Swamped barrel on Southern Mtn Rifle?

[strask]

While at friendship I picked up a rice swamped barrel that is 42" long. I was wondering if anyone knows if they used swamped barrels on this type of rifle or not? I would like to try a gun from a board and thought if it was historically correct it would make a nice .54 caliber hunting rifle. If not correct anyone know where I can get specifics on Berry (sp?) rifles. Was able to hold an original that just felt wonderful.

Thanks,

 

[Mike Brooks]

I've seen lots of swamped barrels on original mnt. rifles. The catch is they were swamped a little differently. They have a "blob" on either end and are fairly straight in between.
That being said, I personally would use a swamped barrel to build one and not worry about it.

 

[44-henry]

Last night I posted some pictures of an original mountain rifle I own on the Barn Gun thread, the barrel on this rifle is swamped, although very lightly.

 

[Bob J]

Roger Sells built my .54 southern mountain rifle with a 42" swamped Green Mountain barrel and it balances very well. Its a pleasure to carry in the woods, too.

 

[szihn]

Mike is right. In fact you expect to see swamped or tapered barrels on original S. Mountain rifles in the "flint years"

The straight Oct. berrels that you see on most S. Mountain rifles were made in factories, and sold to rifle makers after 1845. All this type of rifle (Which I have seen anyway..) are cap locks, and they come from a later age. This was the age of deep-hole drilling, and the process used to make those barrels was such that straight was the best and easiest way to make them for a lower price. (just like it is today) But on the earlier hand made flint rifles, swamped barrels were common.

 

[tg]

I recall several threads on straight and swamped barrels in the past and I though that 1810 was the general date given as to when straight barrels begun to appear fairly often?

 

[TANSTAAFL]

Also some of the barrels in the late ML period were cast steel. When a kid I had an original half stock .36 nipple gun and on the bottom flat it was marked cast steel, and was the only provenance on the rifle. I was told that such low end guns were called hardware guns, as that was where the majority of them were retailed.

 

[44-henry]

One thing to keep in mind here is that these guns were largely built by and used by very frugal (read that poor if you will) people. Don't think for a minute that every rifle built in the mountains was an assemblage of brand new parts, if there was an old completely worn out rifle in need of a new stock and lock, it likely received those items and was put back into service. Thus a swamped barrel could very likely have ended up on a late period percussion gun. I think one of the problems with recreating these guns is we tend to create generalities that often times don't apply.

 

[Cherokee]

I have said this a few times, like Mr. Johnsons post. My dad grew up in the mountains of TN and KY pretty much on the border and you didnt waste any money on something that didnt put clothes on your back or food in your stomach.
Lots of things were hand carved and leather was used as a fixit like duct tape.
Most everybody was a poor farmer in his area.
I still have his old single barrel red letter winchester that he has owned since he was 11 years old. The stock was busted in the wrist area and the local Mr. fix-it guy wrapped pianno wire around the split and tacked the wire to the stock.
To this day the repair is there.

 

[Okwaho]

I agree with Steve and Mike here.I've looked at a lot of early Southern [post Ca.1800}rifles and a number were swamped. I had a couple of Va. rifles made in East Tennessee,one Ca.1790-1810 and the other Ca. 1800-1810 by the same maker. The earlier one had a barrel which had a slight taper to about 8" from the muzzle then slightly flared out.The gun,as is the case of many Tennessee rifles of the first few decades of the 19th century, was very barrel heavy. I don't remember the second one since I sold it without looking at the barrel closely.

As to East Tennessee and Western North Carolina rifles I would respectfully disagree with those writers who have opined that these "mountain" rifles tend to be somewhat on the crude side with parts recovered from earlier guns.I guess I have looked at and handled two thousand or more of these rifles and while they were often plain,the majority of them had good architecture and were usually above average examples of wood to metal fit.The metal forging was usually very good and while I am on that subject, I have often suspected that much of the iron furniture especially on guns of the upper East Tennessee and Northwestern North Carolina school was manufactured by blacksmiths and sold to the gunsmiths.Guns by makers such as the Beans,Grosses,Lawing,Wilhelm,Harris,and others have mounts especially the guards that are virtually identical and cannot be distinguished from each other than by a signature or solid attribution; so much for the so called "Bean guards". I had a really nice rifle from the upper East Tennessee area,either from Washington or Unicoi County. It had almost all of the characteristics of the "Bean" rifles but it was really too slim and graceful and well made to be a Bean rifle. It had no box and was original percussion although the lock plate had been made for a flint lock and had not been drilled for the frizzen and frizzen spring holes. From later information I now suspect the gun might have been made by Jason Harris of either Washington or Unicoi County,Tennessee.
Just some random thoughts on East Tennessee and Western North Carolina "Hog {"Hawg"}rifles".
Tom Patton

 

[Wehrmacht]

There's no reason for me to even say a word. Tom, Steve and Mike covered it all! :winking:

 

[strask]

Thanks to you all. I am fairly new to the PC side of this. I really appreciate your input on this stuff. :bow: I am having a blast building and shooting. Now I just need to come up with a persona :grin:

 

[44-henry]

I never made any mention of these guns being crude, I just said they made use of old parts. I know of one Southern rifle from the 1700's that did exactly that, not crude either. All I'm saying is that parts were not wasted, what practical arguement can you present that would say that a gunsmith in any region, would have thrown away an older barrel that might only have required freshing out when the alternative was either to purchase a new barrel or make one by hand. Simple logic dictates that if a barrel, that with a little work could be made to shoot like new and look like new, why go to the expense of getting another when the client would just have to pay more for it anyways. Why would a rifle built around an older "reworked" barrel end up being crude? If in the end you can make a product that works, and looks good to boot, with a cheaper (however not low quality) component than why wouldn't you?

 

[Cherokee]

This is what IM trying to say also. Nothing was wasted so you could verywell find all types of modified rifles and maybe some restocked that people would swear was built a certain time and place and can actually be a repaired or reconstructed hodgepodge of parts.

 

[Okwaho]

I never made any mention of these guns being crude, I just said they made use of old parts. I know of one Southern rifle from the 1700's that did exactly that, not crude either. All I'm saying is that parts were not wasted, what practical arguement can you present that would say that a gunsmith in any region, would have thrown away an older barrel that might only have required freshing out when the alternative was either to purchase a new barrel or make one by hand. Simple logic dictates that if a barrel, that with a little work could be made to shoot like new and look like new, why go to the expense of getting another when the client would just have to pay more for it anyways. Why would a rifle built around an older "reworked" barrel end up being crude? If in the end you can make a product that works, and looks good to boot, with a cheaper (however not low quality) component than why wouldn't you?

As I recall I didn't say that your post was to the effect that mountain rifles are overly crude or that recovered parts were not used.Of course recovered parts were reused.I had a probable SW Va. rifle Ca.1830 with a much earlier forged barrel and I now have a probable Va. smooth rifle Ca.1775-1800 which has a lock,guard,and butt piece from a mid 18th century Ketland fowler but with a 47" full swamped octagonal barrel in about .55 cal.My basic point is, as it has long been, that Southern mountain rifles by and large are well designed and built guns with good wood to metal fit. They may be plain but they are excellent examples of the gunsmith's craft.There are,on the other hand, rifles with recovered parts and original parts which are less than attractive. The first gun I mentioned above was such a gun and that was partly why I sold it.Guns with a mixture of old and new parts are generally referred to as composite guns and there's absolutely nothing wrong with them.I have a composite fusil musket from the Revolutionary War with a variety of parts and I have a fondness for these old guns. I just believe that the majority of Southern mountain rifles were for the most part quality weapons.Some were even carved although they are quite rare.
Tom Patton