Love the patch box
-
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
Am I the only one who doesn’t really care for carving on a rifle stock?
- Thread starter Buff1958
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
I like plain guns too ! Got my butt chewed by Kibler because I didn't care for the hash marks on his CNC carved guns. So much for personal opinion ... lol
I have both plain and carved. They're all hunting guns. I just finished assembling a Kibler Colonial which included carving because it seemed appropriate for the style. My carving is simple (due to carving skills) but tasteful. It took a lot of extra time, but I anticipated that when I bought the kit. Since I don't build rifles for sale, this was just for personal satisfaction. It will be used this deer season.
I like to use my guns, and sometimes when out in the woods things happen. I have tripped, I have dropped it,and how mant have stood it up leaning against a tree? Plain stock is easier to patch and refinish.
Mike in FL
50 Cal.
I agree. A rifle with machine carving (let's assume it's a Kibler) is not unique or custom in the sense of "special" because others are just like it, while hand carving is one of a kind even if the pattern is basically the same. I guess paying for ANY carving is vanity, and if I want to be vain about my gun, I prefer total vanity knowing the carving is indeed special.
Good grief, that sounds like a VP's word salad. But maybe you see what I mean.
very nice
dang I likeYeah, this Jaeger is a little over the top …
thatWhy did the old masters even carve rifles and do so at such high a high level? Perhaps it was because the rifles they built were an expression of their dedication to the craft. These rifles differed by builder and region but combined form and proportion that represented state of the art at that time. Carving was a given part of the total product. These guns were both utilitarian and art forms that were expected to give a lifetime of performance under often severe conditions. Some degree of carving today is just an acknowledgement of and tribute to the old masters. I don't consider it frill or vanity.
Yes, I know what you mean. I enjoy the challenge and the resulting vanity. The carving of the stock, is after all, the carving of the stock.... and being unburdened by what has been....
This was my second attempt.
I especially like the finish on this rifle, the wood, and brass. The brass doesn't look artificially aged, like a lot of new stuff on here these days. Mike, how did you do that, or is it just time and nature?
American rifles cr 1750-1800 typically had some sort of carving. I can’t do it, so all I have on my Lancaster is some raised molding and cuts in the cheak plate. That’s historically incorrect for my style gun. But for me better none and incorrect, then garbage I would get if attempted
Well - sometimes , some tasteful decoration can REALLY look good , like on this Gastinne Renette in my small , poor collection , ( which is a perfect shooter )
BUT - my favorite target pistol ( for the moment ) is this : my absolutely plain and completely selfbuilt tackdriver :
or , these , also homemade , hand mortars :
The only thing that counts , in my opinion :
what/however it looks like or is decorated is : YOU have to like it , and if it not doesen't only shoot , but also hits - what the hell !
BUT - my favorite target pistol ( for the moment ) is this : my absolutely plain and completely selfbuilt tackdriver :
or , these , also homemade , hand mortars :
The only thing that counts , in my opinion :
what/however it looks like or is decorated is : YOU have to like it , and if it not doesen't only shoot , but also hits - what the hell !
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2010
- Messages
- 201
- Reaction score
- 207
I took the carving class from Jim Chambers awhile ago..I couldn't understand rococo design at all...
5 day class.. Nothing gelled until I looked in his vault, and then Wednesday afternoon, I got it.
Carved the butt on Thursday and Friday morning....Came out OK...You like better if you've done a couple yourself..
I never appreciated the carvings until I had done a few...
5 day class.. Nothing gelled until I looked in his vault, and then Wednesday afternoon, I got it.
Carved the butt on Thursday and Friday morning....Came out OK...You like better if you've done a couple yourself..
I never appreciated the carvings until I had done a few...
Agreed.
Frankly, it looks cheap and too "artificial". Especially around the lock mortise. Looks very tacky.
Kinda like pressed in checkering vs hand cut. It just ain't the same.
flatcreek
40 Cal
I think carving and inlays today are much like they were in the 17 and 18 hundreds, a status symbol. To some a gun is a tool and to others more than just a tool. I can go either way, but lean toward more plain guns as I'm more of a utilitarian type.
Last edited:
Terry Lightle
40 Cal
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2019
- Messages
- 243
- Reaction score
- 292
Think you are right,my 54 flintlock is maybe the plainest gun you will ever see.Some folks might even call it ugly but she really looked good laying with 2 deer she killed in less than 2 minutes last year.Would post picture of her if I knew how.
Mike in FL
50 Cal.
I ought not have called it vanity. Sometimes I screw up. Didn't mean to ruffle feathers. A shrink would likely tell me I'm jealous of those with beautiful rifles.
Similar threads
