• 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

A North Bucks Lehampton Valley Spring rifle

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Joined
Nov 26, 2005
Messages
5,223
Reaction score
10,881
Hi,
A few year ago I posted a rifle I called the "Star of Bethlehem". It was based on RCA #52 and came out pretty well but I was never happy with it. The red maple stock had wonderful figure but was difficult to carve because it was soft in spots. But most importantly, I obtained good photos and dimensions of the original and realized I made some mistakes. Mine was too skinny. So I decided to make another RCA #52 with much better data and turn the Star of Bethlehem into a nice early Buck, Lehigh, Northhampton gun with a little Christian's Spring thrown in. I changed the trigger guard, made a new muzzle cap, reworked the stock to slim it down even more, and added a slightly more obvious step at the wrist. I reworked all of the carving finding the wood polymerized by the old finish to be better to carve!!!! I also reworked the lock. It is a Davis Colonial American lock. I was happy with it on the original gun after working it over a bit but after changing the architecture of the stock a bit, I remembered Jim Kibler's comment on my original rifle that the flintcock and frizzen were too big. He was right of course and after I changed the architecture of the stock, the original flintcock looked like a giant rooster over hanging the pan and the frizzen way too tall. I discovered that the flintcock on a Chambers early Ketland lock is a perfect substitute only requiring a little filing of the square hole to fit it. I then ground down the frizzen and reshaped it. I really like the results and the lock is now superb and perfectly fitted to this gun. I also cut moldings on the edges of the plate and flint ****. I am now satisfied with this rifle and will build an RCA#52 in the future. The barrel is a 1980s Getz barrel in 62 caliber and "D" weight. It was not a good barrel requiring me to lap the bore to keep it from shredding patches and remove machining marks 6" from the muzzle. It now shoots very well. The trigger pull is just 1.5 pounds. The thimbles, muzzle cap, trigger, toe plate, sights, inlays, and side plate were hand made by me. The stain is ferric nitrate and the finish is Sutherland-Welles polymerized tung oil tinted with red and yellow dyes.

dave


























 
That is absolutely gorgeous as usual.
I think you should send it to me for further testing, at least through our December muzzleloading season....

I am confused by one thing though. In one sentence you said the gun as originally built was "too skinny," but then you talk of slimming it down.
What did I miss?
 
Hi Brokennock,
It was too skinny in the wrist and lock area to match RCA 52, particularly width of the wrist. For this current gun, I slimmed down the fore stock even more than before giving it a slight "V" profile hinting at a Lehigh. It is hard to realize that the barrel is "D" weight, almost 1 3/16" at the breech, and 1" at the muzzle with a full 3/8 diameter ramrod hole. There is not 1/32" of extra wood anywhere on that stock. The rifle weighs 8 lbs and balances really well. I added a light glaze of bone black to darken the corners of any features which is why some of the carving seems to have some gritty looking stuff at the edges. The photos don't capture the effect very well.

dave
 
I like your style, Great Looking rifle.

In your list, " The thimbles, muzzle cap, trigger, toe plate, sights, inlays, and side plate were hand made by me. "

Did you also make the butt plate?
 
Beautiful rifle. Just the right amount of carving without being "over the top." Is the star an inlay with silver wire accents? It almost looks like it was poured into the stock.
 
Hi Brokennock,
It was too skinny in the wrist and lock area to match RCA 52, particularly width of the wrist. For this current gun, I slimmed down the fore stock even more than before giving it a slight "V" profile hinting at a Lehigh. It is hard to realize that the barrel is "D" weight, almost 1 3/16" at the breech, and 1" at the muzzle with a full 3/8 diameter ramrod hole. There is not 1/32" of extra wood anywhere on that stock. The rifle weighs 8 lbs and balances really well. I added a light glaze of bone black to darken the corners of any features which is why some of the carving seems to have some gritty looking stuff at the edges. The photos don't capture the effect very well.

dave
Another truly wonderful rifle.
Thank you for the response.
 
Back
Top