-
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
L&C 1792 Contract Rifle by Charles Chalk
- Thread starter KHickam
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
Nothin' like the excitement of getting a new rifle you've been waitin' on! Hope it shoots as nice as it looks.
looks nice....me likie. Never looked in to one, were the origanals 36 inch barrels?
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2010
- Messages
- 3,697
- Reaction score
- 408
Lookin good :thumbsup: Congrats to ya :hatsoff:
- Joined
- May 24, 2005
- Messages
- 5,455
- Reaction score
- 5,241
Super nice! Great work. Congrats. Let us know how she shoots. Rick. :thumbsup: :hatsoff:
oldwolf
40 Cal.
That's a nice looking rifle.
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2005
- Messages
- 5,211
- Reaction score
- 10,826
Hi Tenngun,
Unfortunately, no one really knows what kinds of rifles L&C carried. It is the subject of debate by students, historians, and L&C afficionados. There is circumstantial evidence in their journals and other related documents suggesting they carried full length contract rifles, or shortened contract rifles, or some sort of Harpers Ferry rifle prototype. There is even a purported Harpers Ferry prototype rifle suspiciously numbered 15 that was recently discovered in a collection. I place blame for this dilemma squarely on Lewis and Clark. They should have known that folks would want to know what guns they carried 200 years after their expedition. Talk about short sightedness. :wink:
dave
Unfortunately, no one really knows what kinds of rifles L&C carried. It is the subject of debate by students, historians, and L&C afficionados. There is circumstantial evidence in their journals and other related documents suggesting they carried full length contract rifles, or shortened contract rifles, or some sort of Harpers Ferry rifle prototype. There is even a purported Harpers Ferry prototype rifle suspiciously numbered 15 that was recently discovered in a collection. I place blame for this dilemma squarely on Lewis and Clark. They should have known that folks would want to know what guns they carried 200 years after their expedition. Talk about short sightedness. :wink:
dave
robert reed
40 Cal.
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2014
- Messages
- 276
- Reaction score
- 1
Short sightedness??? To them the weapons were so common that they didn't warrant mention. Just like patched round ball in smoothbores, and rear sights and slings on trade guns. :yakyak: :grin: :rotf: :surrender:
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2005
- Messages
- 5,211
- Reaction score
- 10,826
Hi,
You do recognize sarcasm when you see it, right?
dave
You do recognize sarcasm when you see it, right?
dave
GreyWhiskers
69 Cal.
If only there was a Muzzleloading Forum back then. :grin:
robert reed
40 Cal.
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2014
- Messages
- 276
- Reaction score
- 1
Grey Whiskers said:
There would have been more duels! :slap:
Johnny Tremain
Silversmith in training
Jess Melot over at the rifle Shoppe has studied these his entire life. His answer was a full stocked 1803 Harper's Ferry rifle, with a few changes in metal and styling types.
He even has original the barrel stamps.
If I were to make this, Id use his lock hardware, its as close any anyone's elses guess
He even has original the barrel stamps.
If I were to make this, Id use his lock hardware, its as close any anyone's elses guess
smoothshooter
50 Cal.
Much to my dismay, I have noticed a nearly total lack of detailed, technical descriptions on ANYTHING pertaining to the first 175 to 200 years of European settlement and other activities in North America.
Was it because they act of writing something down was generally a much more laborious task due to the use of quills, ink, ink wells, and procuring paper as opposed to our ballpoint pens, pencils, and almost bewildering variety and availability of paper? Perhaps even the relative scarcity of smooth flat, even surfaces in less settled areas to lay the paper on for writing played a role here too; remember that sawed lumber for doors, benches,and table tops was often expensive and hard to come by.
The L & C expedition obviously went to great lengths to overcome those and many other obstacles, largely because documentation was one of the primary purposes of their trip Too bad for us the several members of the group who recorded in minute detail what they did and saw didn't take the time to give those of us interested in their personal equipment more to go on.
I seem to recall that some of their journals were lost when one of their boats capsized. I suppose there is the possibility than some of the information on the subject at hand was recorded in the documents lost, but not likely.
Was it because they act of writing something down was generally a much more laborious task due to the use of quills, ink, ink wells, and procuring paper as opposed to our ballpoint pens, pencils, and almost bewildering variety and availability of paper? Perhaps even the relative scarcity of smooth flat, even surfaces in less settled areas to lay the paper on for writing played a role here too; remember that sawed lumber for doors, benches,and table tops was often expensive and hard to come by.
The L & C expedition obviously went to great lengths to overcome those and many other obstacles, largely because documentation was one of the primary purposes of their trip Too bad for us the several members of the group who recorded in minute detail what they did and saw didn't take the time to give those of us interested in their personal equipment more to go on.
I seem to recall that some of their journals were lost when one of their boats capsized. I suppose there is the possibility than some of the information on the subject at hand was recorded in the documents lost, but not likely.
It also has to be kept in mind people didn't write down the "unimportant". "Rifle" was self expanitory, and no one reading back then would have thought to ask what that rifle looked like. Very little details got in to any journals then. Then they wernt as technical on terms used back then. Some times things we devide up by different words were spoke of by the same word back then, and separate words were used for the same thing.
Similar threads
- Locked
