Rifle from Patriot

[Cheyenne]

Hello, first post, so please be gentel with me. I'm going to get back to Flint Lock shooting as that was the ignition system on the first gun I ever bought myself....way back about 29 years ago when I was a kid. It was an EMF "Kentucy".

Anuway, having seen the Patriot a zillion times, I really like the style of Benjamin Martin's (Mel) rifle. So far, I've been able to find out that it is a House made gun and have found a few pictures, all of the right side of the gun, but none of the under side or left side.

The NRA book "Real guns of Reel Stars" has it pictured twice, both from the right side. The book says it is "based on a Tdewater original"......what's a Tidewater?

I'd like to build something similar, but maybe with brass furnature instead of silver, and had thought that an early lancaster may be close. The House gun seems to have a rounded English style lock, or Fowler type lock, which would be good for sparks, I think.

I know it's a 54 and a swamped barrel, but what is the style? Where would be a good place to start looking for appropriate parts?

TVM and the Possible shop both have an early lancaster 'kit' that has the option of an L&R fowler lock, but they both have a straight barrel, not swamped.

Anybody know of a source of more photo's of the House? ::

 

[Stumpkiller]

http://www.longmountain.com/movieguns/ThePatriot

This site says it's a .56 caliber

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a39565f1c721f.htm

The weapon was also modeled on the styles that dominated the Tidewater region of the Carolinas, where British influence held sway. That meant he stuck with understated ornamentation typical of the period.

 

[Cheyenne]

Well, now that i look and read the description in the NRA booklet, it too says "56", which the only thing that could be better than a 54 is a 56! :winking:

Thanks for the pictures Stump, and the link to the forum with the info.......still would like to see the other side of the butt.......I think that's why this rifle appeals to me so much is because fo the styling and the lack of a bunch of guady orimentation......wire inlays and sivler everywhere is ok, but I prefer a gun that's a little plainer.

From the DVD I can tell there's no toe plate, but haven't found a scene where I can get a look at the butt.

That article said Frank built the pistols used by the evil Brit from a "kit" to save time....wonder where the kit came from?

Anybody know how to get in touch with Mr. House? maybe he could tell me. :master:

 

[eat moose meat]

The kits came from Kennedy Firearms in Muncy, Pennsylvania. I belive.

 

First, the pistol kits were from Kennedy firearms, reproduction of 1760 Wilson holster postols.

The rifle, several varieties of information here! Don't know where they all came from.

My information is from Muzzle Loader, Nov, 2000.

The gun is losely coppied from Shumway #526. The rifle was owned by Col. John Thomas of South Carolina Colony. The Col. was captured early in the war and spent most ot the duration in prison at Fort 96. The gun was taken to England and has been part of the Royal collection since that time.

Frank's copy:

General pattern of an early South Carolina gun.

(the "tidewater" is the area of the east coast where the rivers actually rise and fall with the tides of the ocean. This was the richest area of colonial settlement, where ships could run up to the docks of individual plantations. SC was the richest colony in the North America.)

This will vary only slightly from an early VA or MD gun or some early PA guns. (the Morovian craftsmen were quite mobile at this period, PA was not thier only base.)

Stock; curly maple. aqua fortis heat treated stain, liberal linseed oil.

barrel; .50 cal Getz, (Not .54 or .56) 46" long, swamped.

lock; hand forged plate & externals with L&R guts

trim; Iron reflecting the English influnce of the area. the patchbox is of "captive style". (Look closely, it does not open completely to the buttplats. The lid is completely sorrounded by the "trim".

The gun was given a "patina" of use (you do not have to agree with the practice, or the iron trim, I'm just teling what was done to this gun). The house boys are masters at this aging process, espically on iron.

This gun is "tastefully carved".

This gun would be considered an "advanced project" in anyone's view. You will not find the hardware in any catologue, it was all hand forged and finished. You will not find the lock in any catalogue, it was hand made, except for internals. The stock was cut from a billit, not preformed, you can no longer buy aquafortis stain. Every element of this gun requires that it be done "the hard way". This is not restocking a TC or putting a drop in GM barrel on a Renagade.

I would estimate 200++ hours work for an experienced craftsmen. Definately not a "first build" gun!

Frank's basic poor boys go $1500-3000 each, his hawks run $3000-5000 per copy. Waiting list of ????? years!!

Nice thing about Frank is that he is still just a KY goofball guy who will sit down at your campfire and talk to you like a regular human! No pretenses, he knows he was blessed and lucky.

 

:imo: The line of that patch box does not look right in relation to the line of the stock! Seems off to me.

Just a thought, could be wrong. Don't look right to the wrist or lock angle.

 

[Cheyenne]

Never thought it'd be easy, or a beginner's product, nor that I could buy the parts off the shelf.....I'm familiar with Mr. House's work, having admired it from afar and know he makes most all of the gun. Just figured to style one close, so maybe an early Lancaster would be a good start. I now have two references that the gun is a 56, and two that it is a 50.....either way, maybe that's how I got 54 on my mind.....go in between! :winking:

Thanks for the tip on Kennedy Firearms!

Yup, that's what I'm looking for!

 

[Flintshooter in Indiana]

According to the article in Muzzleloader Magazine "Good/Fine Enough for a Gentleman Farmer", or something like that, the rifle "is" 50 caliber. And the feller that wrote it knows Frank and supposedly turned the movie people on to him to build it, his wife Lally for the powder horn strap and Roland Cadle for the horn.

 

[Wayne Combs]

Cheyenne,go to Jim Chambers website,www.flintlocks.com,on the left side of the home page click on pg 4 of the rifle kits.This shows the Mark Silver Early Virginia rifle.See if that might be what you're looking for.Wayne.

 

[Cheyenne]

Thanks WCC, that's pretty close! Anybody have experience with Chambers kits?

 

[Hoyt]

This gun looks a lot like the one on Chamber's site.. http://www.firelocks.com/page14.html

 

[Keith]

I've been working on one. Good quality. If you are not an experienced and or gifted woodworker this is not the kit for you. The last 10 % of the inletting on a 90% inlet kit is the hard part. A Chambers gun finished, by someone other than me, would be a very nice gun IMO.

 

[Cheyenne]

Well, the Chambersd looked good right up to the caliber.....58's as small as it goes. :cry:

 

[Slowpoke]

I wish to second what Keith is saying about Chamber's kits. These are not for the faint of heart. This isn't to single out Chamber's but just kits in general. I've been working on one off and one for about 4 months. I get tired of working on it, then start back. On my York rifle there were some serious design flaws.

1. The lock mortice is to low in the stock and I had to file a 1/4 of the touch hole liner off.
2. The lock mortice doesn't match the side plate mortice.
3. Ramrod hole was drilled so it hits the front lock bolt.

These aren't major things but they are annoying when you're anal retentive and trying to build it right. I've finished all the hard stuff now I get to have some fun. I working on the moulding, carving, and wire work.

Chuck

 

[Cheyenne]

:imo: The line of that patch box does not look right in relation to the line of the stock! Seems off to me.

Just a thought, could be wrong. Don't look right to the wrist or lock angle.

The box is neat, and I like the captive lid....different and interesting. It appears that the lid is secured by a screw???? Wonder if this is the release? Turn a 1/2 turn and it opens?? Kind of like the lock on a cheap file cabinet. :hmm:

 

[Zonie]

IMO the center line of the patch box should be pointed upward so that a line drawn thru it intersects close to the middle of the lockplate.
The one in the picture seems to be running parallel with the barrel.

As for these "kits" being difficult, your right, they are.
That's why my backhair (what's left of it) goes up when someone looks at one of my rifles and says "Is that a Kit gun?".
My answer is, "No, it's not a kit. It is a custom gun."
Saying it is "custom" IMO is fairly accurate. If you are building one of these, there are so many things that you have to decide and so much you have to do that the final gun is indeed a custom and probably the only one just like it in the world.

To me, a Kit Gun is what TC, CVA, and Lyman makes. They are about 95% complete and require a minimum of work and knowledge to put together.

I'm not knocking these kits, or the people who put them together. I think it's great that they are there and indeed they can introduce people to the satisfaction of actually building their own rifle.
I suspect that more than one person (including me) got their start building kits.

 

[tg]

Briefly thumbing through RCA many boxes were in line with the center of the lock or the front or the cock screw or the rear late screw, stock drop, builders preference and style were probably factors in the different methods.

 

[Cheyenne]

Been away for a while. Haven't given up on this project.

Ghost, what you said about Frank House is true, in spades! :master: He's a great guy. :applause: I spoke with him at length about this rifle and got a lot of information on it and several other things such as muzzle coning, round vs. square rifling, &c.

It'll have to be done the hard way, that's for sure, but if I want to do it right....then that's how it'll have to be.

Mr. House gave suggestions on which lock to use as well as other helpful tips to make one as close as possible without having a forge set up in the back yard.....course, I could make one and use for a bar-b-que pit on weekends! :crackup:

 

Zonie- I agree in spades, however many originals seem to have the box lower at the nose than I prefer, from purely leasing asthetics point of view. They look 'odd' or 'out of place' or plain wrong, lacking symetry in the butt section, to me. There are many originals whose patch box asthetics are pleasing, though and they line up properly with the wrist(my preference).

 

[jimmytheshank]

Well, I'm glad you havent given up on your project. I was thinking in another year or so of having oldarmy build me a Benjamin Martin rifle after he builds my LOTM rifle. I aint rich, and the economy might put a damper on things for a bit, but it might be doable in the future. I ordered my custom barrel from Ed Rayl for the LOTM rifle, and so I'll be ordering a 46" .50 cal barrel from him if I decide to have the rifle built. Oldarmy has a stocksupplier that has stocks big enough for that long barrel, and in fancy maple too. Mike loves building Lancaster rifles, and to me anyway, early Lancasters sorta look similiar to Carolina guns I guess, I'm no expert. I prefer lehighs, although this movie rifle really looks good. Dont have too much research material on that rifle. Information on the LOTM rifle and the Ben Martin gun is as scarce as hen's teeth. The booger for sure,will be the patchbox.
Maybe we can get together and trade ideas. I'd like to see how your project turns out whichever way you go about it. :thumbsup: