MVTC Tulle Fusil de Chasse (w/Pics)

[pichou]

About a 320 or 400 grit emery cloth would be about right for that gun. I have seen several of those India stocks darkened up, and they do look nice.

Pichou, trade knife Nazi. :wink:

 

[happyhunter]

I am not authority on authenticity, but it looks more authentic than my TC Renegade. Much, much prettier than mine too. And .62 is better that .50!! Wanna trade??

 

[Okwaho]

Russ, I read with interest your comment on the weight of French Fusils de chasse.The owner of the subject gun estimated its weight at "seven to eight pounds".There exists a slight confusion as to the weight of these guns.My experience and study are based on Tulle guns although these De chasse guns were also made by St.Etienne as well as by other manufacturers and being products of a cottage industry vary as to detail.The documentation with which I am familiar often mentions the Tulle guns as being sturdy well built guns.I am especially familiar with two Tulle Fusils de chasse one of which is presently going through restoration.I have not weighed either gun. One of them is somewhat more slender and refined with particularly nice pied de vache butt architecture.There will be virtually no difference in overall length.I discussed the question of weight of Tulle Fusils de chasse with an experienced collector of French arms and Tulles in particular and was advised that there was a marked variance in weight ranging from about seven pounds to about eight and a half pounds.Weight of Fusils de chasse like bore condition on early Ky.rifles is not a matter of acute concern to serious collectors.

I agree with you also that it is tiresome to see the Fusil de chasse kits on the market which are marginally correct and at best require extensive reworking and wood removal.While I am very sure that the subject gun is a solid well built gun suitable for field use,I just wish it and others like it were more accurate representations of the classic French Fusil de chasse.
As always I welcome responsible opposing comment.
Tom Patton :bow: :v

 

[pichou]

I think we can all agree there. A manufacturer starting from scratch might as well make a faithful copy, not some amalgam-parts gun-fantasy. Pedersoli has been guilty of this from the start, yes?

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

Tom, being from New England, there are a number of original guns here. Unfortunately they aren't all in good enough shape to be certain of details including weight. But the nice ones, from fusil de trait to fusil fin all exhibit nice, slender lines and are very light. Under 7 pounds in all cases and often much lighter and barrels much longer than anyone offers today save for Mike Brooks and perhaps Davis. I haven't seen one lately, but their beauty is hard to forget. Not at all like the "clubby" stuff coming out of the Asian sub-continent. Dan

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

Yes. I just don't understand why, when they are making the tooling, they don't just make it right to begin with. Proper stock and barrel profiles and correct furniture wouldn't be any more costly and might even save on material costs. I guess close enough is good enough for some folks. :barf:

 

[old ugly]

looks like fun to me . have fun with your new gun . let us know how she shoots .
o/u

 

[pichou]

Well, I think some of it is to make them "stronger." Bridled everything, beefy wood...

The India guns are "low tech" by modern standards, but lack the lifetime know-how and careful choice of wood (for example) of the 18th century gunmaker.

I do want to get one of the Ketland trade pistols. Not as a range blaster or hunting gun, just for a occasional shooter and reenacting gun.

 

[Okwaho]

Tom, being from New England, there are a number of original guns here. Unfortunately they aren't all in good enough shape to be certain of details including weight. But the nice ones, from fusil de trait to fusil fin all exhibit nice, slender lines and are very light. Under 7 pounds in all cases and often much lighter and barrels much longer than anyone offers today save for Mike Brooks and perhaps Davis. I haven't seen one lately, but their beauty is hard to forget. Not at all like the "clubby" stuff coming out of the Asian sub-continent. Dan

Dan,Well I just got through weighing my Tulle Fusil de chasse{Ca. 1720's} and with the ramrod it came in at a whopping 7lbs.& 2oz.The other gun,therefore will probaby weigh about 6 1/2 lbs.It's a lot more slender in the butt and the height of the butt is about 3/4 in. shorter than the other heel to toe.I am not convinced that all Tulle Fusils de chasse will weigh 7 lbs. or less but certainly 8 lbs.is too heavy and the subject gun needs slimming down especially the forestock and under the lock and sideplate panels.These are the areas most often left too thick.I hope this helps.
Tom Patton.

 

[tg]

I think that the barrels we used today have more metal in them than the orginals, mine came in just under 8 lbs mainly due to the fact that the same barrel profile is used for the 16 bore 20 bore and 24 bore and I chose the smaler cal. I did not leave a lot of extra wood but I am packing some extra metal but the gun will likely take a very stout load, I have seen some French guns somewhere listed at 6.5-7.5 lbs maybe in Neumanns books, mine would be just under 7lb with the 16 bore tube and just over 7 1/2 with the 20 bore or thereabouts judging by the weights TOW lists for the 44"barrels, even at just under 8 lbs the gun handles very well and feels rather light compared to other guns as the balance is so good when carrying and shooting, I will have to live with the fact that my gun is a bit heavy to be PC but such is life....I should take off the buttplate and see if someone drilled a hole and filled it with pearls.

 

[John Wasmuth]

Nice looking gun. Hope you have fun with it. :thumbsup:

 

[Mike Brooks]

I think that the barrels we used today have more metal in them than the orginals, mine came in just under 8 lbs mainly due to the fact that the same barrel profile is used for the 16 bore 20 bore and 24 bore and I chose the smaler cal. I did not leave a lot of extra wood but I am packing some extra metal but the gun will likely take a very stout load, I have seen some French guns somewhere listed at 6.5-7.5 lbs maybe in Neumanns books, mine would be just under 7lb with the 16 bore tube and just over 7 1/2 with the 20 bore or thereabouts judging by the weights TOW lists for the 44"barrels, even at just under 8 lbs the gun handles very well and feels rather light compared to other guns as the balance is so good when carrying and shooting, I will have to live with the fact that my gun is a bit heavy to be PC but such is life....I should take off the buttplate and see if someone drilled a hole and filled it with pearls.

My new "Type D" french Fusil De Traight kit I'm working on will go about 6 1/2 lbs with a 48" barrel. I'm copying and original french trade gun I picked up a few weeks ago. The Original barrel is very light weight and slightly over 1 1/8" at the breech and 20 bore.

 

[pichou]

I've always thought the 'D' was the most elegant of the French guns. Can't wait for pics. :hatsoff:

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

Mike, who makes your barrels?

 

[Mike Brooks]

Bob Hoyt these days for custom stuff. Otherwise I use mainly Colerain barrels for standard stuff.

 

[hawk]

Mike what lock will you be using for that french Kit gun?

 

[Mike Brooks]

Mike what lock will you be using for that french Kit gun?

Modified early Ketland by Chambers.

 

[BV]

When do you think they might be available?

 

[Mike Brooks]

When do you think they might be available?

Sometime this winter.

 

[FearNot]

Just curious, but ... since original firearms were made by hand, can one really say the 7 - 8 lbs is too heavy? I mean, how do we know. Is this base on existing examples? Would, say an apprentice, just learning the trade maybe have made less "typical" and "elegant" versions? Or would the master have not released them. Many of these, after all, were produced for the military. How exacting were the military's standards when they need massive numbers (say during a war or something)?

Just wondering.