Historically accurate example of Flint, Full stock, hooked breech, barrel wedges?

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Hi,
You don't have to restrict yourself to some flint version of a full stocked Hawken. Hook breeches and tangs (properly called standing breeches) with flat barrel keys were used by quite a few Golden Age long rifle makers. Andrew Verner and J. P. Beck come to mind immediately. Every new builder I've ever known, including myself, was enamoured by roller frizzens, "waterproof" pans, etc early in their building careers. That is until they learned that none of that stuff was all that important. With respect to lock choices go with Kibler's or Chambers late flint locks if you have to have a roller frizzen. Don't worry about the waterproof pan stuff. However, both the round faced English locks by Kibler and Chambers will perform just as well and perhaps even more reliably. The obsession with "fast" ignition is really something appropriate if you are shooting birds on the wing, which was the reason roller frizzens, short throw flint cocks, and stirrup tumblers were invented. If you are just shooting targets or deer hunting, the effects of those features will be largely invisible. Given your objectives, an 18th century English rifle in 54 caliber would be a good choice. Here is an example. Just disregard the bling and look at the style and guts of the rifle. The Chambers lock on this rifle successfully fired it 671 times without a misfire and using up only 10 flints. The fit and balance is far superior to any full stocked Hawken I've ever handled, and I've built 3 of those.
hQuR8YI.jpg

tWLTocB.jpg

APht5fU.jpg

UAzK3hC.jpg

1eotydP.jpg


dave
I'm looking forward to get home and look at those pics on a screen bigger than 3x6 and really study them. I'm supposed to be working, but keep pulling them up on my phone. This rifle very much seems to embody what I had in mind and didn't have to vocabulary to describe. It's so much more with the carving and engraving, well beyond what I could ever hope to do. I'd be thrilled if I could create a crude but functional imitation.
 
Hi,
In America barrel keys and standing breeches were less common in the 18th century, though more common than most realize. Like I wrote previously, Beck, Verner, and Schuler used them. Use of standing breeches and flat keys was standard on all English sporting guns whether they were full stocked or half. Only cheap trade, livery, and military guns used pins and simple breeches after about 1750.

dave
I completely agree.
One thing I do see a lot of Dave,
It seems to me, most of the keyed standing breech American “rifles” of the 18th Century are Smoothbore with octagonal to round barrels. Most of these have “rifle architecture”.
I hesitate to use the term smoothrifle. Sometimes I think it’s overused.
Beck
Beyer
Honecker attributed


Above is the “Honecker”.......

One thing I have seen and it seems to come into fashion in the Federal period are Longrifles with keys and simple breech tangs.
I have seen a few 18th Century rifles retrofitted with barrel keys.
You can tell the keys were added later because these keys sometimes go though the lower forestock decoration.
 
Well that's an interesting run down & advert for a particular CNC maker, And non that I would question. The aspirant maker is jumping in the deep end no question about that .We all had our' deep end' many gunmakers wish they could get their first gun &' Bury It' ! . My own first serious rifle was all wrong but I was so proud of it . shot fine I didn't bury it the law change of anti gun Queensland did that for me and its still out there I expect. Do I wish it back?. No but would like to know what happened to it ? Well yes a beech stocked 'Jager' looking affair forend comes off, original ' London' marked lock(Typical New England Militia lock)1" oct 40 cal with a row of Bears running by the breech to serve as a proof marks .' Uglee' but shot a picket bullet very well .I kept it on a Cattle station then new anti law dreamed up so it got sold off for me in Brisbane for the price of the lock in my absence . Our aspirant' roll it all his self 'maker I wish every success itle be a learning curve whatever it turns out like & he has the Kibler ? to guide him nothing so useful as an original to study . So" Boldly go where no man in his right mind would even think of boldly going " '! To seek out & explore". To paraphrase Star Treks Captain Kirk.( & no Ime not a Trekkie !) And I sincerely wish him every success.
' Been there,' done that,' (& worse) bought the Tee shirt Regards Rudyard .

PS actually never owned or wore a T shirt . R
 
I would not recommend standing hook breeches and sliding keys for a first build by any means. I would go with a Kibler Woodsrunner. High quality and a lot of work done for you correctly out of the box.
Well yes but that rather defeats the point of the OPs desire to do the lot' Deep Ending ' Ive never seen a Kibler or a Chambers . When I started I think there wasn't much other than Ron? Southgate & Hacker Martin. I Had to' Deep end' .Was it a wonderous success ? . Naa was Uglee! but I thought well of it . Regards Rudyard
 
Since there was no Kibler Woodsrunner in the mid 70s I started with a T/C Hawken kit. Then in 1976 an Ithaca Hawken kit. I learned a few things and dove into a scratch built Southern Mountain rifle around 1980. I made some mistakes in choosing the wrong lock and getting the fore-end too skinny but it turned out to be a deadly accurate shooter. I still have it. So yes, I'd agree with others to try a kit first and then dive into your scratch build. Maybe a pre carved stock may be advisable.
 
Answering your Q by number:
1. Flint-yes. PA late season is great. (I will mention that PA early season in Oct is fantastic but doe only)
2. I love them but found that they're not a deal breaker. I have a pinned Lancaster that has never had the barrel off.
3. Full stockers have that unique look and styling. I'd recommend no shorter than 36" (mine is 38) barrel for the look.
don't worry about a thin forend.
4. 50 cal opens up a lot more options for you in projectiles and accessories. 54 has whompability.
5.1:48 has all the accuracy you will need.
6. Noted barrel length above. While it'll make your build a bit more difficult, I would highly recommend a swamped barrel. The weight and balance will amaze you if you keep stock architecture correct.

There you go. If you use quality components thruout you'll have a rifle you can depend on for years. Then you can think about your next rifle.
 
Hi Ham385,
Making a Kibler kit would be the easiest way to go but you won't learn much about muzzleloading gunmaking. You will have an excellent example of a proper gun in front of you for reference when finished but you won't learn the skills to make that happen. Now don't get me wrong, that reference and resource is very valuable to someone wanting to learn the trade. However, it does not teach you how to make your hands do what your mind desires even when you have a Kibler model in front of you showing what a gun should look like. Moreover, it will be forever and always, a Kibler, and in most Kibler's posted on this site, there is little distinguishing them one from another. You are attempting a challenging project for a new maker. OK. Go for it but do your homework. There are many threads on this site describing inletting standing breeches and flat barrel keys. Use the search function at the top right corner of your screen. You have skills. Great! Learn the specifics related to muzzleloading guns like how to shape lock panels, how to model cheek pieces and forearms. etc. This site has a wealth of information about those topics. There is much information available on the internet but there is also a lot of junk. Most You Tube videos I've seen about muzzleloading gun building are pathetic and produced by people hyping wrong information and very mediocre skills. Let me repeat, address the challenge but do your homework. In the "Gunbuider's Bench" section a new builder posted a gun he worked long and hard over. He did a good job with superficial details but it was putting lipstick on a pig. He got the basic architecture of the gun wrong, which ruins the entire project. Don't let that happen to you. Do your homework and be skeptical of things posted on the internet.

dave
 
Last edited:
Well yes but that rather defeats the point of the OPs desire to do the lot' Deep Ending ' Ive never seen a Kibler or a Chambers . When I started I think there wasn't much other than Ron? Southgate & Hacker Martin. I Had to' Deep end' .Was it a wonderous success ? . Naa was Uglee! but I thought well of it . Regards Rudyard
I can certainly understand this line of thought also if one has the money to spend on something that may end up a dog's dinner, they have access to a good instructor or maybe they may be a prodigy. I have always tended to be a little conservative knowing I had a one shot with my available cash. I did go wild and carve lock panels and a tang shell on my first build: )
The aforementioned kit puts good architecture in the hands of the builder so one can see and feel a good slim forend, correct shaping around the lock that doesn't allow room to park a lorry, etc. Good foundation knowledge for future builds or already done for the one who might call it quits afterwards.
There are many who are after an end result and not the journey.
If the trip is the main focus I'm in the line of thought you have. If its the destination that's prominent, I stand with my recommendation.
Cheers my friend.
 
What the heck is a "livery gun" ???? Also , don't and won't want to start an argument here about how mny post 1750 American longrifles had pinned fore arms. I've held a hundred or more originals in my hands , and just saying most were pinned forearm examples. Pardon me for disagreeing , looks like I have some research to do. I don't want HAM to be confused thinking he has to own a "fine" longrifle with wedges in the forearm. I built several Shulers using pinned forearms , because the original gun I copied , had a pinned forearm.
 
Hi Ham385,
Making a Kibler kit would be the easiest way to go but you won't learn much about muzzleloading gunmaking. You will have an excellent example of a proper gun in front of you for reference when finished but you won't learn the skills to make that happen. Now don't get me wrong, that reference and resource is very valuable to someone wanting to learn the trade. However, it does not teach you how to make your hands do what your mind desires even when you have a Kibler model in front of you showing what a gun should look like. Moreover, it will be forever and always, a Kibler, and in most Kibler's posted on this site, there is little distinguishing them one from another. You are attempting a challenging project for a new maker. OK. Go for it but do your homework. There are many threads on this site describing inletting standing breeches and flat barrel keys. Use the search function at the top right corner of your screen. You have skills. Great! Learn the specifics related to muzzleloading guns like how to shape lock panels, how to model cheek pieces and forearms. etc. This site has a wealth of information about those topics. There is much information available on the internet but there is also a lot of junk. Most You Tube videos I've seen about muzzleloading gun building are pathetic and produced by people hyping wrong information and very mediocre skills. Let me repeat, address the challenge but do your homework.

dave
I appreciate your advice, and I appreciate you not trying to tell me to buy a kit.

This is a marathon for me, not a sprint. 100% I hear you. I get that some guys want the end result and paint by numbers is exactly the right amount of investment to have the satisfaction. I'm not that guy, for me it's about the journey, I'm willing to put in the time and the work.

I already have a flintlock, that I acquired last year and found to be in bad shape. I repaired the lock and tuned it when I ran into problems trying to hunt with it in the fall. All work I did myself. I replaced the worn out frizzen with a new one that required fitting. The frizzen screw was frozen and sheared off, so I drilled, tapped and replaced that too. I was having exploding flints because the angle of attack smashed the flints instead of scraping them. I replaced cock with a longer one but the hole for the tumbler pin was too large, so I had to pein it to shrink the metal, and file for a tight friction fit. After all that I stoned the sear to get good contact and a crisp break, and polished all of the mating surfaces. It throws great sparks now, I'm still on the same flint after several range trips, 2 hunting trips, and a ton of dry firing. I wish I had kept count on how many strikes, I've knapped twice so far.

I'm not saying all that to share how great I am, or a natural or whatever. It's the opposite, I didn't understand what was wrong and put in so many hours to learn about lock geometry. I could have just bought a L&R RPL lock and been done.

I'm just now embarking on the learning and information gathering. If you check back with me in 3 months, it will be likely I've nailed down the shape with notes and measurements and sketches, a parts list, probably a supplier(s), maybe even ordered the parts. A year from now I will probably have a complete rifle. Until I know what exactly I want, I don't intend to touch any wood. I have a LOT to learn.

In the meantime I have an acquaintance with a Peidersoli and a custom longrifle (I couldn't say who the maker is but he was quite proud to show me a few years ago) that I can reach out to and study the lines, shape, and positioning of the hardware, how the drop, the LOP, the cast fit me. I can ask around at my club, I'm sure there are a few Kiblers and maybe get lucky with some other custom rifles I can look at too.

I know, despite my best efforts, patience, and caution with every piece of material I remove, the first rifle is going to have something that's just not right, I'm ok with that, it's part of the journey. First time made a box the dovetails were bad, first time I made a handplane the mouth wound up much larger than I wanted, first time I made a table the stretcher shoulders were sloppy, first time I inlaid a medallion there were gaps, first time I made a bow the draw weight was 18 lbs. None of that meant the projects were ruined, just stepping stones that I was still proud of.
 
I can certainly understand this line of thought also if one has the money to spend on something that may end up a dog's dinner, they have access to a good instructor or maybe they may be a prodigy. I have always tended to be a little conservative knowing I had a one shot with my available cash. I did go wild and carve lock panels and a tang shell on my first build: )
The aforementioned kit puts good architecture in the hands of the builder so one can see and feel a good slim forend, correct shaping around the lock that doesn't allow room to park a lorry, etc. Good foundation knowledge for future builds or already done for the one who might call it quits afterwards.
There are many who are after an end result and not the journey.
If the trip is the main focus I'm in the line of thought you have. If its the destination that's prominent, I stand with my recommendation.
Cheers my friend.
I hear what you're saying, but it's not really about saving money, it's about learning and creating, which I find rewarding in and of itself. I'm going to have so much of my time invested it'll be the most expensive rifle ever created.
That said, in the grand scheme of things it's really not that much risk. If I completely futz up a stock and have to start over, Pecatonia sells CM4 (90-100% curly) blanks for $225, and straight grain for under $100. They will cut a swamped barrel channel and drill a ramrod hole for $60. With shipping, worst case scenario I'm risking $325, maybe $350 if I'm going fancy.
 
Sounds like you can handle it. I'd buy "Recreating the American Longrifle" by Buchele and Shumway and "The Art of Building the Pennsylvania Longrifle" by Chuck Dixon. These were the books I used and they will tell and show you everything you need to know. Forget the kits.
 
What the heck is a "livery gun" ???? Also , don't and won't want to start an argument here about how mny post 1750 American longrifles had pinned fore arms. I've held a hundred or more originals in my hands , and just saying most were pinned forearm examples. Pardon me for disagreeing , looks like I have some research to do. I don't want HAM to be confused thinking he has to own a "fine" longrifle with wedges in the forearm. I built several Shulers using pinned forearms , because the original gun I copied , had a pinned forearm.
Not at all. I started the original post asking about flinters with full stocks, hooked breeches and wedged keys that were on rifles made by someone other than the hawkins brothers (as I said in the original post people smarter than me doubt that combination ever existed on a hawkins). I'm aware that most longrifles have pinned firearms, which is how my question came about. It's not that I think I have to, it's a feature that is appealing to me and I was asking whether I would be wrong to pursue it.
 
What the heck is a "livery gun" ???? Also , don't and won't want to start an argument here about how mny post 1750 American longrifles had pinned fore arms. I've held a hundred or more originals in my hands , and just saying most were pinned forearm examples. Pardon me for disagreeing , looks like I have some research to do. I don't want HAM to be confused thinking he has to own a "fine" longrifle with wedges in the forearm. I built several Shulers using pinned forearms , because the original gun I copied , had a pinned forearm.
Hi Oldwood,
You misread my post. You have no argument to make. I never wrote most 18th century long rifles had flat keys and standing breeches. I wrote they were uncommon but more makers used them than you might imagine. All you have to do is look at the Schulers, Verner, and Beck in David Hansen's book on American longrifles to see for yourself. Moreover, my posts mostly dealt with English guns. Livery guns are those made for servants and usually without the latest technology reserved for the estate owners. Standing breeches and flat barrel keys were standard on all but the cheapest English guns after the 1750s or military guns.

dave
 
Sorry Dave........I'm old and make mistakes. I'm in a place in my M/L rifle building hobby , where I no longer take orders for guns , and just play at building guns I had thought about , but had no time to creat them. I absolutely love working on flint guns. Today , I put the Last Of The Mohicans movie sound track on the cd player , and went at it. What fun..........oldwood
 
Ham , one more thing.......In a description in an old book I have , rifles used for militia groups , F and Indian war and beyond were defined as 48 cal. to 60 cal. , w/ min. 38" barrel to 46 " barrel. That was the given historic dimentions for a long rifle back in the day. Or , a gun fit for hunting , and warfare.........oldwood............I was a Burger for four yrs. , there for education , and moved east in 1969. I would never let a fellow Burger , fall into confusion about m/l rifles.
 
What the heck is a "livery gun" ???? Also , don't and won't want to start an argument here about how mny post 1750 American longrifles had pinned fore arms. I've held a hundred or more originals in my hands , and just saying most were pinned forearm examples. Pardon me for disagreeing , looks like I have some research to do. I don't want HAM to be confused thinking he has to own a "fine" long rifle with wedges in the forearm. I built several Shulers using pinned forearms , because the original gun I copied , had a pinned forearm.
I believe a' livery gun' is a good but not 'best' quality gun given to coach men or perhaps Game keepers .All that you all call 'wedges' are known as ' Keys'. they don't turn but they don't .wedge, either. what either go through are called' loops' & standing breaches are called' false breeches ' though it depends on which side of the pond you where '.Bolts' are' Side nails'' & 'Tang' nails all other screws are called' Pins 'even' Cock pins' for the Cock most seem to call hammer but the' Hammer ' Or Steel is what are called the frizzen now but originally referred to as hammer, battery, or steel even .depends where & when. Being crotchety I use the old terms and just for an add on. the half 'and full Bents' your scear go's into as you cock the lock .
Regards Rudyard
 
Being crotchety I use the old terms
I don’t know if I’d call it being crotchety or curmudgeonly, but you have it cornered. Sometimes I have to read your posts more than once to understand them, but what you are trying to say comes through. And they are never just a repeat of something from somewhere else on the internet. Enjoy your posts and look forward to reading them.
 
What I want to do is build a rifle, not just assemble one.
Understand a 100%, for my first rifle I bought a rough shaped stock from Log Cabin, with barrel and ramrod inlet. For my second just bought a square blank, swamped barrel and a Late Ketland along with the rest of the parts to build another Tenn. Mt, rifle. A Kibler SMR is a beautiful rifle, but when it was finished I wouldn't feel it was my rifle. I would feel it was someone elses I put together. No disrespect to those that do build them, just a personal thing.
Phil
 
Back
Top