Brass and Iron mounts on early guns

[bob1961]

thanks once again stumpy :hatsoff: ...........bob

 

[rich pierce]

We've talked about iron vs. brass mounts bring pc on F&I period firearms, but there is one more thing I would like to clarify. What about the "poor boys" without buttplates, nosecaps, or toeplates. Do these date from the pre-revolutionary period, and are they purely southern mountain rifles?

No easy answer.
Existing original "Poor Boys" as most folks think of them, Southern guns with no buttplate, nosecap, toeplate, almost all date to the 1820's and later, based on the locks and barrels used.

There are at least 2 examples of early guns with iron mounts, believed to be made in the South, which have some iron furniture and are not completely fitted out with all the bells and whistles. And there is an iron mounted, blacksmith-made (in my opinion) rifle with all the trimmings, crude as they can be, that could date to before the Revolution. It is featured in Kindig's book and, I believe, Shumway's RCA #2?

Then there are Pennsylvania "barn guns", "schimmels" etc which appear to be largely confined to a small area of SE Pennsylvania and to date to the early 1800s. These lack buttplates, nosecaps, patchboxes, etc. I believe they were farmers guns, not hunter's guns, just as a farmer or a kid might have bought a single shot .22 JC Higgins for the barn in the 1950s, but the hunter bought something nicer.

Of course, folks reason that "sure there were plenty of poor boys in the 1760's, but they all got used up and thrown away cause they were not fancy."

It is interesting, in these debates, to consider that the Native Americans would not settle for such stuff. They wanted and paid dearly for fully appointed guns. Look at all the trade rifles and you'll see what I mean. Even the Northwest gun has a buttplate, and that gun was about the cheapest thing around. That makes it harder for me to accept the "economic argument" that common every day folks could not afford a fully appointed rifle and so there was a big demand for poor boys. Folks maybe also forget that the barrel and lock cost a lot more than the rest of the gun, and making and adding standard parts was not a major part of the cost of building.

 

Rich, I generally agree with you and look forward to your knowledgeable answers and comments...but often you seem to imply a greater wealth among people than I think is called for, especially in your discussions of well appointed vs "poorboy" guns, etc...case in point (and a minor one) is your comment above about the JC Higgins .22. My first rifle was a single shot JC Higgins .22 that I think cost $14.00 in the 50s. We were not farmers, it was not a barn gun--we were middle class, but in the 50s that meant 'Poor' by today's standards! My Dad was an FBI Agent and made something like 5000+/- bucks a year (his starting salary was $4000/yr in 1950/51). He hunted with the same rifle he had since a boy and the shotgun his dad had given him. We scraped by with few luxuries. He had two boys and to shellout $28 for two guns was a stretch to the budget--they were Christmas presents. Yet we had infinitely more than our ancestors on the frontier, more cash, more material wealth, etc....we've had this discussion before so I won't repeat it, but I think the plain rifles greatly outnumbered the fancy ones, whether brass mounted or not. We were hunters, but we could not afford to splurge on fancy rifles, we couldn't even splurge on brand name plain rifles--it was Sears specials for us.... :m2c:

 

[Stumpkiller]

What you did in the 1950's has nothing to do with what "they" did in the 1750's. There was no Sears or J.C. Higgins/Ted Williams off brands. They went into a professional's shop and asked for weapons on which the smith's reputation and good name was hanging.

You can't go to Steinway's in New York and ask for a piano with 63 keys instead of 88, and a rough finish. You buy the best they can make, because that's all they sell.

I'd wager that the plain guns with no hardware were restocks done by the owner or perhaps a carpenter, furniture or wagon builder in areas without a dedicated gunsmith who lacked the castings or incentive to fix it up nice.

 

[rich pierce]

Ya know, I agree with both you guys on this. Poor reasoning on my part, projecting 20th century ways backwards too far. Please do me a favor and just figure, "the old guy was having one of his moments." (there are many such moments, and they seem to be increasing in frequency!)

 

While I wholeheartedly agree that the 1950s does not mirror the 1750s, I do think that the customer could walk into a shop in the 18th century and order a plain no-frills gun. In fact the old records repeatedly make reference to different grades of rifles, plain vs fancy, and record their price differences, which was close to 2 to 1 for a high grade over a plain grade. Go read the records. read the surviving bills of sale, read the manifests of the traders, read the estate settlements where the grades of guns are valued differently---there were plain utilitarian rifles made and they outnumber the "fine" rifles!

What you did in the 1950's has nothing to do with what "they" did in the 1750's. There was no Sears or J.C. Higgins/Ted Williams off brands. They went into a professional's shop and asked for weapons on which the smith's reputation and good name was hanging.

You can't go to Steinway's in New York and ask for a piano with 63 keys instead of 88, and a rough finish. You buy the best they can make, because that's all they sell.

I'd wager that the plain guns with no hardware were restocks done by the owner or perhaps a carpenter, furniture or wagon builder in areas without a dedicated gunsmith who lacked the castings or incentive to fix it up nice.

 

[C_Laubach]

http://photobucket.com/albums/v186/c_laubach/iron%20mounted%20rifle/

While we are on the subject of iron mounted rifles. Here is a very interesting piece. Some of you have probably already seen this rifle but some may not. This rifle showed up at the KRA show and the belief is that the date (1773) is correct to the rifle.Some believe is was made in New England and some believe it was made in Va.

Wherever it was made it is a spectacular piece.

 

[Stumpkiller]

FANTASTIC! If ever we meet your drinks are on me!

What is the wood? Plain maple, or ~ c-c-can it possibly be ~ the iron mounted cherry pre-Rev. rifle I've dreamed about?!?!?

What did the patchbox top look like?

 

[LSU TIGER]

Looking at the pictures, I'd say it's a VA rifle. But, I'm no expert...

 

[C_Laubach]

Stump,
It is Cherry and I have put another picture showing the top of the box.

 

[rich pierce]

That's the Tileston gun that sold recently. I thought most folks agreed it was New England, seems to me somebody ID'd the gunsmith. The cherry stock would seem to point to New England. One thing's for sure- few guns can be documented for sure.

 

[C_Laubach]

Rich,
You are correct. Most did agree until the name Tileston turned up in Va. in some tax records. Now I am getting this second hand.

Cherry stock doesn

 

[rich pierce]

agreed, it's an important piece and I wish I could forge trigger guards like that. Or build a lock like that. Or....

 

[Stumpkiller]

Still works for me. If I get challenged on my iron mounted cherry Lehigh I can say the name on the barrel (Norwegian) is a NY/NE gunsmith that copied a Lehigh for me (perhaps an apprentice trying to mimic that style).

 

[tg]

I think that near the back of Whiskers "Carolina Gunsmiths" book it a plain gun with no buttplate ...and a tallow hole I think, I don't think there is a date, that book is on loan to a friend so I cannot verify maybe someone else who has this book can take a look

 

[WRussell]

Nothing to do with PC on American arms, but since brass is considerably easier to work, the gunmakers guild in London required apprentices to build their sample pieces with iron mounts, and customers who wanted "best quality" wanted iron mounts. Brass furniture on Brit pieces (18th century) shouts "second quality", which why we see so much iron used in those days.

Brass is plenty strong enough for furniture, so when brass was available at a reasonable price, it's only logical to use it unless the customer demanded otherwise.

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

There's still a lot of Tilestons in New England. I used to know some down on Cape Cod years ago.

 

[Flint1]

Hi everyone,
Not to beat a dead horse to death, but it has been stated that British laws would have made it dificult for colonists to have the iron available to make trim for their guns. If this were so, would it not have hindered gun production in the colonies even more, since the locks, barrels, and triggers were of iron? If iron were used to make those components, would it have been that much more difficult to use iron to mount the guns?

 

[Stumpkiller]

Makes you wonder how they shoed horses, made knives & harpoons, hinged doors, grated fireplaces, fenced cemeteries, linked chain and anchored boats, don't it?

 

well from what i can gather the iron was here in quantity but was pigged for export to Britain and then sent back . IMO it isn