• 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

Building a Ferguson Rifle from Rifle Shoppe Part Set

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Thanks Frank,
How about instead "OCD Dave"? (Obsessive Compulsive Disorder).

Sam, the inside is smoothed using coarse and medium grit sandpaper wrapped around a thick dowel of wood. However, nothing beyond that. There is no bluing or browning on the barrel to rub off. It is just polished armory bright which is not a high polish. The bayonet will lightly scratch the barrel but so be it.

dave
 
Hi,
The finish is about done and I am finishing and polishing up the metal parts. You can see in the photos that it does not look like black walnut anymore. It looks like the Morristown gun.
75DBDEB.jpg

DZlOtcn.jpg

4S21jim.jpg


dave
 
Hi Folks,
One of the reasons I post many of my projects is to cover topics that I find are rarely covered. I intentionally try to fill in gaps in the details that you might not get anywhere else. This post is an example. I have been on this forum for 18 years and I track many of the questions asked over the years. I remember them and try to eventually contribute information to answer those questions. I have a long memory. With respect to making a Ferguson from TRS parts set, a perennial question over those 18 years has been the vent hole. The issue is always that the position of pan of the lock in the machined mortise results in the vent hole being blocked by the screw plug. Let me be clear, the lock position inlet on TRS precarved stocks is wrong and too far back. Anyone looking at the Morristown and Milwaukee guns can easily see this. So what to do? It is not really a serious problem. First, file the flat bottomed notch in the front of the screw plug just a little deeper. Then drill the vent hole at a forward angle to just clear the notch in the screw plug. Use a #51 drill for that hole. If you do that, the gun will fire reliably but it may often fire with a fuze effect. A fizzzzz boom. That is because the vent hole is long. A far better solution is to install a "white lightning" vent liner. That liner can be installed at an angle. Here is the hole and tap showing the forward angle of the hole.
wr6v7ZF.jpg

Then thread in a white lightning liner at that angle. Counter sink the hole at an angle.
DI5SPjo.jpg

Next, use my favorite tool, a ball peen hammer, and peen the liner into the counter sink.
MCmMREO.jpg


File it flush with the barrel and away you go..
tj8XvkG.jpg


Then drill out the hole in the liner with a #51 drill.
ywpdOCK.jpg

x2pbNc1.jpg


In this case the hole is slightly forward of center of the pan but that will not matter at all.
I inserted wire to show that the vent hole reaches the powder chamber unobstructed by the screw plug.
LOxr5Q8.jpg

7gbkTAW.jpg


Ignition will be fast and reliable.

Now let's move to the rear sight. The original rifles had two leaves in the rear sight and two notches. One of the prototype Fergusons by Durs Egg had a a middle distance hole and notch drilled into the leaf. I asked Joe, the owner of my gun if he wanted me to do that. He agreed and here is the result. Kind of like the rear sights on model 1863 Spingfields.

mtJErS8.jpg

7MuDtRi.jpg


dave
 
Hi Sam,
No. I peened this one because the counter sunk hole is at an angle so the forward part of the lip off the liner is raised slightly above the barrel. I just peen that down snugly into the counter sink and file it flush.
dave
 
Just a quick post for all you Fergie Fans out there..

This is an original Durs Egg Ferguson that is in Edinburgh Castle, and which caught my attention as a small boy...

IMG_0635.JPG


Ignore the L shaped piece in the trigger guard, this is the bracket holding the gun to the wall!

This is clearly a commercial pattern Fergie made by Egg after the military contract. I was tempted to copy the chequering and engraving on my TRS Fergie, but had second thoughts!

IMG_0638.JPG


Interesting to note this one has a 10 start screw, again with a nice engraved pattern...

IMG_0637.JPG


Not seen the "line and dot" checkering on other models as well..

IMG_0642.JPG


... and it has a horn end cap and clearing rod tip!
 
Hi,
Nice rifle! Despite private production, it still mounts a bayonet. That kind of early checkering is a challenge.
3U12PGf.jpg

nz3ZiBX.jpg

I87fWMN.jpg

hHG98ou.jpg

7Yxdc22.jpg

rwAmrNL.jpg

MjhOD0I.jpg

zumneJN.jpg

wmfwxzk.jpg


dave
Yes, well you can encounter some quite savage Haggis around these parts, so a bayonet can be quite a handy backup strategy!

Very impressive checkering there Dave...!
 
Hi Folks,
I am building this Ferguson rifle for a client down south. It is my third Ferguson but my first using the TRS precarved stock. I like Fergusons and shoot my personal rifle a lot. However, I have no illusions about the place of the Ferguson rifle in history. Patrick Ferguson and his rifle have almost a cult following. According to those folks if the British were not so stupid and made more Fergusons, we might have lost the Rev War. They also place Paddie on a pedestal as a far sighted visionary and superior officer. However, historical opinion and evidence is not so hegemonic. Ferguson did not invent the breech loading rifle design. He modified an existing design by Isaac de la Chaumette and made a few minor improvements. He was enough of an entrepreneur to stage demonstrations before the Ordnance and the king showing the advantages of his rifle. He was no fraud as a marksman and his demonstrations were legitimate and awe inspiring. But his rifle had some serious weaknesses as a military weapon. First, from the production standpoint, only a handful of British gun makers were qualified to make rifle barrel and breech. While those makers could produce 1,000 muzzleloading rifles, they struggled to make 100 Ferguson barrels and breeches and at 4 times the cost. Paddie put together his experimental rifle corps, who failed early marksmanship demonstrations but eventually congealed into a tight unit. That unit was thrust upon General William Howe in New York without his initial knowledge or consent. The rifle corps was a project of the king. General William Howe and his brother Admiral Richard Howe hated meddling in the American war by the government in Britain without it consulting them first. That put Ferguson and his experimental corps of riflemen on the wrong foot with Howe right away. They arrived in America and asked, "OK, here we are. What do you want us to do?" Anyway, they were put to use and Ferguson's riflemen acquitted themselves well but not superior to other groups like the German jaegers or John Simcoe' s Queens Rangers. They suffered heavy casualties during the Brandywine campaign and lost Ferguson owing to a serious wound. Ferguson recovered but his rifle corps was disbanded and the rifles ordered to be returned to stores in New York. That some of his rifleman kept their rifles is clear but to what extent remains a mystery. Ferguson was a good officer but neither Howe or Cornwallis trusted him. When he went south to operate under Cornwallis in South Carolina, Cornwallis did not trust him and was afraid he would impulsively get into trouble. He did at King's Mountain, a battle that should put to rest any illusion that Ferguson was a brilliant battlefield tactician or strategist.

dave
Black powder residue and fowling killed all such inventions!
 
Dave -

Ramrods - I see most of wood, but have seen a few pictures with metal ramrods. Then I see some wood ones that also stop a good inch or two before the muzzle. Is any one method more correct, for an ordinance rifle?

Nosecaps - Looking around online, I see quite the variety, some right on the end of the stock, which is profiled lower than the upper forend, and then some back a bit. Then some without. Again. is any one method more correct?

Many thanks in advance!
 
Black powder residue and fowling killed all such inventions!
Hi,
If you properly lube the screw plug with melted tallow and beeswax before shooting, it will not foul from powder residue for 30-40 shots and even more. The kiss of death is if you spill powder into the threads above the powder chamber, where the tapered threads really seal tightly. That can stop you in your tracks but is easy to prevent by not over filling the powder chamber. Letters and reports by Ferguson and by others about his unit never mention any issues with powder fouling. Ricky Roberts and Bryan Brown claim to fire 60+ rounds without needing to clean the breech. The other piece is that the rifles used "superfine double strength" rifle powder. This was highest quality stuff from Germany and it burned much cleaner than the usual stuff. It was also much more expensive. Today, Swiss 3F powder works well.

dave
 
Dave -

Ramrods - I see most of wood, but have seen a few pictures with metal ramrods. Then I see some wood ones that also stop a good inch or two before the muzzle. Is any one method more correct, for an ordinance rifle?

Nosecaps - Looking around online, I see quite the variety, some right on the end of the stock, which is profiled lower than the upper forend, and then some back a bit. Then some without. Again. is any one method more correct?

Many thanks in advance!
Hi,
Assuming you are describing different Ferguson-style rifles, there were different varieties. I am building a copy of the ordnance rifle issued to the experimental British rifle company in 1776-77. One hundred were made and 2 are known to survive. I base my work on the gun in the NPS Morristown Historical Park and Museum in Morristown, NJ. It has a full cast nose cap and wooden ramrod/cleaning rod. The rod ends short of the muzzle because it must clear the bend of the bayonet blade, which is under the barrel rather than to the side like Brown Besses. The famous de Peyster rifle in the Smithsonian was made by Durs Egg and may have been one of the prototypes used by Ferguson during his demonstrations at Woolwich and in front of the King. There is another Durs Egg military Ferguson that survives and is similar. Both have wooden rods but nose bands open at the end rather than cast nose caps. That was common on privately purchased military guns and those were purchased by Ferguson from Egg rather than being issued by ordnance. There are also Fergusons made for the East India Company, which also differ from the ordnance rifles. Some might have had metal rods. Finally, there are any number of civilian purchased Fergusons used either as sporting guns or as weapons in British militia and volunteer units. Their designs differ a lot.

dave
 
Back
Top