French Type "D" Tradegun

[Mike Brooks]

Often the butt was made with about 1/16" shorter than the toe of the butt piece and this was done to protect the toe since most early guns were built without toe plates.

Actually, that is shrinkage in that case. I never leave the butt piece proud in that area yet many of my guns that I built 10 to 15 years ago have now shrunk 1/16" or more in that area.
All of the "Tulles" and "Type C's & D's" that I've seen in the finished form today are built more like muskets than the light fowling pieces that they are supposed to represent. A proper light weight gun can be made from these kits (if you'll over look the locks etc.) if you take enough wood off :thumbsup:

 

[Okwaho]

OK, Thomas I probably should have made myself a tad clearer here. I do not doubt for a minute that here were some besses cut back for one reason or another during their period of use just as there were Northwest guns cut back on both ends for probable use on horseback by Plains Indians or that there were Besses and other muskets which had muzzle edges become sharp with repeated use of iron rammers and had their barrels cut back to remedy the problem.I have an 18th century Fusil which has extremely sharp muzzle edges and has not been cut back.Additionally I'm sure some barrels were damaged resulting in their being cut back.My post was aimed at those cut back Besses sold with radically shortened barrels and the labeling of them as historically authentic based on an often lack of solid documentation of such guns as a class not merely mutulations or abberations.

One of the more interesting guns being sold today is the English Officer's model {Bess?}. To date I cannot find any basis for such a gun as a distinct British pattern.Officrs usually purchased their own weapons and the quality and type depended on their level of affluency.An interesting feature of this gun is it's side plate.One vendor states that as to this gun, "It is the perfect Roger's Ranger's long gun for the French and Indian war period". The side plate appears to be a copy of the Royal Horse Guards or Blues carbine Ca.1765,"British Military Longarms 1715-1815"{1971} by D.W. Bailey PP.52-53 or the Pattern 1760/78 Royal Foresters Light Dragoon carbines and pistols, "Pattern dates for British Ordnance Small Arms 1718-1783"{1997} by De Witt Bailey,Ph.D.PP.27,40{carbine}and 87,114{pistol} A somewhat similar plate has been noted on the Pattern 1745 Lord Loudon light Infantry Carbine but it's plate is unique to that pattern,Bailey,{1997}P.102.

My contention is that while period mutilations of guns occurred during their period of use such mutilations should be considered abberations and not the basis for a type of gun which did not exist as a class during it's original period of use.Joe Kindig Jr once opined that, "No rifle can possibly date before it's latest detail first came into use","Thoughts on the Kentucky Rifle in It's Golden Age", a comment which remains valid today and one should always remember this statement when doing one's homework prior to purchasing a gun which appears to different from the norm.

AS always I welcome responsible conflicting opinions and again to quote Mr.Kindig, "I have no desire that anyone else shares my opinions about the Kentucky and it's makers, but I do hope that other students will attempt to prove or disprove them.Being proven wrong or right would bring me equal joy because such proof would indicate that others were affording the Kentucky rifle the importance which I believe it deserves."
Tom Patton

 

[Okwaho]

Mike mon ami,I stand corrected oh great protector of butts,heels,and toes.I do think upon further meditaion and mulling the question that you are indeed correct here although it did seem plausible.
Tom Patton

 

[Okwaho]

John it's always good to see you posting on our mutually favorite gun, the French Fusil. I started recommending the R E Davis Fine Fusil quite some time ago and I agree with Mike's comments.I particularly liked the 48" barrel with the longitudinal sighting rib and the large breech.These are common on many early French guns.The lock does,as Mike Pointed out, need some sanitizing work but is pretty much the best available. I would date the gun a little earlier than Mike did as I will explain.I too wondered about the gun not having seen it up close so when Fitz Williams told me he was building one I asked him to bring it to Toulouse which he did.I have two early Fusil fins which I believe were made in Liege and imported by the French into Quebec City or Montreal.I think they were either made in the same shop or there was a relationship between two makers in Liege.I tentatively date the first one to Ca. 1696-1716 and the second to Ca.1715-1730.Both of these guns are brass mounted with some relief carving and chiseled barrels in the Baroque tradition.The Baroque tradition began in the 17th century and continued into the first two decades of the 18th century in France when the Rococo tradition emerged.The earlier of these two guns is heavier in feeling than the second one.The original locks were missing on both guns and the later gun is in poor shape.

When Fitz told me he was coming to Toulouse,I took the second gun down and we were able to compare the two guns.The stock architecture of the two guns was really close and both of them were slender and graceful although the Davis gun could stand some more wood removal and some scraping particularly in the lock area and forestock.The mounts were very good and the sideplate was very similar to my gun.The gun mounts overall had a nice rococo feel to them which is appropriate for a gun of the Ca. 1725-1740 period.With some nice rococo relief and incised carving where the wrist meets the comb,the tang surround,and the area between the foward guard finial and rear entry pipe,the panels and moulding outlining the guard by someone who has a feel for such styling this gun could be really spectacular.Are you paying attention,Mike?

I would definitely get this gun in walnut{French maybe?} and mounted in brass. Anything else on either account would be a travesty.The lock offered by R E Davis {the Tulle Arsenal lock,TOW P.153} is fine but does require some real sanitizing. Of the two locks available in this area{the R E Davis and the L&R} the Davis lock is the earlier of the two with the slight banana bottom line configuration as opposed to the L&R which is fairly straight on the bottom.As I recall TG sanitized this lock for installation in a Tulle Fusil de chasse and did a good job of it.For a good picture of what the lock should look like see Hamilton{1980}PP.46 and 50. See also TOW Catalogue No.16 @PP.108-109 for a recent sanitizing which is pretty good although I don't care for the small projection on the foward bottom line of the lock. I hope this helps,I really like this Davis kit but it is a fancier gun and most French Canadians and not a few Indians would have been carrying plain fusils de chasse by a variety of makers whereas this gun like the originals is a Fusil fin de chasse which was a step above the others.
Tom Patton

 

[tg]

". Hamilton says there were two kinds of guns traded or given to the Indians - the fusil de chasse (hunting gun) and the fusil de traite (tradegun)." I think it is important to remember that Hamilton is an archeologist and not a gun historian this is where much of the confusion come from.

 

Has anyone seen/have a finished Davis French fusil? How does it balance and how much does it weigh?

Squire John, I have a Type D that I made using the barrel from Davis and stocked it with cherry and used there Early rifle lock instead of the long banana shaped lock. Anyway, it handles real well and shoots real good. I was real surprised at how well it handled with the 48" long barrel. As big as the breech is , it still came out real long and slender. I would recommend that barrel if you want a early french gun. Ed Rayl makes these barrels and they mike out to .625 which is a tad bigger than most 20 ga. barrels on the market. Loads and shoots .600 real fine. I never have weighed the gun so I can't help you there. I would guess maybe 9 lbs. maybe a little less.
Don

 

[Okwaho]

You did what I have long suggested and that is to use a lock other than that Jaeger lock for the type C or D.stock. I have long thought that the flat faced Jaeger banana lock was inappropriate for a French gun. The French did use a banana shaped round faced lock in the late 17th century but went to a flat faced slightly banana shaped lock about 1700.. I'm not sure what lock you used but it had to be better than that Jaeger lock.
Tom Patton

 

[thomas]

Okwaho, That does clear up for me what you were saying. I wouldn't disagree with you on any point stated that way. :v

Thomas

 

I use the lock that Jack Haugh designedTOTW has them listed as Tulle fisul de chasse lock #Lock-Tulle. The plate drops right into the original french gun lock mortises. Not perfectly but almost. The face parts are junk IMHO so I refit it with another cock or file all the goofy stuff off of the existing cock. The steel on this lock is about 3x thicker than it should be so annealing and filing and reheat treating is in order. I also reshape the feather spring. This sounds like a lot of fiddlin' to get something done but it's worth the effort for me. I have some photographs of this gun that I will try to post this evening if I can wrangle my college age daughter to sit still long enough to talk me through the process. :grin:
Don

 

[Okwaho]

The problem with these French locks is that outside of a couple in the Rifle Shoppe{PP.92 and 121}there are NO commrcially available locks for these early fusils de chasse or fusils fin de chasse which can be used without modification.I had this problem with my two old Liegeois fusil fins since neither had it's original lock and the mortices had been enlarged somewhat in the conversion to percussion.I am in the process of having a lock for the earlier gun made to go with an old lockplate and internals which are correct for a lock replacement during it's period of use and I have correct old externals.We will then use that as a model for a lock for the later gun.NO wood will be added to nor removed from the mortice and the locks will be shaped to fit the existing mortice.The guns will look as though the locks are period replacements.Other than stabilizations no further restoration is planned.I have no choice since my friend Wallace Gusler has threatened dire consequences if I do any restoration and he is not alone.

The modern locks are pretty good but while the length is very close the width is a problem on old guns.On these new guns it's generally not a problem although I'm not quite sure what they did on the Davis Fusil fin to accomodate the wider breech. Old guns have aslightly humped top configuration at the breech to accomodate the wider breeches.The Davis Tulle lock has a slightly earlier lock outline on the bottom than the L&R which is fairly straight.You can see what I'n talking about with reference to these early locks by checking with Torsten Lenk,"The Flintlock" which is the Bible on the development of the flintlock gun in France and Europe especially the Low Countries{Liege and The Netherlands} and the German city states}There are at present 33 copies available on[url] www.abebooks.com[/url] with prices ranging from $45.00 to $125.00 and most at $60.00 or below.Dr. Lenk was for many years the Director of the Royal Armory in Sweden and his book ,written in 1939,translated 1965 is invaluable if one is interested in the flint and it's development.
As to the Davis lock the frizzen needs to be cleaned up at the back and the base is too massive and not plain enough,The cock has too much of a curlicue at the base and the back of the cock should be a straighter line, the end of the feather spring needs to be shortened, the pan flattened a little
See Hamilton{ Colonial guns,1980}PP.46 and 50 showing two original flintlocks on fusils de chasse.The lock on P.50 is especially good as an example.I hope this helps
Tom Patton

 

Here are some pictures of my type D french fusil.
This first picture is full-length and sorry about it being sideways. It should actually be butt to ground. :grin: As you can see, these french fusils are real long, slender, and graceful as a beautiful woman.

Here's the muzzle end, showing the position of the front sight. Also, you may be able to see the beading along the top edge of the fore stock, and the molding along the ramrod channel.

This one is the trigger-guard and molding that Okwaho was describing earlier.

This photo shows the molding around the round-ended tang.

Rear-ram pipe and molding

Here's a picture of the Davis lock I used, filing away all the extra fantasy manure. Note the thin steel.

Here's a picture of the side plate and moldings. The original stock fragment that I was copying did not have the side plate in it. So this engraving on this side plate was lifted from Colonial Frontier Guns.

Here's the engraving on the butt plate finial which is common to type D's.

Don

 

[Mike Brooks]

MOST EXCELLENT! :thumbsup: :applause: That's what they're supposed to look like! :hatsoff:

 

[tg]

Very nice Don, it looks like you were able to straighten out the spur behind the thumbscrew? I bought an extra cock to attempt that and have not got there yet, very nice job on the lock alterations, and all aspects of the gun, that is one of the nicest (PC and well done) French fusils.....with type D furniture I have seen.

 

Mike, TG, thanks for the compliments fellas. I am glad you like 'er. :grin:
Don

 

[akapennypincher]

Cooner thank for going to the troble of posting your photos. Very Nice... :hatsoff:

 

[Okwaho]

Don, I really like your gun and you did a good job on the lock.The guard molding was a nice touch also as was the lower forestock molding.How much of a fragment did you have and was there a lock in it with a name?If you have Hamilton's book Firearms on the Frontier about Ft Michilimackinac there is a lock plate shown on P.23 Fig.19{e}which is described as being from an early French fine gun which has molding filed across the tail and Lenk shows several early Berain style flat faced locks with molding across the tail.Also why no thumb piece on a fusil fin?Just wondered but again a nice piece of work.
Tom Patton

 

[fklein]

Greetings,
Very nicely made trade gun. I am in the process of assembling components to made a "Type D." Questions: Were the originals stocked in walnut (probably European) or were some originals stocked in maple? What is the most likely bore size 24 ga, 20 ga or some other? Finally, what would be a likely barrel length? My time period would be 1st half of 18C.
Thanks,
Beowulf

 

[Mike Brooks]

Greetings,
Very nicely made trade gun. I am in the process of assembling components to made a "Type D." Questions: Were the originals stocked in walnut (probably European) or were some originals stocked in maple? What is the most likely bore size 24 ga, 20 ga or some other? Finally, what would be a likely barrel length? My time period would be 1st half of 18C.
Thanks,
Beowulf

Stocked in walnut, never use maple for euro trade guns in the 18th century. Probaly a bore size from 24 ga.(.58) to about a 16 bore (.66) I'd stick to a 20 ga. to represent the most common bore size.
I'd go with a barrel from 44" to 48" or a bit longer. get it as big at the breech as you can, 1 5/16" wasn't uncommon on French guns. But, in today's world You'll probably end up with something more like 1 1/8" if you're lucky.

 

Tom, this fragment was a buttstock up to just ahead of the rear ram pipe. It had no thumb inlay inlet. One thing about this peice is it had been worked down from just ahead of the buttplate finial to the nose of the comb so I had to guess at what the original comb heighth would have been by looking at pictures here and there wherever I could find them. All of the moldings that you see on my replication was found on the original butt stock remnant. Between the remnant and Hamilton's book and also Bouchard I managed to get this one done. There are a few things I would do different if I ever build another one. This was the second (Type D) I have built.

Don

 

Beowolf, Pennypincher and all,
Ed Rayl made this barrel and has a 1 3/16th" breech x 48" long. This barrel was copied from an original barrel for R. E. Davis Type "C" kit. If you want a thicker breech or a longer barrel I would recommend a special order from Ed Rayl. He is only one I know that makes barrels past 48" or so. I don't have his address handy but I think somebody here may. I think a french fusil with a 1 1/4" breech would be awesome.
Don