Search results

Wool works because it’s usually a bit thicker when woven, especially blankets, it is naturally fire resistant which helps when blasted out of something that uses an explosion for power.

Oh no it wasn’t. There were just many grades of woolens. Some rather coarse and scratchy, some nearly as fine as silk.

Indians were known to use worn out wool blankets as wadding, along with grass, leaves and anything else that would hold a ball down. Wait until people realize that for a decent period of the flintlock era patched ball used linen and membrane more than cotton. Wait until certain people hear that...

Be careful of throwing stones from your glass house. Most of the stuff you post is mostly conjecture and guess work.

That looks like turkey at the store 😂

There are no period accurate slings for long rifles. American woodsmen despised slings. Even military rifles took until 1814 to finally get swivels, because up to that point rifles didn’t have slings (as far as the ODGs were concerned) That being said, there are many ways to rig up a simple...

Wool should be just fine, and it’s historically correct too.

What books are these?

If it’s a normal fruit wood type of wood it should work fine for stocks.

Those are pretty cool.

The Rifle Shoppe

What are we looking at here?

That is just outstanding. Every time I’m down at TRS I am severely tempted to get a set of those parts. I then start thinking like a machinist and wondering how I would hold the frame in my lathe jaws to turn the bore and decide against it.

Oh I do not work with teak. Walnut is bad enough.

On the civilian arms the top flat is often referred to as a sighting plane, at least by current collectors. It seems to commonly be on French O/R barrels without a ‘wedding band’ transition. I have no clue as to why they seemingly show up on military guns as they really serve no purpose. It most...

You did a good job with that new side plate. Probably won’t notice it much or at all when the final finish is applied. I hope you can do the rest of the slimming without an undue amount of headaches.

Another issue to consider with random parts off of muskets is the fact that these parts were often enough reused either in militia guns, NE fowlers, COS muskets and even early US contract guns. It would not take very much polishing to remove a light top flat when refitting a barrel for another...

George Neumann’s M1728 in his book Battle Weapons of the American Revolution also has the top flat to “5 inches of the muzzle.” This is three fully intact 1728 muskets with this feature. Along with every 1717-1754 musket in Moller’s book (except the 1729 contract with the really long 14” flats)...

So the barrel was made in 1728? Not sometime between 1728-1765?

Was that barrel made post 1760? And no, the top flat wasn’t always very prominent, and some weren’t even full length.