Patchbox hinge

[Vaino]

Presently working on a Bucks County LR very similar to the Shuler in RCA, vol. 1, p.270 and am just starting the Pbox pictured in f.64e. I've noticed that on this Pbox and the other Bucks County Pboxes that the hinge segments {knuckles} are very narrow widthwise. The possible reasons are that the lid is made from .030-.040 brass or, the brass is thicker but the hinge segments have been filed down or a hinge plate of thinner brass has been soldered to the lid underside. I use .050-.062 and the hinges will look "fat" compared to the pictured Pboxes. Any info at all would be greatly appreciated.....Fred

 

[fitter]

Hinge is probably made from thinner brass and soldered to the lid and screwed to side of the cavity.

 

[Zonie]

That would be my guess too.

Speaking of Bucks County guns in general, what are you using for a ramrod entry pipe?

For those not familure with the Bucks Co. rifles, most of them feature a very large amount of brass which extends back along the forearm towards the lock. This feature on some guns extends over 1/3 the length of the grip length.

I ask because I have added a piece of brass to the rear of a stock rear thimble with silver solder but I'm concerned about the joint breaking as I modify the curvature to match the forearm.

 

[Vaino]

The entry pipes on my Bucks County LRs have the extended "tails" approx. 4"-5" long and are formed from one piece. Made some forming dies out of oak blocks and they've produced these entry pipes which conform to the fore end very closely. The fore end has to be just about finished when I inlet these pipes. Really enjoy building Bucks County LRs and mine all have a curved comb and toeline and are very comfortable to shoot. The present BC has a 46" bbl w/ a 1" breech and is very slender. Anyone else build Bucks County LRs?...Fred

 

[rich pierce]

My first scratch- built longrifle in 1978 was a Bucks County style. Love the style.

I doubt the hinge is separate and soldered on. I think that particular box is either of thin brass or was filed down to look sleeker in the hinge.

 

[B Shipman]

Bucks side opening boxes are usually pretty thin brass relative to others. You will often find them badly dented on originals.

 

[Birddog6]

I have built a couple rifles similar to the unsigned one at the end of the Bucks rifles in the RCA Vol 1 book. I was not trying to copy the rifle so I didn't attempt the extended entrypipe & I also left the patchbox off because I couldn't make up my mind if I liked it or not on the rifle. I had the patchbox & laid it on & off the rifle for 2 weeks trying to make up my mind, finally decided without. :surrender: If I make another one I may try that long entrypipe as I have made several mandrels now & have successfully made a 2 piece pipe like that one appears to be. :thumbsup: But probably will not put that patchbox on it. :grin: I guess it all boils down to yer "Druthers". Would you "Druther" have this or that...... :haha:

 

[Vaino]

Thanks to all for the info asre the hinges and brass thickness and will proceed w/ .050 brass if I do this Pbox. I use a template that's been interpolated and then enlarged from RCA, vol.1, no. 65. Have made 3 using this template and 3 similar to Shuler's BC which is the present build. The BC architecture[s} really appeal to me especially the slightly curved comb and the more curved toeline. BC carving and Pboxes aren't as appealing {IMO} as some other "schools" so all my previous BC LRs have the small, narrow Pboxes w/ the "bullet nose" {RCA no.65}. Am now having second thoughts about using the Schuler Pbox...somehow it's starting to lose it's appeal and I might use the "bullet nose" Pbox again. A big advantage to this small Pbox {IMO} is that it doesn't cover up a lot of wood but does "breakup" a large expanse of stock. Enjoy making all these decisions...whew!....Fred

 

[Birddog6]

Like I said, it is all in the "Druthers". If something doesn't appeal to me on the rifle, I seldom replicate it, be it a patchbox, carving, engraving, etc. Some guys build them Exactly like the originals, I don't do that because I seldom see an original that I like Everything on the rifle.

Now that last rifle in the Bucks section of RCA 1 is the Bucks I like the best. Of all of them, that one appeals to me the most & fits me well & etc. The rifles I have made similar to it had Really nice wood & when I laid the patchbox on them, For Me, it took away from the rifle so I left it off.

Now some will say "Oh, you can't do that, that is what makes it a Bucks." Well, I did & it is still a Bucks !! :haha:

One the same token, if that rifle with that patchbox appeals to you, then you should by all means put it on there.

.050 should be adequate for the patchbox lid. The patchbox I made like that was a 2 piece one. I made the hinge out of some .035 and a SS wire thru the hinge & then I was going to soft soldered the hinge to the lid. I had it all made & ready but never soldered it on cause I decided not to use it. The store bought patchbox kits I looked at for that particular rifle were made the same way. :thumbsup:

 

[Vaino]

I agree that certain features on originals could be improved or not used at all. Like I said, the 2 things I don't especially like on BC LRs are the carving and the Pboxes and that's probably the reason I've used that small, "bullet nosed" Pbox and also use non-BC carving designs. One of these days I'll build a BC LR w/o any embellishments at all and because of the stock architecture, it'll still look like a BC. I also build Lancasters but for whatever reason when they're finished, they don't "excite" me like the BC LRs do. Have all the parts for a Rupp Lehigh but it keeps getting deferred because I still have a lot of details to study {excuse?}....probably {IMO} the most difficult LR to "get right". Happy building...Fred

 

[JOHN ZUREKI]

Fred, out of curiosity what lock are you going to use on your BC? I built a Bucks years ago and used a Siler because it was all I had at the time.

 

[Vaino]

The present Bucks County LR has a deluxe Siler which isn't exactly correct for some of the originals unless the tail would have been reshaped. Don't really care for the looks of the "tails" on some of the BC LRs but some did have a "tail" that is very similar to the Siler. The Siler mates up well w/ the BC architecture {wrist} and looks "at home". It's amazing that a style of LR that had only a 20-25 year lifespan has engendered such an interst to me, but then in a span of 20-25 years, irregardless of the exact year, not many LRs stayed the same......Fred