New "Fusil de Chasse" from Loyalist Arms

[musketman]

The really sad thing about this is these guns could be done right just as easily and cheaply as they're being done wrong....

If the template is wrong, all that follows will be wrong too...

 

[CoyoteJoe]

The really sad thing about this is these guns could be done right just as easily and cheaply as they're being done wrong....

If the template is wrong, all that follows will be wrong too...

Well put fellas, I've often thought exactly the same about many production guns, both ML and modern. I find myself saying "now why in the H did they do that?" I realize that fine finish of wood and metal and finely tuned parts cost money but so often they could make a gun look good and function well for as little or less than the cost of making it ugly, ungraceful, ill-balanced and a PITA to shoot and clean. :cursing:

 

[54ball]

I'll throw my two cents in. I think the gun in question has it's place. That place is not in the hands of someone trying to do a serious living history impression even and especially if that person is on a buget. Six hundred dollars is a lot of money. I think it is a little sad for someone to spend that amount, find out it is not correct, sell it for half of what they paid for it and still need to spend more if they are going to continue to pursue this hobby.
Research and buyer beware is the the key for someone interested in living history. A good correct peice can be found, built from a kit, built by a maker or found used for just a little more than the price of this gun.

 

[BCarp]

Just to keep this can o' worms open a bit longer: the only one of this class of guns that I've actually considered buying is the dog-lock musket:
[url] http://www.loyalistarms.freeservers.com/doglockmusk.html[/url]

The French pieces may be way off, but this rather simple musket seems properly configured, no?

 

[tmdreb]

One of the fun parts about this message board is that people from many different hobbies read and post here. Of course, not all of these hobbies require the same gun.

I don't do really any live fire of BP weapons, but use them for living history and reenacting purposes. That's the perspective I bring when evaluating guns and other items I can or cannot use for my hobby.

If I were developing an impression that required a civilian gun, I wouldn't go with an Indian product for many of the reasons cited above. The finish isn't right, the craftsmanship is lacking, and many other reasons.

However, their military products I feel have quite a few advantages over the Italian reproductions. I've mentioned these in past postings, so I won't go into it again.

It's certainly fine to say that the reproduction in question isn't what it's supposed to be, but I still think that labeling all Indian made reproductions as "terrible" is incorrect. Some are still the best repros available.

 

[Okwaho]

Mike,
As a loyal Forum member, you might enlighten your fellows as to what is so incorrect about this piece. That would be of much greater value to newbies, novices, and those who are not expert in the nuances and details of French firearms, than nonspecific condemnations and wisecracks.

Personally, I'm not interested in the gun (I carry a Jim Chambers long fowler), but posted the link because the attractive price would be of interest to members here. I hate to think I'd be leading someone to a lousy gun, so maybe you can kindly educate us....

Instead of "enlightening" everyone, I'll suggest homework instead. Buy and read all of these books,go to gunshows and museums, then we'll all be on the same page, and can discuss this subject rationally.
THE FUSIL DE TULLE IN NEW FRANCE 1691-1741 by Russel Bouchard
FIREARMS ON THE FRONTIER; GUNS AT FORT MICHILIMACKINAC 1715-1781 by T.M. Hamilton
EARLY INDIAN TREDE GUNS: 1625-1775 by T.M. Hamilton
PROCEDINGS OF THE 1984 TRADE GUN CONFERENCE PART I & II published by the Rochester Mueseum & Science center
THE FLINTLOCK, IT'S ORIGINS AND DEVELOPMENT by Torsten lenk
FLINTLOCK FOWLERS, THE FIST GUNS MADE IN AMERICA by Tom Grinslade
MUSKETS OF THE REVOLUTION AND THE FRENCH AND INDIAN WARS by Bill Ahearn
That ought to keep the curious busy for several evenings..... :winking: I'm sure Tom Patton or TG can recommend even more reading.
I would critique this "thing" in detail, but there are a couple reasons I won't.Mainly, everytime I'm asked to point out the problems with any of the Indian made guns, I get jumped on and called an elitist snob, gun peddler, arrogant jerk.....well, you get the idea :haha:
I also know that the guys that run these businesses that import these things read this board. I'll be damned if I'll do THEIR homework for them anylonger :shake: If these guys want to perpetuate slave labor like conditions in India so Americans can buy cheap junk cartoon guns that's fine by me, I'm just not going to help them out by telling them how to improve their product, at the same time theoretically shooting myself in the foot.
Here's the problem with these India/Paki guns in a nutshell, they look like something Elmer Fudd carries in the cartoons. Although they look vagely similar to what they are supposed to represent, in actuality all they are more of a cartoon charicture. The only thing I can figure out is someone is sending a few dimensions and a blurry picture of whatever gun they want reproduced over to these guys to copy.....what they get back is gun that is a copy of the blurry picture, which unfortunatly, they copy the blurriness to a T. :haha:
I understand the economics of the issue, they are cheap. But, I'd be embarrased to be seen at a decent event with one of these. I know in the circles I camp with I'd be laughed out of camp.
I'll add, there is absolutly no way this french gun can be made to look like it's suppossed to, it's just too far off to be saved. :shake:

Well I guess I had better add some more source material although Mike has mentioned Lenk and there are some duplications so here goes.First of all for the past 8-9 years I have been researching early guns of the Fur Trade period with particular emphasis on French[url] guns.In[/url] response to Mike I would like to post a partial list of source material,that is the books containing material on French guns.I have included the date on each book and for those authors with multiple titles I will refer to them by author and date when I discuss the gun in question.So here goes.
Russel Bouchard:
"Les Armes de Trait,{1976}in French
"The Trade Gun in New France" 1690-1760, Canadian Journal Arms Collecting Vol.15 No.1 {1977}
"The Fusil de Tulle in New France,1691-1741"{1980}

T.M.Hamilton:
"The Missouri Archaelogist" Vol. 22 {1960}
republished as "Indian Trade Guns", Chapters 5&6 by Hamilton {1980}
"Early Indian Trade Guns 1625-1775 {1980}
"Firearms on the Frontier, Guns at fort Michilimackinac 1715-1781" {1976}
"Colonial Frontier Guns" {1980}

Rene Chartrand:
"The French Soldier in Colonial America" Historical Arms Series No. 18 {1980}

Steve DeLisle:
"The Equipment of New France Militia 1740-1760" {1999}

George C. Neuman:
"The History of Weapons of the American Revolution {1967}
"Collectors Illustrated Encyclopedia of the American Revolution" {1975}
"Battle Weapons of the American Revolution"{1998}

Joseph R. Mayer,M.D.F.R.M.:
"Flintlocks of the Iroquois"{1943}

Claude Gaier:
"Four Centuries Of Liege Gunmaking"{1985}

Museum of the Fur Trade:
Assorted Quarterlies

Now to the gun in question.I don't know what the sellers had in mind here. I have never seen a fusil de chasse or fusil fin de chasse which looks like this gun.I have,however, seen illustrated in several sources Marine Common or Grenadier muskets made by Tulle between 1696 and 1716 with round faced locks with the bottom lines being double curved. This was the type of lock used by the French in the late 17th century until about 1699-1700 when flat faced locks came in.The furniture is of the type found on late 17th and early 18th century fine guns and on the Marine muskets until the 1716 contract which specified flat locks and saw the furniture become similar to standard French infantry muskets.I would recommend that consideration be given to Bouchard {1980} PP.14-15 where there is a discussion of the common and grenadier Tulle Marine muskets. Bouchard on p.15 shows a plate from the"Memoires d'Artillierie" by Surirey de St.-Remy,Paris{1697} showing the Common and Grenadier musket which plate is remarkably similar to the gun by Loyalist Arms. I Discussed this gun with a very advanced collector of early French guns and Tulles in particular.His response was that occasionally a 1696 pattern common or Grenadier musket will show up with brass mounts but they are very rare; further that the Tulle fusils de chasse are almost always mounted in iron and always have flat locks with the rather plain side plates and guards with which we are so familiar.They will also occasionally have brass mounts like the ones in iron. Another factor that adds confusion here is the so called Type C and D guns which seem more common in in the South than in Canada.I don't really think the gun in question belongs in any of the types of guns made by Tulle except for the Model 1696 Marine Common and Grenadier muskets. In short I'm not quite sure what this gun really is but it surely doesn't resemble any fusils de chasse or fusils fin de chasse with which I am familiar.There is so little known about these guns from 1691 to 1729.The Montreal Merchants Records show an entry from 1702 listing a number of fine guns grades 3,4,and 5.We really don't know much about these grades of guns or where they originated and there is a possibility that a number of fine fusils such as the ones referred to in 1702 were in fact Liegeoise or Dutch.These include two that I have which I think were manufactured in Liege and then shipped to Canada.As always I welcome responsible opposing comments.
Tom Patton

 

[davidesau]

I've been watching this debate for a while, and decided to say something. I agree with Mike, and this is why.I started my interest in our hobby in about 1975. I didn't have money for good equipment either. I looked at well made and PC stuff and decided to try to make what I could myself. To date I've made almost everything I carry. Are they all perfect? Of course not. Are they all decent and serve there purpose? You bet. Is my Virginia rifle as good as one of Mikes? No. But its accurate, PC, and when you can bust a target, or kill a deer cleanly with it, it gives you a feeling like no other.
I think fellas that can do what Mike does have a gift. That gift has value. Talking about his work and some 12 year old in Indias work in the same breath is an affront to him, and should be.
I've found that when I lamely try to recreat a piece of gear, it makes me appreciate their level of skill that much more. They do have good spices in India though.Hmmmmm. Oh well, carry on.