Classic Kentucky Rifle?

[Bluegrass]

I'm in the market for a Kentucky Rifle and I need a little info on stock style. I know there are several different styles of buttstock on Kentucky Rifles, and I'd like to know which is the most traditional.The exact reason I'd like to know is because I'm thinkin' about buying a Cabela's Blue Ridge or Kentucky Rifle and I don't know exactly what era each rifle is made to replicate. If someone could post a picture or link of a traditional Kentucky rifle,I'd reallty apprerciate it!

 

[Stumpkiller]

A classic Kentucky? (I prefer the name Pennsylvania Longrifle). That's like saying "show me a classic American car. Soooo many.

Here's a sampling. Won't none of 'em look like Cabela's Blue Ridge (which is a Pedersoli Frontier)

Pedersoli Frontier

Not a bad rifle - I knew a fellow that had one and loved it. It was accurate and reliable. What more can you ask?

"Real" Kentucky rifles:

J.P. Beck c. 1770's Lebanon

Jacob Dickert c. 1770 Lancaster

Andrew Verner c. 1780's Buck's County

c. 1780 Bedford County

J. Rupp c.1780 Lehigh

J. Moll c.1780 Also a Lehigh

Of these THE classic would be the Dickert. I like the Lehighs. It's all a matter of taste.

 

[tg]

As stated above the Pedorsoli guns are rather generic and at best may some what resemble some of the post 1800 originals...kinda...with a little help..if you want a gun that is realy in the style of the originals then you will need to step into the semi-custom built or kit offerings and even in tha realm you must do your homework to confirm the seller/builders "interpretation" of a particular gun/style.

 

[Bluegrass]

A classic Kentucky? (I prefer the name Pennsylvania Longrifle). That's like saying "show me a classic American car. Soooo many.

So is "Kentucky Rifle" too broad of a term, or is it just not geographically correct?

 

[Stumpkiller]

Well, it's a personal goal of mine to keep the credit for building and designing the flintlock longrifle with the Pennsylvania smiths that created them. Just me being a crank. "Kentucky rifles" actually manufactured in Kentucky are invariably percussion and made after 1825. Since you posted on the flintlock list, I figured you were interested in "Pennsylvania rifles"; flintlock longrifles. Some of which happened to be in the hands of a Kentucky military unit in the War of 1812 named in a song "The Kentucky Rifles" written after the war (or "The Hunters of Kentucky"). I like the practice of naming the style of rifles after the regions in which they were made.

Here's a background essay by a guy named "John". Note that he is from Kentucky, so it has a bit of a spin that way. His last full paragraph is tongue-in-cheek (I hope). I bet $1.00 there were other names before "Kentucky" used to describe the American longrifles in the 1700's by the men using them. I would argue that if we start calling firearms by where they were used we would need a full page just for the name whenever we discussed the Brown Bess. :winking:

http://johno.myiglou.com/kyrifle.htm

The Kentucky rifle

An American invention

The Kentucky Rifle is a uniquely American invention, for uniquely American needs. It is the first firearm designed in what was then the colonies, and probably the first mechanical device of any sort designed expressly in the new world.

The origin of the Kentucky rifle comes from German gunsmiths, and the Jaeger hunting rifle. During the 1700's, most ethnic immigrants had a wide variety of landscape to choose from in the colonies, and so they settled in lands similar to home. Much of Appalachia was settled by Scotsmen, as it's steep mountains and scarce population were almost identical to the Scottish Highlands. In the case of the Germans, the deep, rolling forests of Pennsylvania were remarkably similar to the Black Forest, both in topography and weather. The relatively settled nature of the area gave easy access to the materials and machinery needed to ply their trade. Thus, it was only natural that the Germans would settle in that area, and German gunsmiths would reproduce the forest hunting rifle.

However, they had their work cut out for them, as the Jaeger rifle was not the optimal solution for the explorer of the American wilderness. Our forests at the time had a few unique qualities about them, which set them apart from the Bavarian forests, or any other.

They're larger. Much larger. The Appalachian forests that ran from New York to Georgia covered more territory than all of Germany.

They were largely unexplored, with settlements being few and far between. The traveler in these forests would have to be self sufficient, as trading posts or other sources of supplies could be weeks away, if you could find them at all.

Travel was done almost exclusively on foot, or occasionally with pack animals. This meant that the intrepid explorer had to carry all supplies on their back to last for several months. Weight became a premium concern. This is complicated by the fact that , at the time, a person could not carry more than a week's food supply with them, if even that. Sustinence would need to be derived from the land.

And, being dense hardwood forests, there isn't much in the way of edible plantlife. The tall trees tend to drown out lesser plants, and a hardwood tree, while magnificent to look at, just doesn't do much for the appetite. If you want to survive in a dense forest, animals are your only consistent food supply. And animals existed in plenty, from rabbits to deer - if you could catch them. Short of setting a trap and waiting, your only choice for surviving in the American forests was a rifle. And unlike a weekend in the Black Forest, running out of food in the Appalachian forests meant starvation.

To meet these needs, the gunmakers had quite a few problems to solve. A rifle to accommodate the Appalachian traveler needed several qualities:

It must be lightweight, and its ammunition must be lightweight. Most traveling was done on foot, with all necessary supplies carried by the person. Given the size of the forests, the relative rarity of trails, and dearth of settlements, the explorer had to carry all necessary items to survive for up to six months. Therefore, the rifle, probably the heaviest single item they would be carrying, needed to place weight at a premium.

It must be accurate. Rifles of the day were slow to load, and a gunshot would scare off any animals nearby. That first shot had to count. One also must consider the limited supply of bullets and gunpowder, carried on the person. With a need to conserve bullets and powder, neither available in the forest, every shot must count.

It must have a minimum of special equipment. Anything relating to the operation of the rifle would have to be carried with the explorer. Loss or breakage of special tools, such as a mallet to drive a bullet into the barrel, would render the rifle inoperable, and leave the explorer out of food.

It must be quick to load. Hostile inhabitants of the woods could descend upon the explorer at any time. While the Indians of the time did not generally have firearms, and had great respect for the person who did have one, they did travel in numbers. Excuse me, can you wait while I prepare my rifle. I'll only be a few minutes... to take this to the extreme, Simon Kenton was reputed to be able to reload his KY rifle in 12 seconds, while running.

To solve these problems, the gunmakers began to evolve the Jaeger rifle into a weapon suitable for the task at hand. They made several changes, unique to gunmakers in the colonies.

The long barrel. This addressed several needs. The very long barrel allowed for open gunsights that could be used in the dark, shady forest, by virtue of placing the rear sight farther from the marksman's eye. You can't hit it if you can't see your sights. A long barrel tends to fire a bullet more consistently, when differing powder charges are used. Game close, use less powder, bullet still goes in the same place. Those who have fired a reproduction of a Kentucky rifle first note the long barrel, which seems rather difficult to aim, as it is nose heavy. However, take the rifle out into dense hardwood forests, and the solution becomes obvious. There is always a tree nearby to rest a hand on to support the barrel. A shortcoming that goes away when you use the rifle within its design parameters.

The smaller caliber. Lighter bullets weigh less, which is critical when you carry your entire supply on your back, and take less powder to shoot, which is critical when you also carry your entire gunpowder supply in a horn. The typical caliber of a woodsman's KY rifle was in the .40-48 range, adequate for the small game that made up the usual explorer's dinner, but also optimized for weight. Smaller caliber bullets also resulted in much lighter barrels, making not only the ammunition, but the rifle itself, lighter.

The patched round ball. One of the most overlooked innovations of the Kentucky rifle is the patched ball. The Jaeger rifle depended upon a tight fitting bullet to get a good gas seal and insure that most of the gunpowder's gas propelled the bullet. The slightly oversized bullet was hard to start in the barrel, and tended to leave lead deposits behind that affected subsequent shots. Consequently, starting the bullet into the barrel was a tedious affair, with an iron (and heavy) rod and mallet (also heavy) to hammer the bullet into the barrel. To solve these two problems, a brilliant but unknown designer used bullets slightly smaller than the barrel, and a greasy patch of cloth to complete the seal. By doing this, the bullet and patch started easy for fast loading, sealed well for maximum power and accuracy, and required no special equipment for loading. No heavy mallet to carry, or to lose or break, leaving one with no food supply. The patched round ball also gave rise to one of the Kentucky rifle's distinctive characteristics: the patchbox on the rifle stock, with which one could easily store a supply of greased patches, and keep them free of the dirt and debris that would normally stick to a greasy cloth.

The slender stock. What gives a Kentucky its unique, and beautiful, appearance. A slender stock simply weighs less than the massive wood stocks of the Jaeger rifles. This was a tradeoff, light stocks are less stable and more fragile than heavy stocks, but the weight factor comes in again: Carry a heavy rifle, and you can't carry much else. Stability was overcome with a tree, and fragility was compensated (probably) by careful handling. Add the all important patch box in the stock, and you now have the complete picture of this rifle's characteristics.

A uniquely American invention to solve a uniquely American situation. In the process, some uniquely American habits were also created. Traditionally, American soldiers have been, man for man, the best marksmen in the major armies of the world. This relates directly back to their forest exploring ancestors, where marksmanship made the difference between thriving and starving. That weeded out the less than adequate very quickly. American soldiers have also typically kept their firearms the cleanest and most well maintained. Once again, their ancestors learned this the hard way: dirty gun, no shoot, no food, starve.

When the forests had been fully explored, the need for the Kentucky rifle's unique characteristics went away, and so did its manufacture. As exploration moved into the plains territory of mid America, the rifle of choice was the Hawken. Heavier caliber for the larger game, shorter so that it can be fired without a tree for support, a more suitable rifle for the Plains states.

While long rifles were made into the late 1800s, large scale manufacture had died down by the mid 1800's. And so it would, the forests had been fully explored, settlements established, trails and bridges built. There was no need for a firearm that placed accuracy and weight over handling and hitting power.

Today, most of the examples that can be found in museums and collections are the 'Golden Age' rifles from the Lancaster, PA area. One must remember that these rifles, for the most part, are showpieces, elaborately made for rich landowners. As such, they represent the pinnacle of development, and not the origins. To get a true picture of why this rifle's unique characteristics were developed, one must look to the woodsman's rifle, which was rather plain, usually with a walnut stock and iron accoutrements.

It is interesting to note that a rifle of similar porportions evolved elsewhere, at a later date. These long barreled, slender stocked rifles were found in and around the mountains of Afghanistan, and while no recorded history of their evolution is known to exist, the design appears to be primarily for light weight and accuracy, as it was carried by travelers on foot. Who wants to lug a 10 pound rifle up a mountain? These rifles were usually made as matchlocks, and the examples that turn up on collections were reported to have been brought out in the mid 1970's, by an enterprising group that went into this region with a few cases of Russian shotguns for trade. The designers of these rifles did have to face one problem not encountered in the US: the Afghan mountains have few trees. For this reason, most Afghan rifles, including the example I have, come with a folding bipod.

What do you call it?

The earliest documentable reference to a generic name for this unique rifle was 1825, and a song about the battle for New Orleans during the war of 1812. The Hunters of Kentucky extolled the virtues of a Kentucky regiment, perhaps a bit too glowingly, but, hey, it's a song. In it, there is a line about "Kentucky Rifles". The song contains no description of a long barreled, slender stocked rifle, just one reference to "Kentucky Rifle". For this reason, it is safe to assume that the name was in use prior to 1825, otherwise those hearing the song would have no clue what the lyrics referred to.

It is also called the Pennsylvania Rifle. As a geographical term, there is merit to this name. The bulk of Kentucky rifles were made in Pennsylvania, though examples were made in just about every state in the Union at the time. However, this rifle was not traditionally referred to as the Pennsylvania rifle. The earliest references I've found to "Pennsylvania Rifle" dates to 1928, and Dillon's book, which makes brief use of the term in a later chapter. To put it in perspective, Dillon's book is titled: "The Kentucky Rifle". So, we can reasonably assume that Pennsylvania Rifle is probably a 20th century term, with more of an interest in location than historical signifigance. However, if one uses the term "Pennsylvania Rifle" as a measure of geographical accuracy, the actual name would be "The Pennsylvania, New York, Connecticut, Ohio, North Carolina, Virginia, Kentucky, Indiana, Alabama, and Tennessee Rifle". That's a mouthful. And I've probably missed a few states.

Were Kentucky Rifles made in Kentucky? Very few, and most are percussion rifles, built later than 1820. The reason for this relates directly to the reason the rifle was so often used in Kentucky: the dense forests, difficult to pass through. Being hard to walk through on foot, transporting gun making equipment was out of the question. The Northeastern states, with their ports and well developed roads, had ready access to the raw steel and barrel making equipment. It would serve little purpose to have shipped barrels all the way to Kentucky with it's limited number of trails. Better still, build the rifle elsewhere and carry the completed item to KY. Three Kentucky based makers come to mind: Joseph Griffith of Louisville, the Settle family of Greensburg, and Mills of Harrodsburg. These were all mid to late 1800s makers, and while the style follows the slender, graceful lines, the period of manufacture made them more of a nostalgic item or a target rifle than a state of the art weapon.

Should it be called the Pennsylvania rifle? A good question. In Connecticut, Samuel Colt invented and made the first repeating pistol, the Colt Revolver. One never hears of the Connecticut pistol, though. Horace Smith and Daniel Beard Wesson devised the first metallic cartridge pistol in Mass. So should any metallic cartridge revolver be named after that state? Now there's a contradiction in terms! In fact, almost no firearms are named for the area that they're made in. Usually, they are named for the inventor, but as no one person invented the Kentucky rifle, that really isnt possible. There is the Springfield rifle, also known as the 03A3, but it is named for the arsenal, not the locale. In any case, this question was supposedly put to rest in the 1960's by the Kentucky and Pennsylvania Historical Societies. They settled the matter with a shooting competition, winner gets naming rights. The Kentucky team handily won the contest.

It is curious to note that a Kentucky Pistol also exists. This is a single shot pistol with a curved grip, and like the rifle, has no real history of being made in Kentucky.

In the end, the historical term "Kentucky Rifle" refers not to it's location of origin, but the area that molded it's design, and justified it's manufacture. When the settlers moved west into the plains area, the rifle of choice was the much shorter Hawken. With pack animals, wagons, and open plains, one could travel easily and carry more food with them, and the absence of trees made the long barrel somewhat unwieldy. Hence, the accuracy and efficiency of the long barrel, and the lower weight of the slender stock, were no longer needed. It was the dense forests of Kentucky that molded the design of this particular rifle. While the rifle could, and was, built outside of Pennsylvania, it would not have existed without the deep, unexplored forests of Kentucky to require its unique characteristics.

Having said all of that, I will close with this simple statement: call it whatever you want to. Over the last 80 years, various historians have come up with new names for this rifle, all insisting that theirs is the 'correct' name. What is the correct name? Whatever you want it to be. Kentucky Rifle is the first recorded name to be applied to this rifle, and certainly one of the most charismatic. Much as I hate to belabor this point, I do get a bit put out with revisionist historians, changing history with as much an eye towards personal glorification as fact.

The fact that I was born and raised in Kentucky, and reside there today, in no way influences my opinion on this subject. Not one bit.

 

[tg]

Any thoughts on how the thick forests of the east in 18th century America had a part in the development of the longrifle....long barreled guns were around for a long time before the longrifle was established, which was as early as the 1740's by some accounts, horses were also the common mode of travel in the east...I cannot quite make sense of the connection that writer puts forth.It does sound a bit like the story of the 24lb. bullfrog my uncle used to tell me about....

 

[Bluegrass]

Between .36 and .45 caliber, which one would be closest to most Kentucky rifles of the mid-1700s?

 

[tg]

From 1750-1775 .50+ would be the norm, I think there may be a few 1770-1775 guns in the .44-.48 range if I recall correctly, after 1780 or so the cals. might have been a little smaller then after 1800 even more so down to .36-.40 all this is generaly speaking, but if the particular gun style is not dateable to the mid 1700's the choice of cal. is probably a moot point.

 

[Stumpkiller]

I've wondered myself where the length of some of the longrifles came from. The eadly Dutch settlers of what is now New York had fowlers with barrels of 50 to 55 inches! Makes a 46" rifle seem a carbine by comparison. I wonder how much the military muskets of the day set the length that became fairly standardized. 46" is about as long as a 'normal' height man can load and handle efficiently, while still giving a practical pike with a bayonet attached.

I've had the good fortune to wander through a few forests locally (New York & Pennsylvania) that have never been logged. The trees are about 15 feet apart and there is very little or no undergrowth. Certainly not a problem for even the longest of barrels. But even by 1750 there was a signifigant amount of clearing around settlements, and besides, the mature old, growth forests are pretty devoid of game because there is no cover or browse, so the glades, glens, creeks, hollows, etc, where there is cover and browse is where you hunt and enemies hide. So why weren't the rifles using 24" barrels to make them light and hamdy?

When you're loading a gun with the buttplate resting on the arch of your foot the muzzle should be at about elbow height to give you the optimal leverage when loading (my own ergonomic observation). Hey Presto! That gives a 28" barrel with a 14" length of pull for me. Plains rifle dimensions.

I've read theories that barrel length tended toward longer because the early powders either had to spend three months at sea or be made domestically with less than optimal ingredients (and stored in community 'magazines' of dubious integrity. Perhaps? There is also some truth to the far forward sight being an aid for low light and a help to uncorrected vision abberations.

Then there's the weight issue. Swamping the barrel helps tremendously, but a 1782 rifle believed to have belonged to Daniel Boone still weighed eleven pounds with it's 48-3/4" .44" cal. barrel (1" across the flats at the breech). That's a heck of a thing to drag all around Tennessee and Kentucky. Something had to have dictated that length of barrel? Style? Effectiveness as a club? Status symbol? We won't even go along the Sigmond Freud theories.

I'd love to be able to ask some of the original smiths why they did what they did.

 

I agree 100% Stumpkiller. My .62 cal, 31" barreled Jaeger should be an awesome brush gun (and one heck of a club as a last resort). I portray a fellow in the 1750's- 1760's or so and I've often wondered why the American longrifle grew so long and skinny and lost the sling. I've read many reasons about why the longer length but why did the sling vanish on most long guns?

 

[tg]

That is an interesting point about the slings, could be just to much gun barrel above the head, there were many long barrel German guns rifles and fowlers, as well as the shorties, which makes one wonder did they really lengthen the existing short barreled rifle or just rifle the existing long barreled fowler.

 

[Stumpkiller]

I solve the sling dilema by carrying a strap with a loop in one end and a "+" shape on the other that can be laced to the butt so that the strap comes off the left side and the gun rides hammer-away. I then carry the gun muzzle down across my back (hopefully when dragging a deer out).

This is close (mine has a lot less leather at the butt)

Makes you believe they either carried it at the ready or else in a leather or blanket sleeve to protect it from the elements. I find the best way is in my right hand at the balance point beside my hip so I can steer the muzzle through braish (that's WV for "underbrush").

 

[Bluegrass]

J. Rupp c.1780 Lehigh

Sorry for the silly question, but what exactly does "J. Rupp c.1780 Lehigh" mean? Does it mean J. Rupp is the smith and his style is unique to Lehigh County? ::


I dunno?

 

[Stumpkiller]

Exactly.

Except . . . :: Lehigh County didn't occur until the mid 1820's. It was part of Northampton Co. prior to that. J.Rupp was of the "Lehigh School" in a region around Macungie, PA (near Bethlehem) on the Lehigh River, and was a splinter group of the Bethlehem/Allentown school(s). Sometimes schools of rifles are named for a city, sometimes a county, sometimes a region. Mostly just to confuse us, I think. There was also J.Rupp and his son J.Rupp, both gunsmiths, which adds to the problem. Then, there's J. Roop of about the same region but later in time.

 

[Deadeye]

Long barrel or short I've never found any use for a sling except if I'm climbing hand over hand up a cliff or sometime
dragging a deer. I'll have a small one rolled up in my pocket or pack for that purpose. Otherwise I carry it, as Stumpkiller says, in my hand where it's ready to use.
Interesting that the long rifles were used in the East where the forest were thick and on the plains the guns were shorter. Now with modern rifles it's just the oposite.

 

[connerm]

I know that on the plains shorter bows were prefered for use on horseback. Maybe its the same with rifles.

 

[tg]

Many factors have been considered in explaining the shorter barrels of the plains rifles, style being one, a better understanding of ballistics being another,different barrel making practices, following military trends(1804 Harpers Ferry) the horse is probably of little importance as most used the horse in the east in the 18th century with long guns. the N.A. evolution of arms can be traced directly to horseback warfare with bows, lances and clubs.

 

[swquiro]

Hey Stump, over 'round Fairmont it might be "braish,", but in the eastern panhandle it's "brursh."

 

[Zonie]

Hey Stump, over 'round Fairmont it might be "braish,", but in the eastern panhandle it's "brursh."

At sounds lik em guys what says "Stowa the drooring in the draw" instead o "Store the drawwings in the droorr".

Oh well, Ah guess everone kan't talk good like ole Zonie does. ::