Truly poor boy style Tennssee rifle

[kansas_volunteer]

I'm doing some initial planning for a very poor boy Tennessee rifle. I've been trying to get some answers through the search function but it isn't working for me.

Think barn gun done in a southern mountain style. Something so plain it probably would not have survived into modern times. It probably would have been thrown on the junk pile at some point.

I'm going with the idea the flint lock was used longer in the southern mountains than elsewhere. Would a poor mountaineer have had the money for a new late model lock, or might he have gone with a used early Lock? I'm thinking the lock ought to be very basic; no rollers, ordinary pan, not rain proof and so on.

The stock may not get a buttplate. How best to reinforce the toe and heel to keep the from Splitting? Big Nails?

I see the barrel pinned in the stock and no muzzle cap.

A single trigger pinned into the stock seems right for 19th century budget gun. What do you think?

Is there a decent option for a trigger guard other than the ubiquitous patterns sold by every dang supplier? I'd like for my rifle to be truly unique, although plain as dirt.

Oh, by the way, the stock is going to be old reclaimed yellow pine! Because it was found everywhere in the south, it would have been cheap in the old days. Also it is as hard and dense as walnut and other more expensive woods -- in the old days but not today! It has the qualities of a good stock wood. Besides the plank I have will ring when tapped. It ain't a soft wood. On top of that I read somewhere once yellow pine was used in at least one surviving gun.

Any opinions would be welcome.

 

[54ball]

Think barn gun done in a southern mountain style. Something so plain it probably would not have survived into modern times. It probably would have been thrown on the junk pile at some point.

Think again. The real world of surviving rifles tells a different story. Many plain rifles survive. Really, they outnumber the rifles that have real artistic merit but they dont get published that much.
Last week I could have bought a flint Lehigh Valley for 1000 bucks and a plain later SMR for 600. In the same show were rifles valued at over a million.
Alas not too many books are written on these plainer 600 buck original rifles. BTW both were well constructed.

I'm going with the idea the flint lock was used longer in the southern mountains than elsewhere. Would a poor mountaineer have had the money for a new late model lock, or might he have gone with a used early Lock? I'm thinking the lock ought to be very basic; no rollers, ordinary pan, not rain proof and so on.

The poor farmer thing is overdone and flawed through modern eyes.
By far the most expensive part was the barrel followed by the lock.

In the show mentioned above was a neat old rifle. It was a restock likely dating to the second quarter of the 19th Century maybe even the 1812 era. I referred to it as the "ugly rifle". From afar that rifle really looked like something until I picked it up. The original parts were from some old grand rifle that's original form is lost to history. I suspect only the shape remains as likely the damaged original stock was used as a pattern. The butt was well fitted but the rifle had no raised lock and side panels. It was pretty much in the square. It obviously stocked by a careful but unskilled hand likely a blacksmith. BTW it was stocked in the most beautiful piece of maple you have ever seen. This rifle was functional but had zero artistic merit. Historical merit oozed from it.

Is there a decent option for a trigger guard other than the ubiquitous patterns sold by every dang supplier? I'd like for my rifle to be truly unique, although plain as dirt.

I have seen a signed Angastat with a simple piece of brass bent and shaped into a trigger guard. It was simple but well done. The front tang of the guard was screwed into the stock with wood screw while the rear tang of the guard was riveted to the trigger plate which was held by the tang bolt.

Oh, by the way, the stock is going to be old reclaimed yellow pine! Because it was found everywhere in the south, it would have been cheap in the old days. Also it is as hard and dense as walnut and other more expensive woods -- in the old days but not today! It has the qualities of a good stock wood. Besides the plank I have will ring when tapped. It ain't a soft wood. On top of that I read somewhere once yellow pine was used in at least one surviving gun.

OK I have read about a very few southern rifles built with such wood....
If this is indeed a real piece of hard yellow longleaf (like from a sunken log or barn beam) pine it deserves a top quality job. That wood has value so why build a junker? Build a full house early 19th Century rifle with artistic merit. When I say artistic merit I mean architecture.

Use set triggers. Use a buttplate. Use a later English lock and do it up proper.

It will still be on the soft side but there were such made. As far as I know they were stocked as well as any other rifle.

You have the potential to have a very interesting rifle so don't skimp or cheap out on the effort.

BTW it takes just as much effort to build with pine as it does a piece of 800 dollar maple.

 

[kansas_volunteer]

Very interesting thoughts. I see your point.

My pine is old growth reclaimed barn wood, very heavy and dense. It's a 4x8x6' an honest measurment, not a lumber yard measurement. I can easily carry that much out of the lumber yard, but my plank weighs 80 pounds. I can't just throw it on my shoulder, I carried like a caber. (I'm old and out of shape.) It has deep saw marks on it. It was obviously cut on a large diameter circular saw with wide set teeth. It will plane down to be very nice wood.

 

[Paul R]

"Pine" can be used to describe a large variety of wood species. While I'm not familiar with a lot of those species, one of the characteristics can be long stringy grain which is not conducive to the kind of detail carving required for gunstock work. The usual difference in density between early & late wood makes it very difficult to control a chisel.
I would suggest that before you get too much time invested in a stock, rough out a blank, then use a good sized off cut to practice with to see if you can do an inlet like you might do for a lock plate. Or, carve some other typical part of a stock, just to see if the wood will shape the way you want it to. If the wood lets you do these things without a lot of chipping out or splitting, you're off to the races. If not, you might have to ask yourself if you really want to make what is already a difficult job into something much more frustrating.
All the best in your project, Paul

 

[Gene L]

I'd suggest cherry for the stock. It was widely used, although plain maple was also used. Just because I wouldn't want to make a pine gun and have never seen one with a pine stock. Also, a piece of yellow pine like yours could probably bring you twice what cherry stock would cost.

 

[tenngun]

We know the 'five civilized tribes' had a lot of gunsmiths that were restocking guns, and non discript guns were made from mismatched parts. Many of our 'styles' and 'school' of guns is a modern construct based on a few surviving guns from a peculiar area.
We know god-awful ugly repairs were made and ugly guns survived.
Most southern poor boy guns were very well done.the museums in Arrow Rock mo have a lot of southern guns that have all southern stock shape but are brass or silver mounted.
A 'barn gun' poor boy miss matched gun is HC but is the exception and not the rule.
As such a gun you could use a trigger guard off a fowler or trade gun,you could cut a southern style stock and poor boy style and hang a north eastern style guard as the gun you are discribing is by its nature a miss match.

 

[don hepler]

I like the Cherry wood better, too. The trigger guards on SMR are usually two pieces of metal, joined and hammered out of strap steel. Google iron mounted southern rifles.

Also you could get some general ideas from a Schemmel Barn Gun, even though the shape is very different. Some of these had small toe plates and metal on the top heal of the stock, without any butt plate.

Sitting Fox has an Appalachian Barn gun, that might give you some ideas.

Google, Google and you can find a lot of Barn Gun pics.

 

[Gene L]

I checked Specific Gravity of woods and yellow pine has a higher number, .55 than cherry, which IIRC is .47. That was a surprise to me. Cherry looks better and doesn't weigh as much. Show us some pictures.

Beech has a higher SG than Yellow pine. Makes a good Centerfire stock, but I've never seen it in a ML.

 

[kansas_volunteer]

Yep, yellow pine is about the same weight per cubic foot and hardness as a lot of more ordinary stock woods. It's classified with other conifers as soft wood, but it is harder than many hardwoods. Willow and catalpa come to mind. Why wouldn't it make a good stock for a southern rifle?

My plank shows growth rings that suggest it came from a very large tree. The rings are closely spaced with the early growth and late growth rings of about equal width throughout. It grew slowly.

I need to take a paring chisel to it and see how fibrous it might be. Not much, I think. It's going to be quite a job flattening it with hand planes, but I'm looking forward to every blisters of it.

 

[Black Hand]

You will have alternating hard and soft growth rings which will make inletting a challenge. The grain will sand differently, with the soft rings dishing and the hard rings resisting. Pine & fir are prone to splitting/splintering. Personally, I would choose a wood with a more homogeneous grain structure. There is a reason why pine is not routinely used as a stock wood (except maybe under extreme conditions).

 

[Pete G]

Making a stock out of heart pine would not be much different that carving one out of oak. I would think you will never want to try that again. Walnut shows up on southern guns quite often because it was plentiful and cheap(back in the day). You might also want to take a look at ash, but it is not much different that trying to work in oak either.

If you want a different looking guard take a look at the guards that Hershel House makes.

 

[tenngun]

I bought plans for a 'Bean' rifle. I now can't tell you which Bean it was. The gun looked much like DGW Tennessee rifle. It was a flint lock. It was stocked in beech.i had bought the plans from log cabin sport shop.

 

[kansas_volunteer]

Making a stock out of heart pine would not be much different that carving one out of oak. I would think you will never want to try that again. Walnut shows up on southern guns quite often because it was plentiful and cheap(back in the day). You might also want to take a look at ash, but it is not much different that trying to work in oak either.

If you want a different looking guard take a look at the guards that Hershel House makes.

I'm not sure about the comparison to oak. The English have done extremely well for centuries doing decorative wood carving using a lot of oak. In the Black Forest high end cuukoo clocks are decorated with very detailed carving in pine. I'll see how it goes.

I know about the sanding issues. I'm planning on finishing the stock using scrapers only, just as it would have been done "back in the day."

ARCHITECTURE.

There's mention above of building a nice stock with architecture. What would that consist of, how to achieve It? I do want to keep things simple.

 

[Black Hand]

The English have done extremely well for centuries doing decorative wood carving using a lot of oak. In the Black Forest high end cuukoo clocks are decorated with very detailed carving in pine.

And neither were under the stresses that a gun-stock would experience...

 

[tenngun]

Do you think that would count in a small caliber rifle gun? Say a .40 or smaller, vs a more heavy .50 and bigger.
While heart of pine can be tough, as walnut or oak it can split awful easy.
There must be a reason pine gunstocks often had inlays made out of hens teeth.
However style is important, would people have bought a pine stock in the old days. We know maple and walnut were go to woods back to the early seventeenth century. :idunno:

 

[Chowmif16]

ARCHITECTURE.
There's mention above of building a nice stock with architecture. What would that consist of, how to achieve It? I do want to keep things simple.

What most folks mean when they talk about the architecture of long rifles, is that the basic design of the rifle is correct and pleasing to the eye. It has the right proportions, and flows towards the muzzle. In the case of the gun that you are talking about building, it doesn't necessarily mean that there are nice, pretty embellishments like inlays, carving, etc. It just means that the stock is shaped correctly, and the hardware (ramrod pipes, nose cap, ramrod entry thimble etc) are in the right place.
Guns that look right were built in proportions derived from the Golden Mean (basically 3 to 5). As a result, the length of the buttstock, comb, wrist, fore-arm up to the ramrod entry pipe, and then upper fore-arm all have a specific relationship.
You can have a gun with beautiful carving, engraving, etc, but if the architecture is bad, the gun will look bad.

I'm going to assume based on the question, that you are new to building guns. If that is in error, I do apologize.
As such, I would recommend researching examples of the type of gun you want to build, either through books, or photos online. There are also some great gun building books out there that will talk about architecture, proportions etc.
A very common error for new builders is making fat, chunky guns. It's quite amazing how much wood needs to be removed to make a gun with nice lines.
The style and period of gun you choose will determine some of the architecture and the shaping of the stock. However, a good looking gun will have good proportions and be skinnier than you expect.

I hope that helps, and drives you towards following a specific style and maybe even buying a set of plans.

Cheers,
Chowmi

 

[54ball]

Before you get too far lets look at the proposed stock wood.
If it is circular sawn it's post 1840ish or "modern". If it's straight sawn or the saw lines are parallel with no radius it very well could be hand sawed from a pit or saw table. So....If the blank is modern sawn it's relatively common, if it's pit sawed, it's a historical artifact that needs to be preserved as a mantle, table or display background for your new rifle stocked out of modern wood.

Another thought is pine looks like pine and the novelty mat be short lived....
I have read about these pine stocked rifles but have never seen one. Supposedly one was in a museum in PA but the leads run dry. Too I'm not too sure about the assumption that these pine rifles were Southern! Any odd rifle is assumed to be Southern.

Also many odd woods like hack berry, ash, even plain maple, birch, beech, sycamore, chestnut and many others could be mistaken for pine. Really the only pine rifle I have personally seen was a WWII era Soviet Rifle....

Chowi gives a good description of architecture. While I'm not a Golden Mean disciple, I do believe that elements of the so called Golden Mean can be applied a fine rifle after the fact....If it looks good it usually is and come comes close to the "Mean"....after the fact.

Architecture is the basic design elements of the rifle. Decoration is just that. No amount of decoration can correct bad architecture. In fact a new builder should build for architecture first decoration later. When decoration is used it should be on a par with the architecture.

Example......A very nicely built rifle with poorly done decoration.....it takes away instead of adds to it.

To learn this....study study study originals not as a historian but as a builder....develop your eye to know what is right and whats not....

By far the biggest challenge is transposing what your mind's eye sees into wood and metal. This is where skill comes in and it must be learned through doing.

 

[kansas_volunteer]

Thanks for the words on architecture. My experience is working on muzzleloader kits and modern rifle stocks. I feel like I have a good eye for proportion, and an good ability to make my hands do what my minds eye can see. More widely I have and can use a full range of muscle powered tools. I'm confident of my ability to build this rifle. I don't want to screw it up, but if I do there's enough wood for two completely stocks.

My plank was ripped on a circular saw. The spacing between the saw tooth marks suggest it moved slowly through the mill. Without scientific analysis it would be hard to say how old the tree was or where it was grown.

I pulled down my copy of The Muzzleloading Rifle Then and Now by Cline. In it on plate 48 is a picture of a Southern rifle stocked in very nice maple. However, it has a grease hole in the butt, and no buttplate. The trigger guard is nice. It appears there's only a single trigger. The pic isn't high quality. It has me thinking about my original idea of going sans buttplate.

I've been doing some mental planning on a try stock built of plywood. It will help me figure out dimensions before making any cuts. I do have a couple of modern rifles that when they come to the shoulder the sights are perfectly aligned with my eye. I can measure these for a start.

I disagree that pine is like some other woods mentioned above. I've worked with them all. True pine, especially yellow pine, is distinctly different.

 

[Kansas Jake]

From another Kansan, another option for wood could be locally sourced black walnut. I'm looking to doing that for a couple of shotguns that I have thinking about putting together. There are a number of local saw mills in NE Kansas that may have a nice piece. Maybe even local maple, or cherry, but those may be harder to find. Using a Kansas wood in a nice touch.

I do know that old yellow pine is harder than heck from trying to salvage woodwork from a early 1900's house we remodeled many years ago. One couldn't drive a nail easily and it had a tendency to split.

 

[Vaino]

If you use yellow pine. I would then call your gun a "poor, poor, poor boy". Having had some experience w/ Southern yellow pine, I can't see myself making a gun stock w/ it......even a "poor boy" deserves better.....Fred