Brass patch box...Is it required?

[Allan Gray]

I've gone back to my York rifle build after a break from my "Honey-do" list.

The stock is a very nice piece of Maple with a good curl to it.
I've gone back and forth about a patch box, but I'm leaning towards no patch box at all, letting the nice wood show itself off.

I won't lose sleep if the finished rifle is not 100% PC, but I've been wondering...

Were any of the original rifles made without a patch box? Looking through the Shumway books I've got, I didn't see one without a box of some type.

By the way, I should mention, this is a parts set from Mr. Chambers. I can tell right away that it's destined to be a nice shooter and I plan on taking it in the field to find meat.

Suggestions, please..

 

[jtmattison]

It's your rifle. Build it the way you want it. Besides, there's not much use for a patch box anyway IMO.

:hatsoff:

HD

 

[LRB]

I have heard of examples of no patch box, but can't recall acually seeing one without. I am sure there are some. What about doing a wood patch box? They are not easy, but easier than many brass ones.
My patch box gets used. I store my cleaning tips in it, with a few patches and an extra flint.

 

[Birddog6]

Bear in mind what you are seeing in the books are just a few left, that somehow managed to be saved, of literally thousands upon thousands of rifles made. The general farmer, hunter, Mt. Man, regular guy couldn't afford a fancy rifle with all the inlays & fancy patchbox & etc. The rifle was generally a Tool, not a show piece. IMHO....

Build it the way you want it. You can always go back later & add a patchbox if the hankerin' really gets to ya.

:thumbsup:

 

[Ephraim]

I like my slidind wood patch box and use it a lot I store my M&M's in it comes in handy. :rotf: yum yum.
Ephraim

 

[tg]

It would be common to have a box on a 18th century rifle but building a gun without one would not be "wrong" a nice wood box does add a lot to a rifle particularly an early one IMO, if you want a plain gun I don't think anyone could call foul if you built it with no box.

 

[Only Round]

OK, I realize I'm bucking the trend here, but I really think you should put in the patch box. IMHO the patch box, with the wide end near the butt, narrowing as it moves forward really helps draw the eye forward into the wrist, to the lock panels and on outward to the nosecap. Without the patch box, you just have a huge blank space between the buttplate and the lock panel. I think having the box there adds to the architecture of the rifle, not having one actually detracts.
Just my 2 cents.

 

[tg]

If you want to see some originals without boxes, Whiskers book on Carolina and Lancaster builders shows a few, a couple are fowlers but there are two or three that are rifles, his York gunbuilders book may have some as well, I did not put one on an early Lancaster several years ago and I think it looked OK it was a plain gun with salvaged earlier round faced lock from an older gun, the choice is yours but the box can add to the guns appeal, I did not regret my choice on the one I did not use a box on, it had nice wood and just the minimum incise molding and a bit of incise decoration behind the cheek piece, let us know how the build goes and share some pics.

 

[Dave K]

I do not think a patch box is reguired. Not all guns had them when they were built. Besides, if you really have a killer piece of wood, why hide it with the patch box? Sometimes,a well executed build, will show the gun in a better light, than covering up the wood under the furniture.Show off the wood!

 

[brubincam]

-----I'd rather see the wood-----

 

[Allan Gray]

Thanks, Guys

It would seem that my worries about going without a patchbox are foolish.

As it was mentioned, I could add one later if want. I did that to my CVA Kentucky.

I don't ever use a patch box and wouldn't miss it. They do add an architectural element, but in this case, I think I'll let the Maple do the talking.

 

[paulvallandigham]

I don't think of a nice, figured piece of wood being a " Blank Space", between the buttplate, and wrist. If you have a beatiful piece of wood, with fiddleback, why not show it off?

You can always add wire inlays, or incise carving, or even that wooden patchbox later if you decide to change your mind. If you put a brass patchbox on now, you will be committed, and you will have covered up some beautiful wood. I have plenty of modern rifles with " Plain " stocks on them, and I don't consider them ugly, or of lesser quality because you get to see the beautiful grain of the wood.

Now, if you have a utility grade piece of wood, with no interesting grain, No fiddleback, etc. then put a fancy patch box and surround on it, By all means! Or do both relief and incise carving on it, to give the stock some character.

Just my $.02 worth. :thumbsup:

 

[Stumpkiller]

If you are copying a specific rifle, copy it close. If you are just going for a general "feel" or a good shooter it doesn't matter so much. Certain schools of PA rifles had distinct patchboxes, and the gunsmith didn't care what the buyer's budget was, he made rifles his way and his customer's probably bought them when they had enough scratch pulled together or shopped elsewhere. Things have flopped around in modern times: material is cheap and labor is expensive. 250 years ago the opposite was true.

Patchboxes may have been like chrome on Detroit cars in the 50's. It didn't do anything but add expense but it was in style, expected, and exceptions were rare.

Unless you are going for a specific rifle or time it doesn't much matter. You are the final judge.

 

[paulvallandigham]

When I decided to get a hunting rifle, I ordered a Tennessee Poor Boy rifle, in iron, but sans buttplate. The stock has very interesting grain. I didn't have a use for a patchbox, so this gun doesn't have one. I have not missed it. I had a patch box on the gun I used to own, and never found a good use for it. I suppose if Chocolate didn't give me the screaming poops, I would put M&Ms in the box for snacks. That is the best use I have yet heard for the things.

Having said that, If I ever were to modify my rifle, I would put a wooden patch box on it, and an iron buttplate. I really have not missed the Shine of patch boxes and other brass trim on that rifle when I have been hunting. I even paint the brass front sight black with enamel paint before going hunting. If its not light enough for me to see that front sight without a shiny brass surface flashing at me, I have no business taking a shot at game. I simply cannot be assured that the background behind the animal is safe from people under such poor light conditions.

 

[bingo1952]

Build it any way you like. It's your gun bought and paid for with your money. You are the only one you have to please. :wink:

 

[Pork Chop]

YOU ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO PUT A PATCH BOX ON IT!!


But only if YOU want to do so... As others have said, it is your choice. Since there is some indication that originals were made without them (and logic would say it is so as well), then just admiring the nice grain in the wood is fine and dandy! :thumbsup:

 

[jethro224]

I like a pretty piece of wood better than a great big blob of shiny brass. That's why I had Roy build my squirrel gun with no box. I think it looks great. :thumbsup:

 

[Mike Brooks]

Generally, ky "rifles" built with out patch boxes were smooth bored, with oct/rnd barrels and were used as buck and ball guns or small bored fowlers.
many of them had cheek pieces and carving, just no box.

 

[Elnathan]

For the life of me, I will never understand why people are given perfectly good boxes and refuse to keep stuff in it. I keep my worm and ballscrew in my box, as well as anything small - feather, wooden flint - that I don't want to lose in my bag.

Mr. Grey,
If you still have the scrap piece that Jim sends with his kits, why don't you make a wooden box? Those don't cover up the grain, and are perfectly functional and PC.

 

[brubincam]

-----I have 2 rifles with exactly the same curly maple one with patch box one without---rather see the wood-----