1728 French Musket

[lexington1]

1728 French musket. I got this when Ebay first started. The seller had listed the lock, barrel, and small parts in seperate auctions. I contacted him right away and found out that he had the stock as well. This musket supposedly was found in the basement of a church on Montreal. The seller was worried about the legality of selling the entire musket and decided to part it out. I made a deal and bought the whole thing from him and then checked into it and found out that he could legally send it from Canada. I guess I would have been shafted if he couldn't have mailed it, but I took a chance.

 

[TDM]

She's a beauty. Glad you saved her.

 

[rich pierce]

Wonderful!

 

[FlinterNick]

A fine specimen, M1728’s in a near complete condition are very rare.

 

[Codger Craig Wilcox]

Happy you were able to import it without problems.

The only bad part is that you will have to cuss at it in French...

 

[oreclan]

Years ago I and a friend modified a 1763 French musket replica with the inclusion of a Kit Ravenshear lock and made up parts It is still my favorite flintlock. It is lighter than my British Long land pattern musket hence easier to handle, shoots fairly accurately, can be used in my three periods of re-enacting (F&I, AWI and 1812), and it just looks good!

 

[rickystl]

Much agree with Nick. A great find. Looks like the frizzen may have been half-soled back in the period (?) You just have to figure this gun has seen a lot of action. But used, not abused. Great condition for this gun. Congrats.

Rick

 

[FlinterNick]

Much agree with Nick. A great find. Looks like the frizzen may have been half-soled back in the period (?) You just have to figure this gun has seen a lot of action. But used, not abused. Great condition for this gun. Congrats.

Rick

Yeap, these early french muskets are often broken down and restocked and mismatched with other parts from 1754, 63 and 66’s. its possible this one is restocked and done very well. The stocks on 1717 and 1728’s were extremely thin in the forearm and the wrist and butt had a little more drop. Not all these were identical, they all varied but I think this might be a colonial restock.

The 1728’s that came over to American were actually mostly marine 1728’s and grenadier muskets as the French colonies were armed by the french admiralty and not the army.

Also not uncommon to find a 1728 lock or barrel on an American made fowler or militia musket.

 

[lexington1]

Yeap, these early french muskets are often broken down and restocked and mismatched with other parts from 1754, 63 and 66’s. its possible this one is restocked and done very well. The stocks on 1717 and 1728’s were extremely thin in the forearm and the wrist and butt had a little more drop. Not all these were identical, they all varied but I think this might be a colonial restock.

The 1728’s that came over to American were actually mostly marine 1728’s and grenadier muskets as the French colonies were armed by the french admiralty and not the army.

Also not uncommon to find a 1728 lock or barrel on an American made fowler or militia musket.

I doubt very much if this is a colonial restock. The drop on this is ~3 inches. I don't have another 1728 to compare it to, but my 1766 and 1768 French muskets are around an inch and a half. Also the sling stud is still present and that probably would have not been used in a restock as it would have been an archaic feature by the time it would been restocked.

This 1728 did have a section of forestock about 8 inches long replaced after I got it and the top band is a TRS part.

 

[FlinterNick]

I doubt very much if this is a colonial restock. The drop on this is ~3 inches. I don't have another 1728 to compare it to, but my 1766 and 1768 French muskets are around an inch and a half. Also the sling stud is still present and that probably would have not been used in a restock as it would have been an archaic feature by the time it would been restocked.

This 1728 did have a section of forestock about 8 inches long replaced after I got it and the top band is a TRS part.

I agree, however. If it is a french colonial restock (Quebec, Louisbourg, New Orleans pre-1763 era), they copied the old stocks very well within minimal tolerances. When the French restocked, everything needed to be the same.

1728 stocks were very delicate and did not hold up well with military use. By the time of the french and Indian War, many had been restocked by the French in Quebec with North American wood.

American colonial restocks tended to restock military arms with a more fowler like profile. The tulle style Roman nose stocks were very delicate for military use. The french attempted to beef up the wrist and butt on the 1754 and finally added a massive amount of wood to the 1763 musket. The french were determined to bolster their guns while keeping the weight around 9 lbs.

What had me thinking restock was the front nose band, on 1728’s the nose band was shouldered to the forearm, this one looks like it slides on and is not shouldered.

None the less its a very fine specimen, I’d place a high value on it.

 

[Kyle Kalasnik]

I love longarms that are muzzleloaders (both flint and percussion), but there is something about the smoothbore flintlocks from the 1700s that just grabs me.

 

[lexington1]

I agree, however. If it is a french colonial restock (Quebec, Louisbourg, New Orleans pre-1763 era), they copied the old stocks very well within minimal tolerances. When the French restocked, everything needed to be the same.

1728 stocks were very delicate and did not hold up well with military use. By the time of the french and Indian War, many had been restocked by the French in Quebec with North American wood.

American colonial restocks tended to restock military arms with a more fowler like profile. The tulle style Roman nose stocks were very delicate for military use. The french attempted to beef up the wrist and butt on the 1754 and finally added a massive amount of wood to the 1763 musket. The french were determined to bolster their guns while keeping the weight around 9 lbs.

What had me thinking restock was the front nose band, on 1728’s the nose band was shouldered to the forearm, this one looks like it slides on and is not shouldered.

None the less its a very fine specimen, I’d place a high value on it.

 

[lexington1]

You well could be right. Don't let the nose band fool you, though. When the upper 8 inches of the forearm was restored, I didn't have the upper band to try. I finally rec'd the the part from TRS a few months later. It's pretty close but needs a tiny bit of fitting to make it slide on properly. That was 20+ years ago and I still haven't fit it exactly. How's that for procrastination!

 

[FlinterNick]

You well could be right. Don't let the nose band fool you, though. When the upper 8 inches of the forearm was restored, I didn't have the upper band to try. I finally rec'd the the part from TRS a few months later. It's pretty close but needs a tiny bit of fitting to make it slide on properly. That was 20+ years ago and I still haven't fit it exactly. How's that for procrastination!

Ive seen a few original 28 and 54 bands. The 28 bands were very small and thin…. Paper thin ! I think the reason why the nose band was shouldered was because it was so think, the 1754 was made longer and thicker, and was not shouldered. This allowed the french to beef up the forearm stock a little without making the musket muzzle heavy.

 

[lexington1]

Thanks for the info. I'll have to really examine one before I put this one in place. I'll put the spring in then too, of coarse. About 20 odd years ago I had the missing section of forearm spliced then got the band. I then just stuck it on the end for a future project and it's still that way! You wouldn't happen to have a pic of a 28 with the top band removed would you? I do want to get this fit right. You are right about the bands. They are very thin. Now if I can just find a band for an 1814 common rifle....

 

[2 shots]

very, very nice. would look nice with my 63/66 and 74 please send it to me i will even pay the shipping.

 

[lexington1]

very, very nice. would look nice with my 63/66 and 74 please send it to me i will even pay the shipping.

Well it is Christmas season.....but no.

 

[Junckopolo]

Yeap, these early french muskets are often broken down and restocked and mismatched with other parts from 1754, 63 and 66’s. its possible this one is restocked and done very well. The stocks on 1717 and 1728’s were extremely thin in the forearm and the wrist and butt had a little more drop. Not all these were identical, they all varied but I think this might be a colonial restock.

The 1728’s that came over to American were actually mostly marine 1728’s and grenadier muskets as the French colonies were armed by the french admiralty and not the army.

Also not uncommon to find a 1728 lock or barrel on an American made fowler or militia musket.

What would be the difference between the marine 1728 brought to North America and a mainland army? Is this one a marine or a regular from what you see?

 

[FlinterNick]

What would be the difference between the marine 1728 brought to North America and a mainland army? Is this one a marine or a regular from what you see?

A marine or grenadier 1728 or 1743 model was two distinctive models.

The earlier version was basically a 1717 musket with a more updated 1728 style lock the later 1743 version was very much like that of a 1728 musket, the barrel was held in by bands. The differences were subtle, for example the octagon sections as shorter or a marine musket than an infantry musket.

The marine musket had a brass sight on the front band, and the hardware was slightly different.

 

[PathfinderNC]

How wonderful that you have saved an invaluable piece of history. Had you not put in an effort, that treasure may have been parceled out and it would be lost forever.
The condition is fantastic for such an old gun kept in some basement or wherever. Seems the Canadian climate was just about right.
Congratulations and thanks for saving that musket and sharing those photos !