Original 1766 Musket

[FlinterNick]

I’ve got both the Pedersoli “1766” and 1795. Every part on both of mine aside from the rammer and forward barrel band are the exact same. I think my 95 was one of the early versions. They both use the same incorrect TG, both feather springs are an eyesore and both have long single side flat for the lock, (I added the other side on the 66 to the shorter length) I removed most of the excess wood from the 66, its better but not perfect. I’ve yet to put the 95 on a diet and defunk regimen, but my shop still isn’t completely set up yet. I bought that TRS 66 lock plate to compare it to the 66, its a touch smaller L & W, but not a massive difference. I’ve not measured the thickness yet.

I’ve had 2 pedersoli 1766’s.

Per my research, the french started the 1763 model in 1762 and came up with the following prototype.

Barrel .69 caliber, breech 1.5-1.600, weight 5.15 Lbs,

Stock, heavy wrist, high comb butt stock that rose past the breech area, obstructing the ability to aim,

Lock, initially the lock was the same as a 1754 with a double throated cock and no slash steps on the, plate, around 6.5 - 6.7 inches depending on where it was made,

Barrel bands were unique, with a rammer guide riveted to the upper band, some call it a spring, however there is a spring pinned to the breech 8” from the breech. So i call it a guide, Austrian and dutch muskets had a similar design that was casted to the front bands.

The guns total weight was around 10 1/2 lbs with most of the weight being in the barrel.

Later production 1763s made between 63 and 65 were lightened and used a smaller lock however still had some features of the initial 1763, such as a heavy barrel, however the bands were changed to the 1766 pattern.

There is one of these on display at the Ticonderoga museum, and it resembles the pedersoli 1766 a lot, however its the only one I’ve ever seen like That, so i can’t say with certainty its a true pattern.

Pathfinder, the barrel tang isn’t flush because i unscrewed it, the screw head is almost destroyed, I’m luck to have gotten it off.

I have some original tang screws (German, Dutch, and British) that match the countersink that I’m going to use as replacements.

Barrel Tang Question.

 

[FlinterNick]

Wonderful! It’s fascinating to see such pieces of well documented history presented in the way you do.
I was struck by something right away about the musket. That is how the barrel tang protrudes above the wrist. ( so does the screw, actually) I was wondering why it was made in such a manner. Certainly not flush with the stock wrist in any closeness. Perhaps the barrel has not been drawn down and fully seated in the channel? It’s so interesting to see how things were done and try to understand why.

The one thing about this musket that really caught my attention was the Buttplate, and butt stock. This musket has survived any ‘Americanized’ changes such as a shaved down comb.

The butt stock swells outward, much like the wrist swell on a brown bess, it’s very difficult to see in pictures becuase you can’t see the cross section. The flutes are cut into the swell which produce a quasi check wrest,

 

[sportster73hp]

Watched another 11 bang bang video where he discusses different models and the politics of when and why changes were made. Sorry, didn’t note the release date

 

[Clark Badgett]

I don’t think it’s that they don’t care. More, in most cases, they just can’t afford it. I paid $300 for this pedersoli Bess. After defarbing and a new mainspring and ram rod, I still only have about $800 in it. It looks pretty good. Is it perfect? Of course not, but I’m not about to take a $3000+ gun reenacting. Stacking arms. Taking a hit. Musket leaning against things or on the ground. Yeah, fine for a military gun, but when you have a perfect replica, that’s a lot of money for most. Just my opinion.

If you can get a decent priced used pedersoli or Miroku, have it defarbed and it looks good, well that works.

Why not? If it’s perfect replica of a military arm, it was designed for such hardship, and such hardships would only make it look more the part.

 

[FlinterNick]

I don’t think it’s that they don’t care. More, in most cases, they just can’t afford it. I paid $300 for this pedersoli Bess. After defarbing and a new mainspring and ram rod, I still only have about $800 in it. It looks pretty good. Is it perfect? Of course not, but I’m not about to take a $3000+ gun reenacting. Stacking arms. Taking a hit. Musket leaning against things or on the ground. Yeah, fine for a military gun, but when you have a perfect replica, that’s a lot of money for most. Just my opinion.

If you can get a decent priced used pedersoli or Miroku, have it defarbed and it looks good, well that works.

It really depends on the owner, and what they want.

Charleville defarbs are difficult because so few people know about the originals.

Take an Italian Brown bess marked grice and remark it tower, you added a bunch of equity to the gun, because there are people out there who want that and will pay for it.

At the end of the day, it’s all about making people feel like they have something special, when all it is is what it previously was.

 

[Comfortably_Numb]

The one thing about this musket that really caught my attention was the Buttplate, and butt stock. This musket has survived any ‘Americanized’ changes such as a shaved down comb.

The butt stock swells outward, much like the wrist swell on a brown bess, it’s very difficult to see in pictures becuase you can’t see the cross section. The flutes are cut into the swell which produce a quasi check wrest,

"cow's foot" is what that swell is...or so they say.. A common characteristic of the de chasse guns too. I noticed that swell on all those early French military guns when I worked at RIACO.
I would call it lazy stock practices if it were one of my students.

 

[Comfortably_Numb]

I don’t think it’s that they don’t care. More, in most cases, they just can’t afford it. I paid $300 for this pedersoli Bess. After defarbing and a new mainspring and ram rod, I still only have about $800 in it. It looks pretty good. Is it perfect? Of course not, but I’m not about to take a $3000+ gun reenacting. Stacking arms. Taking a hit. Musket leaning against things or on the ground. Yeah, fine for a military gun, but when you have a perfect replica, that’s a lot of money for most. Just my opinion.

If you can get a decent priced used pedersoli or Miroku, have it defarbed and it looks good, well that works.

If you start them out like this you have no worries.

 

[sturmkatze]

If you start them out like this you have no worries.

Too nice. I’d never take that out.

 

[sturmkatze]

It really depends on the owner, and what they want.

Charleville defarbs are difficult because so few people know about the originals.

Take an Italian Brown bess marked grice and remark it tower, you added a bunch of equity to the gun, because there are people out there who want that and will pay for it.

At the end of the day, it’s all about making people feel like they have something special, when all it is is what it previously was.

I had it be “Dublin Castle” that was pricey. He doesn’t stamp barrels. I walked around the Allentown gunshow with my barrel (dorks trying to buy it or see it) to meet up with Paul Ackerman to get barrel stamped. Lodgewood Durant stamp the barrel. I’d already removed the modern markings. Not only did he reshape the stock, he refinished it… that was pretty worth it.

To me, it looks better. Is it perfect? No. Am I happy? Sure.

 

[sturmkatze]

Why not? If it’s perfect replica of a military arm, it was designed for such hardship, and such hardships would only make it look more the part.

Because I’m not taking something that I paid that much for and doing that to it.

Just as if not carry a $25k rifle into the woods. To each their own — this is ‘Murica.

 

[Comfortably_Numb]

I'd carry a 25k rifle into the woods with out hesitation.

 

[Clark Badgett]

I'd carry a 25k rifle into the woods with out hesitation.

Same here.

 

[Clark Badgett]

Here are the locks of the two 1766 muskets in our local arms museum. Pardon the crappy pictures.
Charleville top Maubeuge bottom.

The Charleville is a true ‘66 as the rear band spring is a completely different style.
The Maubeuge is a ‘68, and unlike the Charleville has small shelves for the middle and rear bands to rest against. It also has a bottom bayonet stud as well as the button head of the rammer missing and that jaw screw is funky.

 

[2 shots]

I walked around the Allentown gunshow with my barrel (dorks trying to buy it

?? what makes someone asking if something is for sale at a gun show a dork??

 

[sturmkatze]

?? what makes someone asking if something is for sale at a gun show a dork??

Because they kept going on after I said it wasn’t for sale. Just like when I picked it up at Baltimore after it was defarberized and the dorks were like “Are you going to let me look at it?” It’s not real I had to say. I bought a case so they’d shut up. If things are for sale, there’d be a sign on it.

 

[sportster73hp]

Bought a tc scout this weekend and had three people asking to buy it in the next 1/2 hour at the show. Could have made some money

 

[sturmkatze]

Bought a tc scout this weekend and had three people asking to buy it in the next 1/2 hour at the show. Could have made some money

Right. If I were unethical, I could have sold the Bess as real.