Marshall rifle closely and it is a fine and sophisticated gun. The wrist and butt are massive but like jaegers, there is really no excess wood.

dave
 
Thanks Dave! My apologies on calling your fowler French!

And that is exactly what I want! Nice wide Robust butt, stepped wrist with a nice light fore stock with a relatively short barrel. Probably .58 caliber! I loved my TVM jaeger, but it had a strait 30 inch barrel and was not built by me. SO now here is where I am at.

I will probably go with maple and brass and try "aging" the brass. Maybe.. :grin: Its the bright shiny that throws me off.

Tenngunn: That is the look I love too especially when the maple is that honey color with lots of figure and the browning is that soft dark almost warm brown!

I do truly respect you alls input and opinions! We will see where the road takes us!!

Thanks again!
 
jrmflintlock said:
...try "aging" the brass. Maybe.. :grin: Its the bright shiny that throws me off.
I've used powder residue remaining after burning black powder (light off a small amount on a piece of foil). Dampen a patch, rub in the residue and wipe on your brass. Cold blue should also work well.
 
A few things to think about, I'm not sure of the answers myself.

-Edward Marshall rifle is big. Will walnut versus maple make the gun even more heavier?

-How well carved will this be? Relief carvings, decorative inlets, and things like that. I think figured walnut is less forgiving of chips than maple is. Even highly figured maple is more chip prone than lesser grades.

-Do you have a well definied vision of the ideal finish color? Walnut generally makes for a darker color.

-How much work are you looking to do on the stock? figured roughed in with barrel channel and ramrod done, use a blank and do everything, or a mostly finished stock with most inlets shaped?

MY opinion, aged brass looks better than iron.

If you are making a limited number of arms, make the one you like. With a piece of wood with a ton of work to do, it's likely better to follow a particular gun of a certain style. Without much doubt, the edward marshall rifle is a very specific gun, because it modeled after a particular gun itself. Early Dickerts have some wiggle room more than most early styles. Maybe because there's alot of surviving examples.
 
Black Hand said:
jrmflintlock said:
...try "aging" the brass. Maybe.. :grin: Its the bright shiny that throws me off.
I've used powder residue remaining after burning black powder (light off a small amount on a piece of foil). Dampen a patch, rub in the residue and wipe on your brass. Cold blue should also work well.

That works well, and I think there is still a brass darkening agent sold. Shooting it, and a little wipe with water when cleaning followed by a quick wipe to dry will do the job in a few months at the most.
 
jrmflintlock. they're your hard earned, God entrusted, overtaxed dollars, to spend as you see fit.

having said that, i'd go with brass and maple.

one guy's opinion - free and doubtless well worth the price.

good luck with your build, and Make Good Smoke!
 
Good Points!

I don't want it to be extra heavy. I already have that problem with My .54! I used Curley Ashe and boy is it heavy. I used an Octagon to round rifled barrel to reduce some of the weight but will not be fun to pack it up steep mountains after elk!

The Fowler I just finished, which I stocked in fine curly maple, is light as a feather in comparison.

I will probably go with the appropriate maple and brass.

Oh and I will most likely start with a blank!

Thank you all again!
 

Latest posts

Back
Top